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.
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.
Review of assessment The assessment of the applicable percentage should be subject to annual review or earlier on the basis of a reasonable request for such a review. The process of review shall be in accordance with the procedures for assessing capacity under the Supported Wage System.
Data Protection Impact Assessment and Prior Consultation Processor shall provide reasonable assistance to the Company with any data protection impact assessments, and prior consultations with Supervising Authorities or other competent data privacy authorities, which Company reasonably considers to be required by article 35 or 36 of the GDPR or equivalent provisions of any other Data Protection Law, in each case solely in relation to Processing of Company Personal Data by, and taking into account the nature of the Processing and information available to, the Contracted Processors.
Conformity Assessment Procedures 1. Each Party shall give positive consideration to accepting the results of conformity assessment procedures of other Parties, even where those procedures differ from its own, provided it is satisfied that those procedures offer an assurance of conformity with applicable technical regulations or standards equivalent to its own procedures.
2. Each Party shall seek to enhance the acceptance of the results of conformity assessment procedures conducted in the territories of other Parties with a view to increasing efficiency, avoiding duplication and ensuring cost effectiveness of the conformity assessments. In this regard, each Party may choose, depending on the situation of the Party and the specific sectors involved, a broad range of approaches. These may include but are not limited to:
(a) recognition by a Party of the results of conformity assessments performed in the territory of another Party;
(b) recognition of co-operative arrangements between accreditation bodies in the territories of the Parties;
(c) mutual recognition of conformity assessment procedures conducted by bodies located in the territory of each Party;
(d) accreditation of conformity assessment bodies in the territory of another Party;
(e) use of existing regional and international multilateral recognition agreements and arrangements;
(f) designating conformity assessment bodies located in the territory of another Party to perform conformity assessment; and
(g) suppliers’ declaration of conformity.
3. Each Party shall exchange information with other Parties on its experience in the development and application of the approaches in Paragraph 2(a) to (g) and other appropriate approaches with a view to facilitating the acceptance of the results of conformity assessment procedures.
4. A Party shall, upon request of another Party, explain its reasons for not accepting the results of any conformity assessment procedure performed in the territory of that other Party.
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.
Engagement of Independent Review Organization Within 60 days after the Effective Date, Xx. Xxxxxxxx shall engage an individual or entity, such as an accounting, auditing, or consulting firm (hereinafter “Independent Review Organization” or “IRO”), to perform the reviews listed in this Section III.C. The applicable requirements relating to the IRO are outlined in Appendix A to this IA, which is incorporated by reference.
Updated Information Submission by Interconnection Customer The updated information submission by the Interconnection Customer, including manufacturer information, shall occur no later than one hundred eighty (180) Calendar Days prior to the Trial Operation. The Interconnection Customer shall submit a completed copy of the Electric Generating Unit data requirements contained in Appendix 1 to the LGIP. It shall also include any additional information provided to the Participating TO and the CAISO for the Interconnection Studies. Information in this submission shall be the most current Electric Generating Unit design or expected performance data. Information submitted for stability models shall be compatible with the Participating TO and CAISO standard models. If there is no compatible model, the Interconnection Customer will work with a consultant mutually agreed to by the Parties to develop and supply a standard model and associated information.
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.
Representatives’ Review of Proposed Amendments and Supplements During the period when a prospectus relating to the Offered Shares is required by the Securities Act to be delivered (whether physically or through compliance with Rule 172 under the Securities Act or any similar rule), the Company (i) will furnish to the Representatives for review, a reasonable period of time prior to the proposed time of filing of any proposed amendment or supplement to the Registration Statement, a copy of each such amendment or supplement and (ii) will not amend or supplement the Registration Statement (including any amendment or supplement through incorporation of any report filed under the Exchange Act) without the Representatives’ prior written consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. Prior to amending or supplementing any preliminary prospectus, the Time of Sale Prospectus or the Prospectus (including any amendment or supplement through incorporation of any report filed under the Exchange Act), the Company shall furnish to the Representatives for review, a reasonable amount of time prior to the time of filing or use of the proposed amendment or supplement, a copy of each such proposed amendment or supplement. The Company shall not file or use any such proposed amendment or supplement without the Representatives’ prior written consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. The Company shall 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.
