to make these credibility determinations. Schneier v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 595 So.2d 235, 236 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). The UAC may reverse the referee’s findings of fact, however, where there is no competent, substantial evidence in the record to support the referee’s decision. § 120.57, Fla. Stat. (1995); see also Smith v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 588 So.2d 324, 324 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). Overall, the UAC cannot reweigh the evidence and substitute its findings for those of the referee. Studor Inc. v. Duren, 635 So.2d 141, 142 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). In reviewing a substituted conclusion by the UAC, this court must assure that the correct rules of law were applied. See Public Employees Relations Comm’n v. Dade Co. Police Benevolent Assoc., 467 So.2d 987, 989 (Fla.1985)(<HOLDING>). Legal Test of Good Cause Whether an
holding that a court must defer to an agencys reasonable interpretation of a statute even if the court might have preferred another holding that a reviewing court must defer to an agencys interpretation of an operable statute as long as that interpretation is consistent with legislative intent and is supported by substantial competent evidence holding that deference is owed to an agencys interpretation of its own categorical exclusion regulations so long as that interpretation is not plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation holding that when a court is asked to construe an ambiguous statute it must defer to the interpretation set out in a regulation promulgated by the agency charged with administering the statute so long as the agencys interpretation is reasonable holding that an expert is not competent to testify as to statutory interpretation