Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
Larry Allen Zink
Larry Allen Zink
Visitors: 17
0
Bar #109592(OH)    
Canton OH

Are you Larry Allen Zink? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

09-005068EF  DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION vs POLO NORTH COUNTRY CLUB, INC.  (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 17, 2009
The issues in this case are whether Petitioner, Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), should impose on Respondent, Polo North Country Club, Inc. (Polo North), an administrative penalty in the amount of $10,000, require Polo North to take corrective action, and require payment of DEP's investigative costs for allegedly violating rules relating to above-ground storage tank (AST) systems.Petitioner proved failure to maintain financial responsibility, do closure assessment, and label used oil tank. Final Order: $7,500 fine and corrective action.
03-002469  PALM BEACH POLO HOLDINGS, INC., AND WELLINGTON COUNTRY PLACE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. vs ACME IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT  (2003)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 07, 2003
The issue in this case is whether the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) should modify Surface Water Management (SWM) Permit No. 50-00548-S, held by the ACME Improvement District (Acme) to authorize alternate SWM facilities within Acme Basin B primarily by: eliminating the water quality function originally provided by a 79-acre retention area known as Peacock Pond pursuant to a 1979 permit; replacing it with adequate alternate methods of water quality treatment; and authorizing an alternative pump operation schedule for the remainder of Acme Basin B. The permit should be modified only if Acme has provided reasonable assurances that the proposed modifications comply with the relevant portions of SFWMD's Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) regulations set forth in: Part IV of Chapter 373, Florida Statutes; Chapter 40E-4, Florida Administrative Code; and the Basis of Review for ERP Applications (BOR) (collectively referred to as ERP criteria).Respondent applied to modify a 1979 surface water management permit, primarily to eliminate a water quality treatment facility that could not be used. Reasonable assurances were provided. Respondent did not prove that Petitioners` purpose was improper.

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer