Revisions Submissions Date. The Revisions Submission Date will be a date nine (9) months prior to the expiry of the term of this Access Arrangement.
Revisions Submissions Date Sample Clauses
Related to Revisions Submissions Date
REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS Any revisions or amendments to this Agreement must be made in writing and signed by both parties.
Extensions - Special Circumstances An employee shall be entitled to extend the maternity leave by up to an additional six (6) consecutive weeks' leave without pay where a physician certifies the employee as unable to return to work for medical reasons related to the birth. An employee shall be entitled to extend the parental leave by up to an additional five (5) consecutive weeks' leave without pay where the child is at least six (6) months of age before coming into the employee's care and custody and the child is certified as suffering from a physical, psychological or emotional condition. Provided however, that in no case shall the combined maternity and parental leave exceed fifty-two (52) consecutive weeks following the commencement of the leave.
Submission of Certified Payroll Transcripts for Public Works Contracts Only Contractors and Subcontractors on public works projects must submit monthly payroll transcripts to the Authorized User that has prepared or directs the preparation of the plans and specifications for a public works project, as set forth in the Bid Specifications. For Mini-Bid solicitations, the payroll records must be submitted to the entity preparing the agency Mini-Bid project specification. For “agency specific” Bids, the payroll records should be submitted to the entity issuing the purchase order. For all other OGS Centralized Contracts, such records should be submitted to the individual agency issuing the purchase order(s) for the work. Upon mutual agreement of the Contractor and the Authorized User, the form of submission may be submitted in a specified disk format acceptable to the Department of Labor provided: 1) the Contractor/Subcontractor retains the original records; and, (2) an original signed letter by a duly authorized individual of the Contractor or Subcontractor attesting to the truth and accuracy of the records accompanies the disk. This provision does not apply to Article 9 of the Labor Law building services contracts.
PROCEDURE FOR APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT 28. Acceptance of this Settlement Agreement shall be sought at a hearing of the Central Regional Council of the MFDA on a date agreed to by counsel for Staff and the Respondent.
Conclusions and Recommendations The demonstration and evaluation process provided an opportunity to test community specific tools with a range of end users from the memory institution domain and to gain greater insight into both the current and future evolution of the SHAMAN prototypes for preservation, access and re-use. Xxxx et al. (2000) in their user evaluation study of the Alexandria Digital Library which incorporated the evaluation of a Web prototype by earth scientists, information specialists and educators raised four key questions in relation to their findings that SHAMAN may be well advised to consider, they are paraphrased here with our conclusions from the investigations. What have we learned about our target organizations and potential users? Memory institutions are most definitely not a homogenised group; their needs and requirements differ greatly across the domain. Representatives of the archives community are agreed on the benefits of SHAMAN‟s authenticity validation function. The representatives of government information services remained unconvinced as to the need or benefit of grid technologies or distributed ingest while librarians saw the value of grid access as an asset of the framework. What have we learned about the evaluation approach for digital preservation? Within the limits of the exercise, in terms of time-frame and resources, the approach adopted has generated useful information for the further development of demonstrators and for the development of the SHAMAN framework overall. What have we learned about the SHAMAN ISP1 demonstrator? Respondents to the evaluation questionnaires and the focus groups indicate that, overall, the presentation of the demonstrator worked effectively and that, in general, participants in the demonstration and evaluation events were able to understand the intentions of the demonstration and to apply the ideas presented to their own context. What have we learned about the applicability of the SHAMAN framework to memory institutions? Respondents to the questionnaires and participants in the focus groups readily identified the value of the SHAMAN framework to their own operations. The majority had not yet established a long-term digital preservation policy, but recognized the need. Generally, the concepts of distributed ingest and grid operations found favour. Virtually all practitioners in the focus groups, however, drew attention to need of a lower level demonstration that would be closer to their everyday preservation troubles, especially for digital preservation to be applied to non-textual materials, such as film, photographs and sound archives. In addition to the criteria suggested by Xxxx et al., we can add a further project-related question: What have we learned that has implications for the training and dissemination phase of the Project? It was not part of the remit of the demonstration and evaluation specifically to discover information of relevance to the training and dissemination function. However, a number of factors will affect the efficacy of any training programme in particular. o First, no common understanding of digital preservation can be assumed of the potential target audiences for training. Consequently, it is likely that self-paced learning materials will be most effective in presenting the SHAMAN framework. o Secondly, the aims of SHAMAN as a project must be conveyed clearly: specifically, that it is a kind of „proof-of-concept‟ project and is not intended to deliver a package of programs capable of being implemented by institutions. o Thirdly, it needs to be emphasised that the SHAMAN framework is not limited to text documents; it can be applied to materials of all kinds. However, the demonstrations relate to bodies of material that were actually available for use. o Fourthly, the existing presentation materials are capable of being adapted for use in training activities. o Finally, the target audiences will appreciate the possibility of online access to the demonstrator, which will need to have very great ease of access in order that people with diverse backgrounds are able to use it with equal facility. We believe that, overall, WP14 has met its aims and objectives in this demonstration and evaluation of ISP1. Valuable lessons have been learnt by all parties involved, which will be transferred to the evaluation of ISP2 in the coming months.
Decisions by Members Whenever in this Agreement reference is made to the decision, consent, approval, judgment, or action of the Members, unless otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, such decision, consent, approval, judgment, or action shall mean a Majority of the Members.
CLEC to CLEC Conversions for Unbundled Loops 2.1.11.1 The CLEC to CLEC conversion process for Loops may be used by ITC^DeltaCom when converting an existing Loop from another CLEC for the same End User. The Loop type being converted must be included in ITC^DeltaCom’s Agreement before requesting a conversion.
Hiring Decisions Contractor shall make the final determination of whether an Economically Disadvantaged Individual referred by the System is "qualified" for the position.
Review by the Bank of Procurement Decisions The Procurement Plan shall set forth those contracts which shall be subject to the Bank’s Prior Review. All other contracts shall be subject to Post Review by the Bank.
PROVISIONS FOR NON UNITED STATES FEDERAL ENTITY PROCUREMENTS UNDER UNITED STATES FEDERAL AWARDS OR OTHER AWARDS Participating Entities that use United States federal grant or FEMA funds to purchase goods or services from this Contract may be subject to additional requirements including the procurement standards of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, 2 C.F.R. § 200. Participating Entities may have additional requirements based on specific funding source terms or conditions. Within this Article, all references to “federal” should be interpreted to mean the United States federal government. The following list only applies when a Participating Entity accesses Supplier’s Equipment, Products, or Services with United States federal funds.
