Liability Calculation
Liability Calculation Sample Clauses
Related to Liability Calculation
Liability Calculation Method Per Claim Unless subject to a fixed dollar copayment, the calculation of Member liability on claims for Out-of-Area Covered Health Care Services processed through the BlueCard Program will be based on the lower of the provider’s billed charges or the negotiated price made available to Blue Shield by the Host Blue. Host Blues determine a negotiated price, which is reflected in the terms of each Host Blue’s health care provider contracts. The negotiated price made available to Blue Shield by the Host Blue may be represented by one of the following:
Liability Cap Subject to the Sections titled ‘Unlimited Liability’ and ‘Exclusion of Damages’, the maximum aggregate liability of either party (or its respective Affiliates or SAP’s subcontractors) to the other or any other person or entity for all events (or series of connected events) arising in the Contract Term will not exceed the fees paid for Individual Orders during the Contract Term up until the date upon which the incident occurred whereby liability arose.
Overtime Pay Calculation Overtime shall not be claimed or received for less than fifteen (15) minutes. If overtime amounts to fifteen (15) minutes, or more, it shall be paid for the total period.
CERTIFICATION OF INDEPENDENT PRICE DETERMINATION By submission of this bid, the Bidder certifies, and in the case of a joint bid each party thereto certifies as to its own organization, that in connection with this procurement:
Payment Calculation District shall pay Contractor at a rate of $ per . OR District shall pay Contractor as described in attached Exhibit A
Overtime Calculation For the purpose of overtime calculation only, approved or scheduled time off work will be considered the same as time worked.
Tax and Flood Determination Fees Lender may require Borrower to pay (i) a one-time charge for a real estate tax verification and/or reporting service used by Lender in connection with this Loan, and (ii) either (A) a one-time charge for flood zone determination, certification, and tracking services, or (B) a one-time charge for flood zone determination and certification services and subsequent charges each time remappings or similar changes occur that reasonably might affect such determination or certification. Xxxxxxxx will also be responsible for the payment of any fees imposed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or any successor agency, at any time during the Loan term, in connection with any flood zone determinations.
Creditworthiness Determination Duke Energy Ohio will determine the creditworthiness of an SSO Supplier or its Guarantor, if applicable, whether organized under the laws of the United States or organized under the laws of a foreign jurisdiction, based on its most recent senior unsecured debt rating (or, if unavailable, its corporate or issuer rating). Duke Energy Ohio will have full discretion, without liability or recourse to such SSO Supplier or its Guarantor, if applicable, to evaluate the evidence of creditworthiness submitted by such SSO Supplier or Guarantor. Duke Energy Ohio may re-evaluate the creditworthiness of an SSO Supplier or Guarantor from time to time, including whenever it becomes aware of an adverse change in such SSO Supplier’s or Guarantor’s credit standing. In addition, the SSO Supplier may petition Duke Energy Ohio to re-evaluate its creditworthiness whenever an event occurs that the SSO Supplier reasonably believes would improve the determination made by Duke Energy Ohio of its or its Guarantor’s creditworthiness. Duke Energy Ohio’s credit re-evaluation must be completed as soon as practicable, but in no event longer than thirty (30) days after receiving a fully documented request. Duke Energy Ohio shall provide the rationale for its determination of the Credit Limit and any resulting security requirement and such determination shall be deemed final and conclusive. Duke Energy Ohio shall perform its credit re-evaluation and associated security calculation in a non-discriminatory manner. Each SSO Supplier or its Guarantor shall provide unrestricted access to its audited financial statements; however, if audited financial statements are not available, Duke Energy Ohio may specify other types of financial statements that will be accepted. If Duke Energy Ohio determines in its sole discretion that it is unable to adequately assess an SSO Supplier’s or Guarantor’s creditworthiness or the credit rating of an SSO Supplier or its Guarantor is insufficient, such SSO Supplier shall be required to post ICR Collateral in accordance with Section 5.4(d) and Margin Collateral in accordance with Section 5.7.
Offense Level Calculations i. The base offense level is 7, pursuant to Guideline § 2B1.1(a)(1).
Penalty Determination H&SC section 39619.7 requires CARB to provide information on the basis for the penalties it seeks. This Agreement includes this information, which is also summarized here. The provision of law the penalty is being assessed under and why that provision is most appropriate for that violation. The penalty provision being applied in this case is H&SC section 42402 et seq. because IIT sold, supplied, offered for sale, consumer products for commerce in California in violation of the Consumer Products Regulations (17 CCR section 94507 et seq.). The penalty provisions of H&SC section 42402 et seq. apply to violations of the Consumer Products Regulations because the regulations were adopted under authority of H&SC section 41712, which is in Part 4 of Division 26. The manner in which the penalty amount was determined, including aggravating and mitigating factors and per unit or per vehicle basis for the penalty. H&SC section 42402 et seq. provides strict liability penalties of up to $10,000 per day for violations of the Consumer Product Regulations with each day being a separate violation. In cases like this, involving unintentional violations of the Consumer Products Regulations where the violator cooperates with the investigation, CARB has obtained penalties for selling uncertified charcoal lighter material in California. In this case, the total penalty is $7,500 for selling uncertified charcoal lighter material in California. The penalty in this case was reduced because this was a strict liability first-time violation and IIT made diligent efforts to cooperate with the investigation. To come into compliance, IIT no longer offers Safegel BBQ & Fireplace Lighting Gel Fire Starter for commerce in California. Final penalties were determined based on the unique circumstances of this matter, considered together with the need to remove any economic benefit from noncompliance, the goal of deterring future violations and obtaining swift compliance, the consideration of past penalties in similar negotiated cases, and the potential cost and risk associated with litigating these particular violations. The penalty reflects violations extending over a number of days resulting in quantifiable harm to the environment considered together with the complete circumstances of this case. Penalties in future cases might be smaller or larger on a per ton basis. The final penalty in this case was based in part on confidential financial information or confidential business information provided by IIT that is not retained by CARB in the ordinary course of business. The penalty in this case was also based on confidential settlement communications between CARB and IIT that CARB does not retain in the ordinary course of business. The penalty also reflects CARB’s assessment of the relative strength of its case against IIT, the desire to avoid the uncertainty, burden and expense of litigation, obtain swift compliance with the law and remove any unfair advantage that IIT may have secured from its actions. Is the penalty being assessed under a provision of law that prohibits the emission of pollution at a specified level, and, if so a quantification of excess emissions, if it is practicable to do so. The Consumer Product Regulations do not prohibit emissions above a specified level, but they do limit the concentration of VOCs in regulated products. In this case, a quantification of the excess emissions attributable to the violations was not practicable.
