SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS Sample Clauses

SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS. Appendix K to PG&E’s 2011 solicitation protocol states specific subcomponents of the RPS Goals evaluation criterion. Among these is “environmental stewardship”, which is identified in the CPUC’s Decision 00-00-000 as one of a few designated “qualitative attributes” that the Decision allowed the IOUs to use as the basis for including Offers on a short list, subject to (1) the Offer being within reasonable price proximity to others selected and (2) support from the utility’s PRG prior to elevation. In the 2011 RFO, PG&E’s evaluation team screened Offers to identify higher-valued projects with potentially serious environmental impacts; this is the contrapositive of the logic stated in Decision 00-00-000, in that PG&E is using a qualitative attribute to reject Offers from its short list. The team identified only a few Offers as posing sufficiently egregious threats to consider rejection on the basis of the most serious environmental concerns. These typically related to concerns regarding impact to endangered or threatened species from construction of a generating facility in close proximity to critical habitat. In administrating its methodology, PG&E only rejected one 2011 Offer based solely on serious environmental concerns; it was adjacent to known occurrences of both endangered and fully protected species. Other projects that were identified as posing such concerns were rejected anyway based on inadequate value or viability scores.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS. Appendix K to PG&E’s 2009 solicitation protocol states various attributes of a renewable project regarding which Offers are scored to arrive at a rating for support of RPS Goals. Among these is “environmental stewardship”, which is identified in the CPUC’s Decision 00-00-000 as one of a few designated “qualitative attributes” that the Decision allowed the IOUs to use as the basis for including Offers on a short list, subject to (1) the Offer being within reasonable price proximity to others selected and (2) support from the utility’s PRG prior to elevation.20 In the 2009 RFO, PG&E’s administration of its methodology to exclude Offers that pose serious environmental concerns represents the contrapositive of the CPUC’s specific thinking in that Decision: instead of using this element of the RPS Goals criterion to elevate a lower-valued but uniquely environmentally beneficial Offer onto the short list, PG&E is using the qualitative attribute to demote higher-valued but environmentally detrimental projects from the short list. In the interest of transparency of the solicitation, Xxxxxx would recommend that future solicitation materials clarify that, within the components that make up the RPS Goals evaluation criterion, the specific review of environmental stewardship attributes can serve as the basis for rejection of Offers that raise serious concerns.
SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS. Appendix K to PG&E’s 2009 solicitation protocol states various attributes of a renewable project regarding which Offers are scored to arrive at a rating for support of RPS Goals. Among these is “environmental stewardship”, which is identified in the CPUC’s Decision 00-00-000 as one of a few designated “qualitative attributes” that the Decision allowed the IOUs to use as the basis for including Offers on a short list, subject to (1) the Offer being within reasonable price proximity to others selected and (2) support from the utility’s PRG prior to elevation.23 In the 2009 RFO, PG&E’s administration of its methodology to exclude Offers that pose serious environmental concerns represents the contrapositive of the CPUC’s specific thinking in that Decision: instead of using this element of the RPS Goals criterion to elevate a lower-valued but uniquely environmentally beneficial Offer onto the short list, PG&E is using the qualitative attribute to demote higher-valued but environmentally detrimental projects from the short list.

Related to SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS

  • ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS In the worse case scenario, many environmental concerns must be addressed. Along with the police and fire marshal, the state environmental protection department will be on site to monitor the situation. Items to be concerned with in a large central office building could include:

  • Environmental Condition Except as set forth on Schedule 5.12 to the Information Certificate, (a) to each Loan Party’s knowledge, no properties or assets of any Loan Party or any of its Subsidiaries have ever been used by a Loan Party, its Subsidiaries, or by previous owners or operators in the disposal of, or to produce, store, handle, treat, release, or transport, any Hazardous Materials, where such disposal, production, storage, handling, treatment, release or transport was in violation, in any material respect, of any applicable Environmental Law, (b) to each Loan Party’s knowledge, after due inquiry, no Loan Party’s nor any of its Subsidiaries’ properties or assets have ever been designated or identified in any manner pursuant to any environmental protection statute as a Hazardous Materials disposal site, (c) no Loan Party nor any of its Subsidiaries has received notice that a Lien arising under any Environmental Law has attached to any revenues or to any Real Property owned or operated by a Loan Party or its Subsidiaries, and (d) no Loan Party nor any of its Subsidiaries nor any of their respective facilities or operations is subject to any outstanding written order, consent decree, or settlement agreement with any Person relating to any Environmental Law or Environmental Liability that, individually or in the aggregate, could reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Change.

  • Environmental Conditions A Phase I environmental site assessment (or update of a previous Phase I and or Phase II environmental site assessment) and, with respect to certain Mortgage Loans, a Phase II environmental site assessment (collectively, an “ESA”) meeting ASTM requirements conducted by a reputable environmental consultant in connection with such Mortgage Loan within 12 months prior to its origination date (or an update of a previous ESA was prepared), and such ESA (i) did not identify the existence of Recognized Environmental Conditions (as such term is defined in ASTM E1527-05 or its successor, hereinafter “Environmental Condition”) at the related Mortgaged Property or the need for further investigation, or (ii) if the existence of an Environmental Condition or need for further investigation was indicated in any such ESA, then at least one of the following statements is true: (A) an amount reasonably estimated by a reputable environmental consultant to be sufficient to cover the estimated cost to cure any material noncompliance with applicable Environmental Laws or the Environmental Condition has been escrowed by the related Mortgagor and is held or controlled by the related lender; (B) if the only Environmental Condition relates to the presence of asbestos-containing materials, radon in indoor air, lead based paint or lead in drinking water, the only recommended action in the ESA is the institution of such a plan, an operations or maintenance plan has been required to be instituted by the related Mortgagor that can reasonably be expected to mitigate the identified risk; (C) the Environmental Condition identified in the related environmental report was remediated, abated or contained in all material respects prior to the date hereof, and, if and as appropriate, a no further action, completion or closure letter or its equivalent, was obtained from the applicable governmental regulatory authority (or the Environmental Condition affecting the related Mortgaged Property was otherwise listed by such governmental authority as “closed” or a reputable environmental consultant has concluded that no further action or investigation is required); (D) an environmental policy or a lender’s pollution legal liability insurance policy that covers liability for the Environmental Condition was obtained from an insurer rated no less than “A-” (or the equivalent) by Xxxxx’x, S&P and/or Fitch; (E) a party not related to the Mortgagor was identified as the responsible party for the Environmental Condition and such responsible party has financial resources reasonably estimated to be adequate to address the situation; or (F) a party related to the Mortgagor having financial resources reasonably estimated to be adequate to address the situation is required to take action. To Seller’s knowledge, except as set forth in the ESA, there is no Environmental Condition at the related Mortgaged Property.

  • Environmental Contamination Neither Party shall in any event be liable to the other Party for any costs whatsoever resulting from the presence or release of any environmental hazard such Party did not cause or contribute to causing. Each Party shall, at the other Party's request, indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the other Party, each of its officers, directors and employees from and against any losses, damages, claims, demands, suits, liabilities, fines, penalties and expenses (including reasonable attorneys fees) that arise out of or from (i) any environmental hazard that such Party, its contractors or agents caused in the work locations or (ii) the presence or release of any environmental hazard for which such Party is responsible under Applicable Law. In the event both Parties contribute to such environmental hazard, they shall each proportionately bear such liability.

  • Responsibility for Environmental Contamination 5.20.1 Neither Party shall be liable to the other for any costs whatsoever resulting from the presence or release of any Environmental Hazard that either Party did not introduce to the affected Work Location. Both Parties shall defend and hold harmless the other, its officers, directors and employees from and against any losses, damages, claims, demands, suits, liabilities, fines, penalties and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees) that arise out of or result from (i) any Environmental Hazard that the Indemnifying Party, its contractors or agents introduce to the Work Locations or (ii) the presence or release of any Environmental Hazard for which the Indemnifying Party is responsible under Applicable Law.

  • Environmental Compliance The Borrower and its Subsidiaries conduct in the ordinary course of business a review of the effect of existing Environmental Laws and claims alleging potential liability or responsibility for violation of any Environmental Law on their respective businesses, operations and properties, and as a result thereof the Borrower has reasonably concluded that such Environmental Laws and claims could not, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

  • ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS No implications identified.

  • Off-Site Environmental Impacts Nothing in this Article will be construed to make Company liable in any way for any environmental impacts or release of Hazardous Substances affecting the Company Premises that occurs by reason of the migration or flow to the Company Premises from verifiable or documented off-site environmental impacts that is not attributable to Company’s activities at the Company Premises.

  • Prior Environmental Impacts Nothing in this Article will be construed to make Company liable in any way for any environmental impacts or release of Hazardous Substances affecting the Company Premises that occurred prior to Company’s entry upon the Company Premises or that occurred as a result of the actions of Authority or any of its employees, agents, or contractors.

  • Environmental constraints and management Describe or cross refer to environmental constraints applicable to the Contractor’s plan and his activities on the Affected Property and how they should be managed. Include here or cross refer to an Annexure to the Service Information. The Contractor shall comply with the environmental criteria and constraints stated in Annexure

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.