Title: Statement labeled: "Maloney Suggestions"
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00051341/00001
 Material Information
Title: Statement labeled: "Maloney Suggestions"
Alternate Title: Statement labeled: "Maloney Suggestions" for changes in Sec. 1.02A definition of "Well," Sec. 2.15 revocation, Sec. 3.02 revocation, Sec. 3.02 blasting, Sec. 3.11 notice of rejection.
Physical Description: 1p.
Language: English
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
General Note: Box 3, Folder 2 ( SWFWMD (R) HISTORY - LAWS, RULES FIRST ORDERS - B3F2 ), Item 30
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00051341
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text

f In the event of a redraft, it is suggested that consideration be

given to the following (citations are to the sixth draft):

1.02A definition of "well"

Delete any limitations such as diameter. Place exemptions
in a separate section. 120" maximum may permit very heavy users

to excape regulation under this section by constructing infiltra-

tion galleries from a hole over 120" in diameter.

Delete D & E, definitions of "regulatory district" and

"regulatory board" since they conflict with definitions in 363.081.

Retain 102D of 5th Draft providing for control of domestic

wells in areas of salt-water intrusion. However, it should be

moved out of the definition section since it is not a definition.

2.01 registration requirements

Add "firm or corporation" after "person."

2 6 Yo l *ght provi spe ifically f ppell te review b

tYe wa r re our appeal b ar der 373. e Florida

S utes.

2 revocation

Add "to suspend or revoke a certificate of registration"

after the word "proceedings."


Add that blasting is not a permissible method of constructing

a well.

3.11 notice of rejection

3.11A is very vague. No reference to 373 is needed to

establish improper construction as a basis of revocation. If

improper spacing, unreasonable use, or damage to the aquifer is

contemplated as a basis for rejection, these should be enumerated.

Otherwise mere reference to FS373 may not be sufficient to over-
t,,Cf ^ ^ \

__ __ I-- _

University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs