Conflicts Arising After MPO Regional Conformity Determination Sample Clauses

Conflicts Arising After MPO Regional Conformity Determination. After the MPO has made its conformity determination by resolution and adoption/approval, NCDEQ may appeal said conformity determination by resolution and adoption/approval to the Governor of North Carolina within fourteen (14) days of confirmation that NCDEQ received notice. If NCDEQ appeals to the Governor, the final conformity analysis and determination must have the concurrence of the Governor of North Carolina. NCDEQ shall provide written notice of appeal under this Subsection to the Chairperson of the MPO, the Secretary of NCDOT, the FHWA North Carolina Division Administrator, and the USEPA and FTA Region 4 Administrators. Notwithstanding NCDEQ's right of appeal, if NCDEQ supports the final conformity determination, NCDEQ may voluntarily waive its right of appeal, in writing.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Conflicts Arising After MPO Regional Conformity Determination

  • Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.

  • 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 TJX sold, supplied, offered for sale, or manufactured 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 this case, the total penalty is $196,800 for 171 days of administrative and emission violations. The penalty, in this case, was reduced because TJX made diligent efforts to cooperate with the investigation and to comply, including developing new business practices to ensure future compliance. These business practices include modifying relevant purchasing practices, delivering staff training, and implementing a vendor certification program for the relevant vendor population. 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 TJX 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 TJX 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 TJX, Inc., the desire to avoid the uncertainty, burden and expense of litigation, obtain swift compliance with the law and remove any unfair advantage that TJX may have secured from its actions. ls 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.

  • 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:

  • Deviation from Grievance Procedure The Employer agrees that, after a grievance has been discussed at Step 2 of the grievance procedure the Employer or his representatives shall not initiate any discussion or negotiations with respect to the grievance, either directly or indirectly with the aggrieved employee without the consent of the xxxxxxx or the Union.

  • EDD Independent Subrecipient Reporting Requirements Effective January 1, 2001, the County of Orange is required to file in accordance with subdivision (a) of Section 6041A of the Internal Revenue Code for services received from a “service provider” to whom the County pays $600 or more or with whom the County enters into a contract for $600 or more within a single calendar year. The purpose of this reporting requirement is to increase child support collection by helping to locate parents who are delinquent in their child support obligations. The term “service provider” is defined in California Unemployment Insurance Code Section 1088.8, Subparagraph B.2 as “an individual who is not an employee of the service recipient for California purposes and who received compensation or executes a contract for services performed for that service recipient within or without the State.” The term is further defined by the California Employment Development Department to refer specifically to independent Subrecipients. An independent Subrecipient is defined as “an individual who is not an employee of the ... government entity for California purposes and who receives compensation or executes a contract for services performed for that ... government entity either in or outside of California.” The reporting requirement does not apply to corporations, general partnerships, limited liability partnerships, and limited liability companies. Additional information on this reporting requirement can be found at the California Employment Development Department web site located at xxxx://xxx.xxx.xx.xxx/Employer_Services.htm

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