RTP Application Review Process Sample Clauses

RTP Application Review Process. When a new RTP project is received, the ADOT Environmental Planner creates a project folder in the EP-Drive. The State Parks Grants Coordinator notify the ADOT Environmental Planner, ADOT HPT Staff, and ADOT Biologist via e-mail when a new application is ready for review. The ADOT team members access the application through the on-line Web grants System. • The HPT Staff reviews the application. Key items to check for include: o Scope of work consistency between the application, the CCRF and the CE. o Consistency between the scope of work and project location maps. o A complete list of land owning/managing agencies in the CCRF. o If the CCRF identifies surveys, HPIFs or previous consultation, check to see that all documentation is included and that surveys are adequate and cover the entire project area. o Justification for lack of survey (ex. previous disturbance) in the CCRF if no survey or only partial survey. o If a historic property is identified adjacent to the project area, that information is provided in the CCRF explaining how the property will be avoided or why the project does not have the potential to affect the property. o The cultural resources questions in the draft CE are answered correctly. • The HPT Staff conducts background research, as needed, to supplement or verify the information included in the application. However, it is the responsibility of the applicant, not ADOT, to supply all required information. • Questions about the application or requests for missing documentation are directed to the ADOT Environmental Planner or to ASP&T, copying the ADOT Environmental Planner. ASP&T then contacts the applicant. • Once all required information is gathered, the HPT Staff applies the appropriate subparts of Stipulation VIII. • The HPT Staff completes the appropriate review sections in the on-line Webgrants system; ADOT/SHPO Cultural Review section and the Section 106 Memo. The cultural portion of the RPT documentation is to be put in the quarterly report, as appropriate. Once these are completed and dated by the HPT Staff, the ADOT Environmental Planner is notified that the Section 106 review is complete. • Environmental commitments, if needed, can be added to the Categorical Exclusion – CE checklist section (NEPA) in the ‘Final Environmental Commitments’ box.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to RTP Application Review Process

  • Review Process A/E's Work Product will be reviewed by County under its applicable technical requirements and procedures, as follows:

  • Review Protocol A narrative description of how the Claims Review was conducted and what was evaluated.

  • Claims Review Population A description of the Population subject to the Claims Review.

  • Claims Review Methodology ‌‌ a. C laims Review Population. A description of the Population subject‌‌ to the Quarterly Claims Review.

  • 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.

  • Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances 1. If FEMA determines that the entire scope of an Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances in Appendix B of this Agreement, with determinations for Tier II Allowances being made by SOI-qualified staff, FEMA shall complete the Section 106 review process by documenting this determination in the project file, without SHPO review or notification. 2. If the Undertaking involves a National Historic Landmark (NHL), FEMA shall notify the SHPO, participating Tribe(s), and the NPS NHL Program Manager of the NPS Midwest Regional Office that the Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances. FEMA shall provide information about the proposed scope of work for the Undertaking and the allowance(s) enabling FEMA’s determination. 3. If FEMA determines any portion of an Undertaking’s scope of work does not conform to one or more allowances listed in Appendix B, FEMA shall conduct expedited or standard Section 106 review, as appropriate, for the entire Undertaking in accordance with Stipulation II.B, Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings, or Stipulation II.C, Standard Project Review. 4. Allowances may be revised and new allowances may be added to this Agreement in accordance with Stipulation IV.A.3, Amendments. B. Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings

  • 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.

  • Program Review The State ECEAP Office will conduct a review of each contractor’s compliance with the ECEAP Contract and ECEAP Performance Standards every four years. The review will involve ECEAP staff and parents. After the Program Review, the State ECEAP Office will provide the contractor with a Program Review report. The contractor must submit an ECEAP Corrective Action Plan for non-compliance with ECEAP Performance Standards. The Plan must be approved by the State ECEAP Office.

  • Review Procedure If the Plan Administrator denies part or all of the claim, the claimant shall have the opportunity for a full and fair review by the Plan Administrator of the denial, as follows:

  • Completion of Review for Certain Review Receivables Following the delivery of the list of the Review Receivables and before the delivery of the Review Report by the Asset Representations Reviewer, the Servicer may notify the Asset Representations Reviewer if a Review Receivable is paid in full by the Obligor or purchased from the Issuer in accordance with the terms of the Basic Documents. On receipt of such notice, the Asset Representations Reviewer will immediately terminate all Tests of the related Review Receivable, and the Review of such Review Receivables will be considered complete (a “Test Complete”). In this case, the related Review Report will indicate a Test Complete for such Review Receivable and the related reason.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!