Loop Testing/Trouble Reporting 2.1.6.1 Telepak Networks will be responsible for testing and isolating troubles on the Loops. Telepak Networks must test and isolate trouble to the BellSouth portion of a designed/non-designed unbundled Loop (e.g., UVL-SL2, UCL-D, UVL-SL1, UCL-ND, etc.) before reporting repair to the UNE Customer Wholesale Interconnection Network Services (CWINS) Center. Upon request from BellSouth at the time of the trouble report, Telepak Networks will be required to provide the results of the Telepak Networks test which indicate a problem on the BellSouth provided Loop. 2.1.6.2 Once Telepak Networks has isolated a trouble to the BellSouth provided Loop, and had issued a trouble report to BellSouth on the Loop, BellSouth will take the actions necessary to repair the Loop if a trouble actually exists. BellSouth will repair these Loops in the same time frames that BellSouth repairs similarly situated Loops to its End Users. 2.1.6.3 If Telepak Networks reports a trouble on a non-designed or designed Loop and no trouble actually exists, BellSouth will charge Telepak Networks for any dispatching and testing (both inside and outside the CO) required by BellSouth in order to confirm the Loop’s working status. 2.1.6.4 In the event BellSouth must dispatch to the end-user’s location more than once due to incorrect or incomplete information provided by Telepak Networks (e.g., incomplete address, incorrect contact name/number, etc.), BellSouth will xxxx Xxxxxxx Networks for each additional dispatch required to repair the circuit due to the incorrect/incomplete information provided. BellSouth will assess the applicable Trouble Determination rates from BellSouth’s FCC or state tariffs.
ENDANGERED SPECIES The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. § 1531, et seq.) as amended, particularly section 7 (16 U.S.C. § 1536).
Proposed Policies and Procedures Regarding New Online Content and Functionality By October 31, 2017, the School will submit to OCR for its review and approval proposed policies and procedures (“the Plan for New Content”) to ensure that all new, newly-added, or modified online content and functionality will be accessible to people with disabilities as measured by conformance to the Benchmarks for Measuring Accessibility set forth above, except where doing so would impose a fundamental alteration or undue burden. a) When fundamental alteration or undue burden defenses apply, the Plan for New Content will require the School to provide equally effective alternative access. The Plan for New Content will require the School, in providing equally effective alternate access, to take any actions that do not result in a fundamental alteration or undue financial and administrative burdens, but nevertheless ensure that, to the maximum extent possible, individuals with disabilities receive the same benefits or services as their nondisabled peers. To provide equally effective alternate access, alternates are not required to produce the identical result or level of achievement for persons with and without disabilities, but must afford persons with disabilities equal opportunity to obtain the same result, to gain the same benefit, or to reach the same level of achievement, in the most integrated setting appropriate to the person’s needs. b) The Plan for New Content must include sufficient quality assurance procedures, backed by adequate personnel and financial resources, for full implementation. This provision also applies to the School’s online content and functionality developed by, maintained by, or offered through a third-party vendor or by using open sources. c) Within thirty (30) days of receiving OCR’s approval of the Plan for New Content, the School will officially adopt, and fully implement the amended policies and procedures.
Study Population Infants who underwent creation of an enterostomy receiving postoperative care and awaiting enterostomy closure: to be assessed for eligibility: n = 201 to be assigned to the study: n = 106 to be analysed: n = 106 Duration of intervention per patient of the intervention group: 6 weeks between enterostomy creation and enterostomy closure Follow-up per patient: 3 months, 6 months and 12 months post enterostomy closure, following enterostomy closure (12-month follow-up only applicable for patients that are recruited early enough to complete this follow-up within the 48 month of overall study duration).
Research Independence The Company acknowledges that each Underwriter’s research analysts and research departments, if any, are required to be independent from their respective investment banking divisions and are subject to certain regulations and internal policies, and that such Underwriter’s research analysts may hold and make statements or investment recommendations and/or publish research reports with respect to the Company and/or the offering that differ from the views of its investment bankers. The Company hereby waives and releases, to the fullest extent permitted by law, any claims that the Company may have against such Underwriter with respect to any conflict of interest that may arise from the fact that the views expressed by their independent research analysts and research departments may be different from or inconsistent with the views or advice communicated to the Company by such Underwriter’s investment banking divisions. The Company acknowledges that the Representative is a full service securities firm and as such from time to time, subject to applicable securities laws, may effect transactions for its own account or the account of its customers and hold long or short position in debt or equity securities of the Company.
Public Posting of Approved Users’ Research Use Statement The PI agrees that information about themselves and the approved research use will be posted publicly on the dbGaP website. The information includes the PI’s name and Requester, project name, Research Use Statement, and a Non-Technical Summary of the Research Use Statement. In addition, and if applicable, this information may include the Cloud Computing Use Statement and name of the CSP or PCS. Citations of publications resulting from the use of controlled-access datasets obtained through this DAR may also be posted on the dbGaP website.
Agreement Exceptions/Deviations Explanation If the proposing Vendor desires to deviate form the Vendor Agreement language, all such deviations must be listed on this attribute, with complete and detailed conditions and information included. TIPS will consider any deviations in its proposal award decisions, and TIPS reserves the right to accept or reject any proposal based upon any deviations indicated below. In the absence of any deviation entry on this attribute, the proposer assures TIPS of their full compliance with the Vendor Agreement.
Research Use Reporting To assure adherence to NIH GDS Policy, the PI agrees to provide annual Progress Updates as part of the annual Project Renewal or Project Close-out processes, prior to the expiration of the one (1) year data access period. The PI who is seeking Renewal or Close-out of a project agree to complete the appropriate online forms and provide specific information such as how the data have been used, including publications or presentations that resulted from the use of the requested dataset(s), a summary of any plans for future research use (if the PI is seeking renewal), any violations of the terms of access described within this Agreement and the implemented remediation, and information on any downstream intellectual property generated from the data. The PI also may include general comments regarding suggestions for improving the data access process in general. Information provided in the progress updates helps NIH evaluate program activities and may be considered by the NIH GDS governance committees as part of NIH’s effort to provide ongoing stewardship of data sharing activities subject to the NIH GDS Policy.
Study An application for leave of absence for professional study must be supported by a written statement indicating what study or research is to be undertaken, or, if applicable, what subjects are to be studied and at what institutions.
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.