Timely and Adequate Notice of Adverse Benefit Determination. (42 CFR §438.404).
Timely and Adequate Notice of Adverse Benefit Determination Sample Clauses
Related to Timely and Adequate Notice of Adverse Benefit Determination
Adverse Benefit Determination An adverse benefit determination is any of the following: Denial of a benefit (in whole or part), Reduction of a benefit, Termination of a benefit, Failure to provide or make a payment (in whole or in part) for a benefit, and Rescission of coverage, even if there is no adverse effect on any benefit. An appeal of an adverse benefit determination can be made either as an administrative appeal or as a medical appeal, as defined further in this section. Our Customer Service Department phone number is (000) 000-0000 or 0-000-000-0000.
Order of Benefit Determination Rules When a Member is covered by two or more plans, the rules for determining the order of benefit payments are as follows:
HHS Single Audit Unit will notify Grantee to complete the Single Audit Determination Form If Grantee fails to complete the form within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of notice, Grantee maybe subject to sanctions and remedies for non-compliance.
PURPOSE/JUSTIFICATION OF RECOMMENDED ACTION The purpose of the Agreement is to provide the City with the services for one full-time equivalent senior criminalist from the Department to perform DNA testing, analysis, and forensic-related consulting as requested by the City, effective July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2021. The City’s current agreement with the County for this position expires on June 30, 2016. This Agreement will not result in the creation of an additional senior criminalist position, as the position was created during the previous agreement.
Salary Determination 12.5.1 A unit member shall receive a salary not less than the minimum salary nor more than the maximum salary (Articles 12.3 and 12.4) for the rank to which appointed, except as provided in Articles 4.15, 5.6, 10.6.1 or Article 10.6.1.1. The effective dates for salaries shall be the appropriate dates specified in Article 12.2.2.
Examination of the benefit suspension level 1. If the Party complained against considers that the level of benefits suspended is excessive, it may request in writing the original Panel to examine the level of suspension of benefits. If this is not possible, the procedure established in Article 179 (Panel Selection) shall be followed, in which event the periods set out thereof shall be reduced by half (23). 2. This Panel shall issue its ruling within 60 days following the date of the referral of the matter to it. When the Panel considers that it cannot provide its report within this timeframe, it shall inform the Parties in writing of the reasons for the delay together with an estimate of the period within which it will submit its report. Any delay shall not exceed a further period of 30 days unless the Parties otherwise agree. The ruling of the Panel shall be final and binding. It shall be delivered to the Parties and be made publicly available. 3. If the Panel finds that the level of benefits which the complaining Party has suspended is excessive, it shall determine the appropriate level of benefits it considers to be of equivalent effect.
Benefit Level Two Health Care Network Determination Issues regarding the health care networks for the 2017 insurance year shall be negotiated in accordance with the following procedures:
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.
Synopsis and Benefit to Xxxxxxx County The Agreement continues the contractual relationship between the Oregon State Marine Board and Xxxxxxx County through its Sheriff’s Office. The Sheriff’s Office will be reimbursed for marine law enforcement patrols, boater education, and boat inspections conducted throughout Xxxxxxx County.
Eligibility Determination The State or its designee will make eligibility determinations for each of the HHSC HMO Programs.
