Arrears Determination Sample Clauses

Open Split View

Download

Share

Cite

Arrears Determination. The Joint Audit Team of DISCOM and the Distribution Franchisee shall complete an audit of:

Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (4)

Save

Copy

Related to Arrears Determination

• Interest determination (a) Where Screen Rate Determination is specified in the applicable Final Terms as the manner in which the Rate of Interest is to be determined, the Rate of Interest for each Interest Period will, subject as provided below, be either:

• 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.

• 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.

• Expert Determination If a Dispute relates to any aspect of the technology underlying the provision of the Goods and/or Services or otherwise relates to a financial technical or other aspect of a technical nature (as the Parties may agree) and the Dispute has not been resolved by discussion or mediation, then either Party may request (which request will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed) by written notice to the other that the Dispute is referred to an Expert for determination. The Expert shall be appointed by agreement in writing between the Parties, but in the event of a failure to agree within ten (10) Working Days, or if the person appointed is unable or unwilling to act, the Expert shall be appointed on the instructions of the relevant professional body. The Expert shall act on the following basis: he/she shall act as an expert and not as an arbitrator and shall act fairly and impartially; the Expert's determination shall (in the absence of a material failure to follow the agreed procedures) be final and binding on the Parties; the Expert shall decide the procedure to be followed in the determination and shall be requested to make his/her determination within thirty (30) Working Days of his appointment or as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter and the Parties shall assist and provide the documentation that the Expert requires for the purpose of the determination; any amount payable by one Party to another as a result of the Expert's determination shall be due and payable within twenty (20) Working Days of the Expert's determination being notified to the Parties; the process shall be conducted in private and shall be confidential; and the Expert shall determine how and by whom the costs of the determination, including his/her fees and expenses, are to be paid.

• INDEPENDENT PRICE DETERMINATION 6.1 By signing and submitting this bid, the Bidder certifies that the prices in this bid have been arrived at independently, without consultation, communication or agreement, for the purpose of restricting competition, as to any matter relating to such prices with any other Bidder or with any competitor; unless otherwise required by law, the prices which have been quoted in this bid have not been knowingly disclosed by the Bidder prior to bid opening directly or indirectly to any other Bidder or to any competitor; no attempt has been made, or will be made, by the Bidder to induce any person or firm to submit, or not to submit, a bid for the purpose of restricting competition.

• 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:

• Calculations and determinations The Calculation Agent shall in respect of each Series of Notes in relation to which it is appointed as such:

• Proration of calculations If less than total program funding is subject to interest calculation procedures, the resulting interest liability calculations shall be prorated to 100% of program funding.

• Creditworthiness Determination Duke Energy Ohio will determine the creditworthiness of an SSO Supplier or its Guarantor, if applicable, whether organized under the laws of the United States or organized under the laws of a foreign jurisdiction, based on its most recent senior unsecured debt rating (or, if unavailable, its corporate or issuer rating). Duke Energy Ohio will have full discretion, without liability or recourse to such SSO Supplier or its Guarantor, if applicable, to evaluate the evidence of creditworthiness submitted by such SSO Supplier or Guarantor. Duke Energy Ohio may re-evaluate the creditworthiness of an SSO Supplier or Guarantor from time to time, including whenever it becomes aware of an adverse change in such SSO Supplier’s or Guarantor’s credit standing. In addition, the SSO Supplier may petition Duke Energy Ohio to re-evaluate its creditworthiness whenever an event occurs that the SSO Supplier reasonably believes would improve the determination made by Duke Energy Ohio of its or its Guarantor’s creditworthiness. Duke Energy Ohio’s credit re-evaluation must be completed as soon as practicable, but in no event longer than thirty (30) days after receiving a fully documented request. Duke Energy Ohio shall provide the rationale for its determination of the Credit Limit and any resulting security requirement and such determination shall be deemed final and conclusive. Duke Energy Ohio shall perform its credit re-evaluation and associated security calculation in a non-discriminatory manner. Each SSO Supplier or its Guarantor shall provide unrestricted access to its audited financial statements; however, if audited financial statements are not available, Duke Energy Ohio may specify other types of financial statements that will be accepted. If Duke Energy Ohio determines in its sole discretion that it is unable to adequately assess an SSO Supplier’s or Guarantor’s creditworthiness or the credit rating of an SSO Supplier or its Guarantor is insufficient, such SSO Supplier shall be required to post ICR Collateral in accordance with Section 5.4(d) and Margin Collateral in accordance with Section 5.7.

• Eligibility Determination The State or its designee will make eligibility determinations for each of the HHSC HMO Programs.