Claims Review Methodology
a. C laims Review Population. A description of the Population subject to the Quarterly Claims Review.
Review Protocol A narrative description of how the Claims Review was conducted and what was evaluated.
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.
Random Drug Testing All employees covered by this Agreement shall be subject to random drug testing in accordance with Appendix D.
Classification Review Grand Valley State University and APSS shall jointly determine the review assessment survey instrument to be used at Grand Valley State University. The parties shall maintain a Joint Review Committee, composed of three members appointed by the Human Resources Office and three members appointed by the Alliance. Bargaining unit members questioning the assigned classification of their position may do so by using the following procedure:
A. Meet with the Employment Manager in the Human Resources Office to discuss the review process, changes in their job responsibilities, duties and any other process questions they may have.
B. PSS member will fill out the assessment survey and email to the Employment Manager along with any other documentation that supports the request. The survey instrument will be jointly administered/reviewed by the Assessment Team (consisting of the Employment Manager and an Alliance member of the Joint Review Committee). A meeting with the PSS is scheduled for a verbal review of the documentation and to answer any questions the Assessment Team may have. The supervisor or appointing officer is encouraged to attend. If the Assessment Team believes a job site visit is warranted as a result of the survey information, they will schedule a time for a joint visit.
C. The completed survey instrument shall be coded. The survey results, as determined by the Assessment Team, shall be shared with the survey participant.
D. After receiving the survey results, the survey participant, if they so choose shall have the opportunity to meet with the Joint Review Committee for additional input and appeal. Any additional information shall be reviewed by the Committee, and where the Committee feels it is necessary, the survey will be recoded, in a manner mutually agreeable.
E. The Joint Review Committee shall then deliberate as to the merit of the upgrade requested by the participant. If the Committee is not able to reach a consensus, the University will decide on the classification. The Alliance may appeal that decision through the arbitration procedure of the collective bargaining agreement. Professional Support Staff members may engage in the review process no more than once per year. Supervisors questioning the assigned classification of a staff member’s position shall provide supporting rationale, complete an assessment survey instrument and discuss with Manager of Employment. The Manager of Employment shall notify an Alliance Representative that a Supervisor is reviewing a staff member’s classification. The review and outcome shall be completed within 45 working days unless the Alliance Representative and Manager of Employment mutually agreed to an extension. The Alliance will be provided with the scored instrument and any supporting rationale.
Evaluation Criteria 5.2.1. The responses will be evaluated based on the following: (edit evaluation criteria below as appropriate for your project)
Selection Criteria Each Contract is secured by a new or used Motorcycle. No Contract has a Contract Rate less than 1.00%. Each Contract amortizes the amount financed over an original term no greater than 84 months (excluding periods of deferral of first payment). Each Contract has a Principal Balance of at least $500.00 as of the Cutoff Date.
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.
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
Performance Testing 7.2.1 The Design-Builder shall direct and supervise the tests and, if necessary, the retests of the Plant using Design-Builder’s supervisory personnel and the Air Emissions Tester shall conduct the air emissions test, in each case, in accordance with the testing procedures set forth in Exhibit A (the “Performance Tests”), to demonstrate, at a minimum, compliance with the Performance Guarantee Criteria. Owner is responsible for obtaining Air Emissions Tester and for ensuring Air Emissions Tester’s timely performance. Design-Builder shall cooperate with the Air Emissions Tester to facilitate performance of all air emissions tests. Design-Builder shall not be held responsible for the actions of Owner’s employees and third parties involved in the Performance Testing, including but not limited to Air Emissions Tester.
7.2.2 No later than thirty (30) Days prior to the earlier of the Scheduled Substantial Completion Date or Substantial Completion, Design-Builder shall provide to Owner for review a detailed testing plan for the Performance Tests (other than for air emissions). Owner and Design-Builder shall agree upon a testing plan that shall be consistent with the Performance Test Protocol contained in Exhibit A hereto. After such agreement has been reached, Design-Builder shall notify the Owner five (5) business days prior to the date Design-Builder intends to commence the Performance Tests and shall notify the Owner upon commencement of the Performance Tests. Owner and Independent Engineer each have the right to witness all testing, including the Performance Tests and any equipment testing, whether at the Site or at the Subcontractor’s or equipment supplier’s premises during the course of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, Owner shall bear the costs of providing a witness to any such testing and all such witnesses shall comply at all times with Design-Builder’s, Subcontractor’s or equipment supplier’s safety and security procedures and other reasonable requirements, and otherwise conduct themselves in a manner that does not interfere with Design-Builder’s, Subcontractor’s or equipment supplier’s activities or operations.
7.2.3 Design-Builder shall provide to Owner a Performance Test report (excluding results from air emissions testing), including all applicable test data, calculations and certificates indicating the results of the Performance Tests and, within five (5) business days of Owner’s receipt of such results, Owner, Independent Engineer and Design-Builder will jointly inspect such Work and review the results of the Performance Tests to verify that the Performance Guarantee Criteria have been met. If Owner or Independent Engineer reasonably determines that the Performance Guarantee Criteria have not been met, Owner shall notify Design-Builder the reasons why Owner determined that the Performance Guarantee Criteria have not been met and Design-Builder shall promptly take such action or perform such additional work as will achieve the Performance Guarantee Criteria and shall issue to the Owner another notice in accordance with Section 7.2.2; provided however that if the notice relates to a retest, the notice may be provided no less than two (2) business days prior to the Performance Tests. Such procedure shall be repeated as necessary until Owner and Independent Engineer verifies that the Performance Guarantee Criteria have been met.
7.2.4 If Owner, for whatever reason, prevents Design-Builder from demonstrating the Performance Guarantee Criteria within thirty (30) Days of Design-Builder’s notice that the Plant is ready for Performance Testing, then Design-Builder shall be excused from demonstrating compliance with the Performance Guarantee Criteria during such period of time that Design-Builder is prevented from demonstrating compliance with the Performance Guarantee Criteria; provided however that Design-Builder will be deemed to have fulfilled all of its obligations to demonstrate that the Plant meets the Performance Guarantee Criteria should such period of time during which Design-Builder is prevented from demonstrating the Performance Criteria exceed thirty (30) Days or extend beyond the Final Completion Date.
