NOTICE OF VIOLATION LETTERS Sample Clauses

NOTICE OF VIOLATION LETTERS. Case No. ENF-19-1017, dated July 9, 2019 Case No. ENF-19-1018, dated July 9, 2019 Case No. APCD- ENF-20-00006, dated May 15, 2020 Case No. ENF-APCD-20-00032, dated December 14, 2020 Case No. ENF-APCD-21-00009, dated September 20, 20211 BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: Company operates a pork processing plant subject to Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District (District) Federally Enforceable District Origin Operating Permit No. 111-01-F (R7). The District alleges that Company failed to prevent objectionable odors from emitting beyond the property line. Between 2019 and 2021, the District received numerous public complaints of odors emitted from Company’s facility. During its investigation of the odor complaints, the District observed odors alleged by compliance officers to be a 3 out of 4 on the 1 This is erroneously dated as September 20, 2020 in the Notice of Violation. odor scale emitted beyond Company’s property line and entering areas enjoyed by the public on three days in 2019, two days in 2020, and seven days in 2021. The District also alleges Company failed to monitor air pollution control equipment, and record and maintain data as required by its permit in 2018 and 2019. On January 25, 2019, the District responded to an odor complaint and was advised by Company that it had experienced problems with the 75K cubic feet per minute (CFM) scrubber, which controls odors. On February 20, 2019, the District discussed recent equipment malfunctions with Company and conducted an inspection of the 75K CFM scrubber. During the inspection, the District discovered that the flow rate for the scrubber was out of permitted ranges and required Company to provide its monthly and/or quarterly inspection records for four of the facility’s five scrubbers for 2018 and 2019. On March 1, 2019, the District received Company’s 2018 Annual Compliance Report and discovered Company missed daily odor surveys for 60 days and failed to monitor and record numerous readings (ranging from 10 to 33 days) for process and odor control equipment in the inedible rendering operation, including the blood dryer, Dupps cooker, hair hydrolyzer condenser, Venturi scrubber, 40K CFM scrubber, and 75K CFM scrubber. Company also failed to monitor and record numerous readings (ranging from 10 to 33 days) for the 20k CFM scrubber, which is an odor control device for the wastewater treatment system. On March 13, 2019, Company submitted its quarterly inspection records for 2018 and 2019, as required d...
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
NOTICE OF VIOLATION LETTERS. No. 01938, dated March 18, 2008 No. 02060, dated April 14, 2009 No. 02089, dated September 2, 2009 BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: Company is a Delaware corporation that operates an animal rendering plant located at 0000 Xxxxx Xxxxxx xx Xxxxxxxxxx. The violations subject to this agreement relate to Company’s Risk Management Program and several odor emissions. District Regulation 5.15 adopts by reference Section 112(r) of the federal Clean Air Act. Under the authority of section 112(r)’s Chemical Accident Prevention Provisions, facilities that produce, handle, process, distribute, or store certain chemicals must develop a Risk Management Program and prepare a Risk Management Plan (RMP). Company’s animal rendering plant, which operates an ammonia refrigeration system, is subject to those requirements, which also direct the District to conduct on-site audits of Company’s RMP. On November 13 and 16, 2007, the District conducted an on-site audit of Company’s RMP. As a result of that audit, the District alleges that Company’s RMP was deficient. The audit identified twenty-eight separate deficiencies. The deficiencies range in severity from a failure to properly identify the person responsible for implementing Company’s RMP in violation of 40 C.F.R. § 68.15(c), to a failure to maintain operating procedures that include steps to avoid or correct deviations in operating limits in violation of 40 C.F.R. § 68.69(a), to a failure to show that equipment deficiencies were corrected before further use or in a safe and timely manner in violation of 40 C.F.R. § 68.73(e). Subsequently, Company contracted with Process Compliance, Inc. (PCI), to review and correct the audit findings. In July 2008, Company provided PCI’s evaluation to the District. The evaluation described actions implemented by Xxxxx in response to the audit findings. According to PCI, Xxxxx remedied nearly all of the audit findings by July 2008. The District conducted a second audit of Company’s RMP on August 19, 2009. That audit and subsequent communications with Company confirmed that adequate remedial actions have been taken. The District does not allege any violations based on the second audit. Further, a 2010 inspection by PCI of Company’s mechanical integrity program confirmed that Company has improved its procedures associated with addressing issues with equipment deficiencies around the plant. District Regulation 1.13 prohibits the emission into the ambient air of any substance that creates an objectionab...
Sample 1
NOTICE OF VIOLATION LETTERS. The notice of violation will be generated by PHX and include: • Amount due for the violation issued, • Applicable late fees, • How to contest the citation, • Warning of intent to notify a Third Party Collection Agency for non-compliance.
Sample 1

Related to NOTICE OF VIOLATION LETTERS

  • Notice of Violation On or about August 8, 2020, October 30, 2020, April 29, 2021 and July 21, 2022, Xxxxxxx served Xxxxxx.xxx, Inc. and certain requisite public enforcement agencies with 60- Day Notices of Violation (notice), alleging that Xxxxxx.xxx, Inc. violated Proposition 65 when it failed to warn customers or consumers in California that the Products expose users to lead. To the best of the Parties’ knowledge, no public enforcer has commenced and is diligently prosecuting the allegations set forth in the notice.

  • Union Notification The Union shall be notified of all appointments, hirings, layoffs, transfers, recalls and terminations of employment.

  • Notice of Agreement 1. The Institutions agree to provide a copy of this Agreement, with any amendments, to the Maryland Higher Education Commission.

  • Exclusion Letter If, at the conclusion of the 30-day period, Progenity fails to satisfy the requirements of Section X.D.3, OIG may exclude Progenity from participation in the Federal health care programs. OIG shall notify Progenity in writing of its determination to exclude Progenity. (This letter shall be referred to as the “Exclusion Letter.”) Subject to the Dispute Resolution provisions in Section X.E, below, the exclusion shall go into effect 30 days after the date of Progenity’s receipt of the Exclusion Letter. The exclusion shall have national effect. Reinstatement to program participation is not automatic. At the end of the period of exclusion, Progenity may apply for reinstatement by submitting a written request for reinstatement in accordance with the provisions at 42 C.F.R. §§ 1001.3001-.3004.

  • Business Tax Certificate Unless the City Treasurer determines in writing that a contractor is exempt from the payment of business tax, any contractor doing business with the City of San Diego is required to obtain a Business Tax Certificate (BTC) and to provide a copy of its BTC to the City before a Contract is executed.

  • Lodgement of Assessment Instrument (a) All assessment instruments under the conditions of this clause, including the appropriate percentage of the Australian Pay and Classification Scale to be paid to the employee, will be lodged by the Employer with the Registrar of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission.

  • Exhibit D - Debarment Certification By signing and submitting this Contract, the Contractor is agreeing to abide by the debarment requirements as set out below. • The certification in this clause is a material representation of fact relied upon by County. • The Contractor shall provide immediate written notice to County if at any time the Contractor learns that its certification was erroneous or has become erroneous by reason of changed circumstances. • Contractor certifies that none of its principals, affiliates, agents, representatives or contractors are excluded, disqualified or ineligible for the award of contracts by any Federal agency and Contractor further certifies to the best of its knowledge and belief, that it and its principals: • Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded by any Federal Department or Agency; • Have not been convicted within the preceding three-years of any of the offenses listed in 2 CFR 180.800(a) or had a civil judgment rendered against it for one of those offenses within that time period; • Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (Federal, State, or Local) with commission of any of the offenses listed in 2 CFR 180.800(a); • Have not had one or more public transactions (Federal, State, or Local) terminated within the preceding three-years for cause or default. • The Contractor agrees by signing this Contract that it will not knowingly enter into any subcontract or covered transaction with a person who is proposed for debarment, debarred, suspended, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this covered transaction. • Any subcontractor will provide a debarment certification that includes the debarment clause as noted in preceding bullets above, without modification.

  • Suspension or Debarment Instructions Instructions for Certification 1. By answering yes to the next Attribute question below, the vendor and prospective lower tier participant is providing the certification set out herein in accordance with these instructions. 2. The certification in this clause is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was entered into. If it is later determined that the prospective lower tier participant knowingly rendered an erroneous certification in addition to other remedies available to the federal government, the department or agency with which this transaction originated may pursue available remedies, including suspension and / or debarment. 3. The prospective lower tier participant shall provide immediate written notice to the person to which this proposal is submitted if at any time the prospective lower tier participant learns that its certification was erroneous when submitted or has become erroneous by reason of changed circumstances. 4. The terms “covered transaction,” “debarred,” “suspended,” “ineligible,” “lower tier covered transaction,” “participants,” “person,” “primary covered transaction,” “principal,” “proposal” and “voluntarily excluded,” as used in this clause, have the meanings set out in the Definitions and Coverage sections of rules implementing Executive Order 12549. You may contact the person to which this proposal is submitted for assistance in obtaining a copy of those regulations. 5. The prospective lower tier participant agrees by submitting this form that, should the proposed covered transaction be entered into, it shall not knowingly enter into any lower tier covered transaction with a person who is debarred, suspended, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from participation in this covered transaction, unless authorized by the department or agency with which this transaction originated. 6. The prospective lower tier participant further agrees by submitting this form that it will include this clause titled “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion-Lower Tier Covered Transaction” without modification in all lower tier covered transactions and in all solicitations for lower tier covered transactions. 7. A participant in a covered transaction may rely upon a certification of a prospective participant in a lower tier covered transaction that it is not debarred, suspended, ineligible or voluntarily excluded from the covered transaction, unless it knows that the certification is erroneous. A participant may decide the method and frequency by which it determines the eligibility of its principals. Each participant may, but is not required to, check the Nonprocurement List. 8. Nothing contained in the foregoing shall be construed to require establishment of a system of records in order to render in good faith the certification required by this clause. The knowledge and information of a participant is not required to exceed that which is normally possessed by a prudent person in the ordinary course of business dealings. 9. Except for transactions authorized under paragraph 5 of these instructions, if a participant in a covered transaction knowingly enters into a lower tier covered transaction with a person who is suspended, debarred, ineligible or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction, in addition to other remedies available to the federal government, the department or agency with which this transaction originated may pursue available remedies, including suspension and / or debarment.

  • REPORTING - NOTIFICATION Reports, Evaluations, and Reviews required under this §8 shall be in accordance with the procedures of and in such form as prescribed by the State and in accordance with §19, if applicable.

  • Notice of Litigation Each Seller shall promptly notify the applicable Purchaser upon becoming aware of any Proceedings or threatened Proceedings concerning any Serviced Appointment, in each case, excluding Proceedings in servicer-managed mortgage-level litigation with respect to residential mortgage-backed securities transactions. Notices delivered pursuant to this Section 5.4 will be delivered to the notice recipient designated on Annex B.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!