Permit Review Sample Clauses

Permit Review i. Identify data to be included in each electronic submission, dependencies between form questions or sections and the related rules, dependencies between general permit forms and permit requirements (e.g., effluent limits), and schedules or dates for each submission. ii. Ensure any new permit has clear, well described reporting requirements. iii. Make any minor modifications to already issued permits necessary to adopt U.S. EPA’s electronic reporting solution. iv. Work with U.S. EPA to clearly describe the permit requirements and review process (if any) for permit coverage approval. v. Identify cases where a permit requires non-appendix A data elements for a discussion on the best approach on capturing these data elements. vi. Specify any events that may result in a modification of monitoring requirements, particularly, but not limited to, instances where the monitoring requirements should be changed through an NOI or other electronic submission. vii. Avoid referencing a specific technology implementation solution or electronic reporting application in permit language. viii. Identify where a paper submission should be sent from facilities. ix. Ensure the general permit specifies clear authority to collect each data element on the NOI or program report. x. Consult with U.S. EPA early in the permit modification or development process if any questions or concerns arise regarding electronic reporting.
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Permit Review. The performance of any or all of the following work in or on Tribune Tower and adjoining property and structures, including work in or on the Critical Features, is deemed as not affecting any significant or critical aspect of the Critical Features, and no City permit application for any such work shall require Commission final or preliminary approval by (or be subject to disapproval by) the Commission. (i) The alteration, construction, erection, relocation, reconstruction or demolition of or construction of any addition to those aspects of Tribune Tower and adjoining property and structures not included in the designation of Tribune Tower as a Chicago Landmark or not determined as provided in this Agreement to be a Critical Feature; (ii) The installation of tracks and roof structures for window washing equipment; (iii) The cleaning of the exterior and interior of Tribune Tower; (iv) The installation of heating, ventilating (including the replacement of windows and window casings with ventilating grills and other apparatus), electrical, plumbing, compressed air, and chilled water systems, all between those masonry vertical columns existing as of the date of this Agreement; (v) The installation on Tribune Tower or adjoining property and structures of communication systems including antennae, dishes and microwaves (receiving and sending facilities) and supporting structures necessary or desirable, provided upon subsequent removal the Owner shall restore any affected areas of Tribune Tower to the condition substantially similar to that existing as of the date of this Agreement; (vi) The installation, replacement and removal of lighting facilities as may be necessary or desirable for the use and enjoyment of Tribune Tower and adjoining property and structures, provided upon subsequent removal the Owner shall restore any affected areas of Tribune Tower to the condition substantially similar to that existing as of the date of this Agreement; (vii) The installation, replacement and relocation of windows, window casings, canopies, doors and door entrances on the First Floor exterior facades and within the Lobbies, all between those masonry vertical columns existing as of the date of this Agreement, provided the masonry main building arch located on the East Facade is not physically altered; (viii) The erection of temporary scaffolding on Tribune Tower; (ix) The installation of temporary signs and decorative materials on Tribune Tower; (x) The installation of perman...
Sample 1
Permit Review. The Police Department shall seek a review of any land use entitlement, and may request additional security measures, at any time that it appears to be in the best interest of the public safety. The following circumstances will be specifically monitored: a. Criminal activity occurring inside or as a result of the location. b. Loitering occurring as a result of the location. c. Noise and/or other nuisance complaints occurring as a result of the location. d. Violation of any condition of approval in the conditional use permit.
Sample 1
Permit Review i. Identify data to be included in each electronic submission, dependencies between form questions or sections and the related rules, dependencies between general permit forms and permit requirements (e.g., effluent limits), and schedules or dates for each submission. ii. Ensure any new permit has clear, well described reporting requirements. iii. Make any minor modifications to already issued permits necessary to adopt EPA’s electronic reporting solution. iv. Work with OC to clearly describe the permit requirements and review process (if any) for permit coverage approval. v. Identify cases where a permit requires non-appendix A data elements for a discussion on the best approach on capturing these data elements. vi. Specify any events that may result in a modification of monitoring requirements, particularly, but not limited to, instances where the monitoring requirements should be changed through an NOI or other electronic submission. vii. Avoid referencing a specific technology implementation solution or electronic reporting application in permit language. viii. Identify where a paper submission should be sent from facilities. ix. Ensure the general permit specifies clear authority to collect each data element on the NOI or program report. x. Consult with OC early in the permit modification or development process if any questions or concerns arise regarding electronic reporting.
Sample 1
Permit Review. X. XXXX and USEPA agree to work together during the permit application review process to ensure that OEPA's Title V program issues permits that meet all requirements of Title V of the Clean Air Act. USEPA agrees to review draft and proposed permits in accordance with its differential oversight model, and also agrees to review additional draft permits as requested by XXXX. B. OEPA and USEPA agree to participate in monthly telephone conferences to discuss permit program implementation. The monthly calls will generally be scheduled for the second Thursday morning (9:00am - 10:00am CST) of each month. The monthly calls will serve as a forum for discussions between OEPA and USEPA on general permit policy issues. C. USEPA permit review staff agree to work directly and informally with OEPA permit review engineers regarding clarification of specific permit conditions or questions regarding any portion of a specific permit review file. USEPA agrees to formally notify OEPA (Xxxx Xxxxx, Supervisor of the Permit Management Unit) of any objection to any proposed permit. The Permit and Grants section chief will serve as the primary contact person for resolving any objections by USEPA. X. XXXX and USEPA agree to notify one another of any issues as early as possible in the permit application review process. Because USEPA will have the opportunity to be involved early, USEPA will provide guidance during the preliminary determination and draft permit stage, when possible. OEPA and USEPA agree to work together during the draft permit stage with the intention of resolving any issues prior to USEPA's formal 45 day review period. X. XXXX and USEPA agree that USEPA's 45 day review period on a proposed permit will not begin until all the following documents are available and OEPA updates the activity log in STARS to notify USEPA of the availability documents: the permit application or application summary form, the proposed permit, the public comments, and any written refusal to accept an affected State's recommendations. F. If requested by OEPA, for a limited number of specific individual permits, USEPA will, if the proposed permit is approvable, notify OEPA prior to the end of the 45 day review period that USEPA has no objection to the immediate issuance of that particular operation permit. G. Revisions to the acid rain portions of Title V permits: Applications for revision to Phase I federal acid rain permits will be received, reviewed, and issued or denied by USEPA. Following ...
Sample 1
Permit Review. Resource Management or other County departments will periodically inspect the use permit site to insure that all conditions of approval are being met. The violation of any conditions is grounds for revocation of the Mutual Agreement.
Sample 1
Permit Review. The Police Department shall seek a review of any conditional use permit and may request reevaluation by the Planning Commission to add security measures, for the best interest of the public safety. The following circumstances will be specifically monitored: a. Criminal activity occurring inside or as a result of the location. b. Loitering occurring as a result of the location. c. Noise and/or other nuisance complaints occurring as a result of the location. d. Violation of any condition of approval in the conditional use permit.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Permit Review. For all permits required for the construction of the Improvements, the City will use reasonable efforts to ensure that (i) the construction documents are promptly reviewed by the City and (ii) permits are promptly made ready for pick up subject only to delays caused by Xxxx. Time is of the essence with respect to the review timelines for City reviews of Improvements. Therefore, the City will strive to meet the following permit review timelines for all Improvements over which the City has jurisdiction: (i) initial (1st) review = 3 weeks (15 business days); and (ii) subsequent reviews = 1 week (5 business days)
Sample 1
Permit Review 
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3

Related to Permit Review

  • Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances 1. If FEMA determines that the entire scope of an Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances in Appendix B of this Agreement, with determinations for Tier II Allowances being made by SOI-qualified staff, FEMA shall complete the Section 106 review process by documenting this determination in the project file, without SHPO review or notification. 2. If the Undertaking involves a National Historic Landmark (NHL), FEMA shall notify the SHPO, participating Tribe(s), and the NPS NHL Program Manager of the NPS Midwest Regional Office that the Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances. FEMA shall provide information about the proposed scope of work for the Undertaking and the allowance(s) enabling FEMA’s determination. 3. If FEMA determines any portion of an Undertaking’s scope of work does not conform to one or more allowances listed in Appendix B, FEMA shall conduct expedited or standard Section 106 review, as appropriate, for the entire Undertaking in accordance with Stipulation II.B, Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings, or Stipulation II.C, Standard Project Review. 4. Allowances may be revised and new allowances may be added to this Agreement in accordance with Stipulation IV.A.3, Amendments. B. Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings

  • 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.

  • Agreement Review If, pursuant to section 25.10 (Review of Agreement) of the Bilateral Agreement, the Bilateral Agreement is reviewed after three or five years, or both, of the effective date of the Bilateral Agreement, and any changes to the Bilateral Agreement are required as a result, the Parties agree to amend the Agreement as necessary and in a manner that is consistent with such changes.

  • 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.

  • Program Review The State ECEAP Office will conduct a review of each contractor’s compliance with the ECEAP Contract and ECEAP Performance Standards every four years. The review will involve ECEAP staff and parents. After the Program Review, the State ECEAP Office will provide the contractor with a Program Review report. The contractor must submit an ECEAP Corrective Action Plan for non-compliance with ECEAP Performance Standards. The Plan must be approved by the State ECEAP Office.

  • Post Review With respect to each contract not governed by paragraph 2 of this Part, the procedures set forth in paragraph 4 of Appendix 1 to the Guidelines shall apply.

  • 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.

  • Periodic Review The General Counsel shall periodically review the Procurement Integrity Procedures with OSC personnel in order to ascertain potential areas of exposure to improper influence and to adopt desirable revisions for more effective avoidance of improper influences.

  • Compliance Review During the Term, Developer agrees to permit the GLO, HUD, and/or a designated representative of the GLO or HUD to access the Property for the purpose of performing Compliance-Monitoring Procedures. In accordance with GLO Compliance-Monitoring Procedures, the GLO or HUD will periodically monitor and audit Developer’s compliance with the requirements of this Agreement, the CDBG-DR Regulations, the CDBG Multifamily Rental Housing Guidelines, and any and all other Governmental Requirements during the Term. In conducting any compliance reviews, the GLO or HUD will rely primarily on information obtained from Developer’s records and reports, on-site monitoring, and audit reports. The GLO or HUD may also consider other relevant information gained from other sources, including litigation and citizen complaints. 5.04 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: INDEMNIFICATION (a) Developer agrees to the following. (i) Developer shall not receive, store, dispose, or release any Hazardous Materials on or to the Property; transport any Hazardous Materials to or from the Property; or permit the existence of any Hazardous Material contamination on the Property. (ii) Developer shall give written notice to the GLO immediately when Developer acquires knowledge of the presence of any Hazardous Material on the Property; the transport of any Hazardous Materials to or from the Property; or the existence of any Hazardous Material contamination on the Property, with a full description thereof. (iii) Developer will promptly, at Developer’s sole cost and expense, comply with any Governmental Requirements regarding the removal, treatment, or disposal of such Hazardous Materials or Hazardous Material contamination and provide the GLO with satisfactory evidence of such compliance. (iv) Developer shall provide the GLO, within thirty (30) days of demand by the GLO, financial assurance evidencing to the GLO that the necessary funds are available to pay for the cost of removing, treating, and disposing of such Hazardous Materials or Hazardous Material contamination and discharging any assessments that may be established on the Property as a result thereof. (v) Developer shall insure that all leases, licenses, and agreements of any kind (whether written or oral) now or hereafter executed that permit any party to occupy, possess, or use in any way the Property or any part thereof include an express prohibition on the disposal or discharge of any Hazardous Materials at the Property and a provision stating that failure to comply with such prohibition shall expressly constitute a default under any such agreement. (vi) Developer shall not cause or suffer any liens (including any so-called state, federal, or local “Superfund” lien relating to such matters) to be recorded against the Property as a consequence of, or in any way related to, the presence, remediation, or disposal of Hazardous Materials in or about the Property. (b) DEVELOPER SHALL, AT ALL TIMES, RETAIN ANY AND ALL LIABILITIES ARISING FROM THE PRESENCE, HANDLING, TREATMENT, STORAGE, TRANSPORTATION, REMOVAL, OR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ON THE PROPERTY. REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ANY EVENT OF DEFAULT OCCURS OR CONTINUES, WHETHER THE GLO EXERCISES ANY REMEDIES IN RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY, OR SUCH SITUATION RELATED TO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS WAS CAUSED BY OR WITHIN THE CONTROL OF DEVELOPER OR THE GLO, DEVELOPER SHALL DEFEND, INDEMNIFY, AND HOLD HARMLESS THE GLO AND ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL LIABILITIES, SUITS, ACTIONS, CLAIMS, DEMANDS, PENALTIES, DAMAGES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, LOST PROFITS, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, INTEREST, PENALTIES, FINES, AND MONETARY SANCTIONS), LOSSES, COSTS, AND EXPENSES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, REASONABLE ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS) THAT MAY: (i) NOW OR IN THE FUTURE (WHETHER BEFORE OR AFTER THE CULMINATION OF THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED BY THIS AGREEMENT) BE INCURRED OR SUFFERED BY THE GLO BY REASON OF, RESULTING FROM, IN CONNECTION WITH, OR ARISING IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER FROM THE BREACH OF ANY WARRANTY OR COVENANT IN THIS SECTION OR THE INACCURACY OF ANY REPRESENTATION OF DEVELOPER IN RELATION TO THIS AGREEMENT;

  • Design Review ‌ (a) Where so specified in Schedule A (Scope of Goods and Services) or as otherwise instructed by the City, the Supplier shall submit design-related Documentation for review by the City, and shall not proceed with work on the basis of such design Documentation until the City’s approval of such Documentation has been received in writing. (b) None of: (i) the submission of Documentation to the City by the Supplier; (ii) its examination by or on behalf of the City; or (iii) the making of any comment thereon (including any approval thereof) shall in any way relieve the Supplier of any of its obligations under this Agreement or of its duty to take reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy and correctness of such Documentation, and its suitability to the matter to which it relates.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!