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. 122.29

122.29 Records and reports.—The administrator shall maintain accurate accounts of each member of division B; and shall maintain said accounts in such manner, form and detail as shall meet the requirements of the federal Social Security Act and regulations in relation to the social security coverage of such member. The administrator shall from time to time make such reports as may be required by relevant federal laws and regulations relating to the social security coverage of the members of this system.

History.—s. 2, ch. 57-382.

F.S. 122.29 on Google Scholar

F.S. 122.29 on Casetext

Amendments to 122.29

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 122.29

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 122.29.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

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. . . .

RIVERKEEPER, INC. LLC, LLC, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, L., 475 F.3d 83 (2d Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 122.29 (discussed below) and one of two other requirements: the structure must use either (1) “a . . . A “new source” under section 122.29 is a facility that (1) “is constructed at a site at which no other . . . Section 122.29(b) provides further that, in determining whether a facility is “substantially independent . . . Compare id. with § 122.29 (defining “new source” as including a facility that undertakes “processes . . . . The Phase I Rule defines each by reference to the “substantial independence” test of section 122.29(b . . .

NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, 286 F.3d 554 (D.C. Cir. 2002)

. . . . § 122.29(a)(2). If a source is designated as a “new source,” then it must adhere to the NSPS. . . . . § 122.29(b)(1). . . . . § 122.29(b)(1), then the construction is generally classified as a “modification” and is not subject . . . completely adopted the three criteria from the general definition in Part 122 (compare 40 C.F.R. § 122.29 . . . Despite the unchanged language from § 122.29(b)(l)(iii) to § 430.01(j)(l)(iii), Industry Petitioners . . .

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC. v. U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY M. U. S. Co., 859 F.2d 156 (D.C. Cir. 1988)

. . . . §§ 122.29(c)(3), 122.44(d)(9) and 122.49(g), on the grounds that they unlawfully assert a power to . . . Their assertions of power are oddly qualified. 40 C.F.R. § 122.29(c)(3) provides that: [t]he Regional . . . 40 C.F.R. § 122.49(g) (calling for consideration of EIS-related permit conditions as provided in § 122.29 . . . Accordingly, the challenged regulations, 40 C.F.R. §§ 122.29(c)(3), 122.44(d)(9), 122.49(g), cannot stand . . . In 40 C.F.R. §§ 122.29(c)(3) and 122.-44(d)(9), the agency appeared to exclude effluent limitations from . . .

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC. v. U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY M. U. S. Co., 822 F.2d 104 (D.C. Cir. 1987)

. . . . § 122.29(d)(1). . . . See 40 C.F.R. § 122.29(d)(2)(i). . . . . § 122.29(c)(5). . . . Id. § 122.29(c)(4)(i). The construction ban is attacked by both Industry and NRDC. . . . See 40 C.F.R. § 122.29(d)(2). . . .

MANASOTA- INC. v. M. THOMAS,, 799 F.2d 687 (11th Cir. 1986)

. . . . § 122.29(b). . . . C.F.R. §§ 6.604(a), 122.29(c)(1), and 122.21(k)(3). . . . the construction results in a change in the nature or quantity of pollutants discharge. 40 C.F.R. § 122.29 . . .

DROESE, In, 71 Ohio Law Abs. 408 (N.D. Ohio 1954)

. . . does not object, that the sum of $45 should be paid out of the estate since, the trustee collected $122.29 . . .

KEASBEY MATTISON CO. v. UNITED STATES, 141 F.2d 163 (3d Cir. 1944)

. . . The plaintiff recovered on account of those notes a total sum of $122.29 at an expense of $58.33, leaving . . .

JOHN M. LANGSTON v. THE UNITED STATES, 26 Ct. Cl. 256 (Ct. Cl. 1891)

. . . stating the account at the Treasury the accounting officers stated a set-off and make a deduction of $122.29 . . . time, fifteen days, allowed for transit from his post of duty, Port au Prince, to the United States.$122.29 . . . The demurrer is overruled, and judgment will be entered for the claimant for the sum of $122.29, with . . .