Pass/Fail Criteria for Price Proposals Sample Clauses

Pass/Fail Criteria for Price Proposals. 24 Price Proposals will be evaluated based on the following pass/fail criteria.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Pass/Fail Criteria for Price Proposals. 26 Price Proposals will be evaluated based on the following pass/fail criteria. 27 (a) Proposer has provided a D&C Price, ATC Adjustments to Price (if 28 applicable), Adjustments to D&C Price for NTP 3, Developer Draws/Cash Flow Tables 29 for the D&C Price, and other required pricing information for the D&C Work, using the 30 Form M series, that comply with the requirements of Exhibit 4, Section 3.1. 31 (b) Proposer has provided a Maintenance Price, separately stated for Routine 32 Maintenance and Capital Asset Replacement Work, and other required pricing 33 information for Maintenance Services, using the Form N series, that comply with the 34 requirements of Exhibit 4, Section 3.2.

Related to Pass/Fail Criteria for Price Proposals

  • Peer Review Dental Group, after consultation with the Joint ----------- Operations Committee, shall implement, regularly review, modify as necessary or appropriate and obtain the commitment of Providers to actively participate in peer review procedures for Providers. Dental Group shall assist Manager in the production of periodic reports describing the results of such procedures. Dental Group shall provide Manager with prompt notice of any information that raises a reasonable risk to the health and safety of Group Patients or Beneficiaries. In any event, after consultation with the Joint Operations Committee, Dental Group shall take such action as may be reasonably warranted under the facts and circumstances.

  • CHANGE IN CLASSIFICATION SPECIFICATIONS Section 1. The Employer shall notify the Union of intended classification studies.

  • Target Population The Grantee shall ensure that diversion programs and services provided under this grant are designed to serve juvenile offenders who are at risk of commitment to Department.

  • REVIEW OF THE FRAMEWORK PRICES LOTS 1 – 10

  • STATEWIDE ACHIEVEMENT TESTING When CONTRACTOR is an NPS, per implementation of Senate Bill 484, CONTRACTOR shall administer all Statewide assessments within the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (“CAASP”), Desired Results Developmental Profile (“DRDP”), California Alternative Assessment (“CAA”), achievement and abilities tests (using LEA-authorized assessment instruments), the Fitness Gram with the exception of the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (“ELPAC”) to be completed by the LEA, and as appropriate to the student, and mandated by XXX xxxxxxxx to LEA and state and federal guidelines. CONTRACTOR is subject to the alternative accountability system developed pursuant to Education Code section 52052, in the same manner as public schools. Each LEA student placed with CONTRACTOR by the LEA shall be tested by qualified staff of CONTRACTOR in accordance with that accountability program. XXX shall provide test administration training to CONTRACTOR’S qualified staff. CONTRACTOR shall attend LEA test training and comply with completion of all coding requirements as required by XXX.

  • Loop Provisioning Involving Integrated Digital Loop Carriers 2.6.1 Where InterGlobe has requested an Unbundled Loop and BellSouth uses IDLC systems to provide the local service to the End User and BellSouth has a suitable alternate facility available, BellSouth will make such alternative facilities available to InterGlobe. If a suitable alternative facility is not available, then to the extent it is technically feasible, BellSouth will implement one of the following alternative arrangements for InterGlobe (e.g. hairpinning):

  • Loop Provisioning Involving IDLC 2.16.1 Where TWTC has requested an Unbundled Loop and AT&T uses IDLC systems to provide the local service to the customer and AT&T has a suitable alternate facility available, AT&T will make such alternative facilities available to TWTC. If a suitable alternative facility is not available, then to the extent it is technically feasible, AT&T will implement one of the following alternative arrangements for TWTC (e.g., hairpinning):

  • Power Factor Design Criteria Developer shall design the Large Generating Facility to maintain an effective power delivery at demonstrated maximum net capability at the Point of Interconnection at a power factor within the range established by the Connecting Transmission Owner on a comparable basis, until NYISO has established different requirements that apply to all generators in the New York Control Area on a comparable basis. The Developer shall design and maintain the plant auxiliary systems to operate safely throughout the entire real and reactive power design range. The Connecting Transmission Owner shall not unreasonably restrict or condition the reactive power production or absorption of the Large Generating Facility in accordance with Good Utility Practice.

  • Required Coverages For Generation Resources Of 20 Megawatts Or Less Each Constructing Entity shall maintain the types of insurance as described in section 11.1 paragraphs (a) through (e) above in an amount sufficient to insure against all reasonably foreseeable direct liabilities given the size and nature of the generating equipment being interconnected, the interconnection itself, and the characteristics of the system to which the interconnection is made. Additional insurance may be required by the Interconnection Customer, as a function of owning and operating a Generating Facility. All insurance shall be procured from insurance companies rated “A-,” VII or better by AM Best and authorized to do business in a state or states in which the Interconnection Facilities are located. Failure to maintain required insurance shall be a Breach of the Interconnection Construction Service Agreement.

  • Power Factor Design Criteria (Reactive Power A wind generating plant shall maintain a power factor within the range of 0.95 leading to 0.95 lagging, measured at the Point of Interconnection as defined in this LGIA, if the ISO’s System Reliability Impact Study shows that such a requirement is necessary to ensure safety or reliability. The power factor range standards can be met using, for example without limitation, power electronics designed to supply this level of reactive capability (taking into account any limitations due to voltage level, real power output, etc.) or fixed and switched capacitors if agreed to by the Connecting Transmission Owner for the Transmission District to which the wind generating plant will be interconnected, or a combination of the two. The Developer shall not disable power factor equipment while the wind plant is in operation. Wind plants shall also be able to provide sufficient dynamic voltage support in lieu of the power system stabilizer and automatic voltage regulation at the generator excitation system if the System Reliability Impact Study shows this to be required for system safety or reliability.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.