Habitat Analysis and Characterization of Project Study Area Sample Clauses

Habitat Analysis and Characterization of Project Study Area. The Engineer shall perform an analysis and characterization of habitat and habitat impacts for the study area and documented on the Biological Evaluation Form. The habitat analysis shall be based on the most current State and TPWD MOU and associated Programmatic Agreements. o For transportation activities involving no new right-of-way or easements, including temporary easements, this includes:  The habitat descriptions of habitat types (e.g., forested, prairie, riparian, floodplain, rangeland, agricultural) in the study area are based upon the 2013 MOU.  The habitat description shall indicate the vegetative type(s) listed for the study area in the 2013 MOU.  The habitat description shall include a description of the existing vegetation within and adjacent to the right-of-way, as per the 2013 MOU.  The habitat description shall describe habitat for protected species if such habitat occurs within or adjacent to the right-of-way.  The description shall be supplemented with topographic maps (based on USGS 7.5' maps, aerial photos, on-site photographs and per the 2013 MOU.  Maps and aerial photos shall be annotated to indicate the locations and areas of distinct vegetative types if any have been identified during field inspections.  Photographs shall illustrate representative vegetation for each vegetation type. Aerial photographs (with dates) shall be provided when available. o If the vegetation within the right-of-way does not match the description as per the 2013 MOU or if there is an unusual difference between the vegetation in the right-of-way and outside the right-of-way, details shall be included in the description to clearly explain the differences in vegetative content between the existing vegetation and the 2013 MOU 4) For transportation activities involving new right-of-way or easements, including temporary easements, the habitat description shall address the entire study area. For projects with multiple alternatives, all alternatives shall be described to the same level of detail. If lack of access to the new location right-of-way limits field observation for the habitat description, existing published sources shall be used to provide an estimate. All elements of description required for projects with no new right-of-way (above) shall be included. Land use within and outside the DocuSign Envelope ID: B3F57688-319D-4340-876F-E11B399F9D4B proposed right-of-way shall be described. In addition, the description of vegetation in the new right-of- w...
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Habitat Analysis and Characterization of Project Study Area. The Engineer shall perform an analysis and characterization of habitat and habitat impacts for the study area and documented on the Biological Evaluation Form. The habitat analysis shall be based on the most current State and TPWD Memorandum of Understanding With Natural Resources Agencies and Memorandum of Agreement Between State and TPWD for Finalization of 2013 MOU, Concerning Habitat Descriptions and Mitigation.

Related to Habitat Analysis and Characterization of Project Study Area

  • For Product Development Projects and Project Demonstrations  Published documents, including date, title, and periodical name.  Estimated or actual energy and cost savings, and estimated statewide energy savings once market potential has been realized. Identify all assumptions used in the estimates.  Greenhouse gas and criteria emissions reductions.  Other non-energy benefits such as reliability, public safety, lower operational cost, environmental improvement, indoor environmental quality, and societal benefits.  Data on potential job creation, market potential, economic development, and increased state revenue as a result of the project.  A discussion of project product downloads from websites, and publications in technical journals.  A comparison of project expectations and performance. Discuss whether the goals and objectives of the Agreement have been met and what improvements are needed, if any.

  • Project Implementation 2. The Borrower shall:

  • DEVELOPMENT OR ASSISTANCE IN DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIFICATIONS REQUIREMENTS/ STATEMENTS OF WORK Firms and/or individuals that assisted in the development or drafting of the specifications, requirements, statements of work, or solicitation documents contained herein are excluded from competing for this solicitation. This shall not be applicable to firms and/or individuals providing responses to a publicly posted Request for Information (RFI) associated with a solicitation.

  • Study An application for leave of absence for professional study must be supported by a written statement indicating what study or research is to be undertaken, or, if applicable, what subjects are to be studied and at what institutions.

  • Project Plan Development of Project Plan Upon the Authorized User’s request, the Contractor must develop a Project Plan. This Project Plan may include Implementation personnel, installation timeframes, escalation procedures and an acceptance plan as appropriate for the Services requested. Specific requirements of the plan will be defined in the RFQ. In response to the RFQ, the Contractor must agree to furnish all labor and supervision necessary to successfully perform Services procured from this Lot. Project Plan Document The Contractor will provide to the Authorized User, a Project Plan that may contain the following items: • Name of the Project Manager, Contact Phone Numbers and E-Mail Address; • Names of the Project Team Members, Contact Phone Numbers and E-Mail Address; • A list of Implementation milestones based on the Authorized User’s desired installation date; • A list of responsibilities of the Authorized User during system Implementation; • A list of designated Contractor Authorized Personnel; • Escalation procedures including management personnel contact numbers; • Full and complete documentation of all Implementation work; • Samples of knowledge transfer documentation; and • When applicable, a list of all materials and supplies required to complete the Implementation described in the RFQ. Materials and Supplies Required to Complete Implementation In the event that there are items required to complete an Implementation, the Contractor may request the items be added to its Contract if the items meet the scope of the Contract. Negotiation of Final Project Plan If the Authorized User chooses to require a full Project Plan, the State further reserves the right for Authorized Users to negotiate the final Project Plan with the apparent RFQ awardee. Such negotiation must not substantively change the scope of the RFQ plan, but can alter timeframes or other incidental factors of the final Project Plan. The Authorized User will provide the Contractor a minimum of five (5) business days’ notice of the final negotiation date. The Authorized User reserves the right to move to the next responsible and responsive bidder if Contractor negotiations are unsuccessful.

  • Study Population The study was based at the San Francisco KPNC Anal Cancer Screening Clinic. We enrolled men who were identified as positive for HIV through the Kaiser HIV registry, who were aged ≥ 18 years, who were not diag- nosed with anal cancer before enrollment, and who pro- vided informed consent. In total, 363 men were enrolled between August 2009 and June 2010. The study was reviewed and approved by the institutional review boards at KPNC and at the National Cancer Institute. All partici- pants were asked to complete a self-administered ques- tionnaire to collect risk factor information. Additional information regarding HIV status and medication, sexu- ally transmitted diseases, and histopathology results were abstracted from the KPNC clinical database. For 87 of the 271 subjects without biopsy-proven AIN2 or AIN3 at the time of enrollment, follow-up infor- mation concerning outcomes from additional clinic visits up to December 2011 was available and included in the analysis to correct for the possible imperfect sensitivity of high-resolution anoscopy (HRA).13,15 Clinical Examination, Evaluation, and Results During the clinical examination, 2 specimens were col- lected by inserting a wet flocked nylon swab16 into the anal canal up to the distal rectal vault and withdrawing with rotation and lateral pressure. Both specimens were trans- ferred to PreservCyt medium (Hologic, Bedford, Mass). A third specimen was collected for routine testing for Chla- mydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhea. After specimen collection, participants underwent a digital anorectal ex- amination followed by HRA. All lesions that appeared sus- picious on HRA were biopsied and sent for routine histopathological review by KPNC pathologists, and were subsequently graded as condyloma or AIN1 through AIN3. No cancers were observed in this study population. From the first specimen, a ThinPrep slide (Hologic) was prepared for routine Xxxxxxxxxxxx staining and xxxxx- xxxxx. Two pathologists (T.D. and D.T.) reviewed the slides independently. Cytology results were reported anal- ogous to the Bethesda classification17 for cervical cytology except when otherwise noted. The following categories were used: negative for intraepithelial lesion or malig- xxxxx (NILM); ASC-US; atypical squamous cells cannot rule out high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) (ASC-H); low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL); HSIL, favor AIN2 (HSIL-AIN2); and HSIL-AIN3. ASC-H, HSIL-AIN2, and HSIL-AIN3 were combined into a single high-grade cytology category for the current analysis. Biomarker Testing Using the residual specimen from the first collection, mtm Laboratories AG (Heidelberg, Germany) performed the p16INK4a/Ki-67 dual immunostaining (‘‘p16/Ki-67 staining’’) using their CINtec Plus cytology kit according to their specifications. A ThinPrep 2000 processor (Holo- gic) was used to prepare a slide, which then was stained according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The CINtec Plus cytology kit was then applied to the unstained cytol- ogy slide for p16/Ki-67 staining. On the second collected specimen, Roche Molecular Systems (Pleasanton, Calif) tested for HR-HPV, includ- ing separate detection of HPV-16, and HPV-18 DNA, using their cobas 4800 HPV test. To prepare DNA for the cobas test, automated sample extraction was per- formed as follows: 500 lL of the PreservCyt specimen was pipetted into a secondary tube (Falcon 5-mL polypropyl- ene round-bottom tube, which measured 12-mm-by-75- mm and was nonpyrogenic and sterile). The tube was capped, mixed by vortexing, uncapped, placed on the x-480 specimen rack, and loaded onto the x-480 sample extraction module of the cobas 4800 system. The x-480 extraction module then inputs 400 lL of this material into the specimen preparation process. The extracted DNA was then tested as previously described.16 NorChip AS (Klokkarstua, Norway) also tested the second specimen for HPV-16, -18, -31, -33, and -45 HPV E6/E7 mRNA using their PreTect HPV-Proofer assay according to their specifications. All testing was per- formed masked to the results of the other assays, clinical outcomes, and patient characteristics.

  • Research Project 3.1 These Materials and Data will be used by Recipient's PI solely for use in conducting the Research Project, as named and described in the attached research application (insert Research Project name below):

  • Study Area The study area focused on the Bulk Power System in South-Eastern New York between Albany and New York City, and voltages underlying systems at 115 kV and above in the lower Xxxxxx Valley (Zones G, H & I). In the PSS™E power flow base case provided by NYISO, facilities rated at 115 kV and above in PSS™E designated areas 6 through 11 are monitored in the study. These areas are: • Capital District • Xxxxxx • Millwood • Xxxxxxxxx • Con Ed • Long Island

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