NJDEP Enforcement Insight

NJDEP NOV vs. AONOCAPA: What’s the Difference?

September 29, 2026

By Matthew Karmel

NJDEP NOV vs. AONOCAPA: What’s the Difference?

A Notice of Violation (“NOV”) and an Administrative Order and Notice of Civil Administrative Penalty Assessment (“AONOCAPA”) are both commonly used NJDEP enforcement documents, but they have significantly different consequences.

An NOV generally puts a company on notice of an alleged violation and provides an opportunity to achieve compliance.

An AONOCAPA is a formal enforcement action that can order corrective action, impose a civil administrative penalty, and provide the recipient with a limited period to request an administrative hearing. If a hearing is not requested, the recipient generally waives objections to the alleged violation and penalty determination.

Understanding which document NJDEP has issued is therefore important to determining the appropriate response.

What Is an NJDEP Notice of Violation?

NJDEP describes an NOV as an enforcement action that advises a regulated party that a violation has occurred. An NOV typically identifies the violation, the date it was discovered, and a compliance deadline.

NOVs do not themselves carry civil administrative penalties. NJDEP also states that an NOV cannot be appealed through its administrative hearing process. In many instances, if the violation is corrected, no further enforcement action follows.

That does not mean an NOV should be ignored. An NOV may become the basis for additional enforcement if NJDEP concludes that compliance was not achieved or determines that further action is appropriate.

For this reason, companies should use the NOV stage to evaluate the factual and technical basis for NJDEP’s allegations and determine what corrective action may be required.

What Is an AONOCAPA?

An AONOCAPA is more significant.

According to NJDEP, an AONOCAPA may be issued after a company fails to comply with an NOV or where NJDEP determines that a violation is not minor. Unlike an NOV, an AONOCAPA carries a civil administrative penalty and may also order specific corrective action.

An AONOCAPA must be contested through the administrative hearing process within the applicable time frames.  If not, the recipient is generally deemed to have waived all objections to the alleged violation, the required corrective actions, and any penalty assessments.

The deadline for requesting a hearing is not uniform across all NJDEP programs. Hearing deadlines may vary depending on the program and document, generally ranging from approximately 10 to 35 days. The specific enforcement document and applicable regulations should therefore be reviewed immediately.

Contesting an AONOCAPA through a hearing request should be done in all instances and does not generally require extensive litigation but is essential to preserve objections and provide a basis for negotiating a resolution of the alleged violations.

Why the Difference Matters

The distinction affects both timing and strategy.

With an NOV, the immediate focus may be on investigating the violation, addressing compliance, and determining whether NJDEP’s allegations are accurate.

With an AONOCAPA, the company must also consider whether to preserve its right to an administrative hearing, whether the penalty is appropriate, and whether NJDEP’s factual and legal conclusions should be challenged.

Companies receiving correspondence from NJDEP should therefore begin by identifying exactly what NJDEP has issued.

An NOV and an AONOCAPA may arise out of similar facts, but they do not necessarily create the same obligations, deadlines, or rights.

Related People

  • Overview
  • People
  • Publications & News
  • Environmental and Sustainability Law Blog
  • Who We Represent

Firm Highlights

  • Events
    The 2026 Economic, Tax, and Accounting Updates
    We are looking forward to the Mid-Atlantic CFO Roundtable's next event on November 13, 2026. This is a program with topics built for Finance Executives. We are extremely fortunate to have three excellent speakers: Dr. Daraius Irani, Vice President of Business and Public Engagement at Towson University; Mike Stankus, Tax Office Managing Principal at BDO; and Daniel Wahlberg, Managing Partner of Acclare Solutions. The economy is rapidly changing with various factors driving it. The November 3rd midterm elections may also have an impact. Our three expert presenters will discuss the ramifications of the election, and the current year updates to GAAP financial reporting and Federal and State income taxes. Please join us for what will surely be an informative and timely discussion. Meet Our Speakers: Daraius Irani, Ph.D. • Towson University Vice President, Business & Public Engagement Dr. Daraius Irani serves as Vice President of Business and Public Engagement at Towson University as well as the chief economist for the Regional Economic Studies Institute (RESI) at Towson University, a policy group providing economic, fiscal impact, and policy analysis to public and private entities.  Dr. Irani is often called upon to provide economic presentations to organizations across Maryland. He has appeared on numerous television programs and in local and regional print media. Dr. Irani holds a Ph.D. in economics from University of California, Santa Barbara. Dan Wahlberg • Acclare Solutions Managing Partner With over 28 years of experience, Dan Wahlberg is a recognized leader in audit and assurance for the Mid-Atlantic’s middle market business community. As a licensed CPA in Maryland and Virginia, Dan has led assurance practices at top regional firms, including serving as Baltimore Audit Managing Partner and Assurance Practice Leader at BDO USA in Baltimore and as Partner and member of the Management Committee at Hertzbach & Company P.A which merged into BDO in 2020. His expertise centers on delivering clarity, strategic guidance, and proactive solutions to middle-market businesses across Baltimore and beyond. His entrepreneurial spirit has led him to begin a new CPA firm this year with four other CPAs serving the business community. Dan holds a Bachelor of Science in Accounting from Rutgers University and began his career at PWC in New York. He is also deeply engaged in the community, previously serving as President of ACG Maryland and current Board member and as Audit Committee Member for The Associated: Jewish Federation of Baltimore.  Mike Stankus • BDO USA LLP Tax Office Managing Principal Mike Stankus is the Tax Office Managing Principal for the firm’s Baltimore office. He has more than 16 years of experience providing tax planning and preparation and management advisory services for his clients. Mike focuses on advising privately held businesses and their owners on effective growth and tax strategies. He also performs various engagements for mergers and acquisitions and complex cost accounting projects and projections. In addition, he represents various government contracting clients before the DCAA and assists with FAR compliance. Mike’s areas of concentration include working with government contractors, professional service firms, construction companies, and homebuilders.
  • Events
    AIA Tri-State Conference
    Princeton will serve as the backdrop for three days of connection, learning, and design leadership. From keynotes to tours to the Tri-State Design Awards, this year’s conference is designed to go far beyond education sessions. Kick off the week with pre-conference intensives and individual state component Design Award celebrations, followed by three days of education, inspiration, networking, and design excellence at the 2026 AIA Tri-State Conference—featuring pre-conference intensives, three keynote speakers, 25 education sessions, curated tours, an expo, spec academies, and the AIA Tri-State Design Awards—bringing together architects and design professionals from New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania to connect, learn, and celebrate the best of the profession. G2. Designing Secure Practices: Cybersecurity, Data Privacy, Contractual Provisions, and Insurance Risks for Architects (4:00 PM - 5:30 PM) Architects and design professionals increasingly rely on cloud platforms, BIM software, and digital tools to manage sensitive data, creating cybersecurity and privacy risks. A single incident can trigger liability claims, regulatory obligations, reputational harm, and insurance challenges. Yet many firms underestimate how contracts, insurance, and internal practices intersect during a breach. This program offers legal and insurance perspectives on cyber risk in architecture, examining liability exposure, risky contract provisions, and mitigation strategies. A cyber insurance expert will explain policy responses, coverage gaps, coordination with professional liability, and best practices for aligning insurance with contractual risk and protecting firms from evolving cyber threats. Learning Objectives: Identify key cybersecurity and data privacy risks faced by architecture firms and explain how these risks can impact professional liability and project outcomes. Analyze common contractual provisions to determine which clauses may increase exposure to cyber incidents and propose strategies to mitigate these risks. Evaluate the scope and limitations of cyber insurance policies, including coordination with professional liability coverage, to determine how a policy would respond in a breach scenario. Develop actionable risk management strategies by integrating legal, contractual, and insurance considerations to protect sensitive client and project data.