Sentences with phrase «imminent safety threat»

However, when this methodology is applied to closets, this can become an imminent safety threat, as doors are rarely used in closet solutions and there is nothing to prevent the shelves from falling.

Not exact matches

Travel warnings from the Canadian embassy, the US and the UK, indicating imminent threats of terrorist attacks in the country has moved minority members in parliament to demand immediate action from government to assure the safety of the public.

Officials cited the 9/11 attacks, the attempted car bombing in Times Square and recent tornadoes as examples of threats that could merit an emergency alert — «something so imminent it threatens the life and safety of people,» Office of Emergency Management Commissioner Joseph Bruno said.

The flooding and deterioration have caused an imminent public safety threat and «Conner Crusaders» have aptly voiced their distain for three years.

Unveiled at this year's New York Auto Show, the 2014 Impala comes with standard and available new safety firsts for Chevrolet, including special radar to help avoid crashes, visual and audible alerts help drivers identify potential crash situations and even intervene when a crash threat appears more imminent.

Exhibit C is used to identify any property that may pose a threat of imminent and identifiable harm to public health or safety.

An animal control officer may impound any animal that constitutes a serious and imminent threat to public health and / or safety due to the likelihood of its escape from its restraint.

Calls involving wild or dangerous animals that present an imminent threat to public health or safety.

Animal control has the right to trap any cat it deems is a public threat to health and safety; if a «licensed veterinarian decides that the cat is too ill or injured or that it has an illness that presents an imminent danger to the public health or safety or to itself, the cat may be humanely euthanized».

Though our couchbike may have posed an imminent threat to public safety, he had to admit that it was indeed «a nice rig».

Al Gore was one of the first who promoted global warming as an imminent threat to human safety.

The Supreme Court rejected the arguments put forward by Ms Michael's family that the police owe a duty of care in negligence where: (i) they are aware or ought reasonably to be aware of a threat to the life or physical safety of an identifiable person, or member of an identifiable small group («Interveners» Liability Principle»); or alternatively, (ii) a member of the public gives the police apparently credible evidence that a third party, whose identity and whereabouts are known, presents a specific and imminent threat to his life or physical safety («Lord Bingham's Liability Principle»).

While whistleblowers may have a legal right to report wrongdoings, including imminent health and safety threats or environmental crimes, to a «lawful authority,» going public is rarely, if ever, permitted.

As noted, the ILO's Committee on Freedom of Association defined essential services as those needed to prevent a «clear and imminent threat to the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population» (Freedom of Association, at para. 581).

(i)(A) Is necessary to prevent or lessen a serious and imminent threat to the health or safety of a person or the public; and

A covered entity may not, however, include a limitation affecting its right to make a use or disclosure that is either required by law or is necessary to avert a serious and imminent threat to health or safety.

Due to the importance of averting serious and imminent threats to health and safety, we believe it is appropriate to apply a presumption of good faith to covered entities disclosing protected health information under this section.

Similarly, in situations involving a serious and imminent threat to public health or safety, law enforcement officials may be seeking protected health information from covered entities to locate a fugitive.

We believe that the extremely time - sensitive and urgent conditions surrounding the need to avert a serious and imminent threat to the health or safety are fundamentally different from those involved in disclosures that may be made pursuant to other sections of the rule.

Another commented that the standard «* * * based on a reasonable belief that the disclosures are necessary to prevent or lessen a serious and imminent threat to the health or safety of an individual» would apply in only narrow treatment circumstances.

We clarify that if a situation fits one section of the rule (e.g., § 164.512 (j) on serious and imminent threats to health or safety), health plans and covered health care providers may disclose protected health information pursuant to that section, regardless of whether the disclosure also could be made pursuant to another section (e.g., § § 164.512 (f)(2) or 164.512 (f)(3), regarding disclosure of protected health information about suspects or victims to law enforcement officials), except as otherwise stated in the rule.

The final rule requires covered entities to obtain authorization to use or disclose psychotherapy notes for purposes listed in § 164.512, with the following exceptions: An authorization is not required for use or disclosure of psychotherapy notes when the use or disclosure is required for enforcement of this rule, in accordance with § 164.502 (a)(2)(ii); when required by law, in accordance with § 164.512 (a); when needed for oversight of the covered health care provider who created the psychotherapy notes, in accordance with § 164.512 (d); when needed by a coroner or medical examiner, in accordance with § 164.512 (g)(1); or when needed to avert a serious and imminent threat to health or safety, in accordance with § 164.512 (j)(1)(i).

However, we continue to permit a covered entity to disclose protected health information to a health care Start Printed Page 82730provider in an emergency treatment situation if the restricted protected health information is needed to provide the emergency treatment or if the disclosure is necessary to avoid serious and imminent threats to public health and safety.

An authorization is not required for use or disclosure of psychotherapy notes when required for enforcement purposes, in accordance with subpart C of part 160 of this subchapter; when mandated by law, in accordance with § 164.512 (a); when needed for oversight of the health care provider who created the psychotherapy notes, in accordance with § 164.512 (d); when needed by a coroner or medical examiner, in accordance with § 164.512 (g)(1); or when needed to avert a serious and imminent threat to health or safety, in accordance with § 164.512 (j)(1)(i).

In § 164.512 (j), we specifically permit covered entities to disclose protected health information without authorization for the purpose of protecting individuals from imminent threats to health and safety, consistent with state laws and ethical obligations.

For example, a disclosure under § 164.512 (j)(1)(i) to avert an imminent threat to safety is lawful only if made in the good faith belief that the disclosure is necessary to prevent or lessen a serious and imminent threat to the health or safety of a person or the public, and to a person reasonably able to prevent or lessen the threat.

The covered entity may not, however, purport to preclude itself from making uses or disclosures that are required by law or that are necessary to avert a serious and imminent threat to health or safety.

In the final rule, we clarify that if a situation fits one section of the rule (for example, § 164.512 (j) on serious and imminent threats to health or safety), covered entities may disclose protected health information pursuant to that section, regardless of whether the disclosure also could be made pursuant to another section (e.g., § 164.512 (f)-RRB-, regarding disclosure to law enforcement officials).

A covered entity may not include statements in the notice that purport to limit the entity's ability to make uses or disclosures that are required by law or necessary to avert a serious and imminent threat to health or safety.

In the NPRM we proposed to allow covered entities to use or disclose protected health information without individual authorization — consistent with applicable law and ethics standards — based on a reasonable belief that use or disclosure of the protected health information was necessary to prevent or lessen a serious and imminent threat to health or safety of an individual or of the public.

Similarly, this section is not intended to limit a covered entity from disclosing protected health information to law enforcement officials where other sections of the rule permit such disclosure, e.g., as permitted by § 164.512 (j) to avert an imminent threat to health or safety, for health oversight activities, to coroners or medical examiners, and in other circumstances permitted by the rule.

If this was done within the scope of a mandatory reporting law, it is legal to disclose PHI; under § 164.512 it is allowed, «to prevent or lessen a serious and imminent threat to the health or safety of a person or the public».

Includes up to $ 500 for common carrier ticket changes if your trip is interrupted for medical reasons, a terrorist event, or imminent threat to personal safety as documented by a U.S. State Department travel warning issued during your trip.

Find out how «imminent threat to your personal safety» is defined by your travel insurance provider.

Only three types of alerts are allowed: alerts issued by the President, alerts involving imminent threats to safety or life, and amber alerts.

To avert a serious threat to health or safety: We may use and disclose your information when necessary to prevent a serious and imminent threat to your health and safety or to the health and safety of the public or another person.

We may also share your information when needed to lessen a serious and imminent threat to health or safety.