Sufficiency Determination Sample Clauses

Sufficiency Determination. On April 15, 2005, the Panel announced that it would host a conference to review the contents of all information filed by the Proponents. The results of the conference would be used by the Panel to determine whether there was sufficient information on the public record to proceed to the public hearings phase of its review. The conference was held in Yellowknife from June 26 to 29, 2005, and was led by a facilitator retained by the Panel. The Proponents and 21 Interveners made presentations at the conference, which was attended by members of the Panel as observers. The conference facilitator’s report was issued on July 14, 2005. On July 18, 2005, the Panel issued its Sufficiency Determination, a copy of which is included as Appendix 3. The Panel concluded that “there is sufficient information to proceed to the public hearings phase of its review, subject to certain information being filed within the time frame prescribed by the Panel.” The Panel concluded that the major issues to be considered in its review had been identified and could be addressed in the hearings, which should reveal and address any new information that might affect the Panel’s recommendations. The Panel also concluded that many of the deficiencies cited by Interveners who were opposed to proceeding to the hearings phase represented, in fact, differences in approach or concerns about the merits or quality of the information provided rather than the sufficiency of information to proceed to public hearings. In the Panel’s view, such differences would be best addressed in the public hearings. As part of its Sufficiency Determination, the Panel also advised of its intention to adopt a sustainability framework for its assessment of the Project, which is discussed in Chapter 5, “Approach and Methods.”
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Sufficiency Determination 

Related to Sufficiency Determination

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

  • 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.

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