Testing for an Appreciable Sample Clauses

The "Testing for an Appreciable" clause establishes a standard or threshold for determining when a particular effect, change, or impact is significant enough to warrant attention under the contract. In practice, this clause might specify that only changes or effects that are "appreciable"—meaning noticeable or material—will trigger certain rights or obligations, such as the need for notification, adjustment, or remedial action. By setting this threshold, the clause helps prevent minor or trivial issues from causing unnecessary contractual responses, ensuring that only meaningful changes are addressed and reducing the risk of disputes over insignificant matters.
Testing for an Appreciable. Amount of Redispatch Relief and Determining the Settlement Market Flow: a. Calculating the Expected Impact of the PARs at the Michigan-Ontario Border on Market Flows b. Determining Whether to Use Unadjusted Market Flow or LEC Adjusted Market Flow; Determining if Appreciable Redispatch Relief is Available
View SourceView Similar (13)
Testing for an Appreciable. Amount of Redispatch Relief and Determining the Settlement Market Flow for M2M Redispatch Flowgates: a. Calculating the Expected Impact of the PARs at the Michigan-Ontario Border on Market Flows
View SourceView Similar (13)
Testing for an Appreciable. Amount of Redispatch Relief and Determining the Settlement Market Flow: a. Calculating the Expected Impact of the PARs at the Michigan-Ontario Border on Market Flows b. Determining Whether to Use Unadjusted Market Flow or LEC Adjusted Market Flow; Determining if Appreciable Redispatch Relief is Available 1) When the Non-Monitoring RTO’s LEC Adjusted Market Flow equals the Non-Monitoring RTO’s unadjusted Market Flow and the Non-Monitoring RTO’s Market Flow (also the Market Flow used for settlement) is greater than the Non-Monitoring RTO M2M Entitlement for the constrained M2M Flowgate, the Monitoring RTO will assume that an appreciable amount of redispatch relief is available from the Non-Monitoring RTO and will engage the M2M coordination process for the constrained M2M Flowgate. 2) When the Non-Monitoring RTO’s unadjusted Market Flow is greater than the Non-Monitoring RTO’s LEC Adjusted Market Flow, then the following calculation shall be performed to determine if an appreciable amount of redispatch relief is expected to be available: A. Determine the minimum of (a) the Non-Monitoring RTO’s unadjusted Market Flow, and (b) the Non-Monitoring RTO’s M2M Entitlement, for the constrained M2M Flowgate; and B. Determine the maximum of (x) the value from step A above, and (y) the Non-Monitoring RTO’s LEC Adjusted Market Flow When the value from B above (the Market Flow used for settlement), is greater than the Non-Monitoring RTO’s M2M Entitlement for the constrained M2M Flowgate, the Monitoring RTO will assume that an appreciable amount of redispatch relief is available from the Non- Monitoring RTO and will engage the M2M coordination process for the constrained M2M Flowgate. 3) When the Non-Monitoring RTO’s unadjusted Market Flow is less than the Non-Monitoring RTO LEC Adjusted Market Flow, the following calculation shall be performed to determine if an appreciable amount of redispatch relief is expected to be available: A. Determine the maximum of (a) the Non-Monitoring RTO’s unadjusted Market Flow, and (b) the Non-Monitoring RTO M2M Entitlement, for the constrained M2M Flowgate; and B. Determine the minimum of (x) the value from A above, and (y) the Non- Monitoring RTO’s LEC Adjusted Market Flow When the value from B above (the Market Flow used for settlement), is greater than the Non-Monitoring RTO’s M2M Entitlement for the constrained M2M Flowgate, the Monitoring RTO will assume that an appreciable amount of redispatch relief is available from the Non-Monito...
View SourceView Similar (3)
Testing for an Appreciable. Amount of Redispatch Relief and Determining the
View Source

Related to Testing for an Appreciable

  • System for Award Management (▇▇▇) and Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Requirements.

  • METHOD OF AWARD AND PROCEDURE FOR AWARDING A SOW AGREEMENT 5.1. Contractor selection, or the determination to terminate the SOW-RFP without award, shall be done in the best interest of the State.

  • System for Award Management (▇▇▇) Requirement Alongside a signed copy of this Agreement, Grantee will provide Florida Housing with a ▇▇▇.▇▇▇ proof of registration and Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) number. Grantee will continue to maintain an active ▇▇▇ registration with current information at all times during which it has an active award under this Agreement.

  • Performance Share Awards On the Performance Share Vesting Date next following the Executive's date of death, the number of Performance Shares that shall become Vested Performance Shares shall be determined by multiplying (a) that number of shares of Company Common Stock subject to the Performance Share Agreement that would have become Vested Performance Shares had no such termination occurred; provided, however, in no case shall the number of Performance Shares that become Vested Performance Shares exceed 100% of the Target Number of Performance Shares set forth in the Performance Share Agreement, by (b) the ratio of the number of full months of the Executive's employment with the Company during the Performance Period (as defined in the Performance Share Agreement) to the number of full months contained in the Performance Period. Vested Common Shares shall be issued in settlement of such Vested Performance Shares on the Settlement Date next following the Executive’s date of death.

  • Method of Service A Notice may be given by: (i) being personally delivered on a Party; (ii) being left at the Party’s current address for service; (iii) being sent to the Party’s current address for service by pre-paid ordinary mail; or (iv) being sent by facsimile transmission to the Party’s current facsimile number for service provided that a copy of the notice is then delivered by one of the means described above.