Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

BILL HALFACRE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, 93-007088 (1993)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 93-007088 Visitors: 23
Petitioner: BILL HALFACRE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.
Respondent: DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Judges: WILLIAM R. CAVE
Agency: Department of Environmental Protection
Locations: Sarasota, Florida
Filed: Dec. 15, 1993
Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Wednesday, June 22, 1994.

Latest Update: Jul. 26, 1994
Summary: This cause came on for consideration before the undersigned on Respondent Department of Environmental Protection's (Department) Motion For Summary Recommended Order. The motion was heard by telephonic hearing on March 24, 1994. The Petitioner was represented by its president, John F. Cox and the Respondent was represented by its attorney, W. Douglas Beason. At the conclusion of the hearing , Mr. Cox was advised that a similar case had been heard earlier by the undersigned and that the resolution
More
93-7088.PDF

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


BILL HALFACRE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ) INC., DEP Facility No. 588520719 )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 93-7088

) OGC CASE NO. 93-1021

STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT )

OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, )

)

Respondent. )

)


RECOMMENDED ORDER OF DISMISSAL


This cause came on for consideration before the undersigned on Respondent Department of Environmental Protection's (Department) Motion For Summary Recommended Order. The motion was heard by telephonic hearing on March 24, 1994. The Petitioner was represented by its president, John F. Cox and the Respondent was represented by its attorney, W. Douglas Beason. At the conclusion of the hearing , Mr. Cox was advised that a similar case had been heard earlier by the undersigned and that the resolution of that case would have a significant impact on the resolution in this case. The Mr. Cox was further advised that upon the earlier case being decided, he would be furnished a copy and given a time certain for any further response to the motion. By letter dated April 18, 1994, the undersigned furnished Mr. Cox with a copy of the Recommended Order in Parr and Homer vs. Department of Environmental Protection, Case No. 93- 6555 and advised Mr. Cox that he would have until 5:00 p.m. on May 11, 1994, to file any further response to the Department's motion. Additionally, Mr. Cox was advised that failure to timely respond would result in the undersigned assuming that he would make no further response and the undersigned would rule on the motion. Mr. Cox made no further response to the motion after the letter of April 18, 1994.


The facts are not in dispute, and are as follows: (1) sometime before February 26, 1993, the Petitioner submitted an application for eligibility for Restoration Coverage under the Abandon Tank Restoration Program (ATRP) to the Department; (2) by letter dated February 26, 1992, the Department advised the Petitioner that, based on the information furnished to the Department, the Petitioner's petroleum storage system (facility) had been determined to be ineligible for participation in the ATRP on the basis that the Petitioner's facility had stored petroleum products for consumption, use or sale after March 1, 1990, citing Rule 17-769.800(3)(a), Florida Administrative Code; (3) the Petitioner has admitted that its facility had stored petroleum products for consumption, use, or sale subsequent to March 1, 1990; and (4) by letter dated March 19, 1993, the Petitioner advised the Department that it was not aware of the ATRP until June, 1990, had spent a considerable sum of money to remove the tank and the contaminated soil, were expecting help from the ATRP to defray the cost, and requested a waiver of 4 months to July 1990, in order to be eligible for Restoration Coverage under the ATRP.

To be eligible for the ATRP, Section 376.305(7)(a), Florida Statutes, requires, among other things, that an application be submitted to the Department by June 30, 1992, certifying that the system had not stored petroleum products for consumption, use or sale at the facility since March 1, 1990. The Department has interpreted the deadline of March 1, 1990, set forth in Section 376.305(7)(a), Florida Statutes, and its Rule 17-769.800(3), Florida Administrative Code, as a mandatory requirement for eligibility for Restoration Coverage under the ATRP which cannot be waived or extended under any circumstance. See; Parr and Homer v. Department of Environmental Protection, Recommended Order, Case Number 93-6555, Final Order, May 24, 1994.


Therefore, it is, RECOMMENDED:


That the Department enter a final order denying Petitioner's application for Restoration Coverage under the Abandoned Tank Restoration Program.


RECOMMENDED this 22nd day of June, 1994, at Tallahassee, Florida.



WILLIAM R. CAVE

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550

(904) 488-9675


Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 22nd day June, 1994.


COPIES FURNISHED:


John F. Cox, President

Bill Halfacre Construction Co. Inc. 1701 DeSoto Road

Sarasota, Florida 34234


W. Douglas Beason, Esquire Department of Environmental

Protection

Twin Towers Office Building 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400


Virginia B. Wetherell, Secretary Department of Environmental

Protection

Twin Towers Office Building 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400

Kenneth Plante, General Counsel Department of Environmental

Protection

Twin Towers Office Building 2600 Blair Stone Road

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400


NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS


All parties have the right to submit written exceptions to the Recommended Order of Dismissal. All agencies allow each party at least 10 days in which to submit written exceptions. Some agencies allow a larger period within which to submit written exceptions. You should consult with the agency that will issue the final order in this case concerning their rules on the deadline for filing exceptions to this Recommended Order of Dismissal. Any exceptions to this Recommended Order of Dismissal should be filed with the agency that will issue the final order in this case.


Docket for Case No: 93-007088
Issue Date Proceedings
Jul. 26, 1994 Final Order filed.
Jun. 22, 1994 Recommended Order (hearing held , 2013). CASE CLOSED.
Jun. 22, 1994 Recommended Order of Dismissal sent out. CASE CLOSED,
Apr. 18, 1994 Letter to Parties of Record from WRC sent out (J. Cox to respond by 5/11/94)
Mar. 25, 1994 Order of Continuance and Status Report sent out. (Case held in abeyance until further Notice)
Mar. 23, 1994 Department of Environmental Protection`s Notice of Hearing filed.
Mar. 22, 1994 Department of Environmental Protection`s Motion for Summary Recommended Order & Motion for Continuance filed.
Jan. 24, 1994 Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for 4/1/94; 9:00am; Sarasota)
Jan. 12, 1994 Ltr. to WRC from John J. Cox re: Reply to Initial Order filed.
Jan. 12, 1994 Ltr. to WRC from John J. Cox re: Reply to Initial Order filed.
Dec. 29, 1993 Initial Order issued.
Dec. 15, 1993 Request for Assignment of Hearing Officer and Notice of Preservation of Record; Agency Action Letter; Request for Formal Administrative Hearing, letter form filed.

Orders for Case No: 93-007088
Issue Date Document Summary
Jul. 22, 1994 Agency Final Order
Jun. 22, 1994 Recommended Order Statute and rule cite of March 1, 1990 was mandatory and could not be waived.
Source:  Florida - Division of Administrative Hearings

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