The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title X
PUBLIC OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES, AND RECORDS

Chapter 122
STATE AND COUNTY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 122.28

122.28 Benefits.—The relevant provisions of ss. 122.01-122.12, 122.15, 122.16, 122.18 to 122.20, inclusive, fixing or relating to eligibility for retirement, retirement compensation, and other benefits payable to members or for the account of members of this system in relation to members in division A hereof, shall apply with equal force and effect to members of division B, with the following exceptions:

(1) For the period of service of the member prior to the effective date of his or her social security coverage hereunder, retirement benefits shall be computed on average final compensation at the rate of 2 percent for each year of service rendered prior to such effective date and as provided in s. 122.08. For the period of membership in division B the member’s retirement compensation shall be computed on average final compensation at the rate of 1.5 percent for each year of service rendered after the effective date of said social security coverage.

(2) Members of division B retiring under the disability provisions of this chapter shall receive not less than 20 percent of their average final compensation.

(3) For those persons who become members of the retirement system on or after July 1, 1963, the amount of such retirement compensation shall not exceed that amount which when added to the member’s estimated annual primary insurance amount under social security coverage equals 80 percent of his or her average final compensation. The estimated annual primary insurance amount of the member shall be determined by the administrator on the basis of the social security coverage in effect on the member’s retirement date, assuming that payment of such primary insurance amount shall commence at the later of the member’s 65th birthday or actual age of retirement, and that the member earned his or her average final compensation in each year between the date of retirement and his or her 65th birthday for those members retiring prior to age 65.

History.—s. 2, ch. 57-382; s. 5, ch. 63-555; s. 793, ch. 95-147; s. 24, ch. 2014-17.

F.S. 122.28 on Google Scholar

F.S. 122.28 on Casetext

Amendments to 122.28

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 122.28

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 122.28.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

CALIFORNIANS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO TOXICS, v. SCHNEIDER DOCK INTERMODAL FACILITY, INC., 374 F. Supp. 3d 897 (N.D. Cal. 2019)

. . . . § 122.28(b) (general permit requirements applicable to state NPDES programs). . . .

CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION, INC. v. PRUITT, v. U. S. U. S. I,, 881 F.3d 24 (1st Cir. 2018)

. . . . § 122.28(a), or an individual permit—but only the latter would trigger section 124.52. . . .

CATSKILL MOUNTAINS CHAPTER OF TROUT UNLIMITED, INC. s v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, El v., 846 F.3d 492 (2d Cir. 2017)

. . . . § 122.28. . . . . See 40 CFR §§ 122.28, 123.25 (2003). Id. at 108, 124 S.Ct. 1537. . . .

FRIENDS OF MAHA ULEPU, INC. a i v. HAWAI I DAIRY FARMS, LLC, a LLC a LLC a, 224 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (D. Haw. 2016)

. . . . § 122.28. [Haw. Admin. R.] § 11-55-34.01. . . .

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,, 808 F.3d 556 (2d Cir. 2015)

. . . . §§ 122.21, 122.28(a)(2), 124.1-.21, 124.51-66. The permit here is a general permit. . . .

SIERRA CLUB, v. ICG HAZARD, LLC,, 781 F.3d 281 (6th Cir. 2015)

. . . . § 122.28. . . . are more appropriately controlled under a general permit than under individual permit. 40 C.F.R. § 122.28 . . .

ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION ON TOXICS v. AURORA ENERGY SERVICES, LLC, 765 F.3d 1169 (9th Cir. 2014)

. . . . § 122.28. . . . Id. § 122.28(b)(2). . . . Id. § 122.28(b)(2)(iv). . . . Id. § 122.28(b)(3). . . .

CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING PROTECTION ALLIANCE, v. CHICO SCRAP METAL, INC., 299 F.R.D. 638 (E.D. Cal. 2014)

. . . . § 122.28(a) (authorizing the use of general permits in lieu of individualized NPDES permits). . . . .

CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING PROTECTION ALLIANCE, v. CHICO SCRAP METAL, INC. Sr. Jr. W. Sr., 728 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 122.28(a) (authorizing the use of general permits in lieu of individualized NPDES permits). . . . .

NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,, 949 F. Supp. 2d 251 (D.D.C. 2013)

. . . . § 122.28(a)(1). . . .

NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,, 945 F. Supp. 2d 39 (D.D.C. 2013)

. . . . § 122.28(a)(1). . . .

ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION ON TOXICS v. AURORA ENERGY SERVICES, LLC, 940 F. Supp. 2d 1005 (D. Alaska 2013)

. . . . § 122.28(2) to argue that the coal discharges cannot be allowed under the General Permit because EPA . . . the sources within a covered subcategory of discharges are ... storm water point sources.” 40 C.F.R. 122.28 . . .

CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING PROTECTION ALLIANCE, a v. ALL STAR AUTO WRECKING, INC. a Sr. Jr., 860 F. Supp. 2d 1144 (E.D. Cal. 2012)

. . . Id., citing 40 CFR 122.26(c), 122.28, 123.25; 60 Fed.Reg. 50804-01. . . .

LAKE CARRIERS ASSOCIATION, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,, 652 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 122.28(a)). . . .

NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE CENTER, v. BROWN,, 640 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2011)

. . . . §§ 122.28, 124.19(a). . . . See id. § 122.28(a)(2). . . . Id. § 122.28(b)(2). . . . Id. § 122.28(b)(2)(iv). . . .

NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE CENTER, v. BROWN,, 617 F.3d 1176 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . . §§ 122.28, 124.19(a). . . . See id. § 122.28(a)(2). . . . Id. § 122.28(b)(2). . . . Id. § 122.28(b)(2)(iv). . . .

KOPACZ v. HOPKINSVILLE SURFACE AND STORM WATER UTILITY, 714 F. Supp. 2d 682 (W.D. Ky. 2010)

. . . . §§ 122.26 and 122.28; KRS 224.10-100 and KRS 224.16-050 and Kentucky Storm Water permit KYR10. . . .

SANTA MONICA BAYKEEPER, a v. KRAMER METALS, INC. a a LLC, a R P LLC, a LLC, a LLC, a, 619 F. Supp. 2d 914 (C.D. Cal. 2009)

. . . . §§ 122.26(c), 122.28, 123.25; see also 60 Fed.Reg. 50804-01. . . .

SANTA MONICA BAYKEEPER, a v. INTERNATIONAL METALS EKCO, LIMITED, a, 619 F. Supp. 2d 936 (C.D. Cal. 2009)

. . . . §§ 122.26(c), 122.28, 123.25; see also 60 Fed.Reg. 50804-01. . . .

NATIONAL COTTON COUNCIL OF AMERICA, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,, 553 F.3d 927 (6th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 122.28(b)(2)(v)). . . .

KENTUCKY WATERWAYS ALLIANCE v. L. JOHNSON,, 540 F.3d 466 (6th Cir. 2008)

. . . . § 122.28. . . .

NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES Of v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, v. v., 537 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2008)

. . . . §§ 122.28, 124.19(a). . . . See id. § 122.28(a)(2). . . . Id. § 122.28(b)(2). . . . Id. § 122.28(b)(2)(iv). . . .

KARR v. A. HEFNER, III GHK GHK GHK L. L. C. GHK L. L. C. GHK LLC KCS El, 475 F.3d 1192 (10th Cir. 2007)

. . . . §§ 122.28, 122.29; and/or any potentially applicable general permit. 3. . . .

SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT v. MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS, 541 U.S. 95 (U.S. 2004)

. . . See 40 CFR §§ 122.28, 123.25 (2003). . . . See 40 CFR § 122.28(b)(2)(v) (2003). . . .

ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE CENTER, INC. v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, v. v., 344 F.3d 832 (9th Cir. 2003)

. . . . § 122.28 (outlining requirements for NPDES authorities issuing general permits). . . .

OHIO VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COALITION, v. HORINKO,, 279 F. Supp. 2d 732 (S.D.W. Va. 2003)

. . . . § 122.28. . . . See 40 C.F.R. § 122.28(b)(2)®. . . .

ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE CENTER, INC. v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, v. v., 319 F.3d 398 (9th Cir. 2003)

. . . . § 122.28 (outlining requirements for NPDES authorities issuing general permits). . . .

SAVE THE VALLEY, INC. L. v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, In A. In, 223 F. Supp. 2d 997 (S.D. Ind. 2002)

. . . Id. at § 4.3; see .also 40 C.F.R. 122.28(b)(3). . . . Specifically, the EPA stated that the rule did not meet the requirements in 40 C.F.R. § 122.28 pertaining . . .

UNITED STATES PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP, E. v. ATLANTIC SALMON OF MAINE, LLC., 215 F. Supp. 2d 239 (D. Me. 2002)

. . . EPA., 161 F.3d 923, 929 (5th Cir.1998) (citing 40 C.F.R. 122.28). . . .

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY U. S. L. U. S., 279 F.3d 1180 (9th Cir. 2002)

. . . . §§ 122.28, 124.19(a). . . . See id. § 122.28(a)(2). . . . Id. § 122.28(b)(2). . . . Id. § 122.28(b)(2)(iv). . . . Id. § 122.28(b)(3). . . .

ECOLOGICAL RIGHTS FOUNDATION v. PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY, 61 F. Supp. 2d 1042 (N.D. Cal. 1999)

. . . . § 122.28. . . . See 54 Fed.Reg. 40664 (October 3, 1989); 40 C.F.R. §§ 122.28 & 122.62. . . .

TEXAS OIL GAS ASSOCIATION Co. CA Co. v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY M. RAILROAD COMMISSION v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,, 161 F.3d 923 (5th Cir. 1998)

. . . . § 122.28. The EPA frequently uses such general permits for the oil and gas industry. . . .

SIERRA CLUB v. HANKINSON, 939 F. Supp. 872 (N.D. Ga. 1996)

. . . 122.62 and likewise modify general permits as necessary to implement the TMDLs pursuant to 40 CFR § 122.28 . . .

SIERRA CLUB, LONE STAR CHAPTER, v. CEDAR POINT OIL COMPANY INC. SIERRA CLUB, LONE STAR CHAPTER, v. CEDAR POINT OIL COMPANY INC., 73 F.3d 546 (5th Cir. 1996)

. . . . § 122.28. . 46 Fed.Reg. 20,284 (1981). . 56 Fed.Reg. 7698 (1991). . . . .

MOLOKAI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, a a a v. KUKUI MOLOKAI INC. a a Co. a, 891 F. Supp. 1389 (D. Haw. 1995)

. . . . § 122.28(b)(2). . . . . § 122.28(b)(2)(iii). . . . . § 122.28(b)(2)(iv). C. . . . , state-issued general permits must at least meet the federal requirements contained in 40 C.F.R. § 122.28 . . . merely upon “receipt of notice of intent by the Director” or “after a waiting period....” 40 C.F.R. § 122.28 . . .

BOISE CASCADE CORPORATION II, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, NORTHWEST COALITION FOR ALTERNATIVES TO PESTICIDES NCAP v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, CITIZENS FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, NORTHWEST COALITION FOR ALTERNATIVES, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,, 942 F.2d 1427 (9th Cir. 1991)

. . . . § 122.28 allows general NPDES permits to be issued to regulate categories of point sources that satisfy . . .

AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,, 787 F.2d 965 (5th Cir. 1986)

. . . . § 122.28(c). . . . .

KITLUTSISTI, v. ARCO ALASKA, INC. a a a, 592 F. Supp. 832 (D. Alaska 1984)

. . . however, the agency has no duty to act on a license, as is the case with a general permit, see 40 C.F.R. 122.28 . . .

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC. v. U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY M. U. S. AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE, v. U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY M. U. S. DUVAL CORPORATION, a a v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, FERROALLOYS ASSOCIATION, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, PENNZOIL COMPANY, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, M. CITIZENS FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT, v. COSTLE, AMERICAN IRON AND STEEL INSTITUTE, v. M. COSTLE, U. S. U. S. KIMBERLY- CLARK CORPORATION, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, MINING AND RECLAMATION COUNCIL OF AMERICA, INC. v. M. COSTLE, AVTEX FIBERS, INCORPORATED, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, EDISON ELECTRIC INSTITUTE, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, AMERICAN MINING CONGRESS, a v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, M. COSTLE, KERR- McGEE NUCLEAR CORPORATION, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, CHEMICAL MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, FORD MOTOR COMPANY, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY M. STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, v. U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY M. TEXAS OIL GAS CORP. v. U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY M. LUBRIZOL CORPORATION, v. M. COSTLE, CITIZENS FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT, v. COSTLE,, 673 F.2d 392 (D.C. Cir. 1980)

. . . . § 122.28) (“Additional conditions applicable to all RCRA permits”). . . .

AMERICAN EAST INDIA CORPORATION v. IDEAL SHOE COMPANY, 400 F. Supp. 141 (E.D. Pa. 1975)

. . . Previously, by cheek dated February 8, 1968, American had paid its insurance agent $122.28 for insurance . . . goods with charges by Bank of America $15,710.78 Duty, ocean shipping and forwarding 4,637.94 Insurance 122.28 . . .

BABE, INC. a v. BABY S FORMULA SERVICE, INC. a BABY S FORMULA SERVICE, INC. a v. BABE, INC. a, 165 So. 2d 795 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1964)

. . . plaintiff and $2,-092.72 in favor of the defendant, on its counter-claim, leaving a balance of $19,-122.28 . . .

VIRGINIA SURETY COMPANY, v. E. T. W. N. C. TRANSPORTATION COMPANY,, 219 F.2d 919 (6th Cir. 1955)

. . . by judgment of the trial court, recovered in principal, interest and costs the aggregate sum of $24,-122.28 . . .

EDWARD MALLINCKRODT, Sr., 4 B.T.A. 1112 (B.T.A. 1926)

. . . prices: For the Hudson & Manhattan bonds at $57.50, total price_$46,873.42 Less commission and tax- 122.28 . . .