SB 1402 Statement Sample Clauses

SB 1402 Statement. Senate Xxxx 1402 (Xxxxxx, Chapter 413, statutes of 2010, Health and Safety Code section 39617) requires the ARB to provide information on the basis for the penalties it seeks. This required information, which is provided throughout this settlement agreement, is summarized here. The manner in which the penalty amount was determined, including a per unit or per vehicle penalty. 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 43024.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (6)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
SB 1402 Statement. Senate Xxxx 1402 (Xxxxxx, Chapter 413, statutes of 2010, Health and Safety Code section 39617) requires the ARB to provide information on the basis for the penalties it seeks. This required information, which is provided throughout this settlement agreement, is summarized here. The manner in which the penalty amount was determined, including a per unit or per vehicle penalty. 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 43024. The per unit penalty in this case is a maximum of $5,000 per unit per strict liability violation under Health and Safety Code section 43154 and 43211. The penalty obtained in this case is approximately $5,000.00 per unit for 4 units. The provision of law the penalty is being assessed under and why that provision is most appropriate for that violation. ARB alleges that the penalty provision being applied in this case, Health and Safety Code section 43154, is appropriate because ARB alleged that Krone NA manufactured for sale, sold, offered for sale, introduced or delivered for introduction into commerce, or imported into California off-road compression- ignition engines that were not certified pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 13, section 2420 et. seq. Is 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 provisions cited above do not prohibit emissions above a specified level. It is not practicable to quantify these emissions, because the information necessary to do so, such as emission rates and time of use, is not available. There are no testing results available that would indicate how much emissions increased as a result of the use of the noncertified engines. However, since the off-road compression-ignition engines were not certified for sale in California, all emissions attributable to them are illegal and excess as well.
Sample 1Sample 2See All (5)
SB 1402 Statement. Senate Xxxx 1402 (Xxxxxx, Chapter 413, statutes of 2010, Health and Safety Code section 39617) requires the ARB to provide information on the basis for the penalties it seeks. This required information, which is provided throughout this settlement agreement, is summarized here. The manner in which the penalty amount was determined, including a per unit or per vehicle penalty. 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 43024. The per unit penalty in this case is a maximum of $500 per unit per strict liability violation. The penalty obtained in this case is approximately $375.00 per unit for 157 units and was reduced because this was an unintentional, first time violation; KOHLER’s exceptionally diligent efforts to comply promptly and fully cooperate with the investigation, and the nature and means of discovery of the violations. The provision of law the penalty is being assessed under and why that provision is most appropriate for that violation. ARB alleges that the penalty provision being applied in this case, Health and Safety Code section 43016, is appropriate because KOHLER allegedly sold engines not certified by ARB.
Sample 1Sample 2
SB 1402 Statement. Senate Bill 1402 (Xxxxxx, Chapter 413, statutes of 2010, Health and Safety Code section 39619.7) requires the CARB to provide information on the basis for the penalties it seeks. This required information, which is provided throughout this settlement agreement, is summarized here. The manner in which the penalty amount was determined, including a per unit or per vehicle penalty. 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 43024. The per unit penalty in this case for alleged violations that occurred prior to January 1, 2017, is a maximum of five hundred dollars ($500) per unit per strict liability violation. The per unit penalty in this case for alleged violations that occurred on or after January 1, 2017, is a maximum of thirty-seven thousand five hundred dollars ($37,500) per unit per strict liability violation. The penalty obtained in this case is approximately two hundred and fifty dollars ($250) per unit for 918 Subject Parts. This reflects the fact that this was a first time violation alleged for J&P; J&P’s good faith and expeditious efforts to correct the alleged violations, including actions prior to the issuance of an NOV; the size of J&P; and J&P’s cooperation with the investigation. The provision of law the penalty is being assessed under and why that provision is most appropriate for that violation. The penalty provisions being applied in this case are Health and Safety Code sections 43008.6 and 43016, because J&P allegedly sold, offered for sale, and/or advertised the Subject Parts that were not exempted pursuant to Vehicle Code sections 27156 and California Code of Regulations, title 13, sections 2220 et seq. The penalty provisions of Health and Safety Code sections 43008.6 and 43016 apply to violations of the Aftermarket Parts Regulations because the Regulations were adopted under authority of Health and Safety Code section 43013, which is in Part 5 of Division 26 of the Health and Safety Code. Whether the penalty is being assed 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 provisions cited above do not prohibit emissions above a specified level. It is not practicable to quantify these emissions, because the information necessary to...
Sample 1
SB 1402 Statement. Senate Xxxx 1402 (Xxxxxx, Chapter 413, statutes of 2010, Health and Safety Code section 39619.7) requires the CARB to provide information on the basis for the penalties it seeks. This required information, which is provided throughout this settlement agreement, is summarized here. The manner in which the penalty amount was determined, including a per unit or per vehicle penalty. 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 43024. The per unit penalty in this case is a maximum of $37,500.00 per unit sold after January 1, 2017 and $500 for those units sold before January 1, 2017 per strict liability violation. The penalty obtained in this case is approximately $250 per unit for approximately 74 Subject Parts. This reflects the fact that this was an unintentional, first time violation by Vortech, Vortech’s cooperation with the investigation, and the speedy efforts taken by the company to correct the issue. The provision of law the penalty is being assessed under and why that provision is most appropriate for that violation. CARB alleges that the penalty provision being applied in this case, Health and Safety Code section 43016, is appropriate because Vortech allegedly sold, and/or offered for sale, and/or advertised the subject non-California certified aftermarket parts that were not exempted pursuant to California Code of Regulations, title 13, section 2222. Is 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.
Sample 1
SB 1402 Statement. Senate Xxxx 1402 (Xxxxxx, Chapter 413, statutes of 2010, Health and Safety Code section 39619.7) requires the CARB to provide information on the basis for the penalties it seeks. This required information, which is provided throughout this settlement agreement, is summarized here. The manner in which the penalty amount was determined, including a per unit or per vehicle penalty. 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 43024. The maximum per unit penalty in this case is $500 per unit per strict liability violation. The penalty obtained in this case is $250.00 per unit for 721 units. This reflects the facts that this was an unintentional, first time violation of this type; KAWASAKI promptly and fully cooperated with the investigation, and to correct the violations; there were no adverse environmental consequences because a running change to increase the EMEL for the subject engines was subsequently approved by CARB; and KAWASAKI is surrendering 985.8 evaporative credits. The provision of law the penalty is being assessed under and why that provision is most appropriate for that violation. CARB alleges that the penalty provision being applied in this case, Health and Safety Code section 43016, is appropriate because KAWASAKI sold, supplied, offered for sale, advertised, and/or manufactured for sale in California small off- road engines that did not meet the evaporative limits. Is 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 provisions cited above do not prohibit emissions above a specified level. KAWASAKI alleges that the subject units did not increase emissions, because a running change for the subject engines was subsequently approved by CARB.
Sample 1
SB 1402 Statement. Senate Bill 1402 (Xxxxxx, Chapter 413, statutes of 2010, Health and Safety Code section 39619.7) requires CARB to provide information on the basis for the penalties it seeks. This required information, which is provided throughout this settlement agreement, is summarized here. The manner in which the penalty amount was determined, including a per unit or per vehicle penalty. 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 43024. The per unit, or vehicle, penalty in this case is a maximum of $5000 per unit, $500 per unit, and $50 per unit per strict liability violation for the sale of illegal vehicles; per non-complying OBD, undisclosed running changes and/or field fixes; and per test program violation, respectively. The penalty obtained in this case is on average $252.41 per unit for 23,281 units. This reflects the facts that PORSCHE timely and thoroughly self-disclosed these violations, these were first time violations, and PORSCHE’s diligent efforts to comply and to cooperate with the investigation. The provision of law the penalty is being assessed under and why that provision is most appropriate for that violation. CARB alleges that the penalty provisions being applied in this case, Health and Safety Code sections 43016, 43154, and 43212, are appropriate because PORSCHE allegedly imported, delivered, received, acquired, sold, and/or offered for sale new motor vehicle engines in violation of Health and Safety Code sections 43151-43153, sold OBD non-compliant vehicles, implemented undisclosed running changes and/or field fixes, and failed to comply with the 2015 TP. Is 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 provisions cited above prohibit emissions above a specified level. However, it is not practicable to quantify these emissions, to the extent there are any, because the information necessary to do so, such as emission rates and time of use, would require a large expenditure of resources by the Parties to obtain. There are no testing results readily available that would indicate how much emissions increased, if at all, as a result of the use of the vehicles impacted by the facts and allegations described in paragr...
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
SB 1402 Statement. Senate Xxxx 1402 (Xxxxxx, Chapter 413, statutes of 2010, Health and Safety Code section 39619.7) requires the CARB to provide information on the basis for the penalties it seeks. This required information, which is provided throughout this settlement agreement, is summarized here. The manner in which the penalty amount was determined, including a per unit or per vehicle penalty. 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 43024. The maximum per unit penalty in this case is $500 per unit per strict liability violation. The penalty obtained in this case is approximately $21.29 per unit for 90,544 units. This reflects the facts that this was an unintentional, first time violation of this type and HONDA promptly and fully cooperated with the investigation. The provision of law the penalty is being assessed under and why that provision is most appropriate for that violation. CARB alleges that the penalty provision being applied in this case, Health and Safety Code section 43016, is appropriate because HONDA sold, supplied, offered for sale, advertised, and/or manufactured for sale in California small off- road engines that did not meet the evaporative limits. Is 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. As described above, the emissions from the engines sold by HONDA exceeded Honda’s self-selected EMEL. However, given variability in use patterns associated with these engines, it is not practicable to quantify the excess emissions here.
Sample 1

Related to SB 1402 Statement

  • E-Statements If we make this service available to you, you may agree to receive statements via electronic means, whereby your periodic statement will be e-mailed to you or sent electronically to, and made available on, our on-line banking website. Please see the provision, "Electronic Statements, Electronic Notices, Electronic Disclosures and Electronic Agreements" for more information regarding e-statements. Notices; e-Notices; Name or Address Change. Any written notice we give to you is effective when it is made available in our on-line banking system (if you have agreed to receive such notices electronically), or when it is deposited in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid and addressed to you at the most recent mailing address on file with us. Notice to any account owner is considered notice to all account owners. Any written notice you give us is not effective until we actually receive it in our offices. You agree to notify us of any postal or e-mail address change or name change in writing. We reserve the right to require verification of your identity and proof of a change in address prior to making any changes in our records. We are only required to attempt to communicate with you at the most recent address you have provided to us. If you fail to provide notice of a change in address or name, and we attempt to locate you, we may impose a service fee as set forth on the Rates & Fees Schedule.

  • CERTIFICATION STATEMENT Under Section 231.006, Family Code, the vendor or applicant certifies that the individual or business entity named in this contract, bid, or application is not ineligible to receive the specified grant, loan, or payment and acknowledges that this contract may be terminated and payment may be withheld if this certification is inaccurate. The contractor understands that it is the contractor’s responsibility to verify whether a child support obligor who is more than 30 days delinquent is the sole proprietor, partner, shareholder or owner with an ownership interest of at least 25%.

  • Annual Statement The Plan Administrator shall provide to the Executive, within one hundred twenty (120) days after the end of each Plan Year, a statement setting forth the benefits to be distributed under this Agreement.

  • Periodic Statement Each month we will send you a periodic statement for each Credit Card account you have with us covering the previous billing period. We may not send you a statement if your balance is zero and there were no transactions during the billing period. The statement will have a "Statement Closing Date" and a "Payment Due Date," and will show, among other things, your "Previous Balance," your "New Balance," and your minimum monthly payment, which will be shown as "Minimum Payment Due." The periodic statement is part of this Agreement. If you choose to receive periodic statements electronically, the statements will be deemed to have been sent to you when they are first made available for you to view online.

  • Final Report The goal of this subtask is to prepare a comprehensive Final Report that describes the original purpose, approach, results, and conclusions of the work performed under this Agreement. The CAM will review the Final Report, which will be due at least two months before the Agreement end date. When creating the Final Report Outline and the Final Report, the Recipient must use the Style Manual provided by the CAM.

  • LEAD WARNING STATEMENT Housing built before 1978 may contain lead-based paint. Lead from paint, paint chips, and dust can pose health hazards if not managed properly. Lead exposure is especially harmful to young children and pregnant women. Before renting pre-1978 housing, lessors must disclose the presence of lead-based paint and/or lead-based paint hazards in the dwelling. Student must also receive a federally approved pamphlet on lead poisoning prevention. That pamphlet is available at xxxx://xxx0.xxx.xxx/lead/protect-your-family-lead-your-home-1

  • Monthly Statement The Contractor shall submit a statement to the Engineer at the end of each month, in a tabulated form approved by the Engineer, showing the amounts to which the Contractor considers himself to be entitled. The statement shall include the following items, as applicable; - the value of the Permanent Work executed up to the end of previous month - such an amount (not exceeding 75 percent of the value) as the Engineer may consider proper on account of materials for permanent work delivered by the Contractor in the site - such amount as the Engineer may consider fair and reasonable for any Temporary Works for which separate amounts are provided in the Bill of Quantities - adjustments under Clause 70 - any amount to be withheld under retention provisions of Sub-clause 60.3 - any other sum to which the Contractor may be entitled under the Contract If the Engineer disagrees with or cannot verify any part of the statement, the Contractor shall submit such further information as the Engineer may reasonably require and shall make such changes and corrections in the statement as may be directed by the Engineer. In cases where there is difference in opinion as to the value of any item, the Engineer’s view shall prevail.

  • REPORT SUBMISSION 1. Copies of reporting packages for audits conducted in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F-Audit Requirements, and required by PART I of this form shall be submitted, when required by 2 CFR 200.512, by or on behalf of the recipient directly to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse (FAC) as provided in 2 CFR 200.36 and 200.512

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