No-Objection - Simplified Review. For Tender Processes below the ICB threshold KfW may agree on a simplified review instead of prior review as per Article 1.6.
No-Objection - Simplified Review Sample Clauses
Related to No-Objection - Simplified Review
Response to Objections Each Party retains the right to respond to any objection raised by a Participating Class Member, including the right to file responsive documents in Court no later than five court days prior to the Final Approval Hearing, or as otherwise ordered or accepted by the Court.
Technical Objections to Grievances It is the intent of both Parties of this Agreement that no grievance shall be defeated merely because of a technical error, other than time limitations in processing the grievance through the grievance procedure. To this end, an arbitration board shall have the power to allow all necessary amendments to the grievance and the power to waive formal procedural irregularities in the processing of a grievance, in order to determine the real matter in dispute and to render a decision according to equitable principles and the justice of the case.
Log Reviews All systems processing and/or storing PHI COUNTY discloses to 11 CONTRACTOR or CONTRACTOR creates, receives, maintains, or transmits on behalf of COUNTY 12 must have a routine procedure in place to review system logs for unauthorized access.
Constructability Review Prepare detailed interdisciplinary constructability review within Fourteen (14) days of receipt of the plans from the District that: 10.1.2.1.6.1 Ensures construction documents are well coordinated and reviewed for errors; 10.1.2.1.6.2 Identifies to the extent known, construction deficiencies and areas of concern; 10.1.2.1.6.3 Back-checks design drawings for inclusion of modifications; and 10.1.2.1.6.4 Provides the District with written confirmation that: 10.1.2.1.6.4.1 Requirements noted in the design documents prepared for the Project are consistent with and conform to the District's Project requirements and design standards. 10.1.2.1.6.4.2 Various components have been coordinated and are consistent with each other so as to minimize conflicts within or between components of the design documents.
Problem Statement School bus fleets are aging, and our communities have poor air quality. Replacing school buses with zero emission school buses will address both of these issues.
Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.
Claims Review Population A description of the Population subject to the Claims Review.
Response/Compliance with Audit or Inspection Findings A. Grantee must act to ensure its and its Subcontractors’ compliance with all corrections necessary to address any finding of noncompliance with any law, regulation, audit requirement, or generally accepted accounting principle, or any other deficiency identified in any audit, review, inspection or investigation of the Grant Agreement and the services and Deliverables provided. Any such correction will be at Grantee’s or its Subcontractor's sole expense. Whether Xxxxxxx's action corrects the noncompliance shall be solely the decision of the System Agency. B. As part of the services, Grantee must provide to HHS upon request a copy of those portions of Grantee's and its Subcontractors' internal audit reports relating to the services and Deliverables provided to the State under the Grant Agreement. C. Grantee shall include the requirement to provide to System Agency (and any of its duly authorized federal, state, or local authorities) internal audit reports related to this Grant Agreement in any Subcontract it awards. Upon request by System Agency, Grantee shall enforce this requirement against its Subcontractor. Further, Grantee shall include in any Subcontract it awards a requirement that all Subcontractor Subcontracts must also include these provisions.
Independent Review Contractor shall provide the Secretary of ADS/CIO an independent expert review of any Agency recommendation for any information technology activity when its total cost is $1,000,000.00 or greater or when CIO requires one. The State has identified two sub-categories for Independent Reviews, Standard and Complex. The State will identify in the SOW RFP the sub-category they are seeking. State shall not consider bids greater than the maximum value indicated below for this category. Standard Independent Review $25,000 Maximum Complex Independent Review $50,000 Maximum Per Vermont statute 3 V.S.A. 2222, The Secretary of Administration shall obtain independent expert review of any recommendation for any information technology initiated after July 1, 1996, as information technology activity is defined by subdivision (a) (10), when its total cost is $1,000,000 or greater or when required by the State Chief Information Officer. Documentation of this independent review shall be included when plans are submitted for review pursuant to subdivisions (a)(9) and (10) of this section. The independent review shall include: • An acquisition cost assessment • A technology architecture review • An implementation plan assessment • A cost analysis and model for benefit analysis • A procurement negotiation advisory services contract • An impact analysis on net operating costs for the agency carrying out the activity In addition, from time to time special reviews of the advisability and feasibility of certain types of IT strategies may be required. Following are Requirements and Capabilities for this Service: • Identify acquisition and lifecycle costs; • Assess wide area network (WAN) and/or local area network (LAN) impact; • Assess risks and/or review technical risk assessments of an IT project including security, data classification(s), subsystem designs, architectures, and computer systems in terms of their impact on costs, benefits, schedule and technical performance; • Assess, evaluate and critically review implementation plans, e.g.: • Adequacy of support for conversion and implementation activities • Adequacy of department and partner staff to provide Project Management • Adequacy of planned testing procedures • Acceptance/readiness of staff • Schedule soundness • Adequacy of training pre and post project • Assess proposed technical architecture to validate conformance to the State’s “strategic direction.” • Insure system use toolsets and strategies are consistent with State Chief Information Officer (CIO) policies, including security and digital records management; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to security and systems integration with other applications within the Department, and within the Agency, and existing or planned Enterprise Applications; • Perform cost and schedule risk assessments to support various alternatives to meet mission need, recommend alternative courses of action when one or more interdependent segment(s) or phase(s) experience a delay, and recommend opportunities for new technology insertions; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to the state of the art in this technology. • Assess a project’s backup/recovery strategy and the project’s disaster recovery plans for adequacy and conformance to State policy. • Evaluate the ability of a proposed solution to meet the needs for which the solution has been proposed, define the ability of the operational and user staff to integrate this solution into their work.
FINRA No Objections FINRA shall have raised no objection to the fairness and reasonableness of the underwriting terms and arrangements.
