Written Decision Summary. If the decision stands following the employee/administrator meeting, the final assignment and considerations shall be summarized in writing.
Written Decision Summary Sample Clauses
Related to Written Decision Summary
Notice of Decision If the Plan Administrator denies part or all of the claim, 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: (a) The specific reasons for the denial; (b) A reference to the specific provisions of the Agreement on which the denial is based; (c) A description of any additional information or material necessary for the claimant to perfect the claim and an explanation of why it is needed; (d) An explanation of the Agreement’s review procedures and the time limits applicable to such procedures; and (e) A statement of the claimant’s right to bring a civil action under ERISA Section 502(a) following an adverse benefit determination on review.
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.
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.
SITE-BASED DECISION MAKING A. The District shall provide the training and staff development to support accountability/site- based decision-making activities. Teachers shall be given release time to attend these programs. B. Participation on the SAC shall not serve as a basis for the evaluation of any teacher. C. A minimum of three (3) to a maximum of five (5) teachers from each school shall serve on their school’s budget advisory committee formed for the purpose of making recommendations on the school’s general fund budget. Teacher members shall be elected by the faculty. Minutes from such meetings may be requested by the faculty and may be posted on the CTA bulletin board at the school by the Association Representative.
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.
Independent Review Contractor shall provide the Secretary of ADS/CIO an independent expert review of any Agency recommendation for any information technology activity when its total cost is $1,000,000.00 or greater or when CIO requires one. The State has identified two sub-categories for Independent Reviews, Standard and Complex. The State will identify in the SOW RFP the sub-category they are seeking. State shall not consider bids greater than the maximum value indicated below for this category. Standard Independent Review $25,000 Maximum Complex Independent Review $50,000 Maximum Per Vermont statute 3 V.S.A. 2222, The Secretary of Administration shall obtain independent expert review of any recommendation for any information technology initiated after July 1, 1996, as information technology activity is defined by subdivision (a) (10), when its total cost is $1,000,000 or greater or when required by the State Chief Information Officer. Documentation of this independent review shall be included when plans are submitted for review pursuant to subdivisions (a)(9) and (10) of this section. The independent review shall include: • An acquisition cost assessment • A technology architecture review • An implementation plan assessment • A cost analysis and model for benefit analysis • A procurement negotiation advisory services contract • An impact analysis on net operating costs for the agency carrying out the activity In addition, from time to time special reviews of the advisability and feasibility of certain types of IT strategies may be required. Following are Requirements and Capabilities for this Service: • Identify acquisition and lifecycle costs; • Assess wide area network (WAN) and/or local area network (LAN) impact; • Assess risks and/or review technical risk assessments of an IT project including security, data classification(s), subsystem designs, architectures, and computer systems in terms of their impact on costs, benefits, schedule and technical performance; • Assess, evaluate and critically review implementation plans, e.g.: • Adequacy of support for conversion and implementation activities • Adequacy of department and partner staff to provide Project Management • Adequacy of planned testing procedures • Acceptance/readiness of staff • Schedule soundness • Adequacy of training pre and post project • Assess proposed technical architecture to validate conformance to the State’s “strategic direction.” • Insure system use toolsets and strategies are consistent with State Chief Information Officer (CIO) policies, including security and digital records management; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to security and systems integration with other applications within the Department, and within the Agency, and existing or planned Enterprise Applications; • Perform cost and schedule risk assessments to support various alternatives to meet mission need, recommend alternative courses of action when one or more interdependent segment(s) or phase(s) experience a delay, and recommend opportunities for new technology insertions; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to the state of the art in this technology. • Assess a project’s backup/recovery strategy and the project’s disaster recovery plans for adequacy and conformance to State policy. • Evaluate the ability of a proposed solution to meet the needs for which the solution has been proposed, define the ability of the operational and user staff to integrate this solution into their work.
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: a) i. such decisions are made by the data importer in entering into or performing a contract with the data subject, and
Decision Making The Joint Development Committee and Joint Commercialization Committee shall each act by unanimous agreement of its members, with each Party having one vote. If the Joint Development Committee or Joint Commercialization Committee, after [* * *] (or such other period as the Parties may otherwise agree) of good faith efforts to reach a unanimous decision on an issue, fails to reach such a unanimous decision, then either Party may refer such issue to the Executive Officers. Such Executive Officers shall meet promptly thereafter and shall negotiate in good faith to resolve the issues. If Executive Officers cannot resolve such issue within [* * *] of referral of such issue to the Executive Officers, the resolution of such issue shall be as follows: (a) if such issue properly originated at the Joint Development Committee, determined by the Developing Party of the relevant Licensed Compound or Licensed Product at issue; provided that, notwithstanding the foregoing: (i) if Acceleron is the Developing Party and such issue relates to (x) the approval of an Additional Development Disease, or (y) matters under Section 5.6.3(d), then such issue shall be determined by [* * *]; (ii) regardless of which Party is the Developing Party, such issue shall be determined by [* * *] following the earliest of: (x) [* * *], and (y) the Joint Development Committee’s decision to go forward with a Phase 3 Clinical Trial of the relevant Licensed Compound or Licensed Product; provided that [* * *] shall continue to determine any issues that relate to the budget for and the conduct of the [* * *]; and (iii) regardless of which Party is the Developing Party, such issue shall be determined by [* * *] following the earliest of: (x) [* * *], and (y) the occurrence of any [* * *]; and (b) if such issue properly originated at the Joint Commercialization Committee, determined by Celgene. Notwithstanding the foregoing, none of Acceleron, Celgene, the Joint Development Committee or the Joint Commercialization Committee may make any decision inconsistent with the express terms of this Agreement without the prior written consent of each Party.
COURT'S DECISION 33.01 In the event of any articles or portions of this Agreement being held improper or invalid by any Court of Law or Labour Relations Board, such decision shall not invalidate any other portions of this Agreement than those directly specified by such decision to be invalid, improper or otherwise unenforceable.
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.
