February 2012 Sample Clauses

February 2012. Re: Support Proposed Amendments to the Cruise Ship MOU Dear ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, Thank you for proposing two of the three amendments put forward by Friends of the Earth, People for Puget Sound and Puget Soundkeeper Alliance for the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) governing cruise ship discharges in Washington State waters and the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary.1 We strongly support both proposed amendments and we urge the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), Port of Seattle (Port) and North West & Canada Cruise Association (NWCCA) to adopt the most protective measures for Puget Sound as a part of the Cruise MOU—a full wastewater discharge ban for cruise ships in all MOU waters. Furthermore, more than 1,300 Friends of the Earth members and activists in Washington State submitted comments in support of a cruise ship wastewater no-discharge zone.2

February 2012. (emergency communication system)1. Punch list also showed incomplete works like provision of administrative operation and maintenance base camp, roadside furniture and roadside facilities which formed part of Schedule ‘C’ of CA, besides other works of minor nature covered under the categories of article 1(1.1) of CA. ▇▇▇▇▇ observed that declaration of 8 February 2012 as PCOD was against the provisions of concession agreement because (i) the tests prescribed under Schedule ‘J’ in respect of toll management system and highway traffic management system (emergency communication system) had not been carried out till that date and without successful completion of these tests, NHAI’s approval to IC for issuance of PCC from this date was in contravention of article 16 of CA. As per IC’s letter dated 18 April 2012 these tests were not completed till 18 April 2012; (ii) works of Road furniture and roadside facilities and administrative operation and maintenance base camp forming part of Schedule ‘C’ should not have been included in Punch list items because these were project assets as they formed minimum spatial /functional requirements for the project and were not covered under the definition of punch list items prescribed under article 1(1.1) read with article 16.5 of CA. These should therefore have been completed by PCC date (8 February 2012). By including such Schedule ‘C’ items under punch list the benefit of 120 days was provided to these critical items which did not qualify to be part of punch list as pointed out in para 1 above. As certified by IC these works were incomplete as on 23 June 2012. The exact date on which pending works of Road furniture and roadside facilities and administrative operation and maintenance base camp were completed was not available, however, IC intimated (23 July 2013) NHAI that all items mentioned under punch list (dated 18 April 2012) were not completed by the concessionaire till 8 June 2012 i.e. within time limit of 120 days2 prescribed under CA, but were actually completed in all respects by 8 February 2013. Hence, declaration of 8 February 2012 as provisional completion date by NHAI was not proper. The concessionaire, therefore, was not entitled for 4th annuity of ` 31.90 crore falling on 4 April 2012 (immediately after PCOD 8 February 2012) and the total annuity entitlements should be 30 annuities (instead of 31 approved by NHAI) starting from 5th annuity listed in Schedule ‘G’ falling due only on 4 October 2012. Thus there ...

February 2012. If at the end of any funding period, the recipient has expended an amount of nonfederal funds less than the agreed upon amount or percentage of total expenditures, the Agreement Officer may apply the difference to reduce the amount of USAID incremental funding in the following funding period. If the award has expired or has been terminated, the Agreement Officer may require the recipient to refund the difference to USAID.

February 2012. Parties: (a) The Company; and