Actuarial Firm Decision Sample Clauses

Actuarial Firm Decision. The determination by the Actuarial Firm, as to the calculation(s) in dispute, will be in writing and will have the same binding effect for all purposes as if such determination had been embodied in a final and binding arbitral award and any Party involved in the Dispute may petition a court having jurisdiction over the Parties involved in the Dispute and subject matter to confirm such determination to final judgment or to vacate such determination pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act. The fees, costs and expenses of retaining the Actuarial Firm will be allocated by the Actuarial Firm between or among, as applicable, each of the Parties involved in the Dispute in accordance with the Actuarial Firm’s judgment as to the relative merits of such Parties’ proposals in respect of the disputed items.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Actuarial Firm Decision

  • Adverse Benefit Determination An adverse benefit determination is any of the following:  Denial of a benefit (in whole or part),  Reduction of a benefit,  Termination of a benefit,  Failure to provide or make a payment (in whole or in part) for a benefit, and  Rescission of coverage, even if there is no adverse effect on any benefit. An appeal of an adverse benefit determination can be made either as an administrative appeal or as a medical appeal, as defined further in this section. Our Customer Service Department phone number is (000) 000-0000 or 0-000-000-0000.

  • Determination by Independent Firm In the event of any question arising with respect to the adjustments provided for in this Article 4 such question shall be conclusively determined by an independent firm of chartered accountants other than the Auditors, who shall have access to all necessary records of the Corporation, and such determination shall be binding upon the Corporation, the Warrant Agent, all holders and all other persons interested therein.

  • Disagreement on Decision Should the parties disagree as to the meaning of the Board's decision, either party may apply to the Chairperson of the Board of Arbitration to reconvene the Board to clarify the decision, which it shall do within five (5) days.

  • Salary Determination 12.5.1 A unit member shall receive a salary not less than the minimum salary nor more than the maximum salary (Articles 12.3 and 12.4) for the rank to which appointed, except as provided in Articles 4.15, 5.6, 10.6.1 or Article 10.6.1.1. The effective dates for salaries shall be the appropriate dates specified in Article 12.2.2.

  • HHS Single Audit Unit will notify Grantee to complete the Single Audit Determination Form If Grantee fails to complete the form within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of notice, Grantee maybe subject to sanctions and remedies for non-compliance.

  • Order of Benefit Determination Rules When a Member is covered by two or more plans, the rules for determining the order of benefit payments are as follows:

  • Hearing Decision The decision of the Board shall be in writing and shall contain findings of fact and the personnel action approved, if any. The findings may reiterate the language of the pleadings or simply refer to them. The decision of the Board shall be certified to the Superintendent or designee who recommended the personnel action, and he/she shall enforce and follow this decision. A copy of the decision shall be delivered to the appellant or his/her designated representative personally or by registered mail. The decision of the Board shall be final.

  • Penalty Determination H&SC section 39619.7 requires CARB to provide information on the basis for the penalties it seeks. This Agreement includes this information, which is also summarized here. The provision of law the penalty is being assessed under and why that provision is most appropriate for that violation. The penalty provision being applied in this case is H&SC section 42402 et seq. because IIT sold, supplied, offered for sale, consumer products for commerce in California in violation of the Consumer Products Regulations (17 CCR section 94507 et seq.). The penalty provisions of H&SC section 42402 et seq. apply to violations of the Consumer Products Regulations because the regulations were adopted under authority of H&SC section 41712, which is in Part 4 of Division 26. The manner in which the penalty amount was determined, including aggravating and mitigating factors and per unit or per vehicle basis for the penalty. H&SC section 42402 et seq. provides strict liability penalties of up to $10,000 per day for violations of the Consumer Product Regulations with each day being a separate violation. In cases like this, involving unintentional violations of the Consumer Products Regulations where the violator cooperates with the investigation, CARB has obtained penalties for selling uncertified charcoal lighter material in California. In this case, the total penalty is $7,500 for selling uncertified charcoal lighter material in California. The penalty in this case was reduced because this was a strict liability first-time violation and IIT made diligent efforts to cooperate with the investigation. To come into compliance, IIT no longer offers Safegel BBQ & Fireplace Lighting Gel Fire Starter for commerce in California. Final penalties were determined based on the unique circumstances of this matter, considered together with the need to remove any economic benefit from noncompliance, the goal of deterring future violations and obtaining swift compliance, the consideration of past penalties in similar negotiated cases, and the potential cost and risk associated with litigating these particular violations. The penalty reflects violations extending over a number of days resulting in quantifiable harm to the environment considered together with the complete circumstances of this case. Penalties in future cases might be smaller or larger on a per ton basis. The final penalty in this case was based in part on confidential financial information or confidential business information provided by IIT that is not retained by CARB in the ordinary course of business. The penalty in this case was also based on confidential settlement communications between CARB and IIT that CARB does not retain in the ordinary course of business. The penalty also reflects CARB’s assessment of the relative strength of its case against IIT, the desire to avoid the uncertainty, burden and expense of litigation, obtain swift compliance with the law and remove any unfair advantage that IIT may have secured from its actions. Is the penalty being assessed under a provision of law that prohibits the emission of pollution at a specified level, and, if so a quantification of excess emissions, if it is practicable to do so. The Consumer Product Regulations do not prohibit emissions above a specified level, but they do limit the concentration of VOCs in regulated products. In this case, a quantification of the excess emissions attributable to the violations was not practicable.

  • Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.

  • Automated decisions For purposes hereof “automated decision” shall mean a decision by the data exporter or the data importer which produces legal effects concerning a data subject or significantly affects a data subject and which is based solely on automated processing of personal data intended to evaluate certain personal aspects relating to him, such as his performance at work, creditworthiness, reliability, conduct, etc. The data importer shall not make any automated decisions concerning data subjects, except when:

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