IMBALANCE SETTLEMENT Sample Clauses

IMBALANCE SETTLEMENT. Balancing costs (capacity procured + activated energy) should be allocated to imbalanced BRPs through the use of imbalance charges. However, in several countries, one can see that balancing capacity procurement costs are disproportionally high. Possible reasons include that the sizing of reserves is not always optimal, (e.g. conservative application of N-1 rule in small systems) and that Capacity is also contracted to deal with network congestions (e.g. Italy, Great-Britain, Poland, Spain). Balancing capacity is generally contracted well before and for longer periods than the actual imbalances. Consequently, procurement costs of balancing capacity cannot be directly attributed to imbalanced BRPs. For this reason, balancing capacity costs are, in most cases, socialized among consumers while balancing energy costs are allocated to imbalanced BRPs through imbalance prices. Finally, procurement rules should be optimized to reduce as much as possible the cost of balancing capacity (cf. previous section), and converging the energy balancing cost to the overall balancing cost. Imbalance charges can be settled under either a single or a dual pricing scheme. A dual imbalance price mechanism is supposed to give stronger incentives to deliver schedules as submitted. However, it could also incentivise strategic gaming behaviour (i.e. bidding towards system imbalance) and may excessively penalise renewables generators, as their forecasts can deviate up or down. Such balancing provisions put them at a disadvantage compared to conventional generators as their forecasts become more accurate closer to electricity delivery, but they have few or no opportunities to use them in real time operation. Finally, the design of the imbalance settlement has to be a zero sum game for the TSO (not a source of revenues). Where a penalty component is added, this extra income is typically used by TSOs to reduce transmission tariffs, thereby resulting in a transfer of money from wind power generators to average users. This put small players at a disadvantage in comparison to large players which can net their imbalances and face lower imbalance costs. The impact of shorter imbalance settlement periods has also been assessed by the project (Market4RES-D3.2, 2015), leading to the conclusion that shorter imbalance settlement periods contribute to a more cost-reflective calculation of imbalance prices. The above mentioned design parameters are summarized in Table 1. A fully-fletched analysis of...
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
IMBALANCE SETTLEMENT. The imbalance settlement unit shall carry out centralised imbalance settlement on be- half of the relevant transmission system operators in Finland, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway. Imbalance settlement shall be carried out in Finland in compliance with Fin- grid Oyj’s handbook in Appendix 1. On assignment from Fingrid, the imbalance settle- ment unit shall maintain the Nordic Imbalance Settlement (NBS) Handbook in accord- ance with these terms and conditions. The NBS includes procedures that specify the terms and conditions of Appendix 1 and a more detailed description of the implemen- tation of imbalance settlement. The Balance Responsible Party must have a valid Imbalance Settlement Agreement with Fingrid’s designated imbalance settlement unit. When the Agreement was signed, the imbalance settlement unit was eSett Oy. The imbalance settlement unit shall determine the magnitude of the imbalance used by the Balance Responsible Party and shall invoice the fees specified in Appendix 2 to the Agreement on assignment from Fingrid. The imbalance settlement unit shall also discharge duties related to power transactions and reserve invoicing on the ba- sis of separate agreements covering these matters.
Sample 1
IMBALANCE SETTLEMENT. Imbalance Settlement Unit implements a centralised imbalance settlement in Finland, Sweden and Norway on behalf of the respective transmission system operators. Imbalance settlement in Finland is carried out in accordance with Fingrid Oyj’s handbook in Appendix 1. At Fingrid’s assignment, Imbalance Settlement Unit maintains the Nordic Imbalance Settlement (NBS) Handbook conforming to these terms and containing procedures that specify the terms of Appendix 1 and a more detailed description of the implementation of imbalance settlement. In order to implement imbalance settlement, Balance Responsible Party shall conclude a separate imbalance settlement agreement with Imbalance Settlement Unit. At Fingrid’s assignment, Imbalance Settlement Unit ascertains and invoices the volume of imbalance power used by Balance Responsible Party’s production balance and consumption balance, power transactions made during the delivery hour and reserve energies on the basis of information reported by Fingrid, distribution system operators and other electricity market participants.
Sample 1

Related to IMBALANCE SETTLEMENT

  • Grievance Settlements With respect to the processing, disposition, or settlement of any grievance initiated under this Agreement, and with respect to any court action claiming or alleging a violation of this Agreement, the Union shall be the sole and exclusive representative of the employee or employees covered by this Agreement. The disposition or settlement, by and between the Employer and the Union, of any grievance or other matter shall constitute a full and complete settlement thereof and shall be binding upon the Union and the bargaining unit, the employee or employees involved, and the Employer. The satisfactory settlement of all grievances shall be reduced to writing and shall be written on or attached to each copy of the written grievance and signed by the representatives involved. Unless otherwise expressly stated, all such settlements shall be without precedent for any future grievance.

  • Final Settlement The Parties agree and acknowledge that this Compromise Agreement shall constitute a final settlement between the Parties. This Compromise Agreement resolves only issues addressed in the Compromise Agreement.

  • Gross Settlement Amount Except as otherwise provided by Paragraph 8 below, Defendant promises to pay $290,000.00 and no more as the Gross Settlement Amount and to separately pay any and all employer payroll taxes owed on the Wage Portions of the Individual Class Payments. Defendant has no obligation to pay the Gross Settlement Amount (or any payroll taxes) prior to the deadline stated in Paragraph 4.3 of this Agreement. The Administrator will disburse the entire Gross Settlement Amount without asking or requiring Participating Class Members or Aggrieved Employees to submit any claim as a condition of payment. None of the Gross Settlement Amount will revert to Defendant.

  • The Settlement The Settlement was reached on May 11, 2018. Class Counsel filed this action on May 10, 2018. Over two years prior to the filing of this action, Class Counsel and Defendant’s Counsel conducted an adversarial informal discovery process. Class Counsel reviewed and analyzed thousands of pages of documents provided by Defendant and also reviewed many other documents, including U.S. Department of Labor Forms 5500 and other publicly available documents. The Parties participated in mediation before a nationally recognized mediator who has extensive experience in resolving similar claims involving other 401(k) plans. Only after six months of extensive arm’s length negotiation following the mediation were the parties able to agree to the terms of the Settlement. As part of the Settlement, a Qualified Settlement Fund of $17,000,000 will be established to resolve the Class Action. The Net Settlement Amount is $17,000,000 minus any Administrative Expenses, taxes, tax expenses, Court-approved Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, Class Representatives’ Compensation, and other approved expenses of the litigation. The Net Settlement Amount will be allocated to Class Members according to a Plan of Allocation to be approved by the Court. In addition to the monetary component of the Settlement, the Parties to the Settlement have agreed to certain additional terms: (1) During the first eighteen months (18) following the final approval of the Settlement, Defendant has agreed that the Plan’s fiduciaries will conduct a Request for Proposal (“RFP”) process for recordkeeping services to the Plan; (2) Within the first year following final approval of the Settlement, Defendant has agreed to publish a communication to then current Plan participants explaining the risks and benefits of the Plan’s money market fund investment option; (3) Defendant also will use an independent consultant familiar with fixed income investment options in defined contribution plans who will review the investment lineup and make recommendations to the Plan’s fiduciaries regarding whether to retain the money market fund and whether to add a stable value or comparable fund; (4) In addition, during the three- year Settlement period, Defendant has agreed to provide Class Counsel a list of the Plan’s investment options and fees; and (5) In considering investment options for the Plan, Defendant has agreed that the Plan’s fiduciaries will consider: (a) the lowest-cost share class available for any particular mutual fund considered for inclusion in the Plan as well as other criteria applicable to different share classes; (b) the availability of revenue sharing rebates on any share class available for any particular mutual fund considered for inclusion in the Plan; and (c) the availability of collective trusts, to the extent such investments are permissible and are otherwise identical to a particular mutual fund considered for inclusion in the Plan.

  • Commercial Settlement All the commercial settlements under this agreement shall be as per Government of Gujarat’s Solar Power Policy 2015 and Order No. 3 of 2015 dated 17.08.2015 of the Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission and any subsequent orders in this regard. The commercial settlement will be as follows:

  • Amicable Settlement The Parties shall use their best efforts to settle amicably any dispute, controversy or claim arising out of this Contract or the breach, termination or invalidity thereof. Where the parties wish to seek such an amicable settlement through conciliation, the conciliation shall take place in accordance with the UNCITRAL Conciliation Rules then obtaining, or according to such other procedure as may be agreed between the parties.

  • Loss Settlement Covered property losses are settled as follows:

  • Net Out of Settlement Amounts The Non-Defaulting Party will aggregate all Settlement Amounts into a single amount by netting out (a) all amounts that are due to the Defaulting Party for Product that has been Delivered and not yet paid for, plus, at the option of the Non-Defaulting Party, any cash, security or other Performance Assurance then available to the Non-Defaulting Party, plus any or all other amounts due to the Defaulting Party under this Agreement against (b) all Settlement Amounts that are due to the Non-Defaulting Party, plus any or all other amounts due to the Non-Defaulting Party under this Agreement, so that all such amounts will be netted out to a single liquidated amount (the “Termination Payment”) payable by the Defaulting Party. The Termination Payment, if any, is due from the Defaulting Party to the Non-Defaulting Party within two Business Days following notice.

  • Funding of Gross Settlement Amount Defendant shall fully fund the Gross Settlement Amount, and also fund the amounts necessary to fully pay Defendant’s share of payroll taxes by transmitting the funds to the Administrator no later than 14 days after the Effective Date.

  • The Settlement Fund 37. Releasors shall look solely to the Settlement Fund for settlement and satisfaction of all Released Claims against the DENSO Defendants and the Releasees, and shall have no other recovery against the DENSO Defendants or any other Releasee for any Released Claims.

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