Title: U. S. Department of Agriculture's Soil Conservation Service's cost sharing program
CITATION PAGE IMAGE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00052725/00001
 Material Information
Title: U. S. Department of Agriculture's Soil Conservation Service's cost sharing program
Alternate Title: Letter from Florida Dept. of Environmental Regulation to SWFWMD enclosing information concerning the U. S. Department of Agriculture's Soil Conservation Service's cost sharing program for the plugging of artesian wells on agricultural lands in certain cou
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
General Note: Box 5, Folder 16 ( QUALITY OF WATER IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (QWIP) ), Item 18
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00052725
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text



"0t, STATE OF FLORIDA
(l a0 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
%DW^ 2562 EXECUTIVE CENTER CIRCLE, EAST
WE' MONTGOMERY BUILDING
TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32301 i
REUBIN O'D. ASKEW JOSEW. LANDERS JR
GOVERNOR --- RETARY

April 22, 1976




Mr. Donald Feaster
Executive Director
Southwest Florida Water
Management District
P. 0. Box 457
Brooksville, Florida 33512

Dear Don:

Enclosed please find information concerning the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
Soil Conservation Service's cost sharing program for the plugging of artesian
wells on agricultural lands in certain counties. Also enclosed is a list of
procedures the department has suggested the Soil Conservation Service follow
in the plugging of wells.

This financial assistance should be very helpful in permitting the districts
to accomplish the plugging of artesian wells as charged by Chapter 373 to
eliminate the exchange of water between aquifers.

If you have any questions or comments regarding the cost sharing program
or the instructions recommended by the Department, please do not hesitate
to contact me.
Sincerely,



arles B. Littlejohn
Chief
Bureau of Water Resources Management


CBL/pm
Enclosure

CC: John Bottcher






UNITED STATES DEPPoTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
SOIL- CONSERVATION SERviCE
State Office, P. ., Box 1208, Gainesville, FL 32602

April 7, 1976

Ir. Pratt Finlayson
Dept. of Environmental Regulation {- ^.
Bureau of Water Resource Management .
2562 Executive Center Circle, East
Montgomery Building
Tallahassee, FL 32301 .





Dear Mr. Finlayson:

We are forwarding the ASCS State Program Handbook that you discussed
with Messrs. Pete Heard and Douglas Hawkins a few days ago. You will
find a list of counties in which the practice has been approved and
practice provisions on pages 7 and 111, respectively, in the enclosed
handbook.

Outlined below are the procedures that we are advising our field offices
to follow for special practice S-10, Plugging Artesian Wells.

1. Upon receipt of a referral, the district conservationist will
notify the appropriate water management district either by
phone or in writing. He will advise the District of the name
of the landowner and give a general description of the location
of the well in sufficient detail to enable a staff member of the
water management district to go to the well.

2. The water management district will then arrange for someone to
investigate the site and advise the district conservationist,
in writing, as to the need and practicability of plugging the
well.

3. The district conservationist will complete the need and practicability
finding certification on the ACP referral.

4. The water management district representative will then develop plans
and specifications for plugging the well and give a copy to the SCS
district conservationist for delivery to the landowner.

5. The landowner will arrange for work to be done under the supervision
of the water management district representative.

6. The water management district representative will then state, in
writing, to our district conservationist, that the well has or has
not been plugged according to plans and specifications.

r/








Mr. Pratt Finlayson 2

7. The district conservationist will then so certify on the ACP-247.

It is our understanding that Mr. Paul Beam of your office will be
coordinating these activities with the water management districts.
We are, therefore, instructing our district conservationists to
contact Mr. Beam should they experience any problems with the above
outlined procedures.

Please don't hesitate to let us know if there are any problems with
these arrangements.

Sincerely,


I / /

William E. Austin
State Conservationist

Enclosure






































4 )




PART 1 1-FL(ACP)(Rev. 1) PAR. 10


or rancher. The time limit shall not be extended beyond
December 31 of the year following the current program year.

B FIP.

1 To be eligible for payment, persons who perform approved
practices must report performance prior to the expiration
date or any .authorized extension granted by the COC.

2 Extensions of time to complete an approved practice may be
granted, if requested by the applicant before the expiration
date or within 15 days from the date of the notice of can-
cellation.

3 Reinstatement of a cancelled practice may be approved when
all of the following conditions exist:

a Applicant requests reinstatement.

b Practice was started before cancellation.

c Practice was, or can reasonably be expected to be,
completed during the authorized period.

d Funds are available to reinstate approval.

11 ESTABLISHMENT OR INSTALLATION OF THE PRACTICES

The State Group has determined that cost-sharing may be authorized
for replacement, enlargement, or restoration of practices for .,which
cost-sharing has been allowed, provided all of the following condi-
tions exist:

A Replacement, enlargement, or restoration of the practice is needed
to meet the conservation problem.

B The failure of the original practice was not due to the lack of
proper maintenance by the current operator.

'C The county committee believes that the replacement, enlargement,
or restoration of the practice merits consideration under the
program to an equal extent with other practices for which cost-
sharing has not been allowed under a previous program.

12 SPECIAL PRACTICES

Counties approved for each special practice are listed below:

A S10 Brevard, Charlotte, Clay, Duval, Flagler, Hardee, Hendry,
/ Hillsborough, Indian River, Lake, Lee, Manatee, Martin,
Nassau, Orange, Osceola, Putnam, St. Johns, St. Lucie,
Seminole, and Volusia counties.

2-27-76 Amend. 1 Page 7





PART 1 -- 1-FL(ACP)(Rev. 1) PAR. 12


B S11. Brevard, Hendry, Lake, Orange, and Palm Beach counties.

C S12. Levy county.

D S13. Jefferson county.

E S14. Brevard, Orange, Osceola, Seminole, and Volusia counties.

F S15. Broward, Charlotte, Collier, Dade, DeSoto, Glades, Hardee,
Hendry, Highlands, Lee,Manatee, Martin, Okeechobee,
Palm Beach, St. Lucie, and Sarasota counties.

13 CONCURRENT OPERATIONS

A ACP. Specifications and rates of cost-sharing in this handbook
are applicable to practices approved under the current ACP. The
specifications and rates of cost-sharing for practices approved
and transferred to a different program year shall be the specifi-
cations and rates of cost-sharing for those practices under the
program applicable at the tine of approval.

B FIP. Not applicable.

14 INCREASED COST-SHARE RATES

A Practice RE7. A 75 percent of actual cost rate was authorized
for Escambia, Santa Rosa, and Walton counties.

B Practice RES. A 75 percent of actual cost rate was authorized
for Escambia and Santa Rosa counties.

C Practice RE11. A 75 percent of actual cost rate was authorized
for 'Escarnbia county.

D Practice RE12. A 75 percent of actual ccst rate was authorized
for Escambia, Santa Rosa, and Walton counties.

E Practice RE14. A 75 percent of actual cost rate was authorized
for Flagler%, utnan, St. Johns. and Volusia counties.

F Practice SI. A 75 percent of actual cost rate was authorized for
VT1usia county.

G Practice SC11. A rate based on 55 percent o, cost was authorized
for Flagler and St. Jchns counties.

S Practice 510. A 75 percent of actual cost rate was authorized
for Charlotte, Flagler, Hendry, Lee, and Martin counties.

15 COST-SHARE RATE PERCENTAGE. CF AVERAGE COST

Instructions for preparing LTA's require the oercentace level aoctlica-
ble to each cost-share rate to be shown in column E of the acreerent,
2-27-76 Arerd. 1 1 ,2'e S






PART 3 l-FL(ACP)(Rev. 1) PAR. 86

PART 3 S PRACTICES (SPECIAL)


8 S10 PLUGGING ARTESIAN WELLS

A Purpose. To eliminate source of salt water intrusion and
prevent or reduce pollution of fresh water supplies.

B Applicability. To deep artesian wells located on agricultural
land.

C Other Provisions. Cost-sharing is limited to plugging deep
artesian we ils ,whose fowinig mineralized water is contaninating
fresh water sources.

D Technical Responsibiiity. Assigned to SCS. The practice must
be carried out in accordance with plans developed to ri.eet
requirements of geologic and hydrologic conditions. These
plans must comply with established principles, standards, and
specifications.

E Maximum Cost-share Rate.

1 Regular Rate. 75 percent of the cost of materials, equip-
ment, and labor, not to exceed $ (as determined by
the county committee).

2 Rate for Low-income Farmers. 80 percent of the cost of
materials, equipment, and labor, not to exceed $
(as determined by the county co-mittee).




















2-27-76 Amend. 1 Page 111
(and 112)




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs