SYSTEM TEST REVIEWS. Detailed test data reviews shall be held during the conduct of the system level test program, with participation by System Test, System Engineering, and XM representatives. The purpose of these reviews shall be to assure test data validity in a near real-time manner. There shall be pre-test and post-test reviews for each of the following test phases: [****]. XM PROPRIETARY EXHIBIT B REV B 25 of 73 ***** Certain information on this page has been omitted and filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Confidential treatment has been requested with respect to the omitted portions. The pre-test reviews shall be held prior to each major test phase. These reviews shall verify test readiness. The post-test phase reviews shall be held immediately at the completion of each major test These reviews, conducted by Systems Engineering and Systems Test, will include a brief data overview, an anomaly list including cause and corrective action status, and open issues, if appropriate. The test phase review shall serve to assure that the appropriate [****] has been completed and that spacecraft status is understood prior to leaving a test facility or major configuration.

SYSTEM TEST REVIEWS. 25 3.3.3 SHIPMENT READINESS REVIEW (SRR)...................................26 3.3.4 FLIGHT READINESS REVIEWS (FRR)....................................26 3.3.5 LAUNCH READINESS REVIEWS (LRR)....................................26 3.3.6 IN-ORBIT ACCEPTANCE TEST REVIEW (IOTR)............................27 3.3.7 MRR, TRR, AND TRB PARTICIPATION...................................27 3.4 ANALYSES.................................................................27 3.4.1 GENERAL DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE ANALYSES REQUIREMENTS..............27 3.4.2 [****] ANALYSIS...................................................28 3.4.3 [****] ANALYSIS...................................................28 3.4.4 [****] ANALYSIS...................................................28 3.4.5 [****] ANALYSIS...................................................28 3.4.6 [****] ANALYSIS...................................................28 ***** Certain information on this page has been omitted and filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Confidential treatment has been requested with respect to the omitted portions.

SYSTEM TEST REVIEWS. Detailed test data reviews shall be held during the conduct of the system level test program, with participation by System Test, System Engineering, and XM representatives. The purpose of these reviews shall be to assure test data validity in a near real-time manner. There shall be pre-test and post-test reviews for each of the following test phases : [****]. ***** Certain information on this page has been omitted and filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Confidential treatment has been requested with respect to the omitted portions. The pre-test reviews shall be held prior to each major test phase. These reviews shall verify test readiness. The post-test phase reviews shall be held immediately at the completion of each major test These reviews, conducted by Systems Engineering and Systems Test, will include a brief data overview, an anomaly list including cause and corrective action status, and open issues, if appropriate. The test phase review shall serve to assure that the appropriate [****] has been completed and that spacecraft status is understood prior to leaving a test facility or major configuration.

SYSTEM TEST REVIEWS. Detailed test data reviews shall be held during the conduct of the system level test program, with participation by System Test, System Engineering, and XM ***** Certain information on this page has been omitted and filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Confidential treatment has been requested with respect to the omitted portions.

Related to SYSTEM TEST REVIEWS

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
Log Reviews All systems processing and/or storing PHI COUNTY discloses to 11 CONTRACTOR or CONTRACTOR creates, receives, maintains, or transmits on behalf of COUNTY 12 must have a routine procedure in place to review system logs for unauthorized access.
Contract Review Agent shall have reviewed all material contracts of Borrowers including, without limitation, leases, union contracts, labor contracts, vendor supply contracts, license agreements and distributorship agreements and such contracts and agreements shall be satisfactory in all respects to Agent;
Random Testing Notwithstanding any provisions of the Collective Agreement or any special agreements appended thereto, section 4.6 of the Canadian Model will not be applied by agreement. If applied to a worker dispatched by the Union, it will be applied or deemed to be applied unilaterally by the Employer. The Union retains the right to grieve the legality of any imposition of random testing in accordance with the Grievance Procedure set out in this Collective Agreement.
Design Review ‌ (a) Where so specified in Schedule A (Scope of Goods and Services) or as otherwise instructed by the City, the Supplier shall submit design-related Documentation for review by the City, and shall not proceed with work on the basis of such design Documentation until the City’s approval of such Documentation has been received in writing. (b) None of: (i) the submission of Documentation to the City by the Supplier; (ii) its examination by or on behalf of the City; or (iii) the making of any comment thereon (including any approval thereof) shall in any way relieve the Supplier of any of its obligations under this Agreement or of its duty to take reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy and correctness of such Documentation, and its suitability to the matter to which it relates.
Utilization Review NOTE: The Utilization Review process does not apply to Services that are not covered by Blue Shield because of a coverage determination made by Medicare. State law requires that health plans disclose to Subscribers and health plan providers the process used to authorize or deny health care services un- der the plan. Blue Shield has completed documen- tation of this process ("Utilization Review"), as required under Section 1363.5 of the California Health and Safety Code. To request a copy of the document describing this Utilization Review pro- cess, call the Customer Service Department at the telephone number indicated on your Identification Card.
Performance Tests Contractor shall perform Performance Tests in accordance with Section 11.2 of the Agreement and Attachment S.
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.
Performance Testing (a) All performance tests of the Project, including any Initial Performance Test required in Section 2 of Appendix VIII, will be performed in accordance with the test procedures set forth in Appendix VIII (“Performance Test”), including additional procedures and protocols related to Performance Testing as mutually agreed between Buyer and Seller (“Test Procedures”). Seller shall bear all costs and receive all revenues, if applicable, associated with all Performance Tests. (b) After the Initial Delivery Date and during the Delivery Term, Buyer will have the right to conduct a Performance Test (“Buyer Performance Test”) no more than once a calendar year to demonstrate whether the Project is capable of delivering the Distribution Services at the Contract Capacity. Within 30 calendar days following a Buyer Performance Test, Seller will have the right to retest the Project with a Performance Test (“Seller Retest”). For the avoidance of doubt, the results of any Seller Retest will supersede the results of the preceding Buyer Performance Test. (i) If a Buyer Performance Test or, if a corresponding Seller Retest has occurred, a Seller Retest demonstrates the Project is capable of delivering Distribution Services at or above ninety-nine percent (99%) of the Initial Contract Capacity, the Contract Capacity will remain the Initial Contract Capacity; (ii) If a Buyer Performance Test or, if a corresponding Seller Retest has occurred, a Seller Retest demonstrates the Project is capable of delivering Distribution Services at more than or equal to eighty-five (85%) of the Initial Contract Capacity, but less than ninety-nine percent (99%) of the Initial Contract Capacity (“Testing Band”), the Contract Capacity will be automatically adjusted (upwards or downwards) to the capacity commensurate with the amount of Distribution Services the Project delivered during the Performance Test within the Testing Band. (iii) If a Buyer Performance Test or, if a corresponding Seller Retest has occurred, a Seller Retest demonstrates the Project is not capable of delivering Distribution Services of at least eighty-five percent (85%) of the Initial Contract Capacity, an Event of Default shall occur in accordance with Section 7.1(a)(viii).
Post Review With respect to each contract not governed by paragraph 2 of this Part, the procedures set forth in paragraph 4 of Appendix 1 to the Guidelines shall apply.

SYSTEM TEST REVIEWS Sample Clauses

Filter & Search

Related Clauses

Parent Clauses

Related to SYSTEM TEST REVIEWS