Service Eligibility Criteria 4.3.4.1 High capacity EELs must comply with the following service eligibility requirements:
Return to Duty Testing Any employee who has tested positive on a drug and/or alcohol test, and who was afforded the opportunity to return to work, must test negative for drugs and/or alcohol and be evaluated and released to duty by the Substance Abuse Professional before returning to work.
WORKING TEST PERIOD Section One. The Working Test Period shall be deemed an extension of the examination process. Therefore, a determination of unsatisfactory performance during a Working Test Period shall be tantamount to a failure of the competitive exam.
Acceptance/Performance Test 4.7.1 Prior to synchronization of the Power Project, the SPD shall be required to get the Project certified for the requisite acceptance/performance test as may be laid down by Central Electricity Authority or an agency identified by the central government to carry out testing and certification for the solar power projects.
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.
Mileage Measurement Where required, the mileage measurement for LIS rate elements is determined in the same manner as the mileage measurement for V&H methodology as outlined in NECA Tariff No. 4.
Test conditions 6.1.1. The test shall be performed on a flat, dry concrete or asphalt surface affording good adhesion.
Follow-up Testing An employee shall submit to unscheduled follow-up drug and/or alcohol testing if, within the previous 24-month period, the employee voluntarily disclosed drug or alcohol problems, entered into or completed a rehabilitation program for drug or alcohol abuse, failed or refused a preappointment drug test, or was disciplined for violating the provisions of this Agreement and Employer work rules. The Employer may require an employee who is subject to follow-up testing to submit to no more than six unscheduled drug or alcohol tests within any 12 month period.
Exclusion Criteria Subjects fulfilling any of the following criteria are not eligible for participation in this study.
Performance Testing 7.2.1 The Design-Builder shall direct and supervise the tests and, if necessary, the retests of the Plant using Design-Builder’s supervisory personnel and the Air Emissions Tester shall conduct the air emissions test, in each case, in accordance with the testing procedures set forth in Exhibit A (the “Performance Tests”), to demonstrate, at a minimum, compliance with the Performance Guarantee Criteria. Owner is responsible for obtaining Air Emissions Tester and for ensuring Air Emissions Tester’s timely performance. Design-Builder shall cooperate with the Air Emissions Tester to facilitate performance of all air emissions tests. Design-Builder shall not be held responsible for the actions of Owner’s employees and third parties involved in the Performance Testing, including but not limited to Air Emissions Tester.
