No Plan Clause Samples
The "No Plan" clause establishes that there is no formal plan or schedule included as part of the agreement. In practice, this means that the parties are not bound by any predefined timelines, milestones, or deliverables that would otherwise be set out in a project plan or similar document. This clause is typically used to clarify that the agreement does not impose specific planning obligations, thereby reducing the risk of disputes over missed deadlines or unfulfilled planning requirements.
No Plan. Any employee that demonstrates they have medical insurance from another service will receive three hundred and fifty dollars ($350) per month in lieu of medical benefits. The cash payment is subject to normal taxation.
No Plan. No Plan (i) provides or provided any benefit guaranteed by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (as described in ERISA); (ii) is or was a “multiemployer plan” as defined in Section 4001(a)(3) of ERISA; or (iii) is or was subject to the minimum funding standards of Section 412 of the Code or Section 302 of ERISA. There is no Person that (by reason of common control or otherwise) is or has at any time been treated together with Company as a single employer within the meaning of Section 414 of the Code.
No Plan. Section 4.1.10 No Plan Assets" \1 2}. The Borrower is not an "employee benefit plan," as defined in Section 3(3) of ERISA, subject to Title I of ERISA, and none of the assets of the Borrower constitutes or wil constitute "plan assets" of one or more such plans within the meaning of 29 C.F.R. Section 2510.3 101. Section 4.1.11 "Section 4.1.11 \1 2}. The Borrower, the Project and the use thereof will comply, to the extent required, in al material respects with all applicable Legal Requirements. The Borrower is not in default or violation of any order, writ, injunction, decree or demand of any Governmental Authority, the violation of which would materially adversely affect the financial condition or business prospects or the business of the Borrower. There has not been committed by the Borrower or any Affiliate of the Borrower involved with the operation or use of the Project any act or omission affording any Governmental Authority the right of forfeiture as against the Project or any part thereof or any moneys paid in performance of the Borrower's obligations under any Borrower Loan Document or any Funding Loan Documents.
No Plan. The Borrower will not adopt any Plan.
No Plan. The RSUs granted pursuant to the RSU Agreement shall not be contingent upon shareholder approval of the Plan nor subject to the share limit of the Plan. Therefore, all references in the RSU Agreement to the Plan and shareholder approval of the Plan shall be stricken in each instance.
No Plan. Under the No Permits/No Plan alternative, SPI would continue to engage in forestland management activities without developing an HCP and would not receive incidental take coverage for its timber management operations. SPI timber operations and related activities would continue in accordance with existing state and federal regulations, several of which prohibit the take of listed species. SPL&T would not participate in the reintroduction of listed salmonids on SPL&T lands. The alternative was not pursued, because it would not provide the level of regulatory certainty SPL&T seeks for its timber management activities and would not establish a long-term commitment providing conservation benefits for Covered Species. Under the Shorter Permit Duration alternative, SPL&T would develop their HCP with a proposed permit duration of only 10 years. The alternative was rejected, because such a short permit duration is inconsistent with other planning efforts anticipated by SPI and does not reflect the amount of time needed to realize conservation benefits from re-establishing ESA-listed species in the SHA Plan Area. Unpaved roads are likely the dominant source of land use-related sediment pollution in forested landscapes in the United States, with the potential to impact water quality and aquatic biota (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇ 1983; ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 1996; ▇▇▇ 2006; ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al. (2007); ▇▇▇▇▇ et al. 2012). The contribution of roads to sediment pollution (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al. 2001) has led the State of California to impose BMPs to hydrologically disconnect forest roads from streams and reduce sediment delivery. The READI Model was designed to address forest road sediment production and delivery to streams by linking the condition of SPL&T’s constructed road network with site-specific road segments and crossings that produce sediment. SPI investigated alternatives that would change the timing, frequency, location, and overall approach to conducting road management related to forestland management activities. Two road management alternatives were considered; road improvements (sediment reduction) planned on a “THP basis” and road improvements (sediment reduction) following an “assessment basis” using SPI’s READI model. The THP basis alternative consists of assessing, planning, and constructing road improvements based on roads used for certain THPs, including appurtenant roads. The assessment basis alternative consists of using SPI’s READI model to assess and select road imp...