REC Compliance Status Sample Clauses

REC Compliance Status. Each REC Delivered by REC Supplier hereunder shall be capable as of the Delivery Date to be used by Buyer for purposes of compliance with the Act. If any REC Delivered to Buyer is later determined to have been, as of the Delivery Date, unable to be used by Buyer for compliance with the Act for any reason, including, but not limited to, REC Supplier’s failure, whether by act or omission to act, under, or with respect to, this Agreement, REC Supplier shall Deliver to Buyer an equivalent REC, which is capable to be used by Buyer for purposes of compliance with the Act. REC Supplier shall be responsible to reimburse Buyer for any costs or penalties incurred by Buyer with respect to any REC Delivered hereunder, which Buyer is unable to use for compliance with the Act as of the Delivery Date.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to REC Compliance Status

  • CEQA Compliance The District has complied with all assessment requirements imposed upon it by the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resource Code Section 21000 et seq. (“CEQA”) in connection with the Project, and no further environmental review of the Project is necessary pursuant to CEQA before the construction of the Project may commence.

  • Status Substantial Compliance Analysis The Compliance Officer found that PPB is in substantial compliance with Paragraph 80. See Sections IV and VII Report, p. 17. COCL carefully outlines the steps PPB has taken—and we, too, have observed—to do so. Id. We agree with the Compliance Officer’s assessment. In 2018, the Training Division provided an extensive, separate analysis of data concerning ECIT training. See Evaluation Report: 2018 Enhanced Crisis Intervention Training, Training usefulness, on-the-job applications, and reinforcing training objectives, February 2019. The Training Division assessed survey data showing broad officer support for the 2018 ECIT training. The survey data also showed a dramatic increase in the proportion of officers who strongly agree that their supervisors are very supportive of the ECIT program, reaching 64.3% in 2018, compared to only 14.3% in 2015: The Training Division analyzed the survey results of the police vehicle operator training and supervisory in-service training, as well. These analyses were helpful in understanding attendees’ impressions of training and its application to their jobs, though the analyses did not reach as far as the ECIT’s analysis of post-training on- the-job assessment. In all three training analyses, Training Division applied a feedback model to shape future training. This feedback loop was the intended purpose of Paragraph 80. PPB’s utilization of feedback shows PPB’s internalization of the remedy. We reviewed surveys of Advanced Academy attendees, as well. Attendees were overwhelmingly positive in response to the content of most classes. Though most respondents agreed on the positive aspects of keeping the selected course in the curriculum, a handful of attendees chose options like “redundant” and “slightly disagree,” indicating that the survey tools could be used for critical assessment and not merely PPB self-validation. We directly observed PPB training and evaluations since our last report. PPB provided training materials to the Compliance Officer and DOJ in advance of training. Where either identified issues, PPB worked through those issues and honed its materials. As Paragraph 80 requires, PPB’s training included competency-based evaluations, namely: knowledge checks (i.e., quizzes on directives), in-class responsive quizzes (using clickers to respond to questions presented to the group); knowledge tests (examinations via links PPB sent to each student’s Bureau-issued iPhone); demonstrated skills and oral examination (officers had to show proficiency in first aid skills, weapons use, and defensive tactics); and scenario evaluations (officers had to explain their reasoning for choices after acting through scenarios). These were the same sort of competency-based evaluations we commended in our last report. In this monitoring period, PPB applied the same type of evaluations to supervisory-level training as well as in-service training for all sworn members. PPB successfully has used the surveys, testing, and the training audit.

  • FERPA Compliance In connection with all FERPA Records that Contractor may create, receive or maintain on behalf of University pursuant to the Underlying Agreement, Contractor is designated as a University Official with a legitimate educational interest in and with respect to such FERPA Records, only to the extent to which Contractor (a) is required to create, receive or maintain FERPA Records to carry out the Underlying Agreement, and (b) understands and agrees to all of the following terms and conditions without reservation:

  • PCI Compliance A. The Acquiring Bank will provide The Merchant with appropriate training on PCI PED and/or DSS rules and regulations in respect of The Merchants obligations. Initial training will be provided and at appropriate intervals as and when relevant changes are made to such rules and regulations.

  • OSHA Compliance To the extent applicable to the services to be performed under this Agreement, Contractor represents and warrants, that all articles and services furnished under this Agreement meet or exceed the safety standards established and promulgated under the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Law (Public Law 91-596) and its regulations in effect or proposed as of the date of this Agreement.

  • Compliance Audit LEA shall have the right but shall be under no obligation to conduct audit(s), from time to time, of Provider’s records concerning its compliance obligations as set forth in this Article V. Provider shall make such records and other documents available to LEA upon request.

  • 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. Attachment G GLO Contract No. 19-097-041-B662 5.04 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: INDEMNIFICATION

  • Program Compliance The School Board shall be responsible for monitoring the program to provide technical assistance and to ensure program compliance.

  • HIPAA Compliance If this Contract involves services, activities or products subject to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), the Contractor covenants that it will appropriately safeguard Protected Health Information (defined in 45 CFR 160.103), and agrees that it is subject to, and shall comply with, the provisions of 45 CFR 164 Subpart E regarding use and disclosure of Protected Health Information.

  • Monitoring Compliance Upon the request of the Lender, but without incurring any liability beyond the Guaranteed Obligations, from time to time, Guarantor shall promptly provide to the Lender such documents, certificates and other information as may be deemed reasonably necessary to enable the Lender to perform its functions under the Servicing Agreement as the same relates to the Guarantor.

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