OIG INSPECTION, AUDIT, AND REVIEW RIGHTS In addition to any other rights OIG may have by statute, regulation, or contract, OIG or its duly authorized representative(s) may conduct interviews, examine or request copies of Xxxxxx’x books, records, and other documents and supporting materials and/or conduct on-site reviews of any of Xxxxxx’x locations for the purpose of verifying and evaluating: (a) Xxxxxx’x compliance with the terms of this IA and (b) Xxxxxx’x compliance with the requirements of the Federal health care programs. The documentation described above shall be made available by Xxxxxx to OIG or its duly authorized representative(s) at all reasonable times for inspection, audit, and/or reproduction. Furthermore, for purposes of this provision, OIG or its duly authorized representative(s) may interview Xxxxxx and any of Xxxxxx’x employees or contractors who consent to be interviewed at the individual’s place of business during normal business hours or at such other place and time as may be mutually agreed upon between the individual and OIG. Xxxxxx shall assist OIG or its duly authorized representative(s) in contacting and arranging interviews with such individuals upon OIG’s request. Xxxxxx’x employees and contractors may elect to be interviewed with or without a representative of Xxxxxx present.
AUDIT REVIEW PROCEDURES Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this AGREEMENT that is not disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration. Not later than thirty (30) calendar days after issuance of the final audit report, CONSULTANT may request a review by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration of unresolved audit issues. The request for review will be submitted in writing. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by ALAMEDA CTC will excuse CONSULTANT from full and timely performance, in accordance with the terms of this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT and subconsultants’ contracts, including cost proposals and ICRs, may be subject to audits or reviews such as, but not limited to, an AGREEMENT Audit, an Incurred Cost Audit, an ICR Audit, or a certified public accountant (“CPA”) ICR Audit Workpaper Review. If selected for audit or review, the AGREEMENT, cost proposal and ICR and related workpapers, if applicable, will be reviewed to verify compliance with 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31 and other related laws and regulations. In the instances of a CPA ICR Audit Workpaper Review it is CONSULTANT’s responsibility to ensure federal, state, or local government officials are allowed full access to the CPA’s workpapers including making copies as necessary. The AGREEMENT, cost proposal, and ICR shall be adjusted by CONSULTANT and approved by ALAMEDA CTC to conform to the audit or review recommendations. CONSULTANT agrees that individual terms of costs identified in the audit report shall be incorporated into the contract by this reference if directed by ALAMEDA CTC at its sole discretion. Refusal by CONSULTANT to incorporate audit or review recommendations, or to ensure that the federal, state, or local governments have access to CPA workpapers, will be considered a breach of contract terms and cause for termination of the AGREEMENT and disallowance of prior reimbursed costs.
Project Monitoring Reporting and Evaluation The Recipient shall furnish to the Association each Project Report not later than forty-five (45) days after the end of each calendar semester, covering the calendar semester.
Review Procedures a. In consultation with the Illinois SHPO, NRCS shall identify those undertakings with little to no potential to affect historic properties and list those undertakings in Appendix A. Upon the determination by the CRS that a proposed undertaking is included in Appendix A, the NRCS is not required to consult further with the SHPO for that undertaking. A list of undertakings with the potential to affect historic properties comprises Appendix B. b. The lists of undertakings provided in Appendices A and B may be modified through consultation and written agreement between the NRCS State Conservationist and the SHPO without requiring an amendment to this Illinois Prototype Agreement. The NRCS State Office will maintain the master list and will provide an updated list to all consulting parties with an explanation of the rationale for classifying the practices accordingly. c. Undertakings identified in Appendix B shall require further review as outlined in Stipulation V. a. The NRCS shall consult with the SHPO to define the undertaking’s APE, identify and evaluate historic properties that may be affected by the undertaking, assess potential effects, and identify strategies for resolving adverse effects prior to implementing the undertaking. 1) NRCS may provide its proposed APE, identification of historic properties and/or scope of identification efforts, and assessment of effects in a single transmittal to the SHPO, provided this documentation meets the substantive standards in 36 CFR Part 800.4-5 and 800.11. 2) The NRCS shall attempt to avoid adverse effects to historic properties whenever possible; where historic properties are located in the APE, NRCS shall describe how it proposes to modify, buffer, or move the undertaking to avoid adverse effects to historic properties. 3) Where the NRCS proposes a finding of "no historic properties affected" or "no adverse effect" to historic properties, the SHPO shall have 30 calendar days from receipt of this documented description and information to review it and provide comments. The NRCS shall take into account all timely comments. i. If the SHPO, or another consulting party, disagrees with NRCS' findings and/or determination, it shall notify the NRCS within the thirty (30) calendar daytime period. The NRCS shall consult with the SHPO or other consulting party to attempt to resolve the disagreement. If the disagreement cannot be resolved through this consultation, NRCS shall follow the dispute resolution process in Stipulation VIII below. ii. If the SHPO does not respond to the NRCS within the thirty (30) calendar day period and/or the NRCS receives no objections from other consulting parties, or if the SHPO concurs with the NRCS' determination and proposed actions to avoid adverse effects, the NRCS shall document the concurrence/lack of response within the review time noted above and may move forward with the undertaking. 4) Where a proposed undertaking may adversely affect historic properties, NRCS shall describe proposed measures to minimize or mitigate the adverse effects, and follow the process in 36 CFR Part 800.6, including consultation with other consulting patties and notification to the ACHP, to develop a Memorandum of Agreement to resolve the adverse effects. Should the proposed undertaking have the potential to adversely affect a known NHL, the NRCS shall, to the maximum extent possible, undertake such planning and actions that may be necessary to minimize harm to the NHL in accordance with 54 U.S.C. § 306107 of the NHPA and 36 CFR Part 800.6 and 800.10, including consultation with the ACHP and respective National Park Service, Regional National Historic Landmark Program Coordinator, to develop a Memorandum of Agreement. d. NRCS will conduct archaeological surveys and will submit reports and other documentation to SHPO for review and comment. When no archaeological sites have been located by the archaeological survey, NRCS may proceed with the proposed undertaking. Reports for negative surveys must be submitted to SHPO on a quarterly basis. All positive and negative reports submitted to SHPO will be sent digitally for submission to the Inventory of Illinois Archaeological Sites (IAS) data file maintained by staff at the Illinois State Museum (ISM) housed under the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR). The NRCS further agrees that access to specific site location data will be restricted to the CRS, the NRCS field personnel installing conservation practices adjacent to the cultural resource, and the landowner. Specific site location information for individual projects will be maintained in a secure cultural resources file kept in the field offices and will not be available to the public. e. Curation: NRCS personnel will not collect artifactual material during routine field inspections. However, if a professional survey, evaluation testing, or mitigation is required, NRCS shall ensure that all materials and records resulting from cultural resources surveys or data recovery activities on federal or state property are curated by the Illinois State Museum. The NRCS shall ensure that all records resulting from cultural resource surveys or data recovery activities on private property are curated by the Illinois State Museum or an equivalent curation facility in accordance with 36 CFR Part 79. Subject to the landowner's permission, all objects resulting from cultural resources surveys or data recovery activities are maintained by the Illinois State Museum or equivalent research institution until their analysis is complete and they are returned to their owner(s). Although landowners will be encouraged to donate artifactual material, it is understood that objects collected on private land remain the property of the landowner(s) unless the landowner(s) donates the material to the Illinois State Museum or equivalent research institution. This excludes burial goods, as stipulated by XXXXXX.
Response/Compliance with Audit or Inspection Findings A. Grantee must act to ensure its and its Subcontractors’ compliance with all corrections necessary to address any finding of noncompliance with any law, regulation, audit requirement, or generally accepted accounting principle, or any other deficiency identified in any audit, review, inspection or investigation of the Grant Agreement and the services and Deliverables provided. Any such correction will be at Grantee’s or its Subcontractor's sole expense. Whether Xxxxxxx's action corrects the noncompliance shall be solely the decision of the System Agency. B. As part of the services, Grantee must provide to HHS upon request a copy of those portions of Grantee's and its Subcontractors' internal audit reports relating to the services and Deliverables provided to the State under the Grant Agreement. C. Grantee shall include the requirement to provide to System Agency (and any of its duly authorized federal, state, or local authorities) internal audit reports related to this Grant Agreement in any Subcontract it awards. Upon request by System Agency, Grantee shall enforce this requirement against its Subcontractor. Further, Grantee shall include in any Subcontract it awards a requirement that all Subcontractor Subcontracts must also include these provisions.
REVIEW OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 4.2.1 The Contractor shall carefully study and compare the Contract Documents and shall immediately report in writing to the Architect and the State any error, inconsistency or omission he may discover. The Contractor shall not be liable to the State or the Architect for any damage resulting from any such errors, inconsistencies or omissions in the Contract Documents. The
ADB’s Review of Procurement Decisions 11. All contracts procured under international competitive bidding procedures and contracts for consulting services shall be subject to prior review by ADB, unless otherwise agreed between the Borrower and ADB and set forth in the Procurement Plan.
Agent’s Review of Proposed Amendments and Supplements Prior to amending or supplementing the Registration Statement (including any registration statement filed under Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act) or the Prospectus (excluding any amendment or supplement through incorporation of any report filed under the Exchange Act), the Company shall furnish to the Agent for review, a reasonable amount of time prior to the proposed time of filing or use thereof, a copy of each such proposed amendment or supplement, and the Company shall not file or use any such proposed amendment or supplement without the Agent’s prior consent, and to file with the Commission within the applicable period specified in Rule 424(b) under the Securities Act any prospectus required to be filed pursuant to such Rule.
Audit and Testing 4.1 The Contractor shall conduct tests of the processes and countermeasures contained in the Security Plan ("Security Tests") on an annual basis or as otherwise agreed by the Parties. The date, timing, content and conduct of such Security Tests shall be agreed in advance with the Authority. 4.2 The Authority shall be entitled to send a representative to witness the conduct of the Security Tests. The Contractor shall provide the Authority with the results of such tests (in a form approved by the Authority in advance) as soon as practicable after completion of each Security Test. 4.3 Without prejudice to any other right of audit or access granted to the Authority pursuant to this Contract, the Authority shall be entitled at any time and without giving notice to the Contractor to carry out such tests (including penetration tests) as it may deem necessary in relation to the Security Plan and the Contractor's compliance with and implementation of the Security Plan. The Authority may notify the Contractor of the results of such tests after completion of each such test. Security Tests shall be designed and implemented so as to minimise the impact on the delivery Services. If such tests impact adversely on its ability to deliver the Services to the agreed Service Levels, the Contractor shall be granted relief against any resultant under-performance for the period of the tests. 4.4 Where any Security Test carried out pursuant to paragraphs 4.2 or 4.3 above reveals any actual or potential security failure or weaknesses, the Contractor shall promptly notify the Authority of any changes to the Security Plan (and the implementation thereof) which the Contractor proposes to make in order to correct such failure or weakness. Subject to the Authority's approval in accordance with paragraph 3.12, the Contractor shall implement such changes to the Security Plan in accordance with the timetable agreed with the Authority or, otherwise, as soon as reasonably possible. For the avoidance of doubt, where the change to the Security Plan to address a non-compliance with the Security Policy or security requirements, the change to the Security Plan shall be at no additional cost to the Authority. For the purposes of this paragraph 4, a weakness means a vulnerability in security and a potential security failure means a possible breach of the Security Plan or security requirements.
Review Scope The parties confirm that the Asset Representations Review is not responsible for (a) reviewing the Receivables for compliance with the representations and warranties under the Transaction Documents, except as described in this Agreement or (b) determining whether noncompliance with the representations and warranties constitutes a breach of the Eligibility Representations. For the avoidance of doubt, the parties confirm that the review is not designed to determine why an Obligor is delinquent or the creditworthiness of the Obligor, either at the time of any Asset Review or at the time of origination of the related Receivable. Further, the Asset Review is not designed to establish cause, materiality or recourse for any Test Fail (as defined in Section 3.05).
