The issue to be resolved in this proceeding concerns whether the Respondent, Edna Jane Bowman, should be terminated from her position as a teacher with the Duval County School Board (DCSB) for good cause, based on alleged incompetence, as that status is defined at Section 4(e) of the Duval County Teacher Tenure Act, Chapter 21197, Laws of Florida (1941), as amended (Tenure Act).Petitioner proved professional incompetence in a number of instructional areas, as well as failure to cooperate with improvement plan. Recommend termination for cause proven.

Whether proposed amendments to Rules 17-761.200, 17-761.500 and 17- 761.510, Florida Administrative Code, are arbitrary and capricious, and therefore, constitute an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority? Whether the economic impact statement accompanying the proposed amendments to Chapter 17-761, Florida Administrative Code, was adequate? Whether the Department of Environmental Regulation properly considered the impacts of the proposed amendments to Chapter 17-761, Florida Administrative Code, on small and minority business pursuant to Sections 120.54(2)(a) and (3)(b), Florida Statutes?Failed to prove rules governing underground storage of petroleum are invalid.

Whether Petitioner's site located at 2188 N.W. 20th Street, Miami, Florida, is eligible to participate in the Early Detection Incentive Program.Service station not eligible to participate in early detection incentive program due to its gross maintenance of its storage system.

Whether the Petitioner, Flav-O-Rich, Inc., is eligible for the restoration funding portion of Florida Petroleum Liability Insurance and Restoration Program at the Jacksonville location. On March 7, 1990, Respondent, Department of Environmental Regulation (the Department), determined that Petitioner, Flav-O-Rich, Inc. (the Applicant) was precluded from obtaining Florida Petroleum Liability Insurance and Restoration Program eligibility and restoration funding. By letter dated March 20, 1990, the Applicant contested the Department's denial of its application for eligibility and funding. The factual basis given for denial was disputed, and a formal administrative hearing was requested to resolve the controversy. During the hearing, the Applicant presented two witnesses and filed four exhibits. The Department called four witnesses and submitted seven exhibits. All of the exhibits were admitted into evidence. The Hearing Officer allowed the Applicant to file one additional exhibit posthearing, so that the Department's counsel could review it. The objection as to relevancy was overruled, and the exhibit was admitted as Petitioner's Exhibit #5. A transcript of the proceedings was filed on December 3, 1990. Proposed Recommended Orders were timely submitted by the parties. Rulings on the proposed findings of fact are in the Appendix of the Recommended Order.On-Site violations prevented applicant from obtaining restoration coverage in the Florida petroleum Liability Insurance and Restoration Program.

The issue in this case is whether Petitioner's site, Circle K General, Inc., Store #2375, located at U.S. #1 and Pennekamp Park, is eligible for restoration pursuant to the Florida Petroleum Liability and Restoration Program (FPLIRP) set forth in Section 376.3072, Florida Statutes.Storage tank owner did not report positive monitoring well reports or investigate and abate petroleum discharge. Ineligible for site restoration (FPLIRP)

The issue in this case is whether Petitioner's site located at 13292 N.W. 118th Avenue in Miami, Florida is eligible for reimbursement of the costs of petroleum contamination cleanup pursuant to Section 376.3071(12), Florida Statutes.Petitioner's application for participation in reimbursement program was postmarked after filing deadline but should have been accepted based on evidence it was timely mailed.

Whether petitioner's application for reimbursement from the inland protection trust fund should be approved, or whether petitioner was grossly negligent in its conduct and is accordingly not entitled to recovery.Evalution for perticipation in petroleum clean-up program approved. Recommended Order reversed by agency.

Whether Petitioner's service station site known as Siesta Key Exxon Village, at 5201 Ocean Boulevard, Sarasota, Florida, is eligible for state administered cleanup pursuant to Section 376.3071(9), Florida Statutes.Failure to respond to known source of contamination constitutes gross negligence and is grounds for denying cleanup funds.