Verification of Governmental Approval Compliance. The Design-Builder shall provide documentation that all activities and conditions have been met to comply with all the Governmental Approvals and Non-Governmental Approvals;
Verification of Governmental Approval Compliance Sample Clauses
Related to Verification of Governmental Approval Compliance
CONTRACT COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT The HUB requirement on this Contract is 0%. The student engagement requirement of this Contract is 0 hours. The Career Education requirement for this Contract is 0 hours. Failure to achieve these requirements may result in the application of some or all of the sanctions set forth in Administrative Policy 3.10, which is hereby incorporated by reference.
Governmental Compliance The Tenant Improvements shall comply in all respects with the following: (i) the Code and other state, federal, city or quasi-governmental laws, codes, ordinances and regulations, as each may apply according to the rulings of the controlling public official, agent or other person; (ii) applicable standards of the American Insurance Association (formerly, the National Board of Fire Underwriters) and the National Electrical Code; and (iii) building material manufacturer’s specifications.
PCI Compliance A. The Acquiring Bank will provide The Merchant with appropriate training on PCI PED and/or DSS rules and regulations in respect of The Merchants obligations. Initial training will be provided and at appropriate intervals as and when relevant changes are made to such rules and regulations.
Contract Compliance The participating state agency and/or political subdivision that utilize this State Term Schedule will be responsible for the administration of the Contract and will monitor the Contractor's performance and compliance with the terms, conditions and specifications of the Contract. If an agency observes any infraction(s), such shall be documented and conveyed to the Contractor for immediate correction. If the Contractor fails to rectify the infraction(s), the agency will notify the State through the Department of Administrative Services, Office of Procurement Services, by executing a Complaint to Vendor (CTV) to help resolve the infraction(s). The State will apply the terms and conditions of the Termination provision of this Contract to resolve the infractions(s).
County Review and Approval of Insurance Requirements The County reserves the right to review and adjust the Required Insurance provisions, conditioned upon County’s determination of changes in risk exposures.
Compliance with Governmental Requirements Grantor shall comply promptly with all laws, ordinances, rules and regulations of all governmental authorities, now or hereafter in effect, applicable to the ownership, production, disposition, or use of the Collateral. Grantor may contest in good faith any such law, ordinance or regulation and withhold compliance during any proceeding, including appropriate appeals, so long as Lender's interest in the Collateral, in Lender's opinion, is not jeopardized.
CEQA Compliance The District has complied with all assessment requirements imposed upon it by the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resource Code Section 21000 et seq. (“CEQA”) in connection with the Project, and no further environmental review of the Project is necessary pursuant to CEQA before the construction of the Project may commence.
COMPLIANCE OF LAWS, NOTIFICATIONS XXX.XX PARTIES The Parties are entering into this Agreement for the allotment of a Apartment with the full knowledge of all laws, rules, regulations, notifications applicable to the project.
Status Substantial Compliance Analysis The Compliance Officer found that PPB is in substantial compliance with Paragraph 80. See Sections IV and VII Report, p. 17. COCL carefully outlines the steps PPB has taken—and we, too, have observed—to do so. Id. We agree with the Compliance Officer’s assessment. In 2018, the Training Division provided an extensive, separate analysis of data concerning ECIT training. See Evaluation Report: 2018 Enhanced Crisis Intervention Training, Training usefulness, on-the-job applications, and reinforcing training objectives, February 2019. The Training Division assessed survey data showing broad officer support for the 2018 ECIT training. The survey data also showed a dramatic increase in the proportion of officers who strongly agree that their supervisors are very supportive of the ECIT program, reaching 64.3% in 2018, compared to only 14.3% in 2015: The Training Division analyzed the survey results of the police vehicle operator training and supervisory in-service training, as well. These analyses were helpful in understanding attendees’ impressions of training and its application to their jobs, though the analyses did not reach as far as the ECIT’s analysis of post-training on- the-job assessment. In all three training analyses, Training Division applied a feedback model to shape future training. This feedback loop was the intended purpose of Paragraph 80. PPB’s utilization of feedback shows PPB’s internalization of the remedy. We reviewed surveys of Advanced Academy attendees, as well. Attendees were overwhelmingly positive in response to the content of most classes. Though most respondents agreed on the positive aspects of keeping the selected course in the curriculum, a handful of attendees chose options like “redundant” and “slightly disagree,” indicating that the survey tools could be used for critical assessment and not merely PPB self-validation. We directly observed PPB training and evaluations since our last report. PPB provided training materials to the Compliance Officer and DOJ in advance of training. Where either identified issues, PPB worked through those issues and honed its materials. As Paragraph 80 requires, PPB’s training included competency-based evaluations, namely: knowledge checks (i.e., quizzes on directives), in-class responsive quizzes (using clickers to respond to questions presented to the group); knowledge tests (examinations via links PPB sent to each student’s Bureau-issued iPhone); demonstrated skills and oral examination (officers had to show proficiency in first aid skills, weapons use, and defensive tactics); and scenario evaluations (officers had to explain their reasoning for choices after acting through scenarios). These were the same sort of competency-based evaluations we commended in our last report. In this monitoring period, PPB applied the same type of evaluations to supervisory-level training as well as in-service training for all sworn members. PPB successfully has used the surveys, testing, and the training audit.
