Energy and Demand Balancing Sample Clauses

Energy and Demand Balancing. Open Access User shall make reasonable endeavour to ensure that actual demand at the Consumer interconnection point (exit point) do not exceed the net allocated capacity (gross capacity minus loss) in case of Open Access Consumer and sum of net allocated Capacity and Contracted Demand in case of scheduled consumer. Provided that for carrying out balancing and settlement of energy and demand at all entry and exit points relating to open access agreements, the APTRANSCO, PDCL and Open Access Users shall strictly adhere to the Balancing and Settlement Code in force.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Energy and Demand Balancing. Open Access User shall make reasonable endeavor to ensure that his actual demand or actual sent-out capacity, as the case may be, at an inter-connection does not exceed the Contracted Maximum Demand or allocated sent-out capacity for that inter-connection: Provided that for carrying out balancing and settlement of energy and demand at all entry and exit points relating to open access agreements, the TSTRANSCO and TSDISCOM and Open Access Users shall strictly adhere to the Balancing and Settlement Code approved by the Commission, as amended form time to time.

Related to Energy and Demand Balancing

  • EPP command RTT Refers to “EPP session-­‐command RTT”, “EPP query-­‐command RTT” or “EPP transform-­‐command RTT”.

  • Demand Letter If OIG determines that a basis for Stipulated Penalties under Section X.A exists, OIG shall notify Provider of: (a) Provider’s failure to comply and (b) OIG’s demand for payment of Stipulated Penalties. (This notification shall be referred to as the “Demand Letter.”)‌

  • Funding Restrictions and Order Quantities The Agency reserves the right to reduce or increase estimated or actual quantities in whatever amount necessary without prejudice or liability to the Agency, if:

  • EPP query-­‐command RTT Refers to the RTT of the sequence of packets that includes the sending of a query command plus the reception of the EPP response for only one EPP query command. It does not include packets needed for the start or close of either the EPP or the TCP session. EPP query commands are those described in section 2.9.2 of EPP RFC 5730. If the RTT is 5-­‐times or more the corresponding SLR, the RTT will be considered undefined.

  • Response to Demand Letter Within 10 days after the receipt of the Demand Letter, Ensign Group shall either: (a) cure the breach to OIG’s satisfaction and pay the applicable Stipulated Penalties or (b) request a hearing before an HHS administrative law judge (ALJ) to dispute OIG’s determination of noncompliance, pursuant to the agreed upon provisions set forth below in Section X.E. In the event Ensign Group elects to request an ALJ hearing, the Stipulated Penalties shall continue to accrue until Ensign Group cures, to OIG’s satisfaction, the alleged breach in dispute. Failure to respond to the Demand Letter in one of these two manners within the allowed time period shall be considered a material breach of this CIA and shall be grounds for exclusion under Section X.D.

  • General Availability The commitment to availability specified in the letter of appointment shall be subject to mutually acceptable revision. Such revision will occur once per year, or, if mutually agreed between the Employer and the employee, on a more frequent basis. The Employer will issue a revised letter of appointment to reflect approved changes to employee’s general availability.

  • Initial Forecasts/Trunking Requirements Because Verizon’s trunking requirements will, at least during an initial period, be dependent on the Customer segments and service segments within Customer segments to whom CSTC decides to market its services, Verizon will be largely dependent on CSTC to provide accurate trunk forecasts for both inbound (from Verizon) and outbound (to Verizon) traffic. Verizon will, as an initial matter, provide the same number of trunks to terminate Reciprocal Compensation Traffic to CSTC as CSTC provides to terminate Reciprocal Compensation Traffic to Verizon. At Verizon’s discretion, when CSTC expressly identifies particular situations that are expected to produce traffic that is substantially skewed in either the inbound or outbound direction, Verizon will provide the number of trunks CSTC suggests; provided, however, that in all cases Verizon’s provision of the forecasted number of trunks to CSTC is conditioned on the following: that such forecast is based on reasonable engineering criteria, there are no capacity constraints, and CSTC’s previous forecasts have proven to be reliable and accurate.

  • General Wage Increase Effective July 1, 2007, a general wage increase consisting of 2% was added to each grade and step of the pay plan(s) affecting the bargaining unit employees. Effective July 1, 2008, a general wage increase consisting of 2% will be added to each grade and step of the pay plan(s) affecting the bargaining unit employees.

  • DEMAND RESPONSE If Customer is enrolled in a demand response programme, Customer represents and warrants it has the intent and ability to generate and/or reduce electrical demand to achieve Accepted Capacity (as defined in the applicable Programme Rule Attachment attached to the applicable Order Form) when notified by Provider during demand response events. If Customer is enrolled in a demand response programme utilising on-site electric generation, Customer further represents and warrants that (i) it holds all licenses and/or permits that are required by applicable law for the proper participation in such demand response programme; and (ii) when responding to a demand response event, it will comply with, and be responsible for any violation of applicable law.

  • Why did I get this Notice This is a court-authorized notice of a proposed settlement in a class action lawsuit, XxXxxxx, et al. v. Veriff, Inc., No. 2021L001202, pending in the Circuit Court of DuPage County, Illinois before the Xxx. Xxxxx Xxxxxxx. The Settlement would resolve a lawsuit brought on behalf of persons who allege that Veriff, Inc., collected individuals’ biometrics in Illinois through its identity-verification technology without first providing the individuals with legally-required written disclosures and obtaining written consent. If you received notice of this Settlement, you have been identified as someone who, at some time between November 12, 2016 and [Preliminary Approval], had biometrics collected, captured, purchased, received through trade, possessed, retained or otherwise obtained while in Illinois by Veriff or its technology for the purposes of identity verification, and whose identity was verified. The Court has granted preliminary approval of the Settlement and has conditionally certified the Settlement Class for purposes of settlement only. This notice explains the nature of the class action lawsuit, the terms of the Settlement, and the legal rights and obligations of the Settlement Class Members. Please read the instructions and explanations below so that you can better understand your legal rights. WHAT IS THIS LAWSUIT ABOUT? The Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”), 740 ILCS 14/1, et seq., prohibits private companies from capturing, obtaining, storing, transmitting, and/or using the biometric identifiers and/or information, such as scans of face geometry, of another individual for any purpose without first providing them with certain written disclosures and obtaining written consent. This lawsuit alleges that Defendant violated BIPA by collecting or capturing the scans of face geometry of individuals through identity verification technology in Illinois without first providing the requisite disclosures or obtaining the consent required by BIPA. Defendant contests these claims, denies that it collected or possessed facial biometrics or any other information subject to BIPA, and denies that it violated BIPA. WHY IS THIS A CLASS ACTION? A class action is a lawsuit in which an individual called a “Class Representative” brings a single lawsuit on behalf of other people who have similar claims. All of these people together are a “Class” or “Class Members.” Once a Class is certified, a class action Settlement finally approved by the Court resolves the issues for all Settlement Class Members, except for those who exclude themselves from the Settlement Class. WHY IS THERE A SETTLEMENT? To resolve this matter without the expense, delay, and uncertainties of litigation, the Parties have reached a Settlement, which resolves all claims against Defendant and its affiliated entities. The Settlement requires Defendant to pay money to the Settlement Class, as well as pay settlement administration expenses, attorneys’ fees and costs to Class Counsel, and Incentive Awards to each of the Class Representatives, if approved by the Court. The Settlement is not an admission of wrongdoing by Defendant and does not imply that there has been, or would be, any finding that Defendant violated the law. The Court has already preliminarily approved the Settlement. Nevertheless, because the settlement of a class action determines the rights of all members of the class, the Court overseeing this lawsuit must give final approval to the Settlement before it can be effective. The Court has conditionally certified the Settlement Class for settlement purposes only, so that members of the Settlement Class can be given this notice and the opportunity to exclude themselves from the Settlement Class, to voice their support or opposition to final approval of the Settlement, and to submit a Claim Form to receive the relief offered by the Settlement. If the Court does not give final approval to the Settlement, or if it is terminated by the Parties, the Settlement will be void, and the lawsuit will proceed as if there had been no settlement and no certification of the Settlement Class.

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