Legal Basis The coordination of programs serving individuals with disabilities and the development of cooperative agreements between these programs has the following basis in Federal and State law: • The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended by the Workforce Innovation Opportunity Act, 29 U.S.C. 701 et. seq. • 34 Code of Federal Regulations §§ 361, 363, 397 • The Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended • Maryland Education Article, §§ 21-301 – 21-304, Annotated Code of Maryland • Code of Maryland Regulations, 13A, Subtitle 11.
Factual Basis Defendant will plead guilty because he is in fact guilty of the charge contained in the information. In pleading guilty, defendant admits the following facts and that those facts establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt:
Settlement Date Basis For purposes of this Agreement, all determinations of whether an investment is to be included as a Portfolio Investment shall be determined on a settlement-date basis (meaning that any investment that has been purchased will not be treated as a Portfolio Investment until such purchase has settled, and any Portfolio Investment which has been sold will not be excluded as a Portfolio Investment until such sale has settled); provided that no such investment shall be included as a Portfolio Investment to the extent it has not been paid for in full.
Study Population Infants who underwent creation of an enterostomy receiving postoperative care and awaiting enterostomy closure: to be assessed for eligibility: n = 201 to be assigned to the study: n = 106 to be analysed: n = 106 Duration of intervention per patient of the intervention group: 6 weeks between enterostomy creation and enterostomy closure Follow-up per patient: 3 months, 6 months and 12 months post enterostomy closure, following enterostomy closure (12-month follow-up only applicable for patients that are recruited early enough to complete this follow-up within the 48 month of overall study duration).
Conformity Assessment Procedures 1. Each Party shall give positive consideration to accepting the results of conformity assessment procedures of other Parties, even where those procedures differ from its own, provided it is satisfied that those procedures offer an assurance of conformity with applicable technical regulations or standards equivalent to its own procedures.
2. Each Party shall seek to enhance the acceptance of the results of conformity assessment procedures conducted in the territories of other Parties with a view to increasing efficiency, avoiding duplication and ensuring cost effectiveness of the conformity assessments. In this regard, each Party may choose, depending on the situation of the Party and the specific sectors involved, a broad range of approaches. These may include but are not limited to:
(a) recognition by a Party of the results of conformity assessments performed in the territory of another Party;
(b) recognition of co-operative arrangements between accreditation bodies in the territories of the Parties;
(c) mutual recognition of conformity assessment procedures conducted by bodies located in the territory of each Party;
(d) accreditation of conformity assessment bodies in the territory of another Party;
(e) use of existing regional and international multilateral recognition agreements and arrangements;
(f) designating conformity assessment bodies located in the territory of another Party to perform conformity assessment; and
(g) suppliers’ declaration of conformity.
3. Each Party shall exchange information with other Parties on its experience in the development and application of the approaches in Paragraph 2(a) to (g) and other appropriate approaches with a view to facilitating the acceptance of the results of conformity assessment procedures.
4. A Party shall, upon request of another Party, explain its reasons for not accepting the results of any conformity assessment procedure performed in the territory of that other Party.