Introduction of Evidence Sample Clauses

Introduction of Evidence a. Within the time limits hereinafter prescribed for the initiation of Step 2 of these procedures, the grievant shall introduce all evidence in the grievant's possession and on which the grievant relies or intends to rely as supporting the grievant's claim for relief.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (11)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Introduction of Evidence. Evidence may be introduced into the grievance record only in compliance with the following provisions:
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (6)
Introduction of Evidence. The parties agree to disclose all facts and exchange all documents relating to disciplinary action at Step Three of the grievance procedure. The Employer agrees not to introduce as evidence in a hearing relating to disciplinary action any document from the file of an Employee, the existence of which the Employee was not aware at the time of filing or within a reasonable period thereafter.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (5)
Introduction of Evidence. 1. All oral evidence or documentary evidence shall be presented to the designated representative of the Commission at the initial hearing on a controverted claim. The oral evidence shall be stenographically reported. Each party shall present all evidence at the initial hearing. Further hearings for the purpose of introducing additional evidence shall be granted only at the discretion of the hearing officer or Commission. A request for a hearing for the introduction of additional evidence shall show the substance of the evidence desired to be presented.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3
Introduction of Evidence. No evidence shall be adduced at arbitration which has not been presented fully at a prior Step in the Grievance procedure.
Sample 1

Related to Introduction of Evidence

  • Introduction of Change (a) Employer's duty to notify

  • Introduction and Background 1.1 The purpose of this Schedule 2 (Contract Services and Contract Supplies) is to set out the characteristics of the Contract Services and/or Contract Supplies (as the case may be) and Funding that the Provider will be required to make available to all Contracting Authorities in relation to Lot 1 and/or Lot 2 (as the case may be) and to provide a description of what the Contract Services and/or Contract Supplies (as the case may be) and Funding will entail.

  • Introduction The Texas Health and Human Services Commission ("HHSC") and the Contractor named in Section I (HHSC and Contractor may be referenced in this document collectively as the “Parties” and individually as the “Party") hereby enter into this Community Services Contract - Provider Agreement (the “Contract”) for the provision of services under the Contract type specified in Section I for the considerations set forth herein. The Contract Begin Date specified in Section I is not valid until this Contract is signed by both parties.

  • Finalization of Evaluation A Written Report 1 Before the evaluation cycle is final, and not later than May 10, a copy of the formal written evaluation report shall be given to the teacher and a conference shall be held between the teacher and the evaluator.

  • Evidence Used In Evaluation The following categories of evidence shall be used in evaluating each Educator:

  • BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION The Federal-aid Highway Program (FAHP) is a federally-assisted program of State-selected projects. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the State Departments of Transportation have long worked as partners to deliver the FAHP in accordance with Federal requirements. In enacting 23 U.S.C. 106(c), as amended, Congress recognized the need to give the States more authority to carry out project responsibilities traditionally handled by FHWA. Congress also recognized the importance of a risk-based approach to FHWA oversight of the FAHP, establishing requirements in 23 U.S.C. 106(g). This Stewardship and Oversight (S&O) Agreement sets forth the agreement between the FHWA and the State of Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) on the roles and responsibilities of the FHWA and the State DOT with respect to Title 23 project approvals and related responsibilities, and FAHP oversight activities. The scope of FHWA responsibilities, and the legal authority for State DOT assumption of FHWA responsibilities, developed over time. The U.S. Secretary of Transportation delegated responsibility to the Administrator of the FHWA for the FAHP under Title 23 of the United States Code, and associated laws. (49 CFR 1.84 and 1.85) The following legislation further outlines FHWA’s responsibilities: • Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991; • Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) of 1998; • Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) of 2005; and • Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) of 2012 (P.L. 112-141). The FHWA may not assign or delegate its decision-making authority to a State Department of Transportation unless authorized by law. Xxxxxxx 000 xx Xxxxx 00, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx Code (Section 106), authorizes the State to assume specific project approvals. For projects that receive funding under Title 23, U.S.C., and are on the National Highway System (NHS) including projects on the Interstate System, the State may assume the responsibilities of the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation under Title 23 for design, plans, specifications, estimates, contract awards, and inspections with respect to the projects unless the Secretary determines that the assumption is not appropriate. (23 U.S.C. 106(c)(1)) For projects under Title 23, U.S.C. that are not on the NHS, the State shall assume the responsibilities for design, plans, specifications, estimates, contract awards, and inspections unless the State determines that such assumption is not appropriate. (23 U.S.C. 106(c)(2)) For all other project activities which do not fall within the specific project approvals listed in Section 106 or are not otherwise authorized by law, the FHWA may authorize a State DOT to perform work needed to reach the FHWA decision point, or to implement FHWA’s decision. However such decisions themselves are reserved to FHWA. The authority given to the State DOT under Section 106(c)(1) and (2) is limited to specific project approvals listed herein. Nothing listed herein is intended to include assumption of FHWA’s decision-making authority regarding Title 23, U.S.C. eligibility or Federal-aid participation determinations. The FHWA always must make the final eligibility and participation decisions for the Federal-aid Highway Program. Section 106(c)(3) requires FHWA and the State DOT to enter into an agreement relating to the extent to which the State DOT assumes project responsibilities. This Stewardship and Oversight Agreement (S&O Agreement), includes information on specific project approvals and related responsibilities, and provides the requirements for FHWA oversight of the FAHP (Oversight Program), as required by 23 U.S.C. 106(g).

  • Background and/or Criminal History Investigation Prior to commencement of any services, background and/or criminal history investigation of the Vendor’s employees and subcontractors who will be providing services to the Customer under the Contract may be performed by the Customer. Should any employee or subcontractor of the Vendor who will be providing services to the Customer under the Contract not be acceptable to the Customer as a result of the background and/or criminal history check, then Customer may immediately terminate its Purchase Order and related Service Agreement or request replacement of the employee or subcontractor in question.

  • Completion of Evaluation Cycle 1. The summative evaluation rating shall be based upon a preponderance of the evidence, assessed in a holistic manner, that is aligned to the Ohio Educator Standards. Only evidence gathered during the walkthroughs and formal observations that are conducted for the current school year may be used.

  • Introduction and Purpose The Kentucky Community and Technical College System (KCTCS) and the Kentucky Department of Education (KDE) mutually support the attainment of dual credit coursework for high school students. This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) underscores the dedication of both agencies to improving the educational attainment of Kentucky citizens and reinforces the collaboration necessary to achieve this level of success. Improving the educational attainment of Kentucky citizens is key to ensuring the State’s long-term success. The State commits significant resources across the educational spectrum to develop and implement strategies to address this critical issue. Providing secondary students dual credit opportunities is a proven educational strategy with the capacity to complement and maximize the chances of success of our educational initiatives. Effective dual credit systems have impacts both at the secondary and postsecondary levels and provide the opportunity for collaboration. Participants are expected to know and follow current and future versions of Dual Credit Policies established by the Kentucky Council on Postsecondary Education found at: xxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/policies/dualcredit.html. Should policies change during the academic year, KCTCS may request support in meeting those changes outside the scope of this document.

  • Medical Evidence (a) While a medical certificate will not normally be required for leave taken in periods of less than five consecutive days, where it is considered warranted, an employer may require a principal to produce a medical certificate or other evidence of sickness or injury satisfactory to the employer. If so, the employer will agree to meet the employee’s reasonable expenses in obtaining the proof.

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