Judges: Robert L. Shevin, Attorney General Prepared by: Sharyn L. Smith Assistant Attorney General
Filed Date: 5/2/1977
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
QUESTION:
Are the 30-day or 90-day time limits in subsection
SUMMARY:
The 90-day time limitation prescribed by s.
You state that the staff of the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Procedure has suggested that these time limits are jurisdictional limitations on an agency and thus cannot be waived by the licensee. You suggest that these time limits establish certain rights for the benefit of license applicants to ensure an expeditious decision by the regulatory agencies and, therefore, may be waived by the applicant. Further, an applicant may find such waiver advantageous in a case involving a project where the licensing agency determines that the project cannot comply with applicable standards and the applicant desires to discuss any modifications with the licensing agency in order to avoid a denial of the application. You state that in complex cases there might not be enough of the 90-day time period left for the applicant and the licensing agency to discuss and evaluate possible modifications of the proposed project.
Section
When an application for a license is made as required by law, the agency shall conduct the proceedings required with reasonable dispatch and with due regard to the rights and privileges of all parties or aggrieved persons. . . . (Emphasis supplied.)
This provision, which operated on the agencies subject to s.
. . . Within 30 days after receipt of an application for a license the agency shall examine the application, notify the applicant of any apparent errors or omissions and request any additional information the agency is permitted by law to require. Failure to correct an error or omission or to supply additional information shall not be grounds for denial of the license unless the agency timely notified the applicant within this 30 day period. The agency shall notify the applicant if the activity for which he seeks a license is exempt from the licensing requirement and return any tendered application fee within 30 days after receipt of the original application or within 10 days after receipt of additional timely requested information, correction of errors or omissions. Every application for license shall be approved or denied within 90 days after receipt of the original application or receipt of the additional timely requested information, correction of errors or omissions. Any application for license not approved or denied within the 90 day period or within 15 days after conclusion of a public hearing held on the application, whichever is latest, shall be deemed approved and, subject to the satisfactory completion of an examination if required as a prerequisite to licensure, shall be issued. (Emphasis supplied.)
The effect of s. 10, Ch.
An examination of s.
The obvious legislative intent in rewording s.
. . . amending s.
120.60 (2), F. S., and adding a subsection; setting limits upon the time permitted an agency to request additional information and to make decisions on license applications; providing for automatic issue of licenses under specified circumstances and limited permissible exceptions. . . . (Emphasis supplied.)
Thus, as to the applicant, the limitations imposed upon the licensing agencies have the effect of also creating a substantive right for the benefit of the license applicant, and as to him the statute is a substantive law. Cf. Johnson v. State,
However, the precise issue raised by your inquiry is whether the 90-day time limitations contained in s.
The Department of Environmental Regulation issues a variety of environmental permits and licenses, dealing with such matters as pollution of the air and water by stationary installations and weather modification, see ss.
The situation which your letter discusses is one in which the environmental licensing agency has the application under consideration during the course of the prescribed 90-day period and has provisionally determined that the project, as proposed in the application, cannot comply with the applicable and lawfully established standards, and, therefore, should be denied by the licensing agency unless modifications are made in the proposed project and the application for licensing thereof. In this circumstance, the waiver of the prescribed 90-day time limitations by the applicant is for the purpose of giving the applicant and the agency time to evaluate modifications to the proposed project and to negotiate and agree upon the requisite modifications so as to avoid a denial of the license or permit which would force the applicant to reapply for the license or permit or seek judicial review of the agency's final denial thereof.
As a general proposition, a person may waive any matter which affects his property or any alienable right which he owns, which belongs to him, or to which he is legally entitled, whether secured by contract, conferred by statute, or guaranteed by the Constitution, provided such rights and privileges rest in the individual, are intended for his sole benefit, to not interfere with the rights of others, and are not forbidden by law or public policy. Gilman v. Butzloff,
Since an obvious purpose of s.
Prepared by: Sharyn L. Smith Assistant Attorney General