№ lp_2_3_57810
File format: docx
Character count: 19320
File size: 46 KB
Compilation of vendor questions and Joint Board responses providing formal clarifications to specific sections of a Request for Proposals concerning technical requirements, contract terms, scheduling, and system responsibilities for a tolling project.
Document Type:
Request for Proposals Questions and Answers
Related Procurement:
RBOC, ETC and Toll Project Components
Issuing Body:
Joint Board
Project Component:
Tolling Component One – RBOC
Referenced Addendum:
Addendum 1
Proposal Due Date Reference:
May 24, 2013; June 3, 2013, 4:00 p.m. Local Time
Contract Term:
One-year warranty period followed by four-year maintenance period
Scheduling Requirement:
Primavera
Technical Proposal Page Limit:
100 pages maximum
DBE Requirement:
DBE Goals stated in the Contract
Systems Referenced:
RBOC, ETC, DVAS, VPS
Subject Matter:
Technical, contractual, scheduling, and operational clarifications
Price: 8 / 10 USD
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
Don’t have cryptocurrency yet?
You can still complete your purchase in a few minutes:- Buy Crypto in a trusted app (Coinbase, Kraken, Cash App or any similar service).
- In the app, tap Send.
- Select network, paste our wallet address.
- Send the exact amount shown above.
The final amount may vary slightly depending on the payment method.
The file will be sent to the email address provided at checkout within 24 hours.
The product description is provided for reference. Actual content and formatting may differ slightly.
Year:
2020
Region / city:
Harare
Theme:
Gender-based violence, Migration, Legal aid, Health crisis
Document type:
Terms of Reference
Institution:
Zimbabwe Republic Police, Immigration Department, Legal Aid Directorate
Author:
UNDP
Target audience:
Government officials, Law enforcement, Social service providers
Duration:
30 working days
Start date:
March 2020
Approval date:
N/A
Amendment date:
N/A
This document outlines the terms of reference for developing a toll-free GBV call centre in Zimbabwe for three key stakeholders:
the Zimbabwe Republic Police Victim Friendly Unit, the Immigration Department, and the Legal Aid Directorate.
Year:
2023
Region / City:
KwaZulu Natal, eThekwini Municipality
Subject:
Consulting Engineering Services, Toll Plaza Upgrade, National Route 2
Document Type:
Tender Notice
Organization:
South African National Roads Agency SOC Limited (SANRAL)
Author:
South African National Roads Agency SOC Limited (SANRAL)
Target Audience:
Engineering consultants, tenderers
Period of validity:
Until 13 October 2023
Approval Date:
01 September 2023
Amendment Date:
01 September 2023
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Riverside County
Topic:
Transportation Policy
Document Type:
Resolution
Organization / Institution:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
Author:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
Target Audience:
Public, Transportation Facility Users, Financial Community
Effective Period:
Starting from the opening of the 15/91 Express Lanes Connector
Approval Date:
2023
Amendment Date:
January 1, 2023
Year:
2014
Region / City:
Harris County, Texas
Subject:
Proposal Submission for TxDOT Toll Lanes Project
Document Type:
Proposal
Agency / Institution:
Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT)
Author:
Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT)
Effective Period:
2014
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Revisions:
Not specified
Year:
2017
Region / City:
Dublin
Subject:
Transportation / Toll Refunds
Document Type:
Claim Form
Issuing Authority:
Dublin City Council
Target Audience:
Businesses operating 5+ axle vehicles
Period Covered:
From: ___________ to: ___________
Claim Amount:
Number of trips x €4.25 per trip
Submission Deadline:
Claims must be submitted in the 3rd month for the previous two months
Supporting Documents Required:
Official toll invoices/statements, receipts, up-to-date Tax Clearance Certificate/C2 Form
Terms:
Claims only valid for 5+ axle vehicles during operational hours of the HGV Management Strategy; incorrect information may lead to rejection
Year:
2011
Region / City:
Senegal
Topic:
Infrastructure Development
Document Type:
Project Restructuring Report
Organization / Institution:
World Bank
Author:
Moctar Thiam, Supee Teravaninthorn, McDonald P. Benjamin
Target Audience:
Stakeholders in infrastructure and development projects
Period of Action:
2009–2015
Approval Date:
06/02/2009
Amendment Date:
06/14/2011
Year:
1984–1991
Region / Country:
United States and Vietnam
Topic:
Military service and veteran health
Document Type:
Discussion guide / lesson plan
Organization:
Vietnam Veterans for America; Department of Veterans Affairs
Author:
Educational program authors (unspecified)
Target Audience:
Students
Period Covered:
Vietnam War and subsequent veteran experiences
Date of Publication:
1984
Legal References:
Agent Orange Act, 1991
Key Issues:
Agent Orange exposure, PTSD, veteran homelessness, generational health effects
Referenced Sources:
New York Times article “Veterans Speak Out Against Agent Orange”
Year:
2014
Region / City:
Harris County, Texas, USA
Subject:
Toll Lanes Development and Operation Proposal
Document Type:
Proposal Letter
Organization / Agency:
Texas Department of Transportation
Author:
Undisclosed Proposer
Target Audience:
Texas Department of Transportation officials
Period of Action:
2014, proposal validity 180 days from submission
Submission Date:
_____________, 2014
Legal Structure Information:
Includes details of Proposer/Developer and Equity Members
Governing Law:
State of Texas
Attachments:
Executive Summary, Technical Proposal, Financial Proposal, Addenda and Responses
Year:
2020
Region / City:
Northeast Nigeria
Topic:
Boko Haram, Child Soldiers, Displacement, Military Detention, Education
Document Type:
Report
Organization:
Amnesty International
Author:
Amnesty International
Target Audience:
General public, policymakers, human rights organizations
Period of Validity:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
20____
Type of Document:
Contract
Parties:
Buyer and Manufacturer
Subject:
Production and supply of products under toll manufacturing
Effective Date:
______ day of , 20
Term:
__________ years
Payment Terms:
$_____ per unit, with specified payment schedule
Intellectual Property:
Limited, non-exclusive license granted to Manufacturer for production
Delivery Terms:
Manufacturer delivers to Buyer at specified address, risk of loss transfer conditions outlined
Product Acceptance:
Inspection and testing period defined, rejection rights specified
Warranties:
Compliance with SOW and applicable regulations, defects warranty conditions stated
Termination Conditions:
Mutual consent, notice periods, insolvency, or dissolution events
Renewal Terms:
Specified automatic renewal or termination options
Note:
Year
Region / City:
Mumbai, India
Topic:
Education, Alumni Services
Document Type:
Application Form
Organization:
Tata Institute of Social Sciences
Author:
TISS-SSE
Target Audience:
Alumni
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Amendments:
Not specified
Year:
2026
Region / city:
Not specified
Topic:
Academic paper template
Document Type:
Template
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Researchers, academics, authors submitting manuscripts
Period of Action:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
) and join the S1NET. For guides with in depth examinations of performance measure definitions, go to:
https://www.milsuite.mil/book/docs/DOC-129783
Table of Contents (Hyperlinks to Sections):
Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ OER Narratives: Notes, Rules, and Instructions OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: Negative Comment Rules Referred OERs Narrative Comment Examples Block a. APFT and HT/WT Block b. Overall Performance Block c. Character (to include SHARP comments) Block d. Presence Block e. Intellect Block f. Leads Block g. Develops Block h. Achieves Senior Rater Potential Senior Rater Narrative Examples Senior Rater Narrative Comment Examples (for potential, promotion, school, etc.) Successive Assignments Other SR Comments (explanations of anything unusual about OER) Effective Words for Evaluations JUNIOR OFFICER PLATE (DA FORM 67-10-1) NOTE: 2LTs who have NOT completed BOLC, will not receive an OER until they complete BOLC (AC and ARNG; USAR officers can receive an OER before completing BOLC). The FROM date will be their commissioning date. All time until their BOLC graduation will be NONRATED on their first OER. OER PROFILING: OERs: Rater and Senior Rater Profiles are CONSTRAINED, meaning Officers are only allowed to grant 49% of each rank they rate with either an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). HOWEVER, if you have an immature profile, and have only just begun rating/senior rating Officers of a certain rank, you are allowed a ONE TIME option of giving one of the first two evaluations you make at a particular grade, an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). OER (OER SUPPORT FORM) PART III: Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ (blocks a., b., and c.): Refer to DA PAM 611-21 (https://www.milsuite.mil/book/groups/smartbookdapam611-21
) and DA PAM 600-3 (Commissioned Officer Professional Development and Career Management), to assist in the development of PART III, block d. As a minimum, the duty description will include pr:
- Number of personnel supervised, - Amount of resources under the rated officer’s control, - Scope of responsibilities. 3) Descriptions must be clear and concise with emphasis on specific functions required. 4) Note conditions unique to the assignment; e.g. RA officers assigned to FT support duties with RC units or USAR officers assigned to RA units OER NARRATIVES: Notes, Rules, and Instructions Rater and Senior Rater Narratives: - Requires candor and courage; frank and accurate assessment. - Quantify officer’s value relative to peers and do so in concert with rater/senior rater box check. - Are short; tell a simple story about the quality of officer being evaluated. - Are interesting and compelling. - Are looked at by selection board members when they are looking for in-depth information about a rated officer’s performance and potential. - Numbers; 1-10, write them out (e.g. one, two, ten). 11 or higher, write the number; e.g. 11, 15, 105. Exception, when a 1-10 is WITH an 11 or higher; e.g. “5 tool kits with 20 tools each.” - Fashion the narrative to the officer; double check use of “he/his” vs. “she/hers.” - Awards: Awards and/or special recognition received during the rating period may be cited in evaluation comments (for example, “received the Humanitarian Service Medal” or “named the Instructor of the Year”). - Raters and SR CAN use the officer’s name in the narrative; e.g. “1LT Joe was ….” Rater and Rater Narratives: - Focus on PERFORMANCE; explaining what the rated officer did and how well he/she did it. - Focus on specifics to quantify and qualify performance. - Raters should advocate the rated officer to the SR. - When there is no SR (due to lack of qualifications), rater’s narrative provides the input on both performance and potential. Senior Rater (SR) and SR Narrative (see SR Rater Narrative section for examples): - Focus on POTENTIAL, 3-5 years out (promotions, command, school, & assignments). - Can amplify box checks by using the narrative to clearly send the appropriate message to selection boards. - CANNOT mention Box Check. - Additional information for when SR is also Rater can be found in DA PAM 623-3, pg. 26, “DA Form 67–10–1, part VI: block c—Senior Rater Narrative.” OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: - School/Course Comments: Bullets about how a Soldier did in a school or course are ONLY allowed if that school did not produce an AER/DA Form 1059. - Narratives are not a laundry list of superlatives – more is not necessarily better. - Brief, unqualified superlatives or phrases, particularly if they may be considered trite. - Excessive use of technical acronyms, or phrases not commonly recognized. - Techniques aimed at making specific words, phrases, or sentences stand out from the rest of the narrative; e.g. excessive use of capital letters; unnecessary quotation marks; repeated use of exclamation points; wide spacing between selected words, phrases, or sentences to include double spacing within a paragraph or between paragraphs. - Inappropriate references to box checks; e.g “Would be TOP BLOCK if profile allowed” or “absolutely far exceeded the standard”. - Trying to quantify (e.g. “top 2% of my captains”) with a small population. - Stay in your lane/level; avoid comments like “Best 1LT in the Army” unless you’re the Army CoS. - Stating “the best ever”; having 10 in the population, 50 in the profile. - Using overused phrases and clichés that are counterproductive or overused; e.g. stellar, historic, “delivered a dazzling performance,” “hit the ground running,” consummate professional, and unlimited potential. - Using specific selection board-type language. Examples of this include, “definitely a 6+ Soldier”. - Don’t exaggerate; “If I could prove it, CPT X is an LTC disguised as a CPT.” - Be mindful of what IS NOT said; it can have the same impact as what is said; e.g. NOT having numbers, or quantifiable points. - Don’t say the sa
Note:
en
Topic:
Officer Evaluation, Narrative Guidelines
Document Type:
Guide
Target Audience:
Raters, Senior Raters
Year:
2024
Region / city:
Kyoto
Theme:
Admissions
Document type:
Evaluation form
Organization / institution:
Kyoto iUP Admissions Office
Author:
Kyoto iUP Admissions Office
Target audience:
Secondary/high school applicants and evaluators
Period of validity:
Until applicants’ screening results are announced
Approval date:
N/A
Modification date:
N/A
Note:
Date
Declaration:
All the above facts stated are true and correct to best of my / our knowledge and belief.
Year:
Not specified
Region / City:
Not specified
Theme:
Wood doors specification for construction projects
Document Type:
Specification
Organization / Institution:
Simpson Door Company
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Designers and builders
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of amendments:
Not specified
Year:
2021
Region / city:
USA
Topic:
Greenhouse Gas Inventory
Document type:
Template
Agency / organization:
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Author:
EPA
Target audience:
National inventory teams, environmental policy makers
Validity period:
Not specified
Approval date:
Not specified
Date of changes:
Not specified
Year:
2026
Region / City:
[Municipality Name], Wisconsin
Theme:
Professional Services Procurement for CDBG-funded Projects
Document Type:
Template
Organ / Institution:
[Municipality Name]
Author:
[Author Name or Organization]
Target Audience:
Applicants and grantees for CDBG programs
Effective Period:
[Effective Period, if specified]
Approval Date:
[Approval Date, if specified]
Amendment Date:
[Amendment Date, if specified]
Scope of Services:
Consulting services for [Project Title/Type, e.g., Washington Street Water & Sewer Upgrades]
Deadline for Submission:
[Submission Deadline, if specified]
Evaluation Criteria:
[Criteria, if specified]