Candidate Site Identification Sample Clauses

The Candidate Site Identification clause defines the process by which potential locations are selected for a specific project or activity. Typically, this clause outlines the criteria for site selection, the responsibilities of each party in proposing or evaluating sites, and any timelines or documentation required during the identification phase. By establishing a clear framework for identifying and agreeing upon candidate sites, this clause helps ensure that both parties have a mutual understanding of the selection process, reducing disputes and streamlining project initiation.
Candidate Site Identification. ‌ The City of Beaverton already has a list of properties compiled using ODEQ’s Environmental Cleanup Site Information (ECSI) and Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Cleanup Site databases, in addition to the public engagement conducted under the 2013 assessment grant. Staff will work with and monitor the contract to add additional sites as determined necessary. Site eligibility among the sites identified in the inventory will be verified with the Region 10 EPA officer and ODEQ. Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs) will be conducted in an order of priority with input from the community and city staff. The City of Beaverton will use the following threshold criteria in addition to the weights and ranking inputs discussed with the community according to the PIP: • Sites must be either abandoned or underutilized as well as meet the Site Eligibility requirements for ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ projects in the Guidelines for Brownfields Assessment Grants; • Sites are perceived as a threat to human health and the environment; and/or, • Sites are projected to significantly impact the community; with a good proposed beneficial reuse and expressed market interest; and/or, • Site redevelopment or reuse has the potential to contribute to the overall redevelopment and revitalization of the community in line with the plans and adopted polices of the respective jurisdiction; and, • Must have the commitment of the site owner to the brownfields redevelopment process, including for site access through an approved access agreement.
View Source
Candidate Site Identification. The objective of this subtask is to provide a methodology for the selection and review of sites that will receive assessments funds through this project. As noted in the previous subtask, an initial inventory of sites was conducted during the grant application phase. This inventory led to the selection of five (5) initial sites that were identified and proposed for assessment. Although a majority of the initial five (5) sites are still prime candidates for assessment there may be changes to the specific sites initially proposed because of recent sales or lack of willing participation from the landowner. However, since the sites are located in a former industrial/railroad corridor the replacement sites will most likely be adjacent to or have similar characteristics to the original proposed sites. The willingness of property owner participation will have a very strong influence on which specific sites are identified for further assessment. Coalition staff will have the lead responsibility for identifying the sites that will be submitted to EPA for the site eligibility determination process. The Coalition will solicit public involvement regarding the inventory site selection process throughout the entire project horizon. The Coalition will utilize outreach, facilitation and event services to identify and engage both traditional and non-traditional audiences. Specific milestones and deliverables for this subtask include:  Request for public comment regarding the GIS database developed as per section 2.3.1.  Minimum five (5) sites selected and approved for assessment by EPA.
View Source
Candidate Site Identification. The City of Beaverton has already started compiling a list of properties using ODEQ’s Environmental Cleanup Site Information (ECSI) and Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Cleanup Site databases in addition to other publicly available information. Staff will work with and monitor the contract to add additional sites as determined necessary. Site eligibility among the sites identified in the inventory will be verified with the Region 10 EPA officer and ODEQ. Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs) will be conducted in an order of priority with input from the community. The City of Beaverton will use the following threshold criteria in addition to the weights and ranking inputs discussed with the community according to the PIP:  Sites must be either abandoned or underutilized as well as meet the Site Eligibility requirements for ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ projects in the Guidelines for Brownfields Assessment Grants; and  Sites are perceived as a threat to human health and the environment; and/or,  Sites are projected to significantly impact the community; with a good proposed beneficial reuse and expressed market interest; and/or,  Site redevelopment or reuse has the potential to contribute to the overall redevelopment and revitalization of the community in line with the plans and adopted polices of the respective jurisdiction; and,  Must have the commitment of the site owner to the brownfields redevelopment process, including for site access through an approved access agreement
View Source
Candidate Site Identification. After updating the inventory through the activities listed above, City will map the potential contaminated sites within the City and target area. City will then query sites using selection criteria developed by City’s Brownfields Advisory Group based on the goals of this program. Currently, criteria have not been developed for selecting sites. The first priority of the Advisory Committee will be to develop selection criteria, based on desired outcomes for the community. After sites are identified, the City with the assistance of the Environmental Contractor (EC) will then conduct initial research to confirm the likelihood that a particular site will be eligible for funding based on the eligible site determinations listed in the Brownfields Assessment Agreement Terms and Conditions 2017. DEQ will be contacted to confirm likelihood, risk and type of contamination, current use, property owner information, the local jurisdictions knowledge and interest in the site, and surrounding site and natural habitat information. The EC will summarize this site information and produce maps of the sites for the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Advisory Committee meetings. The ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Advisory Committee will meet periodically throughout the project to review, rank, and provide advice on which sites should receive technical and financial assistance from the program. We anticipate the first batch of sites identified will be researched during the 4th quarter of 2017 and brought to the task force during their Q1 2018 meeting. Sites applying or identified at a later date will be researched at that time and brought to the next quarterly ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Advisory Committee meeting. City staff will then select sites to receive Phase I and/or Phase II Assessments and with the EC, submit site-specific information to EPA in order to confirm site eligibility and obtain approval for assessment using cooperative agreement funds. We anticipate this will occur throughout the life of the project beginning in the 1st quarter of 2018. ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ is lead staff for these tasks.
View Source
Candidate Site Identification. The objective of this subtask is to provide a methodology for the selection and review of sites that will receive assessments funds through this project. As noted in the previous subtask, an initial inventory of sites was conducted during the grant application phase. This inventory led to the selection of five initial sites that were identified and proposed for assessment. Although a majority of the initial five sites are still prime candidates for assessment there may be changes to the specific sites initially proposed because of recent sales or lack of willing participation from the landowner. However, since the sites are located in a former industrial/railroad corridor the replacement sites will most likely be adjacent to or have similar characteristics to the original proposed sites. The willingness of property owner participation will have a very string influence on which specific sites are identified for further assessment. Coalition staff will have the lead responsibility for identifying the sites that will be submitted to EPA for the site eligibility determination process. The Coalition will solicit public involvement in the site selection process through press releases, public meetings, and request for comment. The Coalition will also work to identify willing property owners to ensure assessment activities will proceed on schedule. The Coalition will utilize the site inventory as a basis for site selection and will prioritize the inventory based on total expected impact and likelihood of property owner participation. This process will be conducted by Coalition staff and will not incur reimbursable expenses in order to maximize the funding for assessment work. Specific milestones and deliverables for this subtask include: • Request for Public Comment issued to allow public input and comment on selected sites. • Minimum 5 sites selected and approved for assessment by EPA.
View Source

Related to Candidate Site Identification

  • Training Materials Training Materials will be provided for each student. Training Materials may be used only for either (i) the individual student’s reference during Boeing provided training and for review thereafter or (ii) Customer’s provision of training to individuals directly employed by the Customer.

  • Designated Prescription Drug Prescribers and Pharmacies We may limit your selection of a pharmacy to a single pharmacy location and/or a single prescribing provider or practice. Those members subject to this designation include, but are not limited to, members that have a history of: • being prescribed prescription drugs by multiple providers; • having prescriptions drugs filled at multiple pharmacies; • being prescribed certain long-acting opioids and other controlled substances, either in combination or separately, that suggests a need for monitoring due to: o quantities dispensed; o daily dosage range; or o the duration of therapy exceeds reasonable and established thresholds.

  • Commercialization Reports Throughout the term of this Agreement and during the Sell-Off Period, and within thirty (30) days of December 31st of each year, Company will deliver to University written reports of Company’s and Sublicensees’ efforts and plans to develop and commercialize the innovations covered by the Licensed Rights and to make and sell Licensed Products. Company will have no obligation to prepare commercialization reports in years where (a) Company delivers to University a written Sales Report with active sales, and (b) Company has fulfilled all Performance Milestones. In relation to each of the Performance Milestones each commercialization report will include sufficient information to demonstrate achievement of those Performance Milestones and will set out timeframes and plans for achieving those Performance Milestones which have not yet been met.

  • Research Use Reporting To assure adherence to NIH GDS Policy, the PI agrees to provide annual Progress Updates as part of the annual Project Renewal or Project Close-out processes, prior to the expiration of the one (1) year data access period. The PI who is seeking Renewal or Close-out of a project agree to complete the appropriate online forms and provide specific information such as how the data have been used, including publications or presentations that resulted from the use of the requested dataset(s), a summary of any plans for future research use (if the PI is seeking renewal), any violations of the terms of access described within this Agreement and the implemented remediation, and information on any downstream intellectual property generated from the data. The PI also may include general comments regarding suggestions for improving the data access process in general. Information provided in the progress updates helps NIH evaluate program activities and may be considered by the NIH GDS governance committees as part of NIH’s effort to provide ongoing stewardship of data sharing activities subject to the NIH GDS Policy.

  • Clinical Data and Regulatory Compliance The preclinical tests and clinical trials, and other studies (collectively, “studies”) that are described in, or the results of which are referred to in, the Registration Statement or the Prospectus were and, if still pending, are being conducted in all material respects in accordance with the protocols, procedures and controls designed and approved for such studies and with standard medical and scientific research procedures; each description of the results of such studies is accurate and complete in all material respects and fairly presents the data derived from such studies, and the Company and its subsidiaries have no knowledge of any other studies the results of which are inconsistent with, or otherwise call into question, the results described or referred to in the Registration Statement or the Prospectus; the Company and its subsidiaries have made all such filings and obtained all such approvals as may be required by the Food and Drug Administration of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services or any committee thereof or from any other U.S. or foreign government or drug or medical device regulatory agency, or health care facility Institutional Review Board (collectively, the “Regulatory Agencies”); neither the Company nor any of its subsidiaries has received any notice of, or correspondence from, any Regulatory Agency requiring the termination, suspension or modification of any clinical trials that are described or referred to in the Registration Statement or the Prospectus; and the Company and its subsidiaries have each operated and currently are in compliance in all material respects with all applicable rules, regulations and policies of the Regulatory Agencies.