Lee FL Administrative law, Appeals and Arbitration Lawyers

14-005657GM ALERTS OF PBC, INC., PATRICIA D. CURRY, ROBERT SCHUTZER, AND KAREN SCHUTZER vs PALM BEACH COUNTY (2014)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 26, 2014

The issue to be determined in this case is whether the amendments to the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan (“the Comp Plan”) adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County by Ordinance No. 14-030 (“Proposed Amendments”) are “in compliance,” as that term is defined in section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2014).Palm Beach County's determination that the proposed amendments to its comprehensive plan are in compliance is fairly debatable.

13-004254 THOMAS G. MOSHER AND MATTHEW SCHWARTZ vs DAN A. HUGHES COMPANY, L.P., AND DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (2013)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 31, 2013

The issue is whether to approve an application by Respondent, Dan R. Hughes Company, L.P. (applicant or Hughes), for an oil well drilling permit authorizing the drilling of an exploratory oil well in Collier County, Florida.A balancing of three factors in section 377.241 supports issurance of permit to drill an exploratory oil well in Collier County.

13-004920 MATTHEW SCHWARTZ vs DAN A. HUGHES COMPANY, L.P. AND DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (2013)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 19, 2013

The issue is whether to approve an application by Respondent, Dan R. Hughes Company, L.P. (applicant or Hughes), for an oil well drilling permit authorizing the drilling of an exploratory oil well in Collier County, Florida.A balancing of three factors in section 377.241 supports issurance of permit to drill an exploratory oil well in Collier County.

10-002988GM CEMEX CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS FLORIDA, LLC, OLD CORKSCREW PLANTATION, LLC, OLD CORKSCREW PLANTATION V, LLC, TROYER BROTHERS FLORIDA, INC., AND FFD LAND COMPANY, INC. vs LEE COUNTY (2010)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 01, 2010

The issues to be determined in this case are whether the amendments to the Lee County Comprehensive Plan that were adopted through Ordinance Nos. 10-19, 10-20, 10-21 and Remedial Ordinance No. 10-43 ("Plan Amendments") are "in compliance," as that term is defined in section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2011).1/Petitioners failed to prove beyond fair debate that the plan amendments adopted by Lee County are not in compliance.

08-002451GM IZAAK WALTON INVESTORS, LLC vs TOWN OF YANKEETOWN AND DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 20, 2008

The issue in this case is whether Town of Yankeetown (Town) plan amendment 08-01 (adopted by Ordinance 2007-10) and plan amendment 08-CIE1 (adopted by Ordinance 2008-03), as modified by remedial amendment 09-R1 (adopted by Ordinance 2009-02) (together, referred to as the Plan Amendments or the Revised Comprehensive Plan), are "in compliance" as defined in Section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2009).1Landowner failed to prove beyond fair debate that the Revised Yankeetown Comprehensive Plan was not "in compliance."

08-002473GM DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS vs TOWN OF YANKEETOWN (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 21, 2008

The issue in this case is whether Town of Yankeetown (Town) plan amendment 08-01 (adopted by Ordinance 2007-10) and plan amendment 08-CIE1 (adopted by Ordinance 2008-03), as modified by remedial amendment 09-R1 (adopted by Ordinance 2009-02) (together, referred to as the Plan Amendments or the Revised Comprehensive Plan), are "in compliance" as defined in Section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2009).1Landowner failed to prove beyond fair debate that the Revised Yankeetown Comprehensive Plan was not "in compliance."

06-000881GM DIANE BROWN AND PANHANDLE CITIZENS COALITION vs DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS (2006)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 14, 2006

The issues in this case are whether Amendments 05-02B, 05- 02C, 05-02G, and 05-02H to the Bay County Comprehensive Plan ("Plan") are “in compliance” as defined in Section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes.2Sanctions under 57.105 awarded in the amount of $250, plus interest.

01-002442 PUTNAM COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL, INC.; STEWARDS OF THE ST. JOHNS RIVER, INC., AND LINDA YOUNG vs GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION AND DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 19, 2001

The issues are whether Georgia-Pacific Corporation is entitled to the issuance of an industrial wastewater facility permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program that would authorize it to discharge industrial wastewater to the St. Johns River in Putnam County, Florida, and whether Georgia-Pacific Corporation has met the statutory criteria for a related administrative order for the interim discharge to Rice Creek in Putnam County, Florida.Applicant satisfied all criteria for issuance of a wastewater permit and approval of related administrative order relating to discharge of wastewater in St. Johns River.

01-002720 SAVE OUR BAYS, AIR AND CANALS, INC. vs TAMPA ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC., AND DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 11, 2001

There are two issues in these cases: (1) whether Tampa Bay Desal, LLC ("TBD") provided reasonable assurances that its permit application to discharge wastewater from a proposed seawater desalination plant, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") Permit Application No. FL0186813- 001-IWIS, meets all applicable state permitting standards for industrial wastewater facilities; and (2) whether Tampa Electric Company, Inc. (TEC) provided reasonable assurances that its proposed modification to an existing industrial wastewater facility permit, NPDES Permit Modification No. FL0000817-003-IWIS, meets all applicable state permitting standards.Application for industrial wastewater permit for desalination plant using power plant`s once-through cooling water provided reasonable assurance of compliance with permit requirements.

01-001949 SAVE OUR BAYS, AIR AND CANALS, INC. vs TAMPA BAY DESAL AND DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 18, 2001

There are two issues in these cases: (1) whether Tampa Bay Desal, LLC ("TBD") provided reasonable assurances that its permit application to discharge wastewater from a proposed seawater desalination plant, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") Permit Application No. FL0186813- 001-IWIS, meets all applicable state permitting standards for industrial wastewater facilities; and (2) whether Tampa Electric Company, Inc. (TEC) provided reasonable assurances that its proposed modification to an existing industrial wastewater facility permit, NPDES Permit Modification No. FL0000817-003-IWIS, meets all applicable state permitting standards.Application for industrial wastewater permit for desalination plant using power plant`s once-through cooling water provided reasonable assurance of compliance with permit requirements.

Ralf Gunars Brookes