Occurrence of Slippage. N. Any of the risks and warnings of the document “Risks Disclosure and Warnings Notice”, found on the Company’s website, unauthorized.
Occurrence of Slippage Sample Clauses
Related to Occurrence of Slippage
Commercial General Liability – Occurrence Form Policy shall include bodily injury, property damage, personal injury and broad form contractual liability. • General Aggregate $2,000,000 • Products – Completed Operations Aggregate $1,000,000 • Personal and Advertising Injury $1,000,000 • Blanket Contractual Liability – Written and Oral $1,000,000 • Fire Legal Liability $50,000 • Each Occurrence $1,000,000
Consequence of Lapse If required insurance lapses during the Term, the JBE is not required to process invoices after such lapse until Contractor provides evidence of reinstatement that is effective as of the lapse date.
Reports of unusual occurrence The Contractor shall, during the Maintenance Period, prior to the close of each day, send to the Authority and the Authority’s Engineer, by facsimile or e- mail, a report stating accidents and unusual occurrences on the Project Highway relating to the safety and security of the Users and Project Highway. A monthly summary of such reports shall also be sent within 3 (three) business days of the closing of month. For the purposes of this Clause 15.4, accidents and unusual occurrences on the Project Highway shall include:
Return or Destruction of PHI At termination of this Agreement, Business Associate hereby agrees to return or destroy all PHI provided by or obtained on behalf of Covered Entity. Business Associate agrees not to retain any copies of the PHI after termination of this Agreement. If return or destruction of the PHI is not feasible, Business Associate agrees to extend the protections of this Agreement to limit any further use or disclosure until such time as the PHI may be returned or destroyed. If Business Associate elects to destroy the PHI, it shall certify to Covered Entity that the PHI has been destroyed.
Name Collision Occurrence Assessment 6.2.1 Registry Operator shall not activate any names in the DNS zone for the Registry TLD except in compliance with a Name Collision Occurrence Assessment provided by ICANN regarding the Registry TLD. Registry Operator will either (A) implement the mitigation measures described in its Name Collision Occurrence Assessment before activating any second-‐level domain name, or (B) block those second-‐level domain names for which the mitigation measures as described in the Name Collision Occurrence Assessment have not been implemented and proceed with activating names that are not listed in the Assessment.
Authority Event of Default Any of the following events shall constitute an event of default by the Authority ("Authority Event of Default”), when not caused by a Developer Event of Default:
Safety, breakdowns and accidents 17.5.1 The Concessionaire shall ensure safe conditions for the Users and passengers, and in the event of unsafe conditions, it shall follow the relevant operating procedures and undertake removal of obstruction and debris without delay. Such procedures shall conform to the provisions of this Agreement, Applicable Laws, Applicable Permits and Good Industry Practice.
Status Substantial Compliance Analysis The Compliance Officer found that PPB is in substantial compliance with Paragraph 80. See Sections IV and VII Report, p. 17. COCL carefully outlines the steps PPB has taken—and we, too, have observed—to do so. Id. We agree with the Compliance Officer’s assessment. In 2018, the Training Division provided an extensive, separate analysis of data concerning ECIT training. See Evaluation Report: 2018 Enhanced Crisis Intervention Training, Training usefulness, on-the-job applications, and reinforcing training objectives, February 2019. The Training Division assessed survey data showing broad officer support for the 2018 ECIT training. The survey data also showed a dramatic increase in the proportion of officers who strongly agree that their supervisors are very supportive of the ECIT program, reaching 64.3% in 2018, compared to only 14.3% in 2015: The Training Division analyzed the survey results of the police vehicle operator training and supervisory in-service training, as well. These analyses were helpful in understanding attendees’ impressions of training and its application to their jobs, though the analyses did not reach as far as the ECIT’s analysis of post-training on- the-job assessment. In all three training analyses, Training Division applied a feedback model to shape future training. This feedback loop was the intended purpose of Paragraph 80. PPB’s utilization of feedback shows PPB’s internalization of the remedy. We reviewed surveys of Advanced Academy attendees, as well. Attendees were overwhelmingly positive in response to the content of most classes. Though most respondents agreed on the positive aspects of keeping the selected course in the curriculum, a handful of attendees chose options like “redundant” and “slightly disagree,” indicating that the survey tools could be used for critical assessment and not merely PPB self-validation. We directly observed PPB training and evaluations since our last report. PPB provided training materials to the Compliance Officer and DOJ in advance of training. Where either identified issues, PPB worked through those issues and honed its materials. As Paragraph 80 requires, PPB’s training included competency-based evaluations, namely: knowledge checks (i.e., quizzes on directives), in-class responsive quizzes (using clickers to respond to questions presented to the group); knowledge tests (examinations via links PPB sent to each student’s Bureau-issued iPhone); demonstrated skills and oral examination (officers had to show proficiency in first aid skills, weapons use, and defensive tactics); and scenario evaluations (officers had to explain their reasoning for choices after acting through scenarios). These were the same sort of competency-based evaluations we commended in our last report. In this monitoring period, PPB applied the same type of evaluations to supervisory-level training as well as in-service training for all sworn members. PPB successfully has used the surveys, testing, and the training audit.
Reportable Events Involving the Xxxxx Law Notwithstanding the reporting requirements outlined above, any Reportable Event that involves solely a probable violation of section 1877 of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §1395nn (the Xxxxx Law) should be submitted by Practitioner to CMS through the self-referral disclosure protocol (SRDP), with a copy to the OIG. If Practitioner identifies a probable violation of the Xxxxx Law and repays the applicable Overpayment directly to the CMS contractor, then Practitioner is not required by this Section III.G to submit the Reportable Event to CMS through the SRDP.
Available Relief for a Force Majeure Event 11.7.1 Subject to this Article 11:
