Common use of Penalty Determination Clause in Contracts

Penalty Determination. (1) Pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 39619.7, CARB must provide information on the basis for the penalty it seeks. This information is provided throughout this settlement agreement and summarized below. Penalties must be set at levels sufficient to discourage violations. The penalties in this matter were determined in consideration of all relevant circumstances, including the eight factors specified in Health and Safety Code section 43031, subdivision (b). The per unit penalty in the case of NOV F122118-KRNR-RPT is a maximum of $35,000 per day per strict liability violation. CARB alleges that eighteen uncertified blends of CARBOB were sold, supplied and transported resulting in eighteen violations. The penalty obtained in this case is $3,000.00 per violation. CARB discovered this violation, but CARB considered several other factors in Xxxx’x favor. The lower penalty reflects the consideration of a number of facts, including: this appears to have been an unintentional violation, Xxxx has a longstanding compliance history, and Xxxx made efforts to comply and to cooperate with the investigation. CARB alleges that the penalty provisions being applied in this case, Health and Safety Code sections 43027 and 43030, are appropriate because Xxxx allegedly sold, offered for sale, supplied, or offered for supply or transported CARBOB in California in violation of Cal. Code Regs., tit.13, §§ 2250–2273.5. The provisions cited above do not prohibit emissions above a specified level. CARB alleges that because the fuel did not meet California regulatory requirements, any emissions attributable to them are illegal. However, in this case, Xxxx later submitted documentation alleging that the blends passed the predictive model and therefore may have been found compliant if Xxxx had timely notified CARB. (2) Xxxx acknowledges that CARB has complied with Health and Safety Code section 39619.7 in prosecuting or settling these cases. Specifically, CARB has considered all relevant facts, including those listed at Health and Safety Code section 43031, has explained the manner in which the penalty amount was calculated, has identified the provision of law under which the penalty is being assessed, and has considered and determined that this penalty is being assessed under a provision of law that does not prohibit the emission of pollutants at a specified level. (3) Penalties were determined based on the unique circumstances of each 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 case negotiations, and the potential costs and risk associated with litigating these particular violations. The penalty reflects violations extending over a number of days considered together with the complete circumstances of this case. Penalties in future cases might be smaller or larger on a per unit basis. (4) The penalty in each case was based in part on confidential business information provided by Xxxx that is not retained by CARB in the ordinary course of business. The penalty in each case was also based on confidential settlement communications between CARB and Xxxx that CARB does not retain in the ordinary course of business. Each penalty also reflects CARB’s assessment of the relative strength of the case against Xxxx, the desire to avoid the uncertainty, burden and expense of litigation, to obtain swift compliance with the law and to remove any unfair advantage that Xxxx may have secured from its actions.

Penalty Determination. (1) Pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 39619.7, CARB must provide information on the basis for the penalty it seeks. This information is provided throughout this settlement agreement and summarized below. Penalties must be set at levels sufficient to discourage violations. The penalties in this matter were determined in consideration of all relevant circumstances, including the eight factors specified in Health and Safety Code section 43031, subdivision (b). The per unit penalty in the case of NOV F122118F093019-KRNRSHLR-RPT is a maximum of $35,000 25,000 per day per strict liability violation. CARB alleges that eighteen uncertified blends of CARBOB were Shell sold, supplied and transported four blends of uncertified fuel resulting in eighteen four violations. The penalty obtained in this case is $3,000.00 5,000.00 per violation. CARB discovered this violation, but CARB considered several other factors in Xxxx’x favor. The lower penalty reflects the consideration of a number of facts, including: including that this appears appeared to have been be an unintentional violation, Xxxx has a longstanding compliance historyShell did not have reporting violations prior to the discovery of these violations, and Xxxx made efforts to comply and to cooperate Shell’s cooperation with the CARB’s investigation. CARB alleges that the penalty provisions being applied in this case, Health and Safety Code sections 43027 and 43030, are appropriate because Xxxx Shell allegedly sold, offered for sale, supplied, or offered for supply or transported CARBOB in California in violation of Cal. Code Regs.CCR, tit.13title13, §§ 2250–2273.5. The provisions cited above do not prohibit emissions above a specified level. CARB alleges that because since the fuel did not meet California regulatory requirementsair pollution standards, any emissions attributable to them are illegal. Howeverillegal however, in this case, Xxxx later submitted documentation alleging that it is not practicable to quantify these emissions because the blends passed the predictive model and therefore may have been found compliant if Xxxx had timely notified CARBinformation necessary to do so is not available. (2) Xxxx Shell acknowledges that CARB has complied with Health and Safety Code section 39619.7 in prosecuting or settling these cases. Specifically, CARB has considered all relevant facts, including those listed at Health and Safety Code section 43031, has explained the manner in which the penalty amount was calculated, has identified the provision of law under which the penalty is being assessed, and has considered and determined that this penalty is being assessed under a provision of law that does not prohibit the emission of pollutants at a specified level. (3) Penalties were determined based on the unique circumstances of each 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 case negotiations, and the potential costs and risk associated with litigating these particular violations. The penalty reflects violations extending over a number of days considered together with the complete circumstances of this case. Penalties in future cases might be smaller or larger on a per per- unit basis. (4) The penalty in each case was based in part on confidential business information provided by Xxxx Shell that is not retained by CARB in the ordinary course of business. The penalty in each case was also based on confidential settlement communications between CARB and Xxxx Shell that CARB does not retain in the ordinary course of business. Each penalty also reflects CARB’s assessment of the relative strength of the case against XxxxShell, the desire to avoid the uncertainty, burden and expense of litigation, to obtain swift compliance with the law and to remove any unfair advantage that Xxxx Shell may have secured from its actions.

Penalty Determination. (1) Pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 39619.7, CARB must provide information on the basis for the penalty it seeks. This information is provided throughout this settlement agreement and summarized below. Penalties must be set at levels sufficient to discourage violations. The penalties in this matter were determined in consideration of all relevant circumstances, including the eight factors specified in Health and Safety Code section 43031, subdivision (b). The per unit penalty in the case of NOV F122118F072618-KRNRTSOR-RPT OLE is a maximum of $35,000 per day per strict liability violation. CARB alleges that eighteen uncertified blends of the non-complying CARBOB were was sold, supplied and transported resulting in eighteen violationsover a time period of seven days. The penalty obtained in this case is $3,000.00 17,000.00 per violation. CARB discovered this violation, but CARB considered several other factors in Xxxx’x favorday. The lower penalty reflects the consideration of a number of facts, including: that this appears to have been was an unintentional violation, Xxxx has Xxxxxx did not have a longstanding compliance historysimilar olefin violation three years prior to the discovery of this violation, and Xxxx made Xxxxxx’s efforts to comply and to cooperate with the investigation. CARB alleges that the penalty provisions being applied in this case, Health and Safety Code sections 43027 and 43030, are appropriate because Xxxx Tesoro allegedly sold, offered for sale, supplied, or offered for supply or transported CARBOB in California in violation of Cal. Code Regs., tit.13, §§ 2250–2273.5. The provisions cited above do not prohibit emissions above a specified level. CARB alleges that because since the fuel did not meet California regulatory requirementsair pollution standards, any emissions attributable to them are illegal. However, in this case, Xxxx later submitted documentation alleging that it is not practicable to quantify these emissions because the blends passed the predictive model and therefore may have been found compliant if Xxxx had timely notified CARBinformation necessary to do so is not available. (2) Xxxx Tesoro acknowledges that CARB has complied with Health and Safety Code section 39619.7 in prosecuting or settling these cases. Specifically, CARB has considered all relevant facts, including those listed at Health and Safety Code section 43031, has explained the manner in which the penalty amount was calculated, has identified the provision of law under which the penalty is being assessed, and has considered and determined that this penalty is being assessed under a provision of law that does not prohibit the emission of pollutants at a specified level. (3) Penalties were determined based on the unique circumstances of each 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 case negotiations, and the potential costs and risk associated with litigating these particular violations. The penalty reflects violations extending over a number of days considered together with the complete circumstances of this case. Penalties in future cases might be smaller or larger on a per unit basis. (4) The penalty in each case was based in part on confidential business information provided by Xxxx Xxxxxx that is not retained by CARB in the ordinary course of business. The penalty in each case was also based on confidential settlement communications between CARB and Xxxx Tesoro that CARB does not retain in the ordinary course of business. Each penalty also reflects CARB’s assessment of the relative strength of the case against XxxxXxxxxx, the desire to avoid the uncertainty, burden and expense of litigation, to obtain swift compliance with the law and to remove any unfair advantage that Xxxx Tesoro may have secured from its actions.

Penalty Determination. (1) Pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 39619.7, CARB must provide information on the basis for the penalty it seeks. This information is provided throughout this settlement agreement Agreement and summarized below. Penalties must be set at levels sufficient to discourage violations. The penalties in this matter were determined in consideration of all relevant circumstances, including the eight factors specified in Health and Safety Code section 43031, subdivision (b). The per unit penalty in the case of NOV F122118F042717-KRNRTSOT-RPT RVP is a maximum of $35,000 per day per strict liability violation. CARB alleges that eighteen uncertified blends of the non- complying CARBOB were was sold, supplied supplied, and transported over a time period of six days from one tank, resulting in eighteen violationsseven violations under CaRFG regulation sections 2262.4 and 2268. The penalty obtained in this case is $3,000.00 per violation. CARB discovered this violation, but CARB considered several other factors in Xxxx’x favor. The lower penalty reflects the consideration of a number of facts, including: this appears to have been an unintentional violation, Xxxx has a longstanding compliance history, and Xxxx made efforts to comply and to cooperate with the investigation. CARB alleges that the penalty provisions being applied in this case, Health and Safety Code sections 43027 and 43030, 43030 are appropriate because Xxxx Tesoro allegedly sold, offered for sale, supplied, or offered for supply or and/or transported CARBOB in California in violation of Cal. California Code Regs.of Regulations, tit.13title 13, §§ 2250–2273.5sections 2250-2273.5. The provisions cited above do not prohibit emissions above a specified level. CARB alleges that because since the fuel did not meet California regulatory requirementsair pollution standards, any emissions attributable to them are illegal. However, in this case, Xxxx later submitted documentation alleging that it is not practicable to quantify these emissions because the blends passed the predictive model and therefore may have been found compliant if Xxxx had timely notified CARBinformation necessary to do so is not available. (2) Xxxx Tesoro acknowledges that CARB has complied with Health and Safety Code section 39619.7 in prosecuting or settling these casesthis case. Specifically, CARB has considered all relevant facts, including those listed at Health and Safety Code section 43031, has explained the manner in which the penalty amount was calculated, has identified the provision of law under which the penalty is being assessed, and has considered and determined that this penalty is being assessed under a provision of law that does not prohibit the emission of pollutants at a specified level. (3) Penalties were determined based on the unique circumstances of each 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 case negotiations, and the potential costs and risk associated with litigating these particular violations. The penalty reflects violations extending over a number of days considered together with the complete circumstances of this case. Penalties in future cases might be smaller or larger on a per unit basis. (4) The penalty in each this case was based in part on confidential business information provided by Xxxx Tesoro that is not retained by CARB in the ordinary course of business. The penalty in each this case was also based on confidential settlement communications between CARB and Xxxx Tesoro that CARB does not retain in the ordinary course of business. Each The penalty also reflects CARB’s 's assessment of the relative strength of the its case against XxxxTesoro, the desire to avoid the uncertainty, burden and expense of litigation, to obtain swift compliance with the law and to remove any unfair advantage that Xxxx Tesoro may have secured from its actions.

Penalty Determination. (1) Pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 39619.7, CARB must provide information on the basis for the penalty it seeks. This information is provided throughout this settlement agreement and summarized below. Penalties must be set at levels sufficient to discourage violations. The penalties in this matter were determined in consideration of all relevant circumstances, including the eight factors specified in Health and Safety Code section 43031, subdivision (b). The per unit penalty in the case of NOV F122118F040919-KRNRSHR-RPT RVP is a maximum of $35,000 per day per strict liability violation. CARB alleges that eighteen uncertified blends of the non-complying CARBOB were was sold, supplied and transported over a time period of six days resulting in eighteen thirteen violations. The penalty obtained in this case is $3,000.00 15,000.00 per violation. CARB discovered this violation, but CARB considered several other factors in Xxxx’x favor. The lower penalty reflects the consideration of a number of facts, including: including that this appears appeared to have been be an unintentional violation, Xxxx has that XXXX’s discovery of the exceedance of the RVP were due to a longstanding compliance historyself-disclosed incident at the Xxxxxxxx refinery, and Xxxx made efforts to comply and to cooperate that Shell cooperated with the XXXX’s investigation. CARB alleges that the penalty provisions being applied in this case, Health and Safety Code sections 43027 and 43030, are appropriate because Xxxx Shell allegedly sold, offered for sale, supplied, or offered for supply or transported CARBOB in California in violation of Cal. Code Regs.CCR, tit.13title13, §§ 2250–2273.5. The provisions cited above do not prohibit emissions above a specified level. CARB alleges that because since the fuel did not meet California regulatory requirementsair pollution standards, any emissions attributable to them are illegal. Howeverillegal however, in this case, Xxxx later submitted documentation alleging that it is not practicable to quantify these emissions because the blends passed the predictive model and therefore may have been found compliant if Xxxx had timely notified CARBinformation necessary to do so is not available. (2) Xxxx Shell acknowledges that CARB has complied with Health and Safety Code section 39619.7 in prosecuting or settling these cases. Specifically, CARB has considered all relevant facts, including those listed at Health and Safety Code section 43031, has explained the manner in which the penalty amount was calculated, has identified the provision of law under which the penalty is being assessed, and has considered and determined that this penalty is being assessed under a provision of law that does not prohibit the emission of pollutants at a specified level. (3) Penalties were determined based on the unique circumstances of each 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 case negotiations, and the potential costs and risk associated with litigating these particular violations. The penalty reflects violations extending over a number of days considered together with the complete circumstances of this case. Penalties in future cases might be smaller or larger on a per per- unit basis. (4) The penalty in each case was based in part on confidential business information provided by Xxxx Shell that is not retained by CARB in the ordinary course of business. The penalty in each case was also based on confidential settlement communications between CARB and Xxxx Shell that CARB does not retain in the ordinary course of business. Each penalty also reflects CARB’s assessment of the relative strength of the case against XxxxShell, the desire to avoid the uncertainty, burden and expense of litigation, to obtain swift compliance with the law and to remove any unfair advantage that Xxxx Shell may have secured from its actions.