
    SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA and Seminole Wholesale Distributors, Inc., Appellants, v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS REGULATION, DIVISION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO, Appellee.
    No. BK-272.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    Oct. 13, 1986.
    Jack M. Skelding, Jr., Robert S. Cohen and Bob L. Harris of Haben, Parker, Skeld-ing, Costigan, McVoy & Labasky, Tallahassee, for appellants.
    Sandra P. Stockwell and Thomas A. Bell, Dept, of Business Regulation, Tallahassee, for appellee.
   THOMPSON, Judge.

Appellants challenged proposed Fla.Admin.Code Rule 7A-10.26 arguing that it constituted an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority and exceeded the purposes of its enabling legislation. The hearing officer below concluded that the proposed rule merely provided a more explicit definition than the statutory language and that it did not exceed its statutory authority. We agree and affirm.

Proposed Rule 7A-10.26 clarifies the former rule’s definition of Seminole Indians, adds additional record keeping and documentation requirements and specifies that the sales in question may take place only on reservation or trust lands. The primary enabling statute for the rule is § 210.05(5), Fla.Stat. The provisions of the proposed rule are reasonable interpretations of the statutory language and are consistent with the legislative purpose. AFFIRMED.

JOANOS and NIMMONS, JJ„ concur.  