Monetary Penalties Sample Clauses

Monetary Penalties. (a) DDS may impose on a Provider a civil monetary penalty not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500) for each violation of these standards. (1) DDS may file suit to collect a civil monetary penalty assessed pursuant to these standards if the Provider does not pay the civil monetary penalty within sixty (60) calendar days from the date DDS provides written notice to the Provider of the imposition of the civil monetary penalty. (2) DDS may file suit in Pulaski County Circuit Court or the circuit court of any county in which the Provider is located.

Monetary Penalties. (a) The Executive Director has the authority to enter into a settlement agreement on 7 (1) The monetary penalty order is no longer subject to any means of judicial review. 8 (2) Three collection demand letters, each sent at a minimum of 30 day intervals, were 11 (3) Staff made reasonable collection efforts by: 12 (A) Seeking offsets from payments due to the debtor from the Franchise State Tax Board

Monetary Penalties. If fees, fines, penalties, or costs are claimed or assessed against EPE or Seller by any Governmental Authority that are in whole or in part contributed to or due to noncompliance by the other Party with this Agreement, any requirements of law, any permit or contractual obligation, the other Party shall promptly reimburse EPE or Seller for related monetary penalties to the extent of such contribution or attribution.

Monetary Penalties. SEC administrative proceedings and federal district courts are structurally different. The SEC pays all administrative law judges (Eaglesham 2015b). During an administrative proceeding, the SEC simultaneously serves as a litigator and an adjudicator (SEC 2015b). Moreover, jury trials are prohibited in administrative proceedings (SEC 2015b). If defendants are dissatisfied with a judgment, they must first appeal to the SEC’s five commissioners (SEC 2015b). The main criticism of these institutional features is that the SEC may have a “home court advantage” in its administrative proceedings (e.g., ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2015).

Monetary Penalties. 2.1. For any monetary penalty imposed pursuant to this SLA, the following provisions shall apply: 2.1.1. Monetary penalty(ies) shall be imposed and accrue for incidents of noncompliance. 2.1.2. Whenever feasible, the State shall give the Contractor reasonable notice of the State’s intention to impose monetary penalty(ies). 2.1.3. The State will consider external factors that may impact the Contractor’s noncompliance, including the fault of the State. 2.1.4. Monetary penalty(ies) shall not apply to the extent that the parties agree in good faith that penalty(ies) should not be imposed. 2.1.5. The Contractor shall make payment of monetary penalty(ies) to the State by the due date required in the notice(s) of assessment. 2.1.6. The State may require a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) to be developed, approved by the State, and implemented within agreed upon timeframes, for any incident of noncompliance. 2.1.7. The Contractor shall list, document, and track all potential Operational Incidents specified in this SLA and demonstrate if the Contractor is compliant with Contract and Task Order requirements. The Contractor shall submit the Operational Incidents Tracking to AHCCCS as specified in Contract Exhibit C. 2.2. The monetary penalties specified in this SLA: 2.2.1. May be cumulative such that one or more penalties may be assessed and imposed under one or more individual section below for the same or different concurrent failure(s) within a Calendar Year. 2.2.2. Cumulative penalties are not to exceed the contract or task order invoice amount for the month in which the penalty occurs [excluding CMS Issued Monetary Penalty(ies) for Noncompliance]. Penalties may be incurred across consecutive months if corrective action is not taken to bring the service criteria or deliverable into acceptable performance.

Monetary Penalties. The common parent (or principal operating com- pany) and all reporting corporations that join in the filing of a consolidated Form 5472 are liable jointly and sever- ally for penalties for failure to file Form 5472 and for failure to mantain records under section 6038A(d) and § 1.6038A–4(e). See § 1.1502–77(a) regard- ing the scope of agency of the common parent corporation.

Monetary Penalties. The monetary component of a settlement offer is derived from the use of various methods of calculation. See Appendix H. These methods include a penalty schedule for specific violations; the BEN model computer program to calculate the economic benefit, or “noncompliance,” penalty; and factors to reduce or increase the penalty using certain statutory mitigation or aggravation factors.

Monetary Penalties. If the MCO does not adhere to the reporting and data submission requirements and deadlines specified within this Contract, DMA may impose monetary penalties. DMA shall communicate the penalties in writing to the MCO and DMA’s fiscal agent. All financial reports prepared and submitted by the MCO subsequent to the imposition of penalties shall reflect the penalties. DMA shall have the right to assess monetary penalties pursuant to SOW Section 11.2: Timeliness of Provider Payments and Section 9.3: Reporting Requirements.

Monetary Penalties. The violations hearing examiner may assess monetary penalties in accordance with Section 9.56.040(5). (a) The violations hearing examiner has the following options in assessing monetary penalties: (i) Assess monetary penalties beginning on the date the notice of abatement was issued and thereafter; (ii) Assess monetary penalties beginning on the correction date set by the director, or an alternate correction date set by the violations hearing examiner and thereafter; (iii) Assess less than the established monetary penalty set forth in Section 9.56.040(5), based on the criteria of subdivision (5)(b), below, of this section; or (iv) Assess no monetary penalties. (b) In determining the monetary penalty assessment, the violations hearing examiner shall consider the following factors: (i) Whether the person to whom the notice of abatement was issued responded to attempts to contact the person, and cooperated to correct the violation; (ii) Whether the person failed to appear at the hearing; (iii) Whether the violation was a repeat violation; (iv) Whether the person showed due diligence and/or substantial progress in correcting the violation; and (v) Any other relevant factors. (c) The violations hearing examiner may double the monetary penalty schedule if the violation was a repeat violation. In determining the amount of the monetary penalty for repeat violations, the violations hearing examiner shall consider the factors set forth in subdivision (5)(b), above, of this section.