GWR Decision Sample Clauses

GWR Decision. This matter concerns the “GWR Decision,” which specifically is whether Cal-Am shall: (i) pursue a water purchase agreement, acceptable to Cal-Am, for the purchase of water from the GWR Project, and consequently Cal-Am shall develop smaller Desalination Infrastructure with a capacity of approximately 6.4 MGD (or as specified in the CPCN); or (ii) forgo the pursuit of a water purchase agreement for the GWR Project, and consequently Cal-Am shall develop larger Desalination Infrastructure with a capacity of approximately 9.6 MGD (or as specified in the CPCN). The settlement agreement entered among various settling parties to the proceeding within CPUC A.12.04.019 on July 31, 2013 (“Settlement Agreement”) provides for a bifurcated phase of the proceeding to determine the GWR Decision. The Settlement Agreement at Section 4.3(d) provides that the Governance Committee’s opinion on any one or more of the findings for the GWR Decision, as set forth in Section 4.2 the Settlement Agreement, should be provided to the Commission for the Commission’s consideration, and should the Governance Committee issue a written statement concerning any one or more of the findings for the GWR Decision before testimony is submitted in the bifurcated proceeding, California American Water shall file said written statement with the Commission within ten (10) days of receipt for the Commission’ s consideration. Consistent with Section 4.3(d) of the Settlement Agreement, any one or more of the Public Entity Members of the Governance Committee may request that any of the matters pertaining to findings respecting the GWR Decision, as set forth in Section 4.2 of the Settlement Agreement, be agendized for discussion and potential recommendation of the Governance Committee at any time prior to the submission of testimony in the bifurcated proceeding for the GWR Decision. After discussion by the Governance Committee during a meeting for which the matter was agendized, the Governance Committee may approve any written statement included within the agenda for that meeting relating to one or more of the GWR findings, including any modification to such written statement made upon motion at the Governance Committee meeting. Cal-Am shall promptly submit any such written statement approved by the Governance Committee to the Commission, and in no event later than ten (10) days after receipt of notice of the written statement from the Governance Committee.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to GWR Decision

  • Final Decision Concessionaire covenants that the decision of the Commissioner of Department, relative to the performance of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, shall be final and conclusive.

  • Claim Decision Upon receipt of such claim, the Plan Administrator shall respond to such claimant within ninety (90) days after receiving the claim. If the Plan Administrator determines that special circumstances require additional time for processing the claim, the Plan Administrator can extend the response period by an additional ninety (90) days for reasonable cause by notifying the claimant in writing, prior to the end of the initial ninety (90) day period, that an additional period is required. The notice of extension must set forth the special circumstances and the date by which the Plan Administrator expects to render its decision. If the claim is denied in whole or in part, the Plan Administrator shall notify the claimant in writing of such denial. The Plan Administrator shall write the notification in a manner calculated to be understood by the claimant. The notification shall set forth: (i) The specific reasons for the denial; (ii) The specific reference to pertinent provisions of the Agreement on which the denial is based; (iii) A description of any additional information or material necessary for the claimant to perfect the claim and an explanation of why such material or information is necessary; (iv) Appropriate information as to the steps to be taken if the claimant wishes to submit the claim for review and the time limits applicable to such procedures; and (v) A statement of the claimant’s right to bring a civil action under ERISA Section 502(a) following an adverse benefit determination on review.

  • Major Decisions (A) Subject to Sections 7.3(C) and 7.3(D) with respect to the Company, all major decisions of the Company set forth below in clauses (A)(1) through (A)(6) (“Major Decisions”) shall be subject to the Company’s Articles of Incorporation and joint approval by the Advisor and Sub-advisor. For the avoidance of doubt, Major Decisions specifically exclude any decisions regarding the day-to-day operations of the Company, the decision-making authority for which has been delegated to the Sub-advisor pursuant to this Agreement. Major Decisions shall consist of the following: (1) Decisions to recommend to the Board of Directors that the Company acquire or sell Properties, Loans and other Permitted Investments; (2) Retention of investment banks for the Company; (3) Marketing methods for the Company’s sale of Shares; (4) Extending, initiating or terminating the Initial Public Offering or any subsequent Offering of the Shares; (5) Issuing press releases involving the major decisions of the Company or the Advisor or Sub-advisor or their Affiliates with respect to the business or operations of the Company; provided, that the Sub-advisor need not obtain consent to any press releases regarding acquisitions or dispositions of Properties, Loans or other Permitted Investments; and provided further, however, that notwithstanding the immediately preceding proviso, any mention of the Advisor or its Affiliates in such press releases regarding acquisitions or dispositions shall be pre-approved by the Advisor; and (6) Merging or otherwise engaging in any change of control transaction for the Company. (B) Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, if the Parties do not agree to any action constituting a Major Decision that is described in any of clauses (A)(2) through (A)(6) above and that has been proposed by either Party, the Parties shall meet (in person or by phone) to discuss the issue in dispute in good faith over the five-business day period beginning with the delivery of notice of the proposed action to the other Party. (C) Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, with respect to Major Decisions described in clause (A)(1) above (but subject to Section 7.3(D)), (1) joint approval shall not be required, (2) the Sub-advisor and the Advisor shall discuss the proposed transaction (either in person or by phone) prior to either Party making any recommendation of the proposed transaction to the Board of Directors, and (3) the Sub-Advisor and the Advisor shall each give due consideration to the opinions of the other Party. Ordinarily, such discussions shall begin at least five business days before a recommendation is made to the Board of Directors; however, if in the sole discretion of the Sub-advisor it is in the best interest of the Company to make a recommendation to the Board of Directors more promptly, then the Sub-advisor may do so. In the event the Parties do not agree as to whether to recommend the proposed transaction to the Board of Directors, the Sub-advisor’s decision shall govern. (D) Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 7.3 or any other provision in this Agreement to the contrary, in all events, including Major Decisions, the Company will be managed under the direction of the Board of Directors. (E) Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary (but subject to Section 7.3(D)), the Sub-advisor shall have sole authority to act on behalf of the Company regarding amending the Advisory Agreement.

  • The Decision If mediation fails, or is not appropriate, and if the decision can be rendered after a short deliberation, the Arbitrator will do so. By meeting first with counsel to explain the framework of the Arbitrator’s decision, the parties are provided with an opportunity to influence the exact terms of resolution. Within the framework of settlement as outlined by the Arbitrator, the parties can work out exact terms which best suit the specifics of the case. Such an opportunity should not be wasted by continuing to argue the merits of the case.

  • Arbitration Decision The arbitrator’s decision will be final and binding. The arbitrator shall issue a written arbitration decision revealing the essential findings and conclusions upon which the decision and/or award is based. A party’s right to appeal the decision is limited to grounds provided under applicable federal or state law.

  • Arbitration Decisions Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties, the arbitrator(s) shall render a decision within ninety (90) Calendar Days of appointment and shall notify the Parties in writing of such decision and the reasons therefor. The arbitrator(s) shall be authorized only to interpret and apply the provisions of this LGIA and shall have no power to modify or change any provision of this Agreement in any manner. The decision of the arbitrator(s) shall be final and binding upon the Parties, and judgment on the award may be entered in any court having jurisdiction. The decision of the arbitrator(s) may be appealed solely on the grounds that the conduct of the arbitrator(s), or the decision itself, violated the standards set forth in the Federal Arbitration Act or the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act. The final decision of the arbitrator(s) must also be filed with FERC if it affects jurisdictional rates, terms and conditions of service, Interconnection Facilities, or Network Upgrades.

  • Independent Decision The Investor is not relying on the Issuer or on any legal or other opinion in the materials reviewed by the Investor with respect to the financial or tax considerations of the Investor relating to its investment in the Shares. The Investor has relied solely on the representations and warranties, covenants and agreements of the Issuer in this Agreement (including the exhibits and schedules hereto) and on its examination and independent investigation in making its decision to acquire the Shares.

  • Arbitrator’s Decision Within thirty (30) days after the appointment of the third arbitrator, the three (3) arbitrators shall decide whether the parties will use Landlord’s or Tenant’s submitted Fair Market Rental Value and shall notify Landlord and Tenant of their decision. The decision of the majority the three (3) arbitrators shall be binding on Landlord and Tenant.

  • Review of Decision Within sixty (60) days after the Secretary’s receipt of a request for review, he or she will review the Company’s determination. After considering all materials presented by the Claimant, the Secretary will render a written opinion, written in a manner calculated to be understood by the Claimant, setting forth the specific reasons for the decision and containing specific references to the pertinent provisions of this Agreement on which the decision is based. If special circumstances require that the sixty (60) day time period be extended, the Secretary will so notify the Claimant and will render the decision as soon as possible, but no later than one hundred twenty (120) days after receipt of the request for review.

  • Initial Decision Maker The Architect will serve as the Initial Decision Maker pursuant to Article 15 of AIA Document A201–2017, unless the parties appoint below another individual, not a party to this Agreement, to serve as the Initial Decision Maker.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!