Recommended criterion Sample Clauses

Recommended criterion. Regarding the definition of the concept, it is recommended that the term “persons with disabilities” be used, since this definition corresponds to the official definition adopted in the twelfth edition of Annex 9 “Facilitation” and was approved by most of ICAO member States. This recommended criterion is fully consistent with that specified in the Facilitation Manual (Doc 9957) and is what best reflects the agreement reached by the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC), where the term “person with reduced mobility” is used, thus achieving a more universal use of the proposed concept. Accordingly, Recommendation No. 1 should not be amended.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Recommended criterion. Since this is a general standard applicable to all LACAC member States, it is recommended that it apply to all air operators, regardless of nationality, so as to unify criteria amongst the different States. This criterion is based on the Preface of the Facilitation Manual, which lists the duties, commitments, and high level of cooperation required from the various community sectors, such as: airline operators, service providers, airport authorities, and inspection agencies, amongst other organisations. Accordingly, Recommendation No. 3 requires no amendment.
Sample 1
Recommended criterion. Aerodrome facilities for persons with disabilities must take into account accessibility and universal design principles. They must also be in compliance with State legislation providing for full social integration of persons with disabilities. As noted, this recommended criterion is reflected in 8.9.5 and in the background information cited in 8.9.6 of the Facilitation Manual. Furthermore, Attachment 1 “Model Airport Facilitation (FAL) Programme” to the Facilitation Manual makes direct reference to various sections and paragraphs of Annex 9. Accordingly, Recommendation No. 4 would not require amendment. Appendix A — A2 — Recommended Criteria Analysis 5.- Recommended criterion: Assistance dogs must carry the appropriate identification and the certificate issued by the corresponding health authority of each State. . This aspect is not expressly mentioned in the Facilitation Manual, but it is mentioned tangentially in Annex 9, Chapter H, through Recommended Practice 8.36 and in item 36 of Circular 274 “Access to Air Transport by Persons with Disabilities”. There is no document that addresses the identification and certification of animals assisting disabled persons by the health authority of each State. Accordingly, Recommendation No. 5 should be disregarded until expressly required by ICAO, since it could be a source of discrepancy with the laws of other States. Accordingly, it is suggested that the following recommended practice by established: Assistance dogs must carry the appropriate identification and meet the corresponding health requirements of each State.
Sample 1
Recommended criterion. The air operator must provide the necessary information to all types of passengers so that they are fully aware of their limitations and rights. This aspect is not explicitly mentioned in the Facilitation Manual, but it does appear in the Recommended Practices of Annex 9, Chapter H, 8.22, 8.25, and 8.29. Likewise, Circular 274, items 4 to 8, also provides for the delivery of the required information. Accordingly, the proposed recommendation must be maintained.
Sample 1

Related to Recommended criterion

  • Evaluation Criteria 5.2.1. The responses will be evaluated based on the following: (edit evaluation criteria below as appropriate for your project)

  • Desirable Selection Criteria 1. Possession of, or significant progression toward the attainment of a post graduate qualification in area of specialty.

  • Criteria (1) Annual Evaluation Criteria. All performance evaluations shall be based upon assigned duties, and shall carefully consider the nature of the assignment in terms, where applicable, of:

  • Exclusion Criteria Subjects fulfilling any of the following criteria are not eligible for participation in this study.

  • 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.

  • Origin Criteria For the goods that meet the origin criteria, the exporter should indicate in Box 8 of this Form, the origin criteria met, in the manner shown in the following table: Circumstances of production or manufacture in the country named in Box 11 of this form: Insert in Box 8

  • STATEWIDE ACHIEVEMENT TESTING When CONTRACTOR is an NPS, per implementation of Senate Bill 484, CONTRACTOR shall administer all Statewide assessments within the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (“CAASP”), Desired Results Developmental Profile (“DRDP”), California Alternative Assessment (“CAA”), achievement and abilities tests (using LEA-authorized assessment instruments), the Fitness Gram with the exception of the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (“ELPAC”) to be completed by the LEA, and as appropriate to the student, and mandated by XXX xxxxxxxx to LEA and state and federal guidelines. CONTRACTOR is subject to the alternative accountability system developed pursuant to Education Code section 52052, in the same manner as public schools. Each LEA student placed with CONTRACTOR by the LEA shall be tested by qualified staff of CONTRACTOR in accordance with that accountability program. XXX shall provide test administration training to CONTRACTOR’S qualified staff. CONTRACTOR shall attend LEA test training and comply with completion of all coding requirements as required by XXX.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.