Title: Florida Administrative Weekly Sept. 19, 1997 - Section II - Proposed Rules
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00003926/00001
 Material Information
Title: Florida Administrative Weekly Sept. 19, 1997 - Section II - Proposed Rules
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Jake Varn Collection - Florida Administrative Weekly Sept. 19, 1997 - Section II - Proposed Rules
General Note: Box 16, Folder 1 ( SWFWMD - 1997 - 1998 ), Item 19
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00003926
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Levin College of Law, 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






Florida Administrative WeeklyVoue2,Nm r38


34-12.310 Registration Fees.
In order to register, each lobbyist shall pay an annual
registration fee of $35.00 25.00 for each principal represented,
which shall be deposited into the Executive Branch Lobby
Registration Trust Fund. The fee is payable on a calendar year
basis; once having paid the fee, a lobbyist is not required to pay
the fee again during the same calendar year regardless of how
many additional agencies he may lobby.
Specific Authority 112.3215 112.322(10) FS.. Cl. 9 32 bL Law
Implemented 112.3215 FS., ClI. 9 03. LC. History-New 10-12-89.
Amended 10-6-91, 1-1-97 .

34-12.330 Annual Renewals.
Each lobbyist must renew his registration to lobby an agency
on behalf of a principal on a calendar year basis by filing a
Lobbyist Renewal Form 20-R and the annual registration fee of
$35.00 25.00 for each principal represented. Prior to January 1
of each year, the Commission or other office established to
administer lobbyist registration will mail to each currently
registered lobbyist Commission Form 20-R, together with a
notice which states that the lobbyist must renew his registration
of those principals the lobbyist continues to represent before
agencies of the executive branch by filing the form and paying
the annual registration fee.
Specific Authority 112.3215. 112.322(10) FS. Law Implemented 112.3215
FS., 9-2 e3, L- History-New 10-12-89, Amended 10-6-91, 7-5-92,
12-6-92, 1-1-97. .

34-12.405 Penalties for Late Filing.
(1) through (2) No change.
(3) After the person designated to review reveiw the
timeliness of reports has calculated the amount of the fine that
has been assessed against a lobbyist, the lobbyist will be
notified by certified mail, return receipt requested, the amount
of the payment due.
(4) through (6) No change.
Specific Authority 112.3215. 112.322(10) FS. Ch 96-203 LOF. Law
Implemented 112.3215 FS., Ci. 9 -203. LCF. History-New 1-1-97 Amended

34-12.430 Lobbyist's Expenditure Reports.
(1) through (5) No change.
(6) The iLpui Jdu un Januany 15 fu. tL mrpuiting pIuid
ending D,-cimb, 31 shall .taiii umula, tLulta) fou tl"
CRIM1ldl yaJI.
(7) through (11) renumbered (6) through (10) No change.
Specific Authority 112.3215 112 322(100 FS.. Cli. 9-23, LC. Law
Implemented 112.' 1 -3-21 FS., Cei 92. L, F. History-New 1-4-94.
Amended 1-1-97 .

NAME OF PERSON ORIGINATING PROPOSED RULES:
Julia Cobb Costas. Staff Attorney. Commission on Ethics
NAME OF SUPERVISOR OR PERSON WHO APPROVED
PROPOSED RULE: Commission on Ethics
DATE PROPOSED RULE APPROVED: September 5, 1997


DATE NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE DEVELOPMENT
PUBLISHED IN FAW: August 8, 1997

WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS
Southwest Florida Water Management District
RULE CHAPTER TITLE: RULE CHAPTER NO.:
Consumptive Use of Water 40D-2
RULE TITLES: RULE NOS.:
Publications Incorporated by Reference 40D-2.091
Conditions for Issuance of Permits 40D-2.301
PURPOSE AND EFFECT: Silm o .... u 1ii :.,,Hrij "ia
gL-' iD. the
.. .' required by Section
373.042, F.S. (1996), for the District's designated priority
water bodies within Pasco, Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties
by October 1, 1997. The changes to the Basis of Review for
Water Use Permitting set out below set forth how the
established Minimum Flows and Levels will be used in the
District's Water Use Permitting Program.
SUMMARY: The : .l..:
1. wr*r^ awwww s
.. (new or renewal)


2. __ the Minimum Flow
or Level:
a. Unless allowed by the applicable recovery strategy, om'ew
..L--. ."--t-- U .. ...



b.
the Minimum Flow or Level
mnni m lm


- by


the District a


d. When a recovery strategy is implemented in Northern
Tampa Bay, applicants and existing permittees must comply
with the recovery strategy, Chapter 40D-2, F.A.C.. and the
Basis of Review, with the exception that compliance with
Rules 40D-2.301(1)(b) and (c), F.A.C.. (wetland, lake, etc.,
impacts) and Section 4.2 of the Basis of Review is not required
as they relate to existing impacts.
SUMMARY OF STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED
REGULATORY COST:
SPECIFIC AUTHORITY: 373.0421, 373.044, 373.113,
373.149, 373.171 FS.
LAW IMPLEMENTED: 373.0421. 373.219, 373.223.
373.229, 373.239, 373.243 FS.
IF REQUESTED WITHIN 21 DAYS OF THE DATE OF
THIS NOTICE, A HEARING WILL BE HELD AT THE
TIME, DATE AND PLACE SHOWN BELOW:
TIME AND DATE: To be announced.


Section II Proposed Rules 5041

0 printed on
recycled paper


- -


Flnridn AdminirtraCive Weekly


c. H


Volume 23, Number 38, __ _










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


PLACE: Southwest Florida Water Management District,
Governing Board Room, 2379 Broad Street, Brooksville,
Florida
THE PERSON TO BE CONTACTED REGARDING THE
PROPOSED RULES IS: Karen A. Lloyd, Senior Attorney,
Office of General Counsel, 2379 Broad Street, Brooksville.
Florida 34609-6899, (352)796-7211, extension 4651

THE FULL TEXT OF THE PROPOSED RULES IS:

40D-2.091 Publications Incorporated by Reference.
The "Basis of Review for Water Use Permit Applications"
pri-l 1, 1994, the "Agricultural Water Use
Form," July 24, 1990, and the "Agricultural Water Allotment
Form," July 24, 1990, are hereby incorporated by reference
into this Chapter and are available from the District upon
request.
Specific Authority 373.121. 373.044. 373.113 FS. Law Implemented
373.219, 373.239. 373.243 FS. History-New 10-1-89, Amended 11-15-90.
2-10-93,3-30-93,7-29-93,4-11-94

40D-2.301 Conditions for Issuance of Permits.
(1) In order to obtain a Water Use Permit, an Applicant
must demonstrate that the water use is reasonable and
beneficial, is in the public interest, and will not interfere with
any existing legal use of water, by providing reasonable
assurances, on both an individual and a cumulative basis, that
the water use:
(a) through (c) No change.
(d) Will comply with the provisions of 4.3 of the Basis of
Review described in 40D-2.091 not ca ause.. l vl. tu.s
of flo to deiate fiml the riages as.t faut illn Chapte 40 8;
(e) through (n) No change.
(2) through (3) No change.
Specific Authority 373.044, 373.113, 373.149. 373.171 FS. Law Implemented
373.219. 373.223. 373.229 FS. History-Readopted 10-5-74. Amended
12-31-74, 2-6-78. 7-5-78, Formerly 16J-2.11, 16J-2.111, Amended 1-25-81,
10-1-89.2-10-93.

WATER USE PERMITTING BASIS OF REVIEW
The following changes are made to Chapter 4.0:
4.0 CONDITIONS FOR ISSUANCE TECHNICAL
CRITERIA
4.3 MINIMUM FLOWS AND LEVELS
Applicants shall demonstrate compliance with established
minimum flows and levels as set forth in Chapter 40D-8.
F.A.C.. as follows:
1. For water bodies where the actual flow or level is at or
above a Minimum Flow or Level, withdrawals shall not cause
the actual flow or level to fall below the Minimum Flow or
Level on a Long-term average basis. "Long-term" means an
evaluation period used in assessing withdrawal impacts
through modeling or statistical data analysis that represents a
period of time of sufficient lIng:h such that the evaluation
period is insensitive to unstable fluctuations of the variables


utilized in the assessment.e.g., changes in withdrawal rates.
and chances in hvdrolo-ic conditions, in order to simulate
steady state conditions. This will vary because professional
iudgement is necessary to establish the parameters to be used
in the assessment of each application depending on the geology
and climate of the area of withdrawal, the depth of and number
of wells and the quantity to be withdrawn.
2. With regard to existing permits and renewal applicants.
where a withdrawal impacts a Minimum Flow or Level
established in Rules 40D-8.624 or 40D-8.626. F.A.C.. and the
actual level at any of the Minimum Flow or Level sites is
below the Minimum Flow or Level and the District has not vet
implemented a recovery strategy pursuant to Section
373.0421(2). F.S.. the provisions of this Section 4.3 and Rule
40D-2.301(1)(d). F.A.C.. do not arply.
3. For water bodies where the actual flow or level is below
the Minimum Flow or Level and the District has implemented
regulatory requirements as part of a recovery strategy pursuant
to Section 373.0421(2). F.S.. which will be contained within
the District's Water Management Plan, the following apply:
a. Unless otherwise provided for in the District's recovery
strategy, additional withdrawal quantities shall not be allowed
and applications for new uses of water must compete under
Section 373.233. F.S.. for a quantity of water that would
otherwise be authorized by the District under the recovery
strategy.
b. Existing permits with withdrawals that cause or
contribute to the existing flow or level being below the
Minimum Flow or Level will be subject to a recovery strategy
as described in Rule 40D-8.031(4)(b) and Chapter 40D-2.
F.A.C.
4. Within those portions of Hillsborough County north of
State Road 60. and Pasco and Pinellas Counties for which a
recovery strategy has been implemented by the District. where
a withdrawal impacts a Minimum Flow or Level established in
Rules 40D-8.624 or 40D-8.626. F.A.C.. and the actual level at
any of the impacted Minimum Flow or Level sites is below the
Minimum Flow or Level. applicants and existing permittees
shall demonstrate compliance with all the requirements of the
recovery strategy adopted by rule and applicable to the affected
water body. Chapter 40D-2. F.A.C.. and this Basis of Review
with the exception that compliance with Rules
40D-2.301(l)(b) and (c). F.A.C.. and Section 4.2 of the Basis
of Review is not required as they relate to existing imnacts.


Wa te,
i.1 b ake inch, SL to bc .LIUCEd L.mlcm tim zppfi
............. .. .. .. lnH estabhsim. in1 ..IkF46 -8. F...C-.
M.iJLLInflo LtoLU ImUULU LUinfl imminimum

3. PU iM-t1iC Stilf-, Mi Ra!,I. -1ablc L to bL


Ehaptc, 485-8. EAC


5042 Section II Proposed Rules










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


NAME OF PERSON ORIGINATING PROPOSED RULE:
Karen A. Lloyd, Senior Attorney, Office of General Counsel
NAME OF SUPERVISOR OR PERSON WHO APPROVED
THE PROPOSED RULE: Governing Board of the Southwest
Florida Water Management District
DATE PROPOSED RULE APPROVED: September 9, 1997
DATE NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE DEVELOPMENT
PUBLISHED IN FAW: June 6, 1997
The Southwest Florida Water Management District does not
discriminate on the basis of any individual's disability status.
Anyone requiring reasonable accommodation as provided for
in the American's With Disabilities Act should contact Dianne
Lee at (352)796-7211 or 1(800)423-1476, extension 4658;
TDD only number 1(800)231-6103; FAX number
(352)754-6878/SUNCOM 663-6878.
A:\NPR40D-2.CGA

WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS
Southwest Florida Water Management District
RULE CHAPTER TITLE: RULE CHAPTER NO.:
Individual Environmental
Resource Permits 40D-4
RULE TITLE: RULE NO.:
Publications and Agreements Incorporated
by Reference 40D-4.091
PURPOSE AND EFFECT: Simultaneously with this notice of
rulemaking, the District is also giving notice of rulemaking to
establish the Minimum Flows and Levels required by Section
373.042. F.S. (1996). for the District's designated priority
water bodies within Pasco, Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties
by October 1, 1997. The changes to the Basis of Review for
Environmental Resource Permitting set out below set forth
how the established Minimum Flows and Levels will be used
in the District's Environmental Resource Permitting Program.
SUMMARY: The proposed rules require permit applicants to
provide reasonable assurances that the regulated activity and
design will not reduce or suppress the flow of watercourse or
the level of a surface water body below an established
Minimum Flow or Level.
SUMMARY OF STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED
REGULATORY COST: Comparison of Current Rule with
Proposed Rule Revisions. Proposed revisions were made to
Chapters 40D-2, 40D-4 and 40D-8 of the Florida
Administrative Code (F.A.C.). The proposed rule revision sets
minimum flows and levels for priority water resources in the
northern Tampa Bay area including (1) Floridan aquifer levels
within northern Hillsborough, Pascc and Pinellas Counties: (2)
northern Tampa Bay area Lakes Barbara, Big Fish. Cypress.
Dosson, Ellen, Helen, Little Moon, Sapphire and Sunshine: (3)
Wetland levels within northern Hillsborough. Pasco and
Pinellas Counties: and (4) the lower Hillsborough River and


the Tampa Bypass Canal. The proposed rule revision also sets
out how the Minimum Flows and Levels affect applicants and
permittees under Chapters 40D-2 and 40D-4, F.A.C.
In considering the following discussion of estimated regulatory
costs, it is important to note that the proposed lake, wetland
and aquifer levels will expire on October 1, 1999 unless the
proposed levels, or other levels approved by the Governing
Board, are re-published for rule adoption by October 1, 1999.
The proposed minimum flow for the lower Hillsborough River
will take regulatory effect on January 1. 1999. The proposed
minimum flow for the Tampa Bypass Canal will take
regulatory effect upon the effective date of the proposed rule.
The proposed minimum flow for the lower Hillsborough River
is 10 cubic feet per second (cfs) when water level is at or above
20 feet NGVD at USGS gage 02304500, and zero cfs when the
water level is below 20 feet. The proposed minimum flow is
zero cfs for the Tampa Bypass Canal.
Where actual water levels in the Northern Tampa Bay area are
determined to be below the proposed minimum levels, the
proposed minimum levels will have no regulatory effect on
existing water use permittees until applicable portions of a
recovery strategy have been implemented. Under current rule,
permits to applicants for new water use quantities are not being
issued where existing withdrawals have already caused
unacceptable environmental impacts.
Where actual water levels are determined to be above the
proposed minimum water levels, water use permit applicants,
including renewals, must demonstrate compliance with the
proposed minimum levels as of the effective date of the
proposed rule.
Comparison of the current rule with the proposed rule revision
finds that the rule revision is not significantly different from
current rule in terms of the permitted's or applicant's access to
water from the Floridan aquifer, lakes for which levels are
proposed, the Tampa Bypass Canal and the Hillsborough
Reservoir in the Northern Tampa Bay area. The proposed rule
revision is not expected to impact existing environmental
resource permittees. Requirements for environmental resource
permit applicants regarding protection of wetlands will not be
different from that likely to be required under existing rule.
New environmental resource permit applicants who might
have been able to take advantage of a withdrawal-lowered
surficial aquifer level may incur additional costs under the
proposed rule.
Permittees Likely to be Required to Comply with the Proposed
Rule Revision. Other than the City of Tampa, the proposed rule
revision will not affect existing water use permittees. The City
of Tampa may need to increase augmentation of the
Hillsborough River Reservoir with water from the Tampa
Bypass Canal or may also augment the reservoir from Sulphur
Springs. The additional water will be used to comply with the


Section I Proposed Rules 5043


F~lorida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997










Florida Administrative WeeklV


minimum flow requirements for the lower Hillsborough River.
The proposed rule revision will not impact existing
environmental resource permittees.
Applicants Likely to be Required to Comply with the Proposed
Rule Revision. The impacts of the proposed rule revision on
water use permit applicants will not be significantly different
under the proposed rule than under existing rule. The proposed
rule revision is consistent with the purpose and intent of the
existing Chapter 40D-2.301, Conditions for Issuance of
Permits, and the actions that the District has taken to address
adverse impacts of withdrawals within northern Hillsborough.
Pasco, and Pinellas Counties.
There exists a region in the northern Tampa Bay area in which
new Floridan aquifer withdrawals are typically not permitted
due to existing unacceptable environmental impacts.
Applicants for new withdrawals would have to do so under the
competing applications provisions of Section 373 Florida
Statutes, and Chapter 40D-2, F.A.C., under both existing rules
and proposed rules (unless specifically provided for under a
proposed recovery strategy). The proposed rules have the
potential to cause a small increase in the size of this region in
which additional withdrawals are typically not permitted. It is
not possible to obtain a meaningful estimate of the future
number of permit applicants who will request withdrawals
from this very small additional area. However, it is possible
that one or more persons who would have been able to obtain
permitted quantities in this area under the current rule would
not be as successful under the proposed rule revision.
The proposed rule revision as it applies to the minimum flows
established for the lower Hillsborough River will not change
the ability of applicants to obtain a water use permit for
withdrawals from this river.
New environmental resource permit applicants who might
have been able to take advantage of a withdrawal-lowered
surficial aquifer level will not be able to do so under the
proposed rule revision and, therefore, may incur additional site
development costs under the proposed rule. Under the
proposed rule revision, new regulated 40D-4 permitted
activities may not suppress a ground or surface water level
below the minimum level. Therefore, the design of the surface
water management system would have to be based on higher
surficial aquifer levels.
Cost to the District, the State and Local Government Entities.
The proposed rule revisions are not anticipated to incur
significant costs to either the State of Florida or to local
government entities in terms of changes in tax revenues or
changes in non-water-related governmental costs. Tax
revenues and the level of government services are not
anticipated to change as a result of the proposed rule revision.
The cost to the Southwest Florida Water Management District
(District) are those costs that are incremental to current permit
review, monitoring, and enforcement activities that are directly
related to implementation of the proposed rule revisions. The


total one-time cost associated with the proposed rule revision is
estimated to be $509,916. The total annual recurring cost
associated with the proposed rule revision is estimated to be
$65,549. In addition, the incremental cost to review permit
applications for new water quantities to determine if the
proposed minimum flows and levels would be violated will
add about $20 per application to permit application review
costs.
Transaction Costs to Permittees and Applicants. Transaction
cost to the City of Tampa is estimated to be $271,180 per year.
This cost includes estimated capital and annual O&M
requirements to pump additional water from the Tampa Bypass
Canal into the lower Hillsborough River to meet minimum
flow requirements.
The proposed rule revision is not anticipated to incur
transactions costs to other existing water use and
environmental resource permittees.
In areas where the actual water level is above the minimum
level, water use permit applicants, including water use
permittees who request additional withdrawals, may incur
transaction costs as a result of the proposed rule revision.
Because current rule is consistent with the proposed rule
revision, the additional transaction costs are not expected to be
significantly different than that which would occur under
existing rule.
For environmental resource permit applicants, site
development costs would be expected to increase for those
applicants who could have based their surface water
management system design on the incidentally-lowered water
table.
Impact on Small Businesses, Small Cities and Small Counties.
There are no small counties in the affected area. There appear
to be three small cities in the affected area. Small cities are not
expected to be impacted by the proposed rule revision.
Of the 110 water use permittees in the affected area, 91 appear
to be private businesses. An estimated 92 percent or 84
businesses have 100 or fewer employees. None of these
permittees is expected to incur transaction costs under the
proposed rule revision. Some new environmental resource
permit applicants in the area may be small businesses and may
be affected by the proposed rule revision. However, at this
time, it is not possible to predict the number or the cost.
Expected Benefits of Reduced Groundwater Pumping in
Northern Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas Counties. The
proposed minimum flow at the Hillsborough River Reservoir
may improve ecological conditions in the lower portion of the
river, particularly between the Reservoir and Sulphur Springs.
Until a recovery plan is adopted, it is unlikely that groundwater
pumping will be reduced from current levels. Under a recovery
strategy, it is unlikely that groundwater and surface water
levels within the withdrawal impact area will rise above those
levels that would result from the stringent application of
existing rules. However, groundwater and surface water levels


5044 Section II Proposed Rules


Volume 23, Number 38, Septemnber 19, 1997


FZnridn Admini~frative Weekly










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


in aquifers, lakes and wetlands where minimum levels and
recovery strategies are established are expected to increase
relative to current conditions. Also, other lakes and wetlands in
the region may experience increased water levels. Higher water
levels may reduce damage to property owners, other existing
legal water users and environmental resources.
SPECIFIC AUTHORITY: 120.54(8), 373.0421, 373.044,
373.046, 373.113, 373.171, 373.414 FS.
LAW IMPLEMENTED: 120.54(8), 373.046, 373.403,
373.413, 373.414, 373.416, 373.429 FS.
IF REQUESTED WITHIN 21 DAYS OF THE DATE OF
THIS NOTICE, A HEARING WILL BE HELD AT THE
TIME, DATE AND PLACE SHOWN BELOW:
TIME AND DATE: To be announced.
PLACE: Southwest Florida Water Management District,
Governing Board Room, 2379 Broad Street, Brooksville,
Florida
THE PERSON TO BE CONTACTED REGARDING THE
PROPOSED RULE IS: Karen A. Lloyd, Senior Attorney,
Office of General Counsel, 2379 Broad Street, Brooksville,
Florida 34609-6899, (352)796-7211, extension 4651

THE FULL TEXT OF THE PROPOSED RULE IS:

40D-4.091 Publications and Agreements Incorporated by
Reference.
The following documents are hereby incorporated into this
chapter and Chapters 40D-40 and 40D-400, F.A.C.:
(1) "Basis of Review for Environmental Resource Permit
Applications within the Southwest Florida Water Management
District, ___ l,__ J-23, 996." This document is available
from the District upon request.
(2) through (3) No change.
Specific Authority 120.54(8), 730421. 373.044, 373.046, 373.113. 373.171.
373.414 FS. Laws Implemented 120.54(8), 373.0421 373.046, 373.103(8),
373.114, 373.403, 373.413, 373.414, 373.416, 373.429, 373.441 FS. History-
New 4-2-87, Amended 3-1-88, 9-11-88, 10-1-88. 4-1-91, 11-16-92, 1-30-94,
10-3-95, 12-26-95, 5-26-96. 7-23-96,4-17-97._ .

BASIS OF REVIEW FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT
APPLICATIONS WITHIN
THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
The following changes are made to Chapter Three -
Environmental:
3.2.2.4 ne

Pursuant to paragraph 3.1.1(a),


(a) through (c) No change.


The following changes are made to Chapter Four Water
Quantity:
4.6 Overdrainage and water conservation
Where practicable, systems shall be designed to:
1. through 6. No change.
. .. ..- J A / -


NAME OF PERSON ORIGINATING PROPOSED RULE:
Karen A. Lloyd, Senior Attorney, Office of General Counsel
NAME OF SUPERVISOR OR PERSON WHO APPROVED
THE PROPOSED RULE: Governing Board of the Southwest
Florida Water Management District
DATE PROPOSED RULE APPROVED: September 9, 1997
DATE NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE DEVELOPMENT
PUBLISHED IN FAW: June 6, 1997
The Southwest Florida Water Management District does not
discriminate on the basis of any individual's disability status.
Anyone requiring reasonable accommodation as provided for
in the American's With Disabilities Act should contact Dianne
Lee at (352)796-7211 or 1(800)423-1476, extension 4658;
TDD only number 1(800)231-6103; FAX number
(352)754-6878/SUNCOM 663-6878.

WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS
Southwest Florida Water Management District
RULE CHAPTER TITLE: RULE CHAPTER NO.:
Water Levels and Rates of Flow 40D-8
RULE TITLES: RULE NOS.:
Policy and Purpose 40D-8.011
Definitions 40D-8.021
Implementation 40D-8.031
Minimum Flows 40D-8.041
Publications Incorporated by Reference 40D-8.091
Guidance Levels for Lakes 40D-8.603
Cyclic Variations for Minimum Water Level 40D-8.605
Minimum Flood Levels 40D-8.611
Ten (10) Year Flood Warning Levels 40D-8.613
Posted Notice 40D-8.616
Operating Levels for Lakes with
District-Owned Control Structures 40D-8.621
Levels for Lakes and Wetlands 40D-8.624
Minimum Aquifer Levels in Hillsborough
County North of State Road 60, and Pasco
and Pinellas Counties 40D-8.626


Section II Proposed Rules 5045


Florida Administrative Weekly


f


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


PURPOSE AND EFFECT: To establish minimum flows and
levels to satisfy the requirements of Section 373.042, F.S.
Section 373.042, F.S., requires that minimum flows and levels
be established for the District's designated priority water
bodies within Pasco, Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties by
October 1, 1997. The draft rules establish minimum flows and
levels for the priority water bodies. The proposed rules also set
forth informational provisions which instruct where the
implementing rules are located within the District's Water Use
and Environmental Resource Permitting Programs. The
previously adopted levels for lakes within the District are
renamed to avoid confusion with those lake levels adopted
pursuant to the proposed methodology.
SUMMARY: The proposed rules provide the following:
1. Establishes Minimum Levels for the following lakes:
a. In Hillsborough County: Sapphire Lake, Cypress Lake,
Dosson Lake, Sunshine Lake, Lake Helen, Lake Ellen, Lake
Barbara, Little Moon Lake.
b. In Pasco County: Big Fish Lake
2. Establishes Minimum Levels in wetlands at specified sites
within portions of Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas Counties.
3. Establishes Minimum Levels in the Floridan aquifer at
specified sites within portions of Hillsborough, Pasco, and
Pinellas Counties.
4. Establishes Minimum Flows for the Hillsborough River and
the Tampa Bypass Canal.
5. Specifies that the City of Tampa may meet the Hillsborough
River Minimum Flow by diverting flow from the Reservoir or
Sulphur Springs, and that the Minimum Flow for the
Hillsborough River must be met beginning January 1, 1999.
6. Clarifies that the effect of Minimum Flows and Levels on
permits is specified in Chapters 40D-2 and 40D-4, F.A.C.
7. Adds a provision so that Minimum Flows and Levels
adopted through these Rule amendments will sunset October 1,
1999.
8. Levels formerly known as Management Levels, including
the 10-Year Flood Warning Level, the Minimum Low
Management Level, and the Extreme Low Management Level
are renamed Guidance Levels. These Guidance Levels are
adopted for informational purposes only and have no
regulatory effect.
SUMMARY OF STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED
REGULATORY COST: Comparison of Current Rule with
Proposed Rule Revisions. Proposed revisions were made to
Chapters 40D-2, 40D-4 and 40D-8 of the Florida
Administrative Code (F.A.C.). The proposed rule revision sets
minimum flows and levels for priority water resources in the
northern Tampa Bay area including (1) Floridan aquifer levels
within northern Hillsborough. Pasco and Pinellas Counties; (2)
northern Tampa Bay area Lakes Barbara. Big Fish, Cypress,
Dosson, Ellen. Helen, Little Moon, Sapphire and Sunshine; (3)
Wetland levels within northern Hillsborough, Pasco and
Pinellas Counties; and (4) the lower Hillsborough River and


the Tampa Bypass Canal. The proposed rule revision also sets
out how the Minimum Flows and Levels affect applicants and
permittees under Chapters 40D-2 and 40D-4, F.A.C.
In considering the following discussion of estimated regulatory
costs, it is important to note that the proposed lake, wetland
and aquifer levels will expire on October 1, 1999 unless the
proposed levels, or other levels approved by the Governing
Board. are re-published for rule adoption by October 1, 1999.
The proposed minimum flow for the lower Hillsborough River
will take regulatory effect on January 1, 1999. The proposed
minimum flow for the Tampa Bypass Canal will take
regulatory effect upon the effective date of the proposed rule.
The proposed minimum flow for the lower Hillsborough River
is 10 cubic feet per second (cfs) when water level is at or above
20 feet NGVD at USGS gage 02304500, and zero cfs when the
water level is below 20 feet. The proposed minimum flow is
zero cfs for the Tampa Bypass Canal.
Where actual water levels in the Northern Tampa Bay area are
determined to be below the proposed minimum levels, the
proposed minimum levels will have no regulatory effect on
existing water use permittees until applicable portions of a
recovery strategy have been implemented. Under current rule,
permits to applicants for new water use quantities are not being
issued where existing withdrawals have already caused
unacceptable environmental impacts.
Where actual water levels are determined to be above the
proposed minimum water levels, water use permit applicants.
including renewals, must demonstrate compliance with the
proposed minimum levels as of the effective date of the
proposed rule.
Comparison of the current rule with the proposed rule revision
finds that the rule revision is not significantly different from
current rule in terms of the permitted's or applicant's access to
water from the Floridan aquifer, lakes for which levels are
proposed, the Tampa Bypass Canal and the Hillsborough
Reservoir in the Northern Tampa Bay area. The proposed rule
revision is not expected to impact existing environmental
resource permittees. Requirements for environmental resource
permit applicants regarding protection of wetlands will not be
different from that likely to be required under existing rule.
New environmental resource permit applicants who might
have been able to take advantage of a withdrawal-lowered
surficial aquifer level may incur additional costs under the
proposed rule.
Permittees Likely to be Required to Comply with the Proposed
Rule Revision. Other than the City of Tampa. the proposed rule
revision will not affect existing water use permittees. The City
of Tampa may need to increase augmentation of the
Hillsborough River Reservoir with water from the Tampa
Bypass Canal or may also augment the reservoir from Sulphur
Springs. The additional water will be used to comply with the


5046 Section II Proposed Rules


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


Floridar Administrartive Weekly










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


minimum flow requirements for the lower Hillsborough River.
The proposed rule revision will not impact existing
environmental resource permittees.
Applicants Likely to be Required to Comply with the Proposed
Rule Revision. The impacts of the proposed rule revision on
water use permit applicants will not be significantly different
under the proposed rule than under existing rule. The proposed
rule revision is consistent with the purpose and intent of the
existing Chapter 40D-2.301, Conditions for Issuance of
Permits, and the actions that the District has taken to address
adverse impacts of withdrawals within northern Hillsborough,
Pasco, and Pinellas Counties.
There exists a region in the northern Tampa Bay area in which
new Floridan aquifer withdrawals are typically not permitted
due to existing unacceptable environmental impacts.
Applicants for new withdrawals would have to do so under the
competing applications provisions of Section 373, Florida
Statutes, and Chapter 40D-2, F.A.C., under both existing rules
and proposed rules (unless specifically provided for under a
proposed recovery strategy). The proposed rules have the
potential to cause a small increase in the size of this region in
which additional withdrawals are typically not permitted. It is
not possible to obtain a meaningful estimate of the future
number of permit applicants who will request withdrawals
from this very small additional area. However, it is possible
that one or more persons who would have been able to obtain
permitted quantities in this area under the current rule would
not be as successful under the proposed rule revision.
The proposed rule revision as it applies to the minimum flows
established for the lower Hillsborough River will not change
the ability of applicants to obtain a water use permit for
withdrawals from this river.
New environmental resource permit applicants who might
have been able to take advantage of a withdrawal-lowered
surficial aquifer level will not be able to do so under the
proposed rule revision and, therefore, may incur additional site
development costs under the proposed rule. Under the
proposed rule revision, new regulated 40D-4 permitted
activities may not suppress a ground or surface water level
below the minimum level. Therefore, the design of the surface
water management system would have to be based on higher
surficial aquifer levels.
Cost to the District, the State and Local Government Entities.
The proposed rule revisions are not anticipated to incur
significant costs to either the State of Florida or to local
government entities in terms of changes in tax revenues or
changes in non-water-related governmental costs. Tax
revenues and the level of government services are not
anticipated to change as a result of the proposed rule revision.
The cost to the Southwest Florida Water Management District
(District) are those costs that are incremental to current permit
review, monitoring, and enforcement activities that arc directly
related to implementation of the proposed rule revisions. The


total one-time cost associated with the proposed rule revision is
estimated to be $509,916. The total annual recurring cost
associated with the proposed rule revision is estimated to be
$65,549. In addition, the incremental cost to review permit
applications for new water quantities to determine if the
proposed minimum flows and levels would be violated will
add about $20 per application to permit application review
costs.
Transaction Costs to Permittees and Applicants. Transaction
cost to the City of Tampa is estimated to be $271,180 per year.
This cost includes estimated capital and annual O&M
requirements to pump additional water from the Tampa Bypass
Canal into the lower Hillsborough River to meet minimum
flow requirements.
The proposed rule revision is not anticipated to incur
transactions costs to other existing water use and
environmental resource permittees.
In areas where the actual water level is above the minimum
level, water use permit applicants, including water use
permittees who request additional withdrawals, may incur
transaction costs as a result of the proposed rule revision.
Because current rule is consistent with the proposed rule
revision, the additional transaction costs are not expected to be
significantly different than that which would occur under
existing rule.
For environmental resource permit applicants, site
development costs would be expected to increase for those
applicants who could have based their surface water
management system design on the incidentally-lowered water
table.
Impact on Small Businesses, Small Cities and Small Counties.
There are no small counties in the affected area. There appear
to be three small cities in the affected area. Small cities are not
expected to be impacted by the proposed rule revision.
Of the 110 water use permittees in the affected area, 91 appear
to be private businesses. An estimated 92 percent or 84
businesses have 100 or fewer employees. None of these
permittees is expected to incur transaction costs under the
proposed rule revision. Some new environmental resource
permit applicants in the area may be small businesses and may
be affected by the proposed rule revision. However, at this
time, it is not possible to predict the number or the cost.
Expected Benefits of Reduced Groundwater Pumping in
Northern Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas Counties. The
proposed minimum flow at the Hillsborough River Reservoir
may improve ecological conditions in the lower portion of the
river, particularly between the Reservoir and Sulphur Springs.
Until a recovery plan is adopted, it is unlikely that groundwater
pumping will be reduced from current levels. Under a recovery
strategy, it is unlikely that groundwater and surface water
levels within the withdrawal impact area will rise above those
levels that would result from the stringent application of
existing rules. However, groundwater and surface water levels


Section II Proposed Rules 5047


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997










Floida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


in aquifers, lakes and wetlands where minimum levels and
recovery strategies are established are expected to increase
relative to current conditions. Also. other lakes and wetlands in
the region may experience increased water levels. Higher water
levels may reduce damage to property owners, other existing
legal water users and environmental resources.
SPECIFIC AUTHORITY: 120.54(1). 373.016, 373.023,
373.042, 373.0421, 373.044. 373.085. 373.086. 373.103.
373.113, 373.133, 373.149, 373.171 FS.
LAW IMPLEMENTED: 120.53. 120.54(1), 373.016, 373.023,
373.026, 373.0395, 373.042, 373.0421, 373.044, 373.085,
373.086, 373.103. 373.171, 373.339 FS.
IF REQUESTED WITHIN 21 DAYS OF THE DATE OF
THIS NOTICE. A HEARING WILL BE HELD AT THE
TIME, DATE AND PLACE SHOWN BELOW:
TIME AND DATE: To be announced at a later date.
PLACE: Southwest Florida Water Management District,
Governing Board Room, 2379 Broad Street, Brooksville,
Florida
THE PERSON TO BE CONTACTED REGARDING THE
PROPOSED RULES IS: Karen A. Lloyd, Senior Attorney,
Office of General Counsel, 2379 Broad Street, Brooksville,
Florida 34609-6899, (352)796-7211, extension 4651

THE FULL TEXT OF THE PROPOSED RULES IS:

40D-8.011 Policy and Purpose.
(1) The purpose of Chapter 40D-8. F.A.C.. is to establish
Minimum Fflows and Lievels at specific locations
throughout the District pursuant to Sections 373.042 and
373.0421. F.S.. to describe Guidance Levels for lakes, and to
describe how the Minimum Flows and Levels will be used by
the District. In those areas where the actual flow or water level
is below the Minimum Flow or Level the District will
implement a recovery strategy which will be contained within
the District's Water Management Plan and. if required by law.
portions or all may be adopted by rule.
(2) Where appropriate, Mminimum Eflows and Ltevels
may reflect seasonal variations and may include a schedule of
variations and other measures appropriate for the protection of
non-consumptive uses and of the water resources.
(3) A further purpose of Chapter 40D-8. F.A.C.. is to
establish minimum flood levels and warning levels for surface
waters which are anticipated to occur on a somewhat regular
basis, and which shall serve as a precautionary warning to all
persons who would propose to construct facilities which may
be damaged by periodic high water levels.
(4) Minimum Eflows and Ltevels prescribed in Chapter
40D-8. F.A.C.. are used as a basis for imposing limitations on
withdrawals of water and the design and construction of
surface water management systems curtain auth aLti titiiL..


These limitations are prescribed in this and other chapters arts
of the rules of the District as specified in Rule 40D-8.031(3).
F.A.C.
Specific Authority 10.4 373.016. 373.023. 373.044. 373.103 FS. Law
Implemented 373.026. 373.042. 373.044 710S6 FS. History-Ne, 6-7-78.
Amended 1-22-79. Formerly 16J-8.01 Amended

40D-8.021 Definitions.
The terms set forth herein shall have the meanings ascribed to
them unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, and such
meanings shall apply throughout all District these rules. To
facility lte i r Ilfr tain t.m defiA by appliicab
smtuta !acm been inludaJ tim aith ppuprate itin.
The terms defined in Rule 40D-1.102, F.A.C., 4 .*8 +2 shall
also apply throughout Chapter 40D-8. F.A.C.
(1) "Guidance Levels" Levels, determined by the
District using the best available information and expressed in
feet relative to National Geodetic Vertical Datum, used as
advisory information, including for the District, lake shore
residents and local governments or to aid in the control of
adjustable structures. For lakes for which levels were adopted
after September 9. 1997. Guidance Levels include: Ten Year
Flood Warning Level: Pre-modification Annual High Level:
Post-modification Annual High Level: Pre-modification
Annual Low Level: and Post-modification Annual Low Level.
For lakes for which levels were adopted before September 9.
1997. Guidance Levels are the Ten Year Flood Warning Level.
the Annual Flood Level, the Low Level, and, if adopted for the
lake, the Extreme Low Level. "ManageLient ~arng" mean the
diffr nLe betwcni tiL Latablihed mihih All ll II IIL' 2Lli a
iiniaiii n fliiJd le els. aIInd mILpsi ts ti l. I pability uf an
iMP003U1lMlllLUt L IL, LJ11I. UA Of IC L dtiL, U1 ILV L L


S i- p- 1 .I ILt("L L L L .
(2) "Long-term" An evaluation period used in assessing
withdrawal impacts through modeling or statistical data
analysis that represents a period of time of sufficient length
such that the evaluation period is insensitive to unstable
fluctuations of the variables utilized in the assessment e.g..
changes in withdrawal rates, and hydrologic conditions, in
order to simulate steady state conditions. This will vary
because professional judgement is necessary to establish the
parameters to be used in the assessment of each application
depending on the geology and climate of the area of
withdrawal, the depth of and number of wells and the quantity
to be withdrawn.
(3) "Minimum Flow" means the level of flow for a surface
watercourse at which further withdrawals would be
significantly harmful to the water resources or ecology of the
area. "Minimini fluu .od I l" imiAn.i tie ,ti.Lest ln Il u vhi.h\
a s.uif1LL, t lj ud, I.I l :11 4l a.llu .tLiV tLV f tIu L.u L i'thult
intu.'fL.i..i.. .,.J L t ppi UL I 3l [L. D.U ," fu' tI p)u3IP


5048 Section II Proposed Rules


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997









Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


of Cnlse ing Jte waters i3 f&t. Stal. as 3 S 1 ali I, tl full
bInef i. l use. suth lev1l shall bi tA plessed as an cl ati.m, in
feeta absi, ot CIean sft lt0 It.
L4jjt "Minimum water L+evel" means the level of surface
water, water table, or potentiometric surface at which further
withdrawals would be significantly harmful to the water
resources of the area. Such level shall be expressed as an
elevation, in feet relative to National Geodetic Vertical Datum
aboe, mean sa. leel, and may iioipiaLt a lO mIMana1et-LI.ent
le.el and an em e lm management lC iel. which toeLH.A
establish lh i.. limi the man.mn tv h a
ttatL. bod) shall be allowed to fluu. natu y.
(4) "Ten (10) ean lflod vi airing le l" meaia that
iv ati6n in f.Lt abu I le sa l, w lichl appIXimates t1 lth el
of flooding eLxpacte.d n a fiLcquenCy of not 1LS t a la, tet.n
(10) year r ing ntI al, Sl ot a fALqu.Iny Of aut guat .
lian a SL tn p t (10'E) poubability of uLLiinLL in Aa gi
,Yal, tas dateminiL fl vn analysis f bust available data.
(5) "Management Range" means, for those lakes with
levels adopted on or after September 9. 1997. the difference
between the applicable Annual Low Level and Annual High
Level pursuant to Rule 40D-8.603. F.A.C. For lakes with
levels adopted orior to SeDtember 9. 1997. management range
means the difference between the Low Level. or Extreme Low
Level. if adopted for the lake. and the Annual Flood Level.
s"Bs fat aiLu anagnnt p- aStiLe" in tl. dJesign,
LSunt/Autiol., uopiationI, an.d 11aiI1ntenanc uM a uctules i
devic S 1eu-ii- a C.osiderativ anBd alaation of luth
lung-tien nid sltui-tunS effLts ofl tLhe activity upun tSe alL te
rVLOui' of teu Diru- Fat. l to be mc AniddJ uI ILudI the.

(a) tCu iALutrn a nd popmr utilizatiun if auif. awS atl.
(bi) PriUvitiun f datnagra fuin flu Sdt, ail LIonIt, and
LAlssia drainag..
(t) P laesration af natural sLoumcLs, fiL" and wildlife.
(d) .Starag f.. aquifLr chaigem e.
(.') N 1,oILA3nsimpti v uise, i nluding but not limited to,
navigatin, meeiation, iand atuetiia.
Specific Authority 120.54 373.016. 373.023. 373.044. 373.103 FS. Law
Implemented 373.016. 373.042. 373.044 FS. History-New 6-7-78. Amended
1-22-79. Formerly 16J-8.02 Amended

40D-8.031 Implementation.
(1) Thei pluisii. uf Cha ptiu 40D-0 uf tIe Iules Shall
mutinue to be inijplInIIted a. Of iMay 2, 1978, within lthe
Hill bo rnuh Ri v Northwest .illboa Green S war,
Alafia Riv, .a.al Ries, Maa, -Peace- Rives,
r rri 4- nt l. A nr I T


sita! be i mpliAInltSd i ....AIdiatHY mid shali apFil mitilt ilAL


Oin Oi 2 Stfai aau! 1.. a i t A S 1it.U.a t 0it1


d-waterbad-;
Poasting
4E)E) 8616, an


to tilt.e pub ic I t/irtt toi RalAe


3. P'ublieatlit. S t e iU tie, -. a Lne spau Ha ig gnISIeri
cihiulation L ithmAin tlilt affie aLa.
(b) +Ti LAiSiiL \uiv" anagement l.el aL adjusted by Sth
eyelic vatiation slhil become efftLive wlhtlen siiila notice !Ias
= ..- 1 -
bee'rgiten
(1) No Guidance management Levels shall be
prescribed for any reservoir or other artificial structure which
is located entirely within lands owned, leased, or otherwise
controlled by the user, and which require water only for filling,
replenishing, and maintaining of the water level thereof,
provided however:
(a) No change.
(b) That the Pre-modification or Post-modification Annual
High. as applicable miniiiman fltud lv.l muaran..t Rtua s
4D,,- 8.2 and 4ED- 8. and the Ten Year Fflood Wwarning
Level. all as determined pursuant to the procedures set forth in
the District's Lake Level Methodology Manual incorporated
by reference in Rule 40D-8.091. F.A.C.. pusaIt tORues
4,,,,8.2 and 4. 8.613 may be established for any lake Vr
other iimp-tunddmnit determined by the Board to be in the
public interest.
2)(3 No Guidance management Lievels shall be
prescribed for Lake Manatee in Manatee County. Ward Lake in
Manatee County, the City of Tampa Reservoir on the
Hillsborough River in Hillsborough County, and the Peace
River/Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority Reservoir
..i. lALI-l DLBe piinj l Htiiti si-Re S x ./ .instI i.d


LrIniiiLLuItIMi nll1 tLL 'jLun.th


Sltoada ate anaiLlnt


Diastrit's PL.ini N.um..be 750001, 74 -172, and 75 290 in
DeSoto County.
(3) New water use or surface water management activity
shall not cause an established Minimum Flow or Level to be
reduced or suppressed. In addition, the effects of ground water
withdrawals shall not be considered in the design of surface
water management systems permitted under Chapters 40D-4.
40D-40, or 40D-400. F.A.C. The manner in which the
Minimum Flows and Levels established in this Chanter 40D-8.
F.A.C.. are implemented in the District's Consumptive Use
and Environmental Resource Permitting Programs is described
in Rule 40D-2.301. F.A.C.. and Section 4.3 of the Basis of
Review described in Rule 40D-2.091. F.A.C.. and Sections
3.2..2.4 and 4.6 of the Basis of Review described in Rule
40D-4.091. F.A.C.
(4) Where the actual flow or level of a water body is below
the Minimum Flow or Level, pursuant to Section 373.0421(2).
F.S.. the District shall expeditiously implement a recovery
strategy with the intent to achieve recoerv to the established
Minimum Flow and Level as soon as nracticaHle. Wher
required by law. the portion of the recovery strategy containing


Section II Proposed Rules 5049


aLaC PhUICA.AAL*L 111tV11.1 -IL L ) L.ttIIPLl, /p 7n tSI V Or
flvipidp3a) aS f1lD M..
(let)chm Oltt I l f lak'S 31d MIMI S i M O ... t lAIS
psL ~ i- iLI 3I11.l h liLti -. L =fLi. i'MI.IA ia Upk/IA.


I% .. .f I










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


criteria that must be met by permittees and applicants under
Chapters 40D-2 and 40D-4. F.A.C.. shall be adopted by rule.
The entire recovery strategy shall be contained in the District's
applicable Regional Water Supply Plan for the area. and the
District's Water Management Plan.
(5) The District shall annually update the Governing
Board regarding the status of the water levels for those water
bodies for which Minimum Flows or Levels have been
established, and. where appropriate, the Governing Board may.
through rulemaking. change the status reflected in the tables
set forth in Rules 40D-8.624 and 40D-8.626. F.A.C.
(6) Establishment of a Minimum Flow or Level shall not
be deemed to be a determination by the Governing Board that
any quantity above the established Minimum Flow or Level is
available for allocation to consumptive uses. For example, the
District may by regulation or order reserve such quantities as it
deems necessary pursuant to Section 373.223(3). F.S.
Specific Authority 12054 373.016. 373.023, 373.044, 373.103 FS. Law
Implemented 12*154 1t059 373.016, 373.023.373.04. 373.0421 373.044.
373.086. 373.103 FS. History-New 6-7-78. Amended 10-16-78. 1-22-79,
Formerly 16J-8.03. Amended 3-23-81.

(Substantial rewording of Rule 40D-8.041. See Florida
Administrative Code for present text.)
40D-8.041 Minimum Ratesof Flows and Ivetls.
(1) Minimum Flows For the Lower Hillsborough River.
(a) For the purposes of Minimum Flows, the Lower
Hillsborough River is defined as the river downstream of
Fletcher Avenue. The Lower Hillsborough River includes
Sulphur Springs, an artesian spring that enters the River via a
short spring run located 2.2 miles downstream of the
Hillsborough River.
(b) The Minimum Flow for the Lower Hillsborough River
at the base of the City of Tampa's dam shall be ten (10) cubic
feet per second (cfs) when the surface water elevation at USGS
gauge 02304500 is at or above 20.0 feet NGVD and 0.0 cfs
when the surface water elevation is below 20.0 feet NGVD.
This Minimum Flow has been determined based on the
structural alterations in and along the River and the
dependence of viable ecological communities downstream of
the dam with flows from the Hillsborough River Reservoir and
Sulphur Springs. The City of Tampa may meet this flow
requirement by diverting flow from Sulphur Springs or the
Reservoir. The required flows will become effective January 1.
1999.
(c) The District will establish a Minimum Flow for
Sulphur Springs in the future. As part of that process the
District will evaluate if additional flows from Sulphur Springs
are available to supplement the Minimum Flow for the
Hillsborough River at the base of the City of Tampa's dam.
(2) Minimum Flows for the Tamna Bvpass Canal


(a) The Tamna Bypass Canal extends 12 miles from above
Fletcher Avenue to McKav Bay. Structure 160 serves as the
barrier between the freshwater and tidal portions of the Tampa
Bvpass Canal.
(b) The Minimum Flow for the Tampa Bypass Canal at
Structure 160 is 0 cfs. This Minimum Flow accounts for the
structural nature of the Canal. its operational constraints and
the relationship of ecological communities in the tidal reaches
of the Canal and McKav Bay with freshwater flows through
Structure 160.
(c) The Minimum Flow for the Tampa Bypass Canal at
Structure 160 is established specific to the physical
configuration and operations constraints of the Tampa Bvpass
Canal as they exist at the time of adoption of this Minimum
Flow. If physical modifications to the Tampa Bypass Canal are
made. the District shall reevaluate the Minimum Flow at
Structure 160.
Specific Authority 120 4.373.044. 373.133. 373.149. 373.171 FS. Law
Implemented 373.042. 373.086 373.339 FS. History-Readopted 10-5-74.
Amended 12-31-74. Formerly 16J-0.15, 40D-1.601, Amended 10-1-84.

40D-8.091 Publications Incorporated By Reference.
The determination of Guidance Levels. including the Annual
High and Low Levels and Minimum Lake Levels set forth in
Rule 40D-8.603. F.A.C.. are more particularly described in the
Lake Level Methodology Manual. dated September 1997.
which is hereby incorporated by reference into this Chapter
and is available from the District upon request.
Specific Authority 120.54 373.016. 37. 021 373.044 373.10. 7 73,113
373.113 373.149. 373.171 FS Law Imnlemented 120.54. 373 016. 373.023
373.026. 373.0395. 373042. 373.0421 373.044. 373.086. 373 103 373 171.
373.339 FS. Hisioa-New

(Substantial rewording of Rule 40D-8.603. See Florida
Administrative Code for present text.)
40D-8.603 Guidance Mainag mnt Levels for Lakes and
,thi, finpoui.dinn..s.
(1) Guidance Levels adopted by the Governing Board on
or after September 9. 1997. and the method for calculating
those Levels are set forth in Rules 40D-8.603(2) and
40D-8.624(3) and (4). F.A.C. Guidance Levels adopted by the
Governing Board orior to September 8. 1997. are listed in Rule
40D-8.624(6). F.A.C.
(2) Flood and High Levels.
(a) The Ten (10) Year Flood Warning Level is provided as
an advisory guideline for lake shore development. The Ten
(10) Year Flood Warning Level, incorporates the level of
flooding expected on a frequency of not less than the ten (10)
year recurring interval, or on a frequency of not greater than a
ten percent (10%) probability of occurrence in any given year.
The Ten Year Flood Warning Level is calculated as described
in Chapter Two of the District's Lake Level Methodolo2v
Manual described in Rule 40D-S.091. F.A.C.


5050 Section II Proposed Rules


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


(h) The Pre-modification Annual High Level for lakes is
the highest level to which a lake is expected to fluctuate on an
average annual basis. The Pre-modification Annual High Level
is calculated as described in Chapter Three of the District's
Lake Level Methodology Manual described in Rule
40D-8.091. F.A.C.
(c) The Post-modification Annual High Level, for lakes
with hvdrologic regimes modified by surface water
conveyance systems or natural occurrences (e.g. sinkholes), is
the highest level to which a lake is expected to fluctuate on an
average annual basis. The Post-modification Annual High
Level for lakes with an adjustable structure is a peaking
elevation and not one which is maintained. The
Post-modification Annual High Level is calculated as
described in Chapter Four of the District's Lake Level
Methodology Manual described in Rule 40D-8.091. F.A.C.
(3) Low Levels.
(a) The Pre-modification Annual Low Level is the lowest
level to which a lake is expected to fluctuate on an average
annual basis. The Pre-modification Annual Low Level is
calculated as described in Chanter Three of the District's Lake
Level Methodology Manual described in Rule 40D-8.091.
F.A.C.
(b) The Post-modification Annual Low Level. for lakes
with hvdrologic regimes modified by anthropogenic activities
excluding withdrawals or natural occurrences (e.g. sinkholes).
is the expected annual low level of a lake which has been
influenced by such activities and which no longer fully exhibits
pre-modification fluctuations. The Post-modification Annual
Low Level may be used as a guide to operate a lake control
structure, for those lakes with control structures. The
Pre-modification Annual Low Level is calculated as described
in Chapter Four of the District's Lake Level Methodology
Manual described in Rule 40D-8.091. F.A.C.
(4) Posted Notice.
(a) Staff gauges will be installed in prominent locations on
each lake for which Guidance Levels or Minimum Levels have
been established. A notice shall be posted in the immediate
proximity of the staff gauge indicating that Levels have been
established.
(b) The notice shall indicate the elevations of the Guidance
Level and the established Minimum Level.
(5) Renaming of Levels.
(a) Lakes for which lake levels were adopted prior to
September 9. 1997. had what were referred to in the District's
Rules as management levels and alternatively as minimum
levels. These levels were the Ten Year Flood Warning Level.
the Minimum Flood Level. the Low Management Level and
for some lakes there was a Extreme Low Management Level.
As of (effective date of these proposed rule revisions) these
levels are now referred to as 'he Guidance Levels. For those
lakes with leveis established prior to September 9. 99'). the
Minimum Flood is now named the Annual Flood Level, the


Low Management Level is now named the Low Level and the
Extreme Low Management Level is now named the Extreme
Low Level.
(b) For lakes for which levels were adopted before
September 8. 1997. a reference within the District's rules to the
applicable minimum level or to established minimum water
levels shall refer to the Low Management Level, or. if adopted
for the lake. the Extreme Low Management Level. Those lakes
for which levels were adopted prior to September 9. 1997. are
set forth in Rule 40D-8.624(7). F.A.C.. along with the adopted
levels.
(c) For lakes for which levels were adopted on or after
September 9. 1997. a reference in the District's rules to the
applicable minimum level or to established minimum water
levels shall refer to the adopted Minimum Level described in
Rule 40D-8.624(4). F.A.C.
Specific Authority 373.016, 373.023, 373.044. 373.103 FS. Law Implemented
373.016. 373.042. 373.044 373086 FS. History-New 6-7-78, Formerly
16J-8.672(?)(h)(1t Formerly 161-8.6721(4). 161-8.673 Amended

40D-8.605 Cyclic Variations for Minimum Water Level.
Specific Authority 373.016. 373.023, 373.044, 373.103 FS. Law Implemented
373.016. 373.042. 373.044 FS. History-New 6-7-78, Formerly 16J-8.671.
Revealed

40D-8.611 Minimum Flood Levels.
Specific Authority 373.016, 373.023. 373.044 373.103 FS. Law Implemented
373.016, 373.042. 373.044 FS. History-New 6-7-78, Formerly 16J-8.672.
Revealed

40D-8.613 Ten (10) Year Flood Warning Levels.
Specific Authority 373.016. 373.023. 373.044. 373.103 FS. Law Implemented
373.016. 373.042. 373.044 FS. History-New 1-22-79. Formerly 16J-8.6721.
Revealed

40D-8.616 Posted Notice.
Specific Authority 373.016, 373.023, 373.044. 373.103 FS. Law Implemented
373.016. 373.042, 373.044 FS. History-New 6-7-78, Formerly 16J-8.673.
Repealed

40D-8.621 Operating Levels for Lakes;-ad-- their
Intpoundmeints with District-Owned Control Structures.
(1) Schedules, levels, and procedures for operation of
lakes with a District-owned control structure amnd their
impundian il. t ,uipped ith vf, .utu.es shall be established by
the Board.
(2) The operating range for a structure of a lake ur other
impoundment shall be prescribed as that between the high
operating level and the low operating level.
(a) High operating level shall be established by the Board
in consideration of the Guidance Levels, public testimony and
in keeping with the best lake control s afc-c wat.
management practices.
(b) Low operating level shall be established by the Board
in consideration of Guidance Levels, any applicable Minimum
Level public tetrumony and in keeping with the best lake
control surfa e-w ter management practices.


Section II Proposed Rules 5051


Florida Administrative W'eekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997









Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


(3) Best lake control management practices in the design.
construction, operation, and maintenance of structures or
devices requires a consideration and evaluation of both
long-term and short-term effects of the activity upon the water
resources of the District. Factors to be considered include the
following:
(a) Conservation and proper utilization of surface water.
(b) Prevention of damage from floods, soil erosion, and
excessive drainage.
(c) Preservation of natural resources, fish and wildlife.
(d) Storage for aquifer recharge.
(e) Non-consumptive uses, including but not limited to.
navigation, recreation, and aesthetics.
(f) Compliance with any Minimum Level established for
the lake.
41Xy A prescribed schedule for operation of all lakes and
other impoudment with structures shall be established by the
Board. The schedule will contain time sequences by which the
levels of the water body will be maintained throughout the
established management range. While recognizing the
difficulty of maintaining precise control of actual levels, the
schedule shall provide the guideline by which the operator of
the structure will attempt to maintain the prescribed levels
insofar as he has control.
Specific Authority 373.016, 373.023, 373.044, 373.103 FS. Law Implemented
373.016. 373.042, 373.044 FS. History-New 6-7-78, Formerly 16J-8.677.
Amended

40D-8.624 Schedule- f Levels for Lakes- and Wetlands
and Othl' LnFplundnulz .a
(1) Establishment of Minimum Wetland Levels.
(a) Where a Minimum Level for isolated, cvpress
dominated wetlands is established and incorporated into the
table at Rule 40D-8.624(3). F.A.C.. below, the Minimum
Level shall be that level which is 1.7 feet below a reference
elevation referred to as the normal pool elevation. Wetland
water levels are deemed to be below the Minimum Level when
the median stage is below the Minimum Level based on a six
(6) year monitoring period.


(b) The normal pool elevation shall be determined based
on a consideration, utilizing professional iudgement. of
biological indicators of sustained inundation such as:
1. The lower limit of epiDhytic mosses and liverworts
intolerant of sustained inundation:
2. The upper limit of the root crown on Lvonia lucida
growing on tree tussocks:
3. The upper limit of adventitious roots on Hv ericum
fasiculatum and other species which exhibit this morphologic
response to sustained inundation:
4. Other indicators which can be demonstrated to represent
a similar period of sustained inundation.
(2) Wetlands within Hillsborough County north of State
Road 60 and Pasco and Pinellas Counties for which Minimum
Levels have been established as set forth in the table in Rule
40D-8.624(3). F.A.C.. below were selected based upon the
wetland meeting the following guidelines:
(a) located in an area that is or may be experiencing
adverse water withdrawal impacts:
(b) isolated cypress dome greater than 0.5 acres in size:
(c) District's ability to enter propertv on a long term basis
for instrumentation and monitoring of the site:
(d) wetlands with monitoring data are preferred: and
(e) appears to be impacted primarily by water withdrawal.
(3) Minimum Levels for wetlands are hereby established
as set forth in the following table. If insufficient data exists to
determine if the wetland water level is below the Minimum
Wetland Level. pursuant to Rules 40D-8.624(1) and (3)
F.A.C.. the wetland water level can be determined to be below
the Minimum Wetland Level based on an evaluation of aerial
Dhotographs and evaluation of biological indicators. The
Minimum Levels at roved by the Governing Board on
September 9. 1997. shall be reevaluated by the Governing
Board no later than October 1. 1999. These Levels shall expire
on October 1. 1999. unless these levels, or other levels
approved by the Governing Board. are published for rule
adoption prior to October 1. 1999.


5052 Section II Proposed Rules


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


. o


Florida Administrative Weekly










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


Wetland Site
(a) CC W-41
(b) CC W-ll
(c) CC W-12
(d) CC W-17
(e) CC Site G
(f) STWF D
(g) STWF Central Recorder
(h) STWF Z
(i) STWF Eastern Recorder
(j) STWF S-75
(k) STWF M
(1) STWF N
(m) MBWF Entry Dome
(n) MBWF X-4
(o) MBWF Clay Gully
Cypress
(p) MBWF Unnamed
(q) EWWF NW-42
(r) EWWF NW-44
(s) EWWF Salls Property
Wetland 10S/10D
(t) SPWF NW-49
(u) SPWF South Cypress
(v) SPWF NW-50 South
Pasco
(w) S21 WF NW-53 East
(x) Cosme WF Wetland
(y) CBARWF TQ-1 West
(z) CBARWF T-3
(aa) CBARWF Stop #7
(bb) CBARWF Q-1
(cc) CR1
(dd) CR2
(ee) CR3
(ff) CR4
(gg) CR5
(hh) CR6
(ii) NPWF #3
(jj) NPWF #21


Minimum Wetland Levels Approved September 9, 1997
Minimum Level Latitude
73.2 28 18 44
67.6 28 1746
62.2 28 1733
63.2 28 17 8
62.8 28 16 21
29.2 28 15 19
43.4 28 14 40
40.1 281410
44.7 28 14 45
45.5 28 15 1
43.1 281434
45.2 28 14 33
33.8 28 6 55
40.7 28 7 26
39.9 28 7 21


28 6 20
28 921
28 105
29103

28 11 0
28 10 53
2811 17

28 7 16
28 62
28 20 37
28 20 52
28 20 37
28 20 46
28 7 57
287 14
28 6 39
28 6 50
28 5 53
28 7 32
28 190
28 17 23


51.6
39.6
73.3
68.9
72.4
72.8
87.0
90.6
95.5
99.1
105.3
96.1
44.5
44.6


Section II Proposed Rules 5053


Longitude
82 22 25
82236
82 23 39
82 23 41
8224 18
8238 5
82 35 45
82357
82 33 56
82 33 46
82 34 24
82338
82 1824
82 20 14
82 20 45

82 20 33
82 39 47
82 37 52
824058

82 30 27
82 30 29
82 30 28

823051
82 35 27
82 29 11
822944
82 28 28
8228 11
827 16
827 11
827 14
82 5 54
82 4 56
82 5 57
82 34 32
82 34 30


~


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


(4) Establishment of Minimum Lake Levels.
(a) Pre-modification Lakes (PrM) the Minimum Level
shall be the Pre-modification Annual Low Level calculated as
described in Chapter Three of the District's Lake Level
Methodology Manual described in Rule 40D-8.091. F.A.C.
The lake level is deemed to be below the Minimum Level
when the elevation representing the P50 is depressed below the
Annual Low Level for greater than 50% of the time for at least
a six (6) year period.
(b) Post-modification Lakes with at least six (6) years of
hydrologic data (PMD) the Minimum Level is the P50 as
determined from the stage data used to establish the
Post-modification Annual High and Low Levels pursuant to
Chapter Four of the District's Lake Level Methodology
Manual described in Rule 40D-8.091. F.A.C. The lake level is
deemed to be below the Minimum Level when the elevation
representing the P50 is below the Minimum Level more than
50% of the time for at least a six year period.
(c) Post-modification Lakes with less than six (6) years of
hydrologic data or lakes without six (6) years of hvdrologic
data prior to impacts due to water withdrawals (PMND) the
Minimum Level is the midpoint between the Post-modification
Annual High and Low Levels elevations as determined
pursuant Chapters Four and Five of the District's Lake Level
Methodology Manual described in Rule 40D-8.091. F.A.C.
The lake level is deemed to be below the Minimum Level
when the elevation representing the P50 is below the Minimum
Level more than 50% of the time for at least a six (6) year
period.
(d) If insufficient data exists to determine if the lake level
is below the Minimum Level .pursuant to Rules
40D-8.624(4)(a)-(c). F.A.C.. above, the lake level can be


determined to be below the Minimum Level based on a
comparison with similar lakes by use of aerial photographs and
evaluation of biological indicators.
(5) Within Hillsborough and Pasco Counties. Minimum
Levels have been established on Lakes Barbara. Big Fish.
Cypress. Dosson. Helen. Ellen, Little Moon. Rainbow and
Sunshine, based on the Priority Schedule for the Establishment
of Minimum Flows and Levels within the District's Water
Management Plan. dated March 1995. as updated June 1996.
The Minimum Levels established for these lakes shall be
reevaluated by the Governing Board no later than October 1.
1999. These Levels shall expire on October 1. 1999. unless
these levels, or other levels approved by the Governing Board.
are published for rule adoption prior to October 1. 1999.
(6-+) Levels for lakes and vothe, inpuaindent are hereby
established as set forth in the following table. folHws: After
the Minimum Level elevation for each lake an abbreviation of
PrM. PMD or PMND is listed. The abbreviation indicates
which of the methodologies described in Rule 40D-8.624(4).
F.A.C.. above was used to calculate the Minimum Level.
Guidance Levels established prior to September 9. 1997. are
set forth in Rule 40D-8.624(7). F.A.C.. below. Those lakes for
which Minimum Level elevation is followed by an asterisk (*)
it has been deemed that upon the effective date of the rule
adopting the Minimum Level for those lakes the lake level is
below the Minimum Level. If insufficient data exists to
determine if the lake level is below the Minimum Level.
pursuant to Rules 40D-8.624(a)-(c). F.A.C.. above, the lake
level can be determined to be below the Minimum Level based
on a comparison with similar lakes by use of aerial
photographs and evaluation of biological indicators.


5054 Section II Proposed Rules


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997










Flodda Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


Location by
County and Basin
(a) In Charlotte County Within
The Peace River Basin
RESERVED
(b) In Citrus County Within The
Coastal
Rivers Basin
RESERVED
(c) In Citrus County Within The
Withlacoochee River Basin
RESERVED
(d) In DeSoto County Within The
Peace River Basin
RESERVED
(e) In Hardee County Within The
Peace River Basin
RESERVED
(f) In Hemando County Within
The Coastal Rivers Basin
RESERVED
(g) In Hernando County Within
The Hillsborough River Basin
RESERVED
(h) In Hernando County Within
The Withlacoochee River Basin
RESERVED
(I) In Highlands County Within
The Peace River Basin
RESERVED
(i) In Hillsborouoh County Within
The Alafia River Basin
RESERVED
(k) In Hillsborough County
Within The Hillsborough River


Basin
RESERVED
(1) In Hillsborough County Within
the Northwest Hillsborough Basin


Name of Lake Ten Year Flood Annual High Annual Low Minimum
Guidance (NGVD) Guidance (NGVD) Guidanc (NGVD) Level (NGVD)


Sapphire Lake 64.1
S-14.T-27.R-18
Cypress Lake 49.5
S-24.T-27.R-17
Dosson Lake 55.1
S-20.T-27.R-18
Sunshine Lake 55.1
S-20.T-27.R-18
Lake Helen 54.2
S- 9.T-27.R-18
Lake Ellen 54.2
S-19.T-27.R-18
Lake Barbara 54.2
S-19.T-27.R-18


48.9

53.4

52.8

53.0

53.0


47.2


50.6

51.4

51.4

514


62.7*
(PMND)
48.1*
(PMND)
52.1*
(PMD)
51.7*
(PMND)
52.2*
(PMND)
52.2*
(PMND)

(PMND)


Section II Proposed Rules 5055


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997












Little Moon Lake40.8 39.0 37.1 38.1*
S-28.T-27.R-17 (PMND)
(m) In Lake County Within The
Green Swamp Basin
RESERVED
(n) In Levy County Within The
Withlacoochee River Basin
RESERVED
(o) In Manatee County Within The
Manasota Basin
RESERVED
(p) In Marion County Within The
Withlacoochee River Basin
RESERVED
(a) In Pasco County Within the Big Fish Lake 77.4 6.5 74.6 74.6*
Coastal Rivers Basin S-21.T-24.R-19 (PrM)
(r) In Pasco County Within The
Green Swamp Basin
RESERVED
(s) In Pasco County Within The
Hillsboroueh River Basin
RESERVED
(t) In Pasco County Within The
Pinellas-Anclote River Basin
RESERVED
(u) In Pasco County Within The
Withlacoochee River Basin
RESERVED
(v) In Pinellas County Within The
Pinellas-Anclote River Basin
RESERVED
(w) In Polk County Within The
Alafia River Basin
RESERVED
(x) In Polk County Within The
Green Swamp Basin
RESERVED
(v) In Polk County Within The
Hillsborough River Basin
RESERVED
(z) In Polk County Within The
Peace River Basin
RESERVED
(aa) In Sarasota County Within The
Manasota Basin
RESERVED
(bb) In Sumter County Within The
Green Swamp Basin
RESERVED
(cc) In Sumter County Within The
Withlacoochee River Basin
RESERVED


5056 Section II Proposed Rules


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997












(7) Guidance Levels established for lakes nrior to Seotember 8. 1997. are set forth in the following table:


Location of
Impoundment
by County and Basin





(a) In Charlotte
County Within
The Peace
River Basin
(b) In Citrus
County Within
The Coastal
Rivers Basin
(c) In Citrus
County Within
The Withlacoochee
River Basin
Bradley, Lake
23 20S 20E
Cato, Lake
51920
Connell, Lake
61920
Cooter, Lake
17 19 20
Hog Pond, Lake
(Nina)
21919
Holden, Lake
(Inverness)
3219 20
Magnolia, Lake
32020
Rush, Lake
(Williams)
03-17-18


GUIDANCE LEVELS
Ten (10) Annual Minimum Flood Low Mgnt. Level
Year Warning ood Level (NGVD) irrFeet (NGVD) frnFeet-r*boe
L=v. e!I rFeet.. Above vu M, .. Q L: l ,i SXa Le ve..1l (n-Ml)
Me r Sea Level (mst)
(NG.VD fmst)


43.40'

38.82'

35.68'

41.80'

35.92'


32.44'


32.36'

36.20'


42.50'

38.00'

35.50'

40.50'

34.50'


32.00'


31.00'

35.75'


40.25'

35.50'

32.00'

38.25'

32.00'


29.50'


28.50'

33.25'


Extreme
Low Mgmt.
Level
(NGVD In
Feet-Above
Mean-Sea
be Vei (ins!


38.25'

34.00'

30.00'

36.25'

30.00'


28.00'


27.00'

31.25'


Section II Proposed Rules 5057


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


Florida Administrative Weekly











Lake Tsala Apopka (Hemando 40.50' 39.00' 36.75' 34.75'
Pool)
1 18S 19E
2 18S 19E
11 18S 19E
12 18S 19E
13 18S 19E
23 18S 19E
24 18S 19E
25 18S 19E
26 18S 19E
5 18S 20E
6 18S 20E
7 18S 20E
8 18S 20E
16 18S 20E
17 18S 20E
18 18S 20E
19 18S 20E
20 18S 20E
21 18S 20E
27 18S 20E
28 18S 20E
29 18S 20E
30 18S 20E
31 18S 20E
32 18S 20E
33 18S 20E


5058 Section II Proposed Rules


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997












Lake Tsala Apopka (Inverness Pool) 41.80' 40.50' 38.25' 36.25'
33 18S 20E
34 18S 20E
35 18S 20E
1 19S 20E
2 19S 20E
3 19S 20E
4 19S 20E
8 19S 20E
9 19S 20E
10 19S 20E
11 19S 20E
12 19S 20E
13 19S 20E
14 19S 20E
15 19S 20E
16 19S 20E
17 19S 20E
21 19S 20E
22 19S 20E
23 19S 20E
18 19S 21E
19 19S 21E


Section II Proposed Rules 5059


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


Florida Administrative Weekly











Lake Tsala Apopka (Floral City 43.40' 42.50' 40.25' 38.25'
Pool)
19 19S 21E
21 19S 21E
22 19S 21E
27 19S 21E
28 19S 21E
29 19S 21E
30 19S 21E
31 19S 21E
32 19S 21E
33 19S 21E
34 19S 21E
1 20S 20E
2 20S 20E
3 20S 20E
10 20S 20E
11 20S 20E
12 20S 20E
13 20S 20E
14 20S 20E
3 20S 21E
4 20S 21E
5 20S 21E
6 20S 21E
7 20S 21E
8 20S 21E
17 20S 21E
18 20S 21E
25 19S 20E
25 19S 20E
26 19S 20E
34 19S 20E
35 19S 20E
36 19S 20E
Little Lake 43.40' 41.50' 39.00' 37.25'
(Consuella)
15 20S 20E
Lake Twin 38.11' 37.00' 35.00' 33.00'
61920
(d) In DeSoto County Within The
Peace River Basin
(e) In Hardee County Within The
Peace River Basin
(f) In Hernando County Within The
Costal Rivers Basin
(g) In Hemando County Within The
Hillsborough River Basin
LAKES


5060 Section II Proposed Rules


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


Nicks Lake 114.46' 113.00' 110.50' 108.50'
29 23S 20E
St. Clair Lake 114.46' 113.00' 110.50' 108.50'
33 23S 20E
(h) In Hemando County Within The
Withlacoochee River Basin
LAKES
Elizabeth, Lake 62.90' 60.25' 57.00' 55.50'
S11 T23S R21E
Francis, Lake 62.90' 60.25' 57.00' 55.50'
11 23S 21E
Geneva, Lake 62.90' 60.25' 57.00' 55.50'
11 23S 21E
Lindsey, Lake 70.60' 69.00' 66.00' 64.50'
25 23S 19E
Mountain Lake 105.10' 104.00' 101.00' 99.00'
16 23S 20E
Neff Lake 104.40' 103.00' 100.00' 98.00'
20 23S 20E
Sparkman Lake 94.40' 91.50' 89.00' 88.00'
24 23S 19E
Spring Lake 185.02' 184.25' 181.25' 178.25'
15 23S 20E
(I) In Highlands County Within The
Peace River Basin
LAKES
Sec Twsp Rng
Adelaide, Lake 110.00' 106.50' 104.00' 102.50'
5 33S 28E
Angelo, Lake 104.00' 99.50' 97.00' 95.00'
4 27S 25E
Anoka, Lake 124.00' 124.00' 122.00' 120.00'
27 33S 28E
Apthorpe, Lake 72.00' 71.50' 68.00' 66.00'
18 36S 30E
Blue, Lake 78.70' 77.50' 75.00' 73.50'
30 36S 30E
Bonnet, Lake 91.90' 90.75' 88.00' 86.00'
8 34S 29E
Brentwood, Lake 102.30' 102.75' 99.50' 98.00'
10 33S 28E
Buck, Lake 96.40' 94.00' 91.50' 89.50'
29 37S 30E
Byrd, Lake 110.60' 108.25' 105.50' 104.00'
9 33S 28E
Carrie, Lake 75.13' 75.50' 73.00' 72.50'
21 36S 29E
Charlotte, Lake 93.90' 93.75' 91.25' 89.75'
17 35S 29E
Chilton, Lake 116.30' 114.00' 111.00' 109.50'
7 33S 28E


Section II Proposed Rules 5061


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997












Clay, Lake 79 00' 78.75' 76.00' 75.00'
29 36S 30E
Crews, Lake 120.50' 119.50' 117.00' 115.50'
32 36S 29E
Damon, Lake 102.30' 101.00' 98.00' 95.00'
3 33S 28E
Denton, Lake 117.10' 116.50' 114.00' 112.00'
2 34S 28E
Dinner, Lake 103.50' 102.50' 98.50' 97.00'
17 34S 29E
Francis, Lake 70.80' 70.50' 67.50' 66.50'
22 36S 29E
Glenada, Lake 118.40' 120.00' 117.00' 115.50'
34 33S 28E
Grassy, Lake 92.10' 91.50' 88.50' 87.50'
17 37S 30E
Harry, Lake 67.60' 67.50' 63.00' 62.00'
1 36S 29E
Henry, Lake 75.13 75.50' 73.00' 72.50'
25 36S 29E
Hill 101.00' 99.25' 96.00' 94.50'
17 36S 29E
Huckleberry Lake 104.80' 104.50' 102.00' 101.00'
7 35S 29E
Huntley, Lake 83.40' 83.75' 81.00' 79.50'
5 37S 30E
Jackson, Lake 103.20' 103.00' 100.00' 98.00'
30 34S 29E
Josephine, Lake 72.70' 72.50' 69.00' 68.50'
32 35S 29E
June-in-Winter, Lake 75.13' 75.50' 73.00' 72.50'
34 36S 29E
Lake Lachard 79.56' 78.50' 76.00' 74.00'
36 36S 29E
Lelia, Lake 113.00' 114.50' 112.50' 110.50'
34 33S 29E
Letta, Lake 100.00' 100.00' 97.00' 95.00'
31 33S 29E
Little Bonnet Lake 101.70' 100.00' 97.00' 96.00'
36 33S 28E
103.20' 103.00' 100.00' 98.00'
Little Lake Jackson
6 35S 29E
Little Red Water Lake 104.10' 103.25' 100.50' 98.50'
14 36S 29E
Lost 90.60' 88.00' 84.00' 82.75'
12 37S 29E
Lotela, Lake 106.60' 108.50' 105.00' 104.00'
26 33S 28E
McCoy, Lake 87.39' 87.00' 84.00' 82.00'
6 37S 30E


5062 Section II Proposed Rules


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997












Mirror, Lake 94.70' 93.50' 90.00' 88.00'
7 37S 30E
Center Nellie 73.20' 71.50' 67.00' 65.00'
13 36S 29E
N.W. Nellie 73.20' 71.50' 67.00' 65.00'
13 36S 29E
S.E. Nellie 73.20' 71.50' 67.00' 65.00'
13 36S 29E
Olivia, Lake 118.10' 117.50' 114.50' 113.00'
6 33S 28E
Pearl, Lake 87.27' 87.00' 84.00' 82.00'
6 37S 30E
Persimmon 69.30' 68.25' 65.00' 63.50'
10 36S 29E
Pioneer, Lake 108.60' 108.00' 104.50' 103.00'
11 36S 28E
Placid, Lake 94.70' 94.50' 91.50' 90.00'
30 36S 30E
Pythias, Lake 101.20' 101.00' 98.00' 95.00'
2 33S 28E
Red Beach Lake 76.80' 76.50' 73.75' 72.75'
15 35S 29E
Red Water Lake 70.80' 70.50' 67.50' 66.50'
14 36S 29E
Ruth, Lake 94.20' 94.00' 91.50' 90.00'
18 35S 29E
Saddlebags, Lake 84.27' 84.00' 81.00' 79.00'
6 37S 30E
Sebring, Lake 107.60' 107.25' 104.50' 103.00'
14 34S 28E
Simmons 74.30' 72.50' 68.00' 66.50'
24 36S 29E
Sirena, Lake 87.27' 87.00' 84.00' 82.00'
1 37S 29E
Trout Lake 100.60' 101.00' 98.00' 95.00'
34 32S 28E
Tulane, Lake 120.50' 120.00' 116.00' 114.00'
27 33S 28E
Unnamed Lake (B) 92.10' 91.50' 88.50' 87.50'
20 37S 30E
Unnamed Lake (F) 78.50' 78.00' 74.00' 72.00'
24 36S 29E
Verona, Lake 123.00' 119.00' 115.25' 113.00'
23 33S 28E
Viola, Lake 112.20' 109.50' 105.75' 104.00'
14 33S 28E
Wolf Lake 93.80' 92.50' 90.00' 88.00'
24 35S 28E
(j) In Hillsborough County Within The
Alafia River Basin
LAKES


Section II Proposed Rules 5063


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


Carlton, Lake
Edward Medard Reservoir
Grady Lake
Hickory Hammock Lake
Unnamed Lake #2
Wimauma, Lake
(k) In Hillsborough County Within The
Hillsborough River Basin
LAKES
Bellows Lake
(East Lake)
Burrell Lake
Commiston Lake
Eckles Lake
Egypt Lake
Gorto Lake
Hanna Lake
Hart Lake
Hog Island Lake
Hooker Lake
Kathy, Lake
Keene Lake
Kell Lake
Long Lake
Long Pond
Mud Lake
(Lake Walder)
Stemper, Lake
Thonotosassa, Lake
Unnamed Lake
Unnamed Lake
Valrico Lake
Weeks, Lake
(1) In Hillsborough County Within The
Northwest Hillsborough Basin
Sec Twsp Rng
LAKES
Avis lake
15 28S 18E
Bay Lake
Bird Lake
Boat Lake
Brant Lake
Brooker Lake
Carroll Lake
Chapman Lake
Charles, Lake
Cooper, Lake
Crenshaw, Lake
Crystal Lake
Deer Lake
Elaine, Lake
15 28S 18E


5064 Section II Proposed Rules


93.60'
67.10'
40.70'
32.80'
56.00'
87.20'


24.50'

50.50'
64.20'
33.40'
38.50'
39.00'
63.50'
67.20'
67.00'
45.50'
45.50'
63.90'
67.30'
52.00'
48.50'
115.80'

62.60'
39.10'
63.40'
62.00'
48.50'
43.80'


93.50'
62.75'
39.00'
32.25'
56.00'
86.75'


23.75'

50.00'
63.00'
32.50'
37.50'
38.50'
62.50'
66.00'
66.00'
45.00'
43.50'
63.00'
66.00'
50.25'
46.50'
115.00'

62.00'
37.00'
63.00'
61.00'
45.00'
43.25'


90.50'
57.50'
36.00'
30.50'
No Recommendation
83.00'




21.50'

47.50'
60.50'
30.00'
35.00'
36.00'
59.50'
64.00'
64.00'
43.00'
42.50'
60.50'
63.50'
48.00'
44.00'
112.50'

59.50'
34.50'
60.50'
58.50'
42.50'
41.00'


SWEETWATER CREEK WATERSHED
37.00' 34.50'


38.50'

47.00'
53.00'
38.00'
60.50'
66.00'
38.50'
52.30'
56.10'
64.00'
57.50'
62.10'
70.00'
38.50'


46.75'
50.50'
35.50'
58.75'
64.25'
37.00'
52.25'
54.75'
61.75'
56.25'
62.00'
67.25'
37.00'


44.00'
48.50'
33.75'
56.50'
61.00'
34.50'
49.50'
52.00'
59.75'
54.50'
59.00'
64.50'
34.50'


88.00'
56.00'
34.00'
29.00'

81.00'


19.00'

45.00'
59.00'
28.00'
32.50'
34.00'
58.25'
63.00'
61.00'
42.00'
42.00'
59.00'
62.50'
46.00'
42.00'
110.50'

58.00'
33.00'
59.00'
57.00'
41.00'
39.50'


32.50'

42.50'
46.50'
31.25'
54.50'
59.00'
32.50'
48.00'
50.00'
57.00'
51.00'
57.00'
62.50'
32.50'


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


Ellen, Lake
Gass Lake
George, Lake
Geraci, Lake
Halls Lake
328S 18E
Hobbs, Lake
Lipsey, Lake
Magdalene, Lake
Merrywater, Lake
Platt Lake
Reinheimer, Lake
Saddleback Lake
Strawberry Lake
Thomas, Lake
Twin Lake
White Trout Lake

Alien, Lake
Armistead, Lake
Browns Lake
Halfmoon Lake
Harvey, Lake
Josephine, Lake
LeClare, Lake
Pretty Lake
Rock Lake
Starvation Lake
Turkey Ford Lake
Virginia Lake

Fairy Lake
Hixon Lake
Unnamed Lake #1
228S 17E
Unnamed Lake #2
228S 17E

Alice, Lake
Artillery, Lake
327S 17E
Buck Lake
Calm Lake
Church Lake
Crescent Lake
Echo Lake
Elizabeth Lake
Fern, Lake
Frances, Lake
Garden Lake
Horse Lake
Island Ford Lake
Jackson. Lake


41.80'
51.50'
51.00'
65.00'
50.70'


41.50'
49.50'
48.00'
63.50'
50.00'


68.20' 66.75'
42.50' 41.50'
50.70' 50.00'
58.00' 56.50'
51.80' 50.50'
61.50' 59.50'
56.50' 55.50'
62.80' 62.00'
64.00' 63.50'
34.00' 32.00'
38.50' 36.50'
ROCKY CREEK WATERSHED
62.60' 62.50'
46.50' 44.00'
63.70' 63.50'
47.00' 45.00'
62.90' 62.50'
47.50' 46.00'
53.50' 52.00'
46.70' 45.50'
48.00' 46.00'
55.00' 53.00'
55.00' 54.00'
63.00' 62.50'
DOUBLEBRANCH CREEK WATERSHED
36.00' 34.75'
37.00' 36.50'
38.90' 37.50'


38.90'


37.50'


BROKER CREEK WATERSHED
42.40' 42.25'
44.50' 44.00'


35.50'
52.20'
36.40'
44.20'
36.40'
54.00'
48.00'
42.50'
35.00'
48.40'
42.30'
36.00'


35.00'
50.50'
36.25'
42.50'
36.25'
53.00'
46.00'
40.50'
32.00'
46.50'
41.50'
33.50'


Section II Proposed Rules 5065


39.00'
46.25'
45.00'
61.50'
47.50'

63.25'
39.00'
47.50'
54.50'
45.75'
57.00'
53.00'
59.75'
61.25'
30.00'
34.00'

59.75'
40.50'
60.75'
42.00'
60.25'
42.75'
49.50'
42.75'
42.75'
50.00'
51.50'
60.25'

32.00'
33.25'
35.00'

35.00'


40.25'
40.50'

32.00'
47.50'
34.00'
40.00'
34.00'
51.00'
43.00'
38.00'
29.00'
44.00'
39.00'
31.00'


37.00'
44.50'
42.00'
59.50'
46.00'

61.50'
37.00'
46.00'
52.00'
46.00'
56.00'
52.00'
57.00'
59.25'
27.75'
32.50'

57.50'
39.00'
59.00'
39.00'
58.00'
40.00'
47.00'
40.00'
40.00'
48.00'
50.00'
58.00'

29.50'
31.00'
34.50'

34.50'


37.50'
39.00'

29.50'
45.50'
31.50'
38.50'
31.50'
49.00'
41.50'
36.00'
26.50'
42.00'
37.00'
29.00'


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997









Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


James Lake
23 27S 17E
Juanita, Lake
Keystone Lake
Little Lake
23 27S 17E
Mound Lake
Rainbow Lake
Raleigh, Lake
Rogers, Lake
Sunset Lake
Taylor, Lake
Velburton Lake


Dan, Lake
Hiawatha, Lake
Osceola, Lake
(m) In Lake County Within The Green
Swamp Basin
(n) In Levy County Within The
Withlacoochee River Basin
Marion, Lake
02-14-17
(o) In Manatee County Within The
Manasota Basin
(p) In Marion County Within The
Withlacoochee River Basin
Bonable, Lake
31-15-18
Little Bonable, Lake
30-15-18
Tiger, Lake
32-15-18
(q) In Pasco County Within The Costal
Rivers Basin
Crews Lake
16 24S 18E
Garden Lake
16 25S 16E
Moon Lake
28 25S 17E
Pasco Lake
22 24S 18E
Pierce Lake
925S 18E
Richey Lake
326S 16E
Unnamed Lake No. 22
27 24S 18E
Worrell. Lake
(Bass Lake)
26 25S 16E


5066 Section II Proposed Rules


47.70'

43.80'
43.20'
47.70'

51.60'
40.80'
43.30'

35.00'
39.70'
41.50'

35.00'
52.50'
47.40'


46.50'

42.25'
42.00'
46.50'


43.50'

40.00'
39.75'
43.50'


51.00' 48.00'
40.50' 37.50'
42.50' 38.00'
NO LEVELS RECOMMENDED
34.75' 32.50'
39.25' 36.75'
40.00' 37.25'
ANCLOTE RIVER WATERSHED
32.00' 28.00'
50.50' 48.00'
46.50 44.50'


56.60'


53.00'


65.10

59.80'

65.10'


64.00'

58.00'

64.00'


57.00'

22.10'

41.00'

67.50'

73.60'

14.10'

62.60'

22.10'


55.00'

19.00'

40.50'

67.00'

73.00'

13.00'

62.50'

19.00'


50.50'






61.50'

55.50'

61.50'



52.00'

16.25'

37.50'

64.00'

70.00'

10.00'

59.50'

16.25'


48.50'


59.50'

53.50'

59.50'


50.00'

15.75'

35.50'

62.00'

68.00'

8.00'

57.50'

15.75'


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


42.00'

37.50'
39.00'
42.00'

46.00'
35.00'
35.00'

31.00'
34.75'
35.00'

25.00'
45.00'
42.50'












(r) In Pasco County Within The Green
Swamp Basin
(s) In Pasco County Within The
Hillsborough River Basin
Bell Lake 72.53' 72.50' 70.00' 69.00'
13 26S 18E
Bird Lake 67.70' 67.50' 65.00' 63.00'
Catfish Lake 68.72' 68.00' 65.50' 63.50'
30 25 19
Cow (East) Lake 78.63' 78.50' 76.00' 75.00'
19 26S 19E
Floyd, Lake 68.41' 68.50' 66.00' 64.00'
36 26 19
Gooseneck, Lake 75.10' 73.50' 71.00' 69.00'
29 26 19
Lake Hancock 107.48' 106.50' 104.00' 102.00'
5 24S 20E
Hog (Joyce) Lake 76.66' 76.50 73.50' 72.50'
19 26S 19E
Lake Iola 147.55' 147.50' 145.00' 142.50'
15 24S 20E
Lake Jessamine 144.18' 142.00' 138.00' 136.00'
11 24S 20E
JoAnn, Lake 68.72' 68.00' 65.50' 63.50'
302619
King Lake 73.58' 73.50' 71.50' 69.50'
7 26S 19E
King Lake (East) 105.49' 105.25' 102.50' 100.00'
22 25S 20E
Middle Lake 107.48' 107.00' 105.00' 103.00'
4 24S 20E
Moody Lake 110.48' 110.00' 107.50' 105.50'
10 24S 20E
Myrtle, Lake 68.72' 68.00' 65.50' 63.50'
302619
Padgett, Lake 71.34' 71.25' 69.00' 67.50'
24 26S 18E
Saxon Lake 71.34' 71.25' 69.00' 67.50'
30 26S 19E
Tampa (Turtle) 66.00' 65.50' 63.00' 61.00'
32 26 19
Toni, Lake 68.72' 68.00' 65.50' 63.50'
302619
Twin, Lake 68.35' 67.50' 65.00' 63.00'
2826 19
Unnamed #26 68.72' 68.00' 65.50' 63.50'
25 26 18
(t) In Pasco County Within The
Pinellas-Anclote River Basin
Bass Lake (Holiday) 48.80' 48.75' 45.75' 45.00'
34 26E 17S


Section II Proposed Rules 5067


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997












Big Lake Vienna 70.70' 70.25' 67.00' 65.00'
23 26 18
Camp 64.30' 64.00' 61.75' 59.00'
342618
Fishing Lake 48.80' 48.75' 45.75' 45.00'
34 26E 17S
Geneva Lake (Mud) 51.20' 50.00' 48.00' 46.00'
26 26E 17S
Linda 67.30' 66.75' 64.00' 62.00'
262618
Little Moss (Como) 67.00' 66.00' 63.00' 62.00'
35 26 18
Minniola, Lake 51.20' 50.00' 48.00' 46.00'
34 26E 17S
Moss 65.00' 64.00' 61.50' 59.00'
35 26 18
Parker Lake (Ann) 48.80' 48.75' 45.75' 45.00'
35 26E 17S
Seminole, Lake 49.20' 48.75' 46.00' 45.00'
35 26E 17S
Thomas 75.60' 75.00' 72.50' 71.50'
112618
Wistaria 74.90' 74.00' 71.00' 69.00'
22618
(u) In Pasco County Within The
Withlacoochee River Basin
Buddy, Lake 97.02' 94.50' 91.50' 90.00'
S17 T25S R21E
Pasadena, Lake 97.02' 94.50' 91.50' 90.00'
16 25S 21E
Clear Lake 127.90' 127.50' 125.25' 123.75'
1 25S 20E
(v) In Pinellas County Within The
Pinellas-Anclote River Basin
Lake Tarpon 4.20' 3.80' 2.20' 1.00'
7 27S 16E
8 27S 16E
16 27S 16E
17 27S 16E
18 27S 16E
19 27S 16E
20 27S 16E
28 27S 16E
29 27S 16E
30 27S 16E
32 27S 16E
33 27S 16E
4 28S 16E
(w) In Polk County Within The Alafia
River Basin
Scott, Lake 168.60' 168.00' 165.00' 164.25'


5068 Section II Proposed Rules


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997












(x) In Polk County Within The Green
Swamp Basin
Agnes, Lake 135.20' 135.75' 134.75' 130.75'
Alfred 132.30' 130.75' 128.25' 126.25'
S30 T27S R26
Arietta, Lake 144.00' 144.00' 141.00' 138.00'
Camp, Lake 133.40' 134.50' 132.00' 130.00'
Clearwater Lake 146.20' 143.50' 141.00' 139.00'
Cummings 131.50' 131.00' 127.50' 125.50'
S31 T27 R26
Eva 132.30' 131.50' 129.00' 127.00'
S29 T27 R26
Grassy Lake 133.20' 132.00' 129.50' 128.00'
(Big Glades)
Griffin 132.30' 131.50' 129.00' 127.00'
S30 T27 R26
Gum, Lake 132.60' 131.00' 128.50' 126.00'
Haines, Lake 129.70' 128.75' 126.50' 124.50'
Helene, Lake 144.80' 144.00' 141.00' 139.00'
Juliana, Lake 134.70' 132.50' 130.00' 127.50'
Little Lake Agnes 135.20' 136.00' 133.00' 131.00'
Little Van Lake 141.40' 139.00' 136.50' 135.50'
Mattie, Lake 134.70' 132.50' 130.00' 127.50'
Mud, Lake 141.80' 141.50' 137.75' 136.00'
Myrtle, Lake 141.70' 141.00' 138.50' 136.50'
Swoope, Lake 133.00' 132.50' 130.00' 128.00'
Tennessee, Lake 134.70' 134.00' 130.00' 128.00'
Van, Lake 133.00' 132.75' 130.00' 128.00'
Whistle, Lake 140.90' 137.50' 135.00' 133.75'
(y) In Polk County Within The
Hillsborough River Basin
Bonnet, Lake 146.40' 148.00' 145.00' 142.50'
Hunter, Lake 162.30' 162.75' 160.25' 159.00'
(z) In Polk County Within The Peace
River Basin
Ada 123.80' 123.00' 120.00' 118.00
S33-T28-R27
Altamaha 122.60' 122.50' 120.00' 118.00'
S 11-T30-R27
Amoret Lake 115.50' 115.25' 113.00' 111.00'
24 30 27
Annie, Lake 122.10' 119.00' 116.00' 114.00'
S3 T29S R27E
Ariana, Lake 137.10' 137.00' 134.50' 132.50'
3 28 25E
Aurora, Lake 103.30' 100.00' 97.00' 95.00'
133028
Banana, Lake 106.75' 106.50' 103.50' 102.00'
10 29 24E
Belle, Lake 123.60' 120.00' 117.00' 115.00'
11 3027


Section II Proposed Rules 5069


--


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997











Bess, Lake 125.50' 125.25' 123.00' 121.00'
18 29S 27E
Big Gum Lake 95.50' 95.00' 92.00' 89.00'
26 29 R28
Blue 149.80' 149.00' 146.50' 144.50'
S13 T28 R25
Blue, Lake 118.00' 117.00' 114.00'
24 30S 27E
Bonnie 113.30' 113.00' 110.00' 108.00'
S31-T29-R28
Bonny, Lake 130.90' 130.50' 128.00' 126.00'
20 28S 24E
Buckeye 130.10' 129.00' 126.00' 124.50'
S22 T28S R26E
Buffum, Lake 132.75' 132.25' 129.25'
12 31S 26E
Cannon, Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
19 28S 26E
Clinch, Lake 108.00' 106.75' 104.00' 102.50'
31 31S 28E
Conine, Lake 129.70' 128.75' 126.50' 124.50'
9 28S 26E
Cooper (Worth) 124.20' 123.50' 121.00' 119.00'
S02-T30-R27
Crooked, Lake 122.60' 122.00' 118.50'
1 31S 27E
Crystal 121.40' 121.25' 118.00' 115.00'
S02-T30-R27
Crystal 122.90' 122.00' 119.00' 117.00'
S21-T28-R27
Crystal, Lake 130.00' 129.50' 127.00' 125.00'
23 29S 26E
Cypress 100.20' 98.50' 95.00' 93.00'
36 29 28E
Lake Daisy 130.90' 130.00' 127.00' 126.00'
S6 T29 R27
Lake Deer 141.30' 140.75' 138.50' 136.50'
25 28 25E
Dell 125.70' 123.75' 121.50' 119.50'
S28-T28-R27
Lake Dexter 132.20' 132.00' 129.00' 127.50'
S2 T29 R26
Dinner, Lake 120.90' 118.50' 116.00' 114.00'
15 29S 27E
Lake Eagle 131.00' 130.75' 128.50' 126.50'
1 29 25E
Easy, Lake 115.50' 115.25' 113.00' 111.00'
193028
Echo 132.30' 131.00' 128.00' 126.00'
S05 T28 R26


5070 Section II Proposed Rules


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997












Effie, Lake 119.60' 118.00' 115.00' 113.00'
33027
Elbert 137.50' 135.50' 133.00' 131.50'
S22 T28 R26
Eloise, Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
3 29S 26E
Fannie, Lake 127.00' 125.75' 123.50' 120.00'
11 28S 26E
Lake Florence 128.80' 128.75' 127.00' 125.00'
S35 T28 R26
Lake Fox 135.20' 135.00' 132.00' 131.00'
S6 T29 R27
Garfield, Lake 105.70' 104.75' 101.00' 100.00'
5 30 26E
Gator, Lake 133.60' 133.00' 130.75' 128.50'
26 30S 26E
George 130.70' 130.00' 127.50' 125.50'
S06 T28 R26
Gibson, Lake 144.20' 143.50' 141.50' 141.50'
25 27S 23E
Gordon 121.30' 119.00' 116.00' 114.00'
S 16-T28-R27
Lake Grassy 134.80' 129.00' 126.50' 125.50'
2 29 25E
Lake Gross 138.50' 136.00' 133.50' 132.00'
(Grassy)
S 14 T29 R26
Hamilton, Lake 122.50' 121.50' 119.00' 117.25'
18 28S 27E
Hancock, Lake 102.40' 99.00' 96.00' 94.00'
8 29S 25E
Hart, Lake 124.70' 124.50' 122.00' 120.00'
24 29S 26E
Hartridge, Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
8 28S 26E
Henry, Lake 160.10' 159.00' 156.00' 154.00'
16 31S 26E
Henry, Lake 127.00' 126.50' 124.50' 122.50'
36 27S 26E
Hickory, Lake 98.50' 98.50' 96.00' 94.00'
17 32S 28E
Howard, Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
30 28S 26E
Ida, Lake 80.00' 79.00' 76.50' 75.00'
28 31S 28E
Ida 136.70' 135.25' 132.00' 130.50'
S17 T28 R26
Idyl 134.90' 134.00' 131.50' 130.00'
S16 T28 R26
Idylwild, Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
18 28S 26E


Section II Proposed Rules 5071


--


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997











Jessie, Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
12 28S 25E
Josephine, Lake 121.30' 120.00' 116.50' 114.50'
133027
Josephine 124.10' 121.50' 118.00' 116.50'
S27-T28-R27
Lee 123.50' 123.50' 121.50' 120.00'
S16-T28-R27
Lena, Lake 137.10' 137.00' 134.50' 132.50'
9 28S 25E
Leonore, Lake 87.40' 87.00' 84.50' 83.00'
10 31S 28E
Link, Lake 128.70 128.00' 125.00' 123.00'
27 28S 26E
Little Aurora 103.30' 100.50' 98.00' 96.00'
Lake (Iris)
133028
Little Gum Lake 96.80' 96.50' 94.00' 92.00'
35 29S 28E
Little Lake Hamilton 122.50' 121.50' 119.00' 117.25'
5 28S 27E
LuLu Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
4 29S 26E
Lee, Lake 122.10' 119.00' 116.00' 114.00'
10 29S 27E
Lake McLeod 133.10' 132.00' 129.50' 128.00'
7 29 26E
Mabel, Lake 114.50' 110.75' 107.00' 105.00'
11 29S 27E
Mariam, Lake 124.75' 122.75' 121.00'
27 28S 26E
Marie 121.00' 121.00' 118.00' 116.00'
S27-T28-R27
Martha 142.50' 142.00' 139.00' 137.00'
S21 T28 R26
Maude 141.70' 140.50' 137.50' 136.00'
S21 T28 R26
May, Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
29 28S 26E
Medora 140.40' 138.00' 134.50' 133.00'
S36 T27 R25
Menzie 127.00' 122.00' 120.00' 118.00'
S28-T28-R27
Middle Lake Hamilton 122.50' 121.50' 119.00' 117.25'
7 28S 27E
Lake Millsite 125.30' 123.50' 121.00' 119.00'
11 29 25E
Mirror, Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
20 28S 27E
Moody, Lake 92.80' 93.50' 91.00' 89.00'
17 31S R28E


5072 Section II Proposed Rules


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997












Myrtle, Lake 118.70' 118.50' 116.50' 114.50'
19 29S 27E
Lake Ned 129.60' 128.50' 126.00' 124.00'
SI T29 R26
North Lake Wales 116.80' 115.00' 112.00' 110.00'
S01-T30-R27
Otis, Lake 128.70' 128.00' 125.00' 123.00'
28 28S 25E
Pansy 130.00' 129.00' 126.50' 124.50'
S08 T28 R26
Parker, Lake 122.50' 122.00' 119.50' 117.50'
32 29S 27E
Parker, Lake 131.60' 131.00' 128.75' 127.50'
8 28 24E
Parks, Lake 104.50' 102.50' 100.00' 98.00'
36 29S 28E
Polecat, Lake 142.40' 142.00' 139.50' 137.50'
27 30S 26E
Reedy, Lake 80.00' 79.75' 77.25' 75.25'
35 31S 28E
Reeves, Lake 125.10' 124.50' 122.00' 120.00'
13 29S 26E
Lake River 141.60' 139.50' 136.00' 134.00'
S1 T29 R26
Rochelle, Lake 129.70' 128.75' 126.50' 124.50'
S 4 28S 26E
Round, Lake 129.40' 129.25' 126.50' 124.50'
13 29S 26E
Roy, Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
34 28S 26E
Ruby, Lake 125.50' 125.25' 123.00' 121.00'
12 29S 26E
Ruth 123.50' 121.50' 117.50' 115.50'
S28-T28-R27
Saddlebag, Lake 106.80' 105.00' 102.00' 100.00'
6 30S 29E
Saint Anne Lake 97.50' 96.00' 93.00' 91.00'
14 30 28
Sanitary (Mariana) 138.60' 137.50' 135.00' 133.00'
S01 T28 R25
Sara 122.50' 121.50' 119.00' 117.25'
S17-T28-R27
Scott, Lake 168.60' 168.00' 165.00' 164.25'
18 29S 24E
Lake Sears 143.20' 141.00' 138.00' 136.00'
36 28 25E
Serena 125.30' 118.00' 115.00' 113.00'
S12-T30-R27
Shipp, Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
32 28S 26E


Section I Proposed Rules 5073


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997









Florida AdminL~trative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


Silver, Lake 105.00' 103.00' 100.50' 98.50'
5 32S 28E
Silver 147.10' 146.50' 144.00' 142.00'
S20 T28 R26
Smart, Lake 129.70' 128.75' 126.50' 124.50'
9 28S 26E
Lake Spirit 134.10' 131.50' 129.00' 127.00'
35 28 25E
Spring, Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
20 28S 27E
Starr, Lake 115.50' 113.00' 110.00' 108.00'
14 29 27
Street Lake 108.70' 105.50' 102.50' 101.00'
24 32S 27E
Summit, Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
34 28S 26E
Sunset Lake 101.10' 98.00' 95.50' 93.50'
103028
Surveyors, Lake 133.60' 133.00' 130.75' 128.50'
26 30S 26E
Thomas, Lake 104.20' 99.50' 97.00' 95.00
1 30E 28E
Lake Thomas 135.60' 132.00' 128.00' 126.00'
35 28 25E
Tractor Lake 125.00' 123.25' 121.00' 119.00'
14 30 27
Trask 114.90' 113.00' 108.00' 106.00'
S22-T28-R27
Trout, Lake 100.60' 101.00' 98.00' 95.00'
34 32S 28E
Twin Lakes 124.10' 123.75' 120.00' 118.00'
S11 T30 R27
Venus, Lake 126.10' 125.00' 122.00' 120.00'
9 29S 27E
Wales 114.10' 112.50' 110.00' 108.00'
S01 T30 R27
Walker Lake 143.00' 141.00' 137.00' 135.00'
21 30S 26E
Warren 124.60' 123.50' 121.00' 119.00'
S11-T30-R27
Weader (Weaver) 122.00' 121.75' 119.00' 117.00'
S03-T30-R27
Winterset, Lake 132.60' 132.00' 129.50' 127.00'
11 29S 26E
(aa) In Sarasota County Within The
Manasota Basin
(bb) In Sumter County Within The
Green Swamp Basin
(cc) In Sumter County Within The
Withlacoochee River Basin
Big Gant, Lake 76.50' 76.25' 74.50' 72.50'
14 22S 22E


5074 Section II Proposed Rules


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997













Black, Lake 56.70' 55.00' 53.00' 51.00'
23 18S 23E
Cherry, Lake 56.70' 55.00' 53.00' 51.00'
24 18S 23E
Deaton, Lake 65.50' 65.00' 62.00' 60.00'
14 19S 23E
Miona, Lake 56.70' 55.00' 53.00' 51.00'
27 18S 23E
Okahumpka, Lake 59.90' 58.75' 56.25' 54.00'
21 19S 23E
Panasoffkee, Lake 42.80' 42.50' 39.50' 38.50'



















































i*


Section II Proposed Rules 5075


--


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


Specific Authority 373.044, 373.113, 373.171 FS. Law Implemented 373.016,
373.042, 373.103 FS. History-New 6-7-78, Amended 1-22-79, 4-27-80.
10-21-80, 12-22-80, 3-23-81, 4-14-81, 6-4-81. 10-15-81, 11-23-81, 1-5-82,
3-11-82, 5-10-82, 7-4-82, 9-2-82. 11-8-82, 1-10-83, 4-3-83, 7-5-83, 9-5-83,
10-16-83, 12-12-83, 5-8-84, 7-8-84, 12-16-84. 2-7-85, 5-13-85, 6-26-85,
11-3-85, 3-5-86, 6-16-86, Formerly 161-8.678. Amended 9-7-86, 2-12-87,
9-2-87, 2-18-88, 6-27-88, 2-22-89, 3-23-89, 9-26-89, 7-26-90, 10-30-90,
3-3-91, 9-30-91,10-7-91, 7-26-92, 3-1-93, 5-11-94, 6-6-96, 2-23-97.

40D-8.626 Minimum Aquifer Levels in Hillsborough
County North of State Road 60, and Pasco and Pinellas
Counties.
(1) The Minimum Aquifer Level shall be a Long-term
average water level and shall be used as a Long-term average
when evaluating water use permit applications.
(2) The aquifer sites for which Minimum Aquifer Levels
have been established, as set forth in Rule 40D-8.626(4).
F.A.C., below, were selected using the following guidelines:
(a) the site is located in an area that is or may be
experiencing adverse withdrawal impacts:
(b) the site has a Floridan monitor well:
(c) sites where a surficial well is co-located with the
Floridan well (well nests) are preferred:
(d) wells or well nests having a long period of record are
preferred and ideally include data before water withdrawals
commenced: and


(e) the well or well nest should be within close proximity
of lakes or wetlands.
(3) Aquifer levels are deemed to be below the Minimum
Aquifer Level when the six-year-average level is below the
Minimum Aquifer Level. It insufficient data exists to
determine if the aquifer level is below the Minimum Aquifer
Level set forth in Rule 40D-8.626(4). F.A.C.. the aquifer level
can be determined to be below the Minimum Aquifer Level
based on an evaluation of regional aquifer level data. including
Dotentiometric surface mans. For those aquifer sites whose
Minimum Aquifer Level elevation is followed by an asterisk
(*). it has been deemed that upon the effective date of the rule
adopting the Minimum Level for those aquifer sites the aquifer
level is below the Minimum Aquifer Level as described in
Rule 40D-8.626(4). F.A.C.. below.
(4) Minimum Aquifer Levels shall be established as
follows. These Minimum Aquifer Levels shall be reevaluated
by the Governing Board no later than October 1. 1999. These
levels shall expire on October 1. 1999. unless these levels or
other levels annroved by the Governing Board are published
for rule adoption prior to October 1. 1999.


5076 Section II Proposed Rules


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


Florida Administrative Weekly










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


Well Name
(a) RMP8d
(b)-T-2
(c) Hutchinson
(d) Cosme 3
(e) Eagles CC
(f) Morris Bridge 1
(g) James 11
(h) Morris Bridge 13
(i) Berger
(i) Hillsborough 13
k) T-l1
(1) Debuel
(m) DGW2
(n) Calm 33A
(o)T-3 '
(D) EW 11
(a) Lutz Park
(r) Lutz Lake Fern
(s) EW N4
(t) EW 2N
(u) MW2-1000
(v) SP42
(w) Matts
(x) Starkey Ranch WRAP
) (Uv) SR54
(z) DMW500
(aa) Seven Springs Deep
(bb) Ledantec
(cc) Starkey Regional
(dd) Starkev 1A East
(ee) MWI
(ff) Bexley
(gg) Starkev 707
(hh) Pasco 13
(ii) NPMW- 11
(ii) TMR4D
(kk) TMR 1D
(11) TMR3D
(mm) NPMW-7
(nn) TMR-2
(oo) SR52 East
(pO) FK6D
(ag) SR52 West
(rr) SRW
(ss) CB 1SED
(tt) SERW
(uu) CB3ED
(vv) WRW


Latitude
280342
280510
280552
280608
280609
280652
280653
280656
280700
280703
280708
280741
280827
280834
280849
280905
280913
280921
280945
281011
281019
281036
281102
281135
281144
281204
281223
281255
281312
281443
281447
281449
281454
281559
281631
281650
281719
281745
281825
281845
281918
281938
282010
282035
282100
282206
282221
282324


Longitude
823256
820438
823257
823529
823830
822042
823415
821751
822942
823027
820748
822709
822055
823435
820537
823905
822832
822230
823804
823905
822114
823056
822924
823607
823046
822238
823933
823103
823616
823401
823542
823017
823802
822645
823411
822444
822246
822342
823405
822240
822645
822423
823737
822839
822628
822711
822419
822853


Minimum Level (NGVD)
31.4*
94.9
32.2*
30.4*
21.5*




46.4*
84.6
55.9*
40.9*


25.0*
57.7*
45.5*
32.4
26.0*

52.9*
62.5*
42.8*
52.0*
512
21.2*
52.2*
43.3*
34.3*




6459.5
28.7*
72.2







70.7*

70.7*

121


Section II Proposed Rules 5077


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


Florida Administrative Weekly










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


Specific Authority 120.54. 373.042. 373.044. 373.113 373.171 FS Law
Imlemented 12054 373 016 373.03. 373.0395 373 04'2 373 171 FS.
History-New


The following document is incorporated by reference in Rule
40D-8.091, F.A.C.
LAKE LEVEL METHODOLOGY MANUAL
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
(1) Objectives Under Part I of Chapter 373. Florida
Statutes (F.S.). and Chapter 40D-8. Florida Administrative
Code (F.A.C.). the District is responsible for establishing
minimum levels for lakes within its jurisdiction. Pursuant to
Chapter 373.042. F.S.. minimum levels shall be calculated
using best available information, and may reflect seasonal
variations. The District shall also consider, and at its discretion
may provide for. the protection of non-consumptive uses in
establishment of Minimum Levels. The objective of this
document is to identify and describe the usual procedures and
methods used by District staff in determining and proposing
lake levels to the Governing Board.
(2) History of the Lake Levels Program Since the
mid-1970s. the District has maintained a program to adopt
management levels for lakes throughout the District. These
management levels were selected to be representative of a
healthy fluctuation range for each lake and can be used for
water management nurooses.
Prior to 1996. management levels had been set on 397 lakes.
However. in 1996. revisions to Chapter 373. F.S.. resulted in
changes to the Lake Levels Program. The most substantial
change to the program was the requirement that a Minimum
Level be established. This Minimum Level is the level of a
lake at which further withdrawals would be significantly
harmful to the water resources of the area. As a result of the
1997 rule revisions. for those lakes for which levels are
adopted after September 9. 1997. the terms management levels.
Minimum Flood Level and Low Management Level were
changed to Guidance Levels. Annual High Level and Annual
Low Level. respectively. The Extreme Low Level was deleted
from the methodology and will no longer be an adopted level.
(3) Criteria for Inclusion of Lakes in the Lake Levels
Program Historically, lakes were included in the Lake Levels
Program based on several criteria. These criteria included lakes
with District water control structures, lakes with water use
permits and lakes 20 acres or larger with multiple owners. In
response to legislative mandates in 1996. criteria were added to
the lake selection process which emphasized lakes located in
Water Resource Caution Areas, lakes in the vicinity of major
water withdrawals and lakes specifically identified by local
governments or other entities. The revisions to Chapter 373.
F.S.. also required that the District adopt a Minimum Flows
and Levels (MF/L) Priority List. The MF/L Priority List, which
identifies the lakes and the time frames for establishing levels.
is included in the District Water Management Plan.


(4) Levels Established under the Lake Levels Program -
The levels defined below will be established based on the
procedures and methods discussed in this document. All levels
shall be expressed in feet relative to National Geodetic Vertical
Datum (NGVD) of 1929.
Guidance Levels, as described in section a. below, are
established for all lakes in the Lake Level Program as follows.
Pre-modification Guidance Levels will be determined for all
lakes included in the Lake Levels Program. For lakes with
modified surface conveyance systems. Post-modification
Guidance Levels also will be determined. The levels finally
recommended to the Governing Board will depend on the tvpe
of lake system.
A Minimum Level will also be determined and recommended
to the Governing Board for lakes included in the Lake Level
Program.
(a) Guidance Levels determined by the District using the
best available information and expressed in feet relative to
National Geodetic Vertical Datum. They are used as advisory
information to aid in the control of adjustable structures, for
lake shore residents and for local governments. Guidance
Levels include: Ten Year Flood Warning Level:
Pre-modification Annual High Level: Post-modification
Annual High Level: Pre-modification Annual Low Level: and
Post-modification Annual Low Level.
1. Ten (10) Year Flood Warning Level is an advisory
level provided as a discretionary guideline for lakeshore
development. The Ten (10) Year Flood Warning Level.
incorporates the level of flooding expected on a frequency of
not greater than ten percent (10%) probability of occurrence in
any given year.
2. Pre-modification Levels refer to lake water regimes
before impacts by withdrawals and before modification of
surface water conveyance systems and water withdrawals.
a. Pre-modification Annual High Level the highest level
to which a lake is expected to fluctuate on an average annual

b. Pre-modification Annual Low Level the lowest level
to which a lake is expected to fluctuate on an average annual
basis.
3. Post-modification Levels refer to lake water regimes
resulting from alterations to the lake's surface water
conveyance systems.
a. Post-modification Annual High Level is for lakes with
water regimes resulting from alterations to the lake's surface
water conveyance systems. The Post-modification Annual
High Level is the highest level to which a lake is expected to
fluctuate on an average annual basis.
b. Post-modification Annual Low Level is for lakes with
water regimes resulting from alterations to the lake's surface
water conveyance systems. The Post-modification Annual Low
Level is the lowest level to which the lake is expected to
fluctuate on an average annual basis.


5078 Section II Proposed Rules


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


Florida Administrative Weekly










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


(b) Minimum Levels.
1. Pre-modification Minimum Level is equal to the
Pre-modification Annual Low Level. The lake level is deemed
to be below the Minimum Level when the elevation
representing the P50 for the previous six (6) years is depressed
below the Annual Low Level.
2. Post-modification Minimum Level for lakes with
hydrologic data. the Post-modification Minimum Level is the
P50 as determined from the stage data used to establish the
Post-modification Annual High and Annual Low Levels. For
lakes with less than six (6) years of hydrologic data or lakes
without hvdrologic data prior to impacts due to water
withdrawals, the Post-modification Minimum Level is the
midpoint between the adopted Post-modification Annual High
and Annual Low Guidance Levels. The lake level is deemed to
be below the Minimum Level when the elevation representing
the P50 for the previous six (6) years is below the Minimum
Level
(5) Definitions The definitions in this section apply to
the determination of all levels described in this document.
(a) P10 a percentile ranking defined as the elevation of
the water surface of a lake that is equaled or exceeded 10
percent of the time as determined from a stage duration
analysis.
(b) P50 a percentile ranking defined as the elevation of
the water surface of a lake that is equaled or exceeded 50
percent of the time as determined from a stage duration
analysis.
(c) P90 a percentile ranking defined as the elevation of
the water surface of a lake that is equaled or exceeded 90
percent of the time as determined from a stage duration
analysis.
(d) Reference Lake Water Regime (RLWR) is a regional
factor that approximates the tvyical annual range of lake level
fluctuations for lakes within a similar hvdrogeologic setting.
The RLWR corresponds to the difference between the Annual
High and Annual Low Levels. It is used to estimate the Annual
High or Annual Low Level for lakes without hydrologic data
and biological indicators of one of the levels. (See Chapter

(e) Stage Duration Curve a graphic representation of the
percent of time the water surface of a lake equals or exceeds a
particular elevation. A stage duration curve is developed by
plotting lake level elevations against the cumulative frequency
of occurrence of those elevations for uniform increments of
time e.g.. monthly readings.
1. Pre-modification Stage Duration Curve a stage
duration curve prepared using a minimum of six (6) years of
Pre-modification hydrologic data.
2. Post-modification Stage Duration Curve a stage
duration curve prepared using a minimum of six (6) years of
Post-modification hvdrologic data which begins after the
construction/installation of surface water conveyance systems.


(f) Pre-modification a period before lake water regimes
were impacted by human activities such as alteration of surface
water conveyance systems and water withdrawals.
(g) Post-modification a period after lake water regimes
were impacted by human activities, specifically alterations to
the surface water conveyance systems.
CHAPTER TWO DETERMINATION OF 10-YEAR
FLOOD WARNING LEVELS
(1) General The Ten (10) Year Flood Warning Level
shall be established using methods that correspond to the
hydrology and type of conveyance system of the lake being
evaluated. Generally. lakes are classified as open basin lakes
that discharge and closed basin lakes. Open basin lakes that
discharge are those lakes that have a surface water conveyance
system that by itself, or in series with other lakes, connects to
or is Dart of an ordered stream or creek. A closed basin lake.
has no outlet conveyance system, or has an outlet system that
overflows only during peak elevations. The methodology to be
used for the determination of the 10-vear Flood Warning Level
of these two lake tvyes is given below.
(2) Lakes that discharge 10-Year Flood Warning Levels
for lakes that discharge shall be established using numerical
single storm event models. Rainfall depths shall be taken from
Part D of the District's Environmental Resource Permitting
Information Manual. Runoff volumes shall be computed using
conventional methods such as the Soil Conservation Service
(SCS) curve number method. or with standard infiltration
formulas (e.g. Hortons Equation. Green-Amnt Equation).
Runoff distributions shall be computed using conventional
methods including the SCS method or other unit hvdrogranh
methods. or the kinematic wave overland flow method.
Modeling programs that account for tailwater and compute
backflow are preferred for the hydraulic routing. The initial
water level elevation used in the model of a lake with no
significant alterations to its natural surface conveyance and/or
outlet configuration shall be the Pre-modification Annual High
Level as defined in Chapter 3. The initial water level elevation
of a lake with significant alterations to its natural surface
conveyance and/or outlet configuration shall be the
Post-modification Annual High Level as defined in Chapter 4.
Exceptions shall be based on peer review by the appropriate
District staff and their consensus and thoroughly documented
in a report or memorandum to the project file.
(3) Closed Basin Lakes 10-Year Flood Warning Levels
for closed basin lakes and lakes that overflow only during peak
elevations shall be derived using a frequency analysis of lake
stage readings, or lake stages predicted by a physically based
numerical "continuous simulation model." or an empirical
simulation model derived either by linear or non-linear
regression methods. The choice to use a linear or non-linear
regression technique shall be based on engineering iudgement.
The simulation periods for either numerical or empirical
models shall be based on not less than thirty (30) years of


Section II Proposed Rules 5079


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997









Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September19, 1997


contiguous rainfall record. A composite of more than one
rainfall station in the region in which the subject lake is located
is acceptable. Calibration of the simulation model shall be
based on as many indicators as possible including, but not
limited to. stage records and biological and physical indicators
referenced in other parts of this document. If stage records do
not exist or the record does not contain peak elevation
readings, then particular attention should be given to obtaining
eve-witness accounts of peak stages. Model simulations to
determine the 10-Year Flood Warning Level shall exclude
effects of water withdrawals.
CHAPTER THREE DETERMINATION OF
PRE-MODIFICATION LEVELS
(1) General Pre-modification Levels refer to lake water
regimes prior to impacts by human activities including
modification of surface water conveyance systems and water
withdrawals.
(a) Determination of Levels Pre-modification levels may
be determined from one or a combination of the following
procedures more fully described in Sections (2) and (3) below:
analysis of stage duration data: and analysis of biological and
physical water level indicators. Other information used to
determine Pre-modification Levels may include, but not be
limited to. survey data. maps and hydrologic data from such
sources as the United States Geological Survey. the Army
Corns of Engineers and General Land Office Notes. For lakes
without stage duration data and biological indicators, the
Pre-modification Annual Low Level may be determined using
the Reference Lake Water Regime described in Chapter 5.
(b) Reconciliation If Pre-modification Levels are
determined using more than one procedure, the
Pre-modification Levels finally recommended will be a
reconciliation of the procedures used. Reconciliation involves
comparing the levels determined by the various methods. If the
Pre-modification Levels determined by each of the methods
are similar, then the levels determined from analysis of stage
duration data take precedence unless the stage duration data are
determined to be impacted by water withdrawals. If the levels
determined by each of the methods are not similar, then
possible reasons for the difference should be investigated.
Physical indicators should only be used to determine the
Pre-modification levels if biological indicators and hydrologic
data are not available for the lake.
Biological and physical indicators have been used to determine
water levels. (Cooke. 1939: Davis. 1973: Florida Board of
Conservation. 1969: Holcomb & Wegener. 1971: Kenner.
1961). This approach has been used primarily to determine
high-water levels on lakes (Bishop. 1967: Knochenmus. 1967).
Dooris and Courser (1976) related both high and low water
levels to various biological. hydrological and cultural features.
(2) Analysis of Stage Duration Data This method applies
only to lakes which have a minimum six (6) years of
Pre-modification stage data.


(a) Pre-modification Annual High Level The Flood
Annual High Level is eaual to the elevation corresponding to
the P10 value on a Pre-modification Stage Duration Curve.
(b) Pre-modification Annual Low Level The
Pre-modification Annual Low Level is equal to the elevation
corresponding to the P90 value on a Pre-modification Stage
Duration Curve.
(3) Analysis of Biological and Physical Indicators This
method is applied to lakes for which one or more biological
and/or physical indicators are present. The methodology is
based on known relationships between the location of wetland
and upland plant species and Pre-modification water levels.
(a) Methods for Site Selection and Measuring Indicator
Elevations Elevations of the indicators described in
Subsection (3)(b) below shall be measured using accepted
surveying practices.
Locations for measuring biological indicators shall be chosen
based on the presence of the indicator plant species. Preferred
locations will have naturally vegetated wetlands around the
lake. fringed by palmettos or other upland plant species. As
many transects as practical should be measured in each of these
areas. If multiple specimens of each indicator species occur on
the lake. then elevations should be determined for as many
specimens as practical.
In the absence of naturally vegetated wetlands and uplands.
elevations shall be measured for any available biological
indicators included in this document. Activities which may
have impacted elevations, such as. filling, soil subsidence, land
clearing and similar activities shall be considered and
accounted for during evaluation and analysis of the data. If no
biological or physical indicators are present, proceed to
Chapters Four and Five.
(b) Pre-modification Annual High Level Biological
indicators of the Pre-modification Annual High Level may
include, but not be limited to. the following: palmetto (Serenoa
reoens): cypress (Taxodium so.): longleaf nine (Pinus
palustrus): live oak (Ouercus virginiana): and mature wax
mvrtle (Mvrica cerifera).
1. The method for measuring elevations of the indicator
plants is described below. Data recorded includes the elevation
of the indicator species and for trees, the diameter at breast
height (DBH).
a. The elevation of the soil at the base of the lowest
lakeward extent of the palmetto (Serenoa repens) fringe is
measured at the lowest rooted extent of the plant.
b. The elevation of the soil at the base of the highest
landward extent of the cypress (Taxodium sp.) fringe is
measured on the landward side of the tree at the base of the
trunk.


5080 Section II Proposed Rules


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


Florida Administrative Weekly










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


c. The elevation of the soil at the base of the lowest
lakeward extent of longleaf Dine (Pinus valustrus) fringe is
measured on the lakeward side of the tree at the base of the
trunk. Note: Only longleaf nine shall be used to establish the
Annual High Level.
d. The elevation of the soil at the base of the lowest
lakeward extent of the live oak (Ouercus virriniana) fringe is
measured on the lakeward side of the tree at the base of the
trunk for trees with a minimum diameter at breast height
(DBH) of 24".
e. The elevation of the soil at the base of the lowest
lakeward extent of the mature wax myrtle (Mvrica cerifera)
fringe is measured on the lakeward side of the tree at the base
of the trunk.
If more than one specimen of each indicator species is
measured, then the average elevation and standard deviation
are calculated for the indicator species. The average elevations
of the indicator species are used in the analysis of the
Pre-modification Levels. If multiple biological indicators occur
on the lake. then the Pre-modification Annual High Level may
be determined from the biological indicators using best
scientific iudgement. If more than one indicator plant species is
present and measured, then typically the priority order for use
of biological indicators is palmetto, cypress. nine and/or live
oak and mature wax myrtle.
2. In the absence of. or in support of. biological indicators.
physical indicators may be used to determine the
Pre-modification Annual High Level. Physical indicators may
include, but not be limited to. one or a combination, of the
following:
a. The elevation of the toe of the highest landward scarp
line. (Bishop. 1967 and Knochenmus. 1967).
b. Analysis of historic aerial photography, topographic
maps. surveys, site plans or other information that may identify
locations or elevations of biological indicators of the
Pre-modification Annual Level.
c. The elevation of stratified beach deposits (Bishop. 1967
and Knochenmus. 1967).
If none of the above biological or physical indicators exist
along the lake shore and cultivated groves of perennial woody
species (i.e. citrus trees. pine plantations) occur along the
shoreline, then the lowest lakeward elevation of the cultivated
species may be used to determine the Pre-modification Annual
High Level. The lowest lakeward elevation of the crop shall be
measured at the lowest rooted extent of the crop. This method
is not applicable if the cultivated species is water dependent or
water tolerant crop.
(3) Pre-modification Annual Low Level Biological
indicators of the Pre-modification Annual Low Level may
include, but not be limited to. the average elevation of the soil
at the base of the lowest lakeward extent of the cvpress


(Taxodium sD.) fringe. The elevation of the lowest lakeward
extent of the cypress trees shall be measured on the lakeward
side of the tree at the base of the trunk.
If other biological indicators of the Pre-modification Annual
Low Level are proposed, they must integrate water levels over
a lone period of time and must persist after water levels have
receded. For example. due to their rapid growth and
colonization rates, the lowest lakeward extent of emergent and
floating aquatic plants such as lotus (Nelumbo smD.). pickerel
weed (Pontederia spo.). maidencane (Panicum hemitomon)
and torpedo grass (Panicum revens) are not a suitable indicator
of Pre-modification Annual Low Levels.
(4) Reference Lake Water Regime The RLWR is used
only if stage duration data and biological or physical indicators
of the Pre-modification Annual High or Annual Low Level are
not available. The Reference Lake Water Regime (RLWR)
represents a lake level fluctuation range, and therefore cannot
be used alone to establish lake levels. The RLWR is used to
calculate a Pre-modification Annual High or Annual Low
Level once a Pre-modification Annual High Level or Annual
Low Level has been determined from one or more of the
biological and physical methods described above.
(a) The Pre-modification Annual High Level is eaual to
the Pre-modification Annual Low Level plus the RLWR.
(b) The Pre-modification Annual Low Level is eaual to the
Pre-modification Annual High Level minus the RLWR.
CHAPTER FOUR DETERMINATION OF
POST-MODIFICATION LEVELS
(1) General Post-modification Levels refer to lake water
regimes impacted by human activities, excluding water
withdrawals. Post-modification*levels may be determined from
analysis of stage duration data and analysis of modifications of
the surface water conveyance systems from the lake. Typically.
biological indicators may not be used to establish
Post-modification levels. For lakes without stage duration data.
Post-modification levels may be determined by the application
of the RLWR described in Chapter 5.
If Post-modification levels are determined by more than one
procedure, the Post-modification levels finally recommended
are a reconciliation of the procedures used. Levels determined
using analysis of stage duration data take precedence over the
levels determined from analysis of outfall elevations and the
RLWR unless the stage duration data is determined to be
impacted by water withdrawals. Analysis of outfall elevations
and application of the RLWR is used only if sufficient stage
duration data are not available or if the lake is impacted by
water withdrawals.
(2) Analysis of Stage Duration Data This method applies
only to those lakes with a minimum of six (6) continuous years
of Post-modification stage duration data that have not been
impacted by water withdrawals.


Section II Proposed Rules 5081


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997









Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


(a) Post-modification Annual High Level The
Post-modification Annual High Level is equal to the elevation
corresponding to the P10 value on the Post-modification Stage
Duration Curve.
(b) Post-modification Annual Low Level The
Post-modification Annual Low Level is equal to the elevation
corresponding to the P90 value on the Post-modification Stage
Duration Curve.
(3) Analysis of Outfall Elevations and Application of
RLWR -This method is applied to lakes with modified surface
water conveyance systems with less than six (6) continuous
years of Post-modification stage duration data or lakes with
stage data impacted by water withdrawals. The method
accounts for modifications to surface water conveyance
systems on the lake that does not allow water levels to be
maintained above the invert elevation of the outfall.
Elevations of outfalls will be measured using accented survey
practices. In the case of open ditches or canals. bottom
elevations shall be measured and the highest legally existing
and maintained stable point along the outlet profile shall be the
control point. For culverts or pipes, the invert (lowest point) of
the pipe or culvert shall be measured and this will be the
control point. For fixed crest weirs. the elevation of the top of
the weir shall be measured and this shall be the control point.
Elevations will be established for all outfalls on the lake using
the above procedures. If there is more than one outfall on the
lake. then the lowest outfall will be considered as the control
point
(a) Post-modification Annual High Level. Non-adiustable
structure/open conveyance The Post-modification Annual
High Level is eaual tO the elevation of the lowest legal flow
line control. The lowest legal flow line control is the highest
stable point along the outlet profile.
(b) Post-modification Annual Low Level. Non-adiustable
structure/open conveyance The Post-modification Annual
Low Level for lakes with less than six (6) continuous years of
stage data or lakes with stage data impacted by water
withdrawals must be determined using the RLWR described in
Chapter 5. The Post-modification Annual Low Level is equal
to the Post-modification Annual High Level minus the RLWR.
(c) Post-modification Annual High Level. Adjustable
Structure The Post-modification Annual High Level is eaual
to the highest elevation to which the structure can be operated.
(d) Post-modification Annual Low Level. Adjustable
Structure The Post-modification Annual Low Level is eaual
to the lowest elevation to which the structure can be operated.
CHAPTER FIVE REFERENCE LAKE WATER REGIME
( ) General In some cases there are little or no lake stage
data or the existing lake stage data reflects impacts due to
human activities (e.g.. water withdrawals). For lakes which
have sustained long-term water level declines, the P10 and P90
values are generally uncorrelated to Pre-modification
biological and physical indicators of water levels. For the case


where declines were caused by water withdrawals, the P10 and
P90 values can not be used to determine Guidance Levels
because they would grandfather effects of the water
withdrawals into the adopted levels.
The Reference Lake Water Regime (RLWR) was developed to
approximate the annual range of lake level fluctuation that
typically occurs and corresponds to the range of fluctuation
defined by the Annual High and Annual Low Guidance Levels.
The RLWR is a regional factor developed for lakes in the same
hvdrogeologic region as the lakes for which levels are being
established. It is applied to lakes with less than six (6) years of
stage data or where stage data have been significantly
influenced by water withdrawals. The District will continue to
investigate methods for calculating the RLWR and to estimate
fluctuation ranges which can be used to establish Guidance
Levels.
Guidance Levels established by use of the RLWR are
considered to be provisional until six years of lake stage data
have been collected. Following collection of sufficient data. an
analysis of the adopted levels and stage data will be conducted
and a recommendation made as to whether the Governing
Board should consider reestablishing the levels.
In many areas of the District there are few lakes that are
unaffected by human activities. To ensure that the RLWR is
based on a representative number of lakes, lakes that are in
decline or that have experienced a decline in water levels, are
incorporated into the calculation of the RLWR. Though water
withdrawals can cause increases in annual lake water level
fluctuations, long-term water level declines are the cumulative
result of these increases and typically do not occur in a single
year. Annual fluctuations in lake levels are still highly related
to changes in rainfall. In some instances lakes have
experienced changes in annual fluctuations of about one (1)
foot when comparing changes for different decades (e.g. Horse
Lake). A review of the data indicates that large annual
fluctuations typically occur in years of high rainfall following a
period of low lake stage.
(2) Calculation of RLWR Calculation and application of
the RLWR is described in the following sections. The District
will continue to investigate methods for calculating the RLWR
and to estimate fluctuation ranges which can be used to
establish Guidance Levels.
(a) CASE 1: Closed basin lake with less than six (6) years
of stage data.
The RLWR is calculated from lakes in the same hvdrogeologic
region as the lake(s) for which levels are being established.
Following identification of representative lakes in the region.
the lake stage data are reviewed and lakes with less than six (6)
years of data are removed from the analysis. Annual stage
duration curves are prepared for each of the remaining lakes
and differences between the annual P10 and P90 levels are
calculated. Next. for each lake the median of the annual


5082 Section I Proposed Rules


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19,1997


Florida Administrative W'eekly










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


differences is obtained to establish a median range of
fluctuation for the respective lakes. The RLWR is finally
calculated as the median of the individual lake medians.
(b) CASE 2 Lake without data connected to lake with
data.
If a lake for which levels are to be established is connected via
a surface water conveyance system to a lake with data, then the
RLWR shall be calculated using data from the adjacent lake.
The criteria for applying this method are: the lakes must share
the same level pool: and the lake must have a minimum of six
continuous years of stage data. For example: Lakes Rainbow
and Little Moon are connected above 34.67'. NGVD and
Rainbow Lake has stage data from 1972 to 1996. Therefore.
the RLWR used for Little Moon Lake is eaual to the median of
the differences between annual P10 and annual P90 values for
Rainbow Lake.
(c) CASE 3: Lake impacted by water withdrawals.
For lakes affected by water withdrawals and that have less than
six (6) years of stage data nrior to the initiation of withdrawals
a site specific RLWR is calculated. The site specific RLWR is
calculated using data collected for the lake of interest. Annual
stage duration curves are prepared and differences between the
annual P10 and P90 levels are calculated. The RLWR is
calculated as the median of the annual differences to establish a
median range of fluctuation for the lake.
(3) Application of RLWR The RLWR may be used to
calculate either Pre-modification Flood Levels or Low Levels
depending upon the biological and physical indicators present.
The RLWR may also be used to calculate the
Post-modification Low Level.
(a) Determination of Pre-modification Levels Using the
RLWR.
1. Pre-modification Annual Low Level If there are
biological or nhvsical indicators of the Pre-modification
Annual High Level then the Pre-modification Annual Low
Level can be calculated by subtracting the RLWR from the
Pre-modification Annual High Level elevation established by
the biological and/or physical indicators.
Pre-modification Annual Low Level Pre-modification
Annual High Level RLWR
2. Pre-modification Annual High Level If there are no
unimpacted biological or physical indicators of the
Pre-modification Annual High Level, but there are biological
indicators of the Annual Low Level, then the Pre-Modification
Annual High Level can be calculated by adding the RLWR to
the Pre-modification Annual Low Level elevation established
by the biological Indicators.
Pre-modification Annual High Level Pre-modification
Annual Low Level + RLWR
(b) Determination of Post-modification Annual Low Level
If the natural surface water conveyance of a lake has been
modified by construction of ditches or the installation of
culverts and there are no Post-modification data available, then
,/


the Post-modification Annual Low Level must be determined
from the RLWR. In this case. the Annual Post-modification
Low Level is determined by subtracting the RLWR from the
Post-modification Annual High Level elevation established by
analysis of outfall elevations.
Post-modification Annual Low Level Post-modification
Annual High Level RLWR
Note: To use the RLWR either the Annual High Level or
Annual Low Level must be available as starting points.
(4) Determining Effects of Water Withdrawals Before
using period of record data to establish Guidance Levels, it is
necessary to determine whether the lake has been or is
potentially affected by water withdrawals. If lake levels are
influenced by water withdrawals, using the period of record
data to establish Guidance Levels may "grandfather" the
effects of water withdrawals. Determining effects of water
withdrawals on lake levels can be accomplished using one or a
combination of the following methods:
(a) Analysis of the hydrologic budget of the lake.
(b) Statistical regression analysis.
(c) Continuous simulation models.
(d) Groundwater flow models.
(e) Analysis of hvdrographs. and/or
(tf Analysis of existing studies.
CHAPTER SIX ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
SUPPLIED TO THE GOVERNING BOARD FOR
ADOPTING LAKE LEVELS
General District staff may provide additional information to
the Governing Board when recommending Guidance and
Minimum Levels to the Governing Board. This information
may include, but not be limited to. bathvmetric maps. aerial
photographs, and elevations of docks, seawalls, house slabs
and other structures. Information regarding typical uses of the
lake (i.e.. recreational uses. irrigation, potable water supplvy
and surrounding land uses also may be provided.
Specific Authority 120.54(1. 373 042. 373.0421. 373.044, 373.085. 373.086
373.103. 373.113, 373.171 FS. Law Implemented 373.016, 373.042,
373.0421. 373.08. 373.0R6 373.1033 .11 FS. History-New 6-7-78,
Amended 1-22-79, 4-27-80. 10-21-80, 12-22-80, 3-23-81, 4-14-81, 6--81,
10-15-81, 11-23-81. 1-5-82, 3-11-82, 5-10-82, 74-82, 9-2-82, 11-8-82,
1-10-83, 4-3-83. 7-5-83, 9-5-83. 10-16-83, 12-12-83, 5-8-84, 7-8-84,
12-16-84, 2-7-85, 5-13-85, 6-26-85. 11-3-85, 3-5-86, 6-16-86, Formerly
16J-8.678. Amended 9-7-86. 2-12-87. 9-2-87, 2-18-88, 6-27-88, 2-22-89.
3-23-89, 9-26-89, 7-26-90. 10-30-90. 3-3-91. 9-30-91, 10-7-91, 7-26-92,
3-1-93, 5-11-94.6-6-96, 2-23-97.

NAME OF PERSON ORIGINATING PROPOSED RULE:
Karen A. Lloyd, Senior Attorney, Office of General Counsel
NAME OF SUPERVISOR OR PERSON WHO APPROVED
THE PROPOSED RULE: Governing Board of the Southwest
Florida Water Management District
DATE PROPOSED RULE APPROVED: September 9, 1997
DATE NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE DEVELOPMENT
PUBLISHED IN FAW: June 6, 1997


Section II Proposed Rules 5083


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Numb~er 38, September 19, 1997










Florida Administrative Weekly Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997


The Southwest Florida Water Management District does not
discriminate on the basis of any individual's disability status.
Anyone requiring reasonable accommodation as provided for
in the American's With Disabilities Act should contact Dianne
Lee at (352)796-7211 or 1(800)423-1476, extension 4658;
TDD only number 1(800)231-6103; FAX number
(352)754-6878/SUNCOM 663-6878

WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS
South Florida Water Management District
RULE CHAPTER TITLE: RULE CHAPTER NO.:
Consumptive Use 40E-2
RULE TITLES: RULE NOS.:
Publications Incorporated by Reference 40E-2.091
Conditions for Issuance of Permits 40E-2.301
Modification of Permits 40E-2.331
Limiting Conditions 40E-2.381
PURPOSE AND EFFECT: The purpose and effect of this rule
is to extend the expiration dates for Individual Irrigation Use
Class Water Use Permits within the District's Lower West
Coast water use basin from December 15, 1997 to December
15, 2001, or a date the District shall specify in rules adopted to
implement the District's Lower West Coast Water Supply Plan,
whichever date establishes the shorter permit duration. The
District shall provide notice to Individual Irrigation Use Class
Water Use Permit holders of the expiration date of their
permits within 30 days after the effective date of the rules
adopted to implement the Lower West Coast Water Supply
Plan. However, under the proposed rule, no Individual
Irrigation Use Class Water Use Permit will expire prior to
December 15, 1998.
SUMMARY: Under this rule, it is anticipated that Sections
1.7.2, 1.8, 5.2.1 K., 5.2.3 C., and 5.2.4 A. of the "Basis of
Review for Water Use Permit Applications within the South
Florida Water Management District February 1997" (BOR),
incorporated by reference in Rule 40E-2.091, F.A.C. will be
amended to reflect the proposed extension of the expiration
dates for Individual Irrigation Use Class Water Use Permits
within the District's Lower West Coast water use basins. Rules
40E-2.091, 40E-2.301, 40E-2.321, 40E-2.331, and 40E-2.381
will also need to be amended to reflect this change and to
reference the update to the BOR.
SUMMARY OF STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED
REGULATORY COST: Any person who wishes to provide
information regarding the statement of estimated regulatory
costs, or to provide a proposal for a lower cost regulatory
alternative must do so within 21 days of this notice.
SPECIFIC AUTHORITY: 373.044, 373.113, 373.171 FS.
LAW IMPLEMENTED: 373.171, 373.219, 373.223, 373.224,
373.229, 373.232, 373.233, 373.236, 373.239 FS.
A HEARING WILL BE HELD AT THE TLME, DATE AND
PLACE SHOWN BELOW:
TIME AND DATE: 9:30 a.m., October 9, 1997


PLACE: South Florida Water Management District
Headquarters, Auditorium, 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm
Beach, Florida
THE PERSON TO BE CONTACTED REGARDING THE
PROPOSED RULES IS: Jim Drosakis, Rules Analyst, South
Florida Water Management District, 3301 Gun Club Road,
West Palm Beach, FL 33406
Although Governing Board meetings, hearings and workshops
are normally recorded, affected persons are advised that it may
be necessary for them to ensure that a verbatim record of the
proceeding is made, including the testimony and evidence
upon which any appeal is to be based. Persons with disabilities
or handicaps who need assistance may contact Tony Burs,
District Clerk, at (407)687-6206 at least two business days in
advance to make appropriate arrangements. at least two
business days in advance to make appropriate arrangements.

THE FULL TEXT OF THE PROPOSED RULES IS:

40E-2.091 Publications Incorporated by Reference.
(1) The "Basis of Review for Water Use Permit
Applications within the South Florida Water Management
District October 1997 Februay 1997" is hereby published by
reference and incorporated into this chapter.
(2) No change.
Specific Authority 373.044. 373.113, 373.171 FS. Law Implemented 373.219,
373.223. 373.224, 373.229. 373.232, 373.233, 373.236. 373.239 FS. History-
New 9-3-81. Formerly 16K-2.035(1). Amended 2-24-85. 11-21-89. 1-4-93.
4-20-94, 11-26-95, 7-11-96. 4-9-97..

40E-2.301 Conditions for Issuance of Permits.
(1) No change.
(2) In order to satisfy the conditions for permit issuance in
subsection (1), the permit applicant must provide reasonable
assurances that the criteria in the "Basis of Review for Water
Use Permit Applications within the South Florida Water
Management District October 1997 Februm~,- 997",
incorporated by reference in Rule 40E-2.091(1), are met.
Specific Authority 373.044, 373.113. 373.171 FS. Law Implemented 373.023,
373.185. 373.219. 373.223, 373.226, 373.236 FS. History-New 9-3-81.
Formerly 16K-2.035(2), Amended 2-24-85. 1-4-93. 4-20-94. 4-9-97.

40E-2.331 Modification of Permits.
(1) through (3) No change.
(4)(a) Modification of an existing water use permit shall
be approved by letter, provided the permit is in compliance
with all applicable limiting conditions and the modification
request:
1. through 2. No change.
3. does not potentially interfere with any presently existing
legal use of water, cause adverse environmental impacts,
saltwater intrusion, pollution of the water resources, adverse
impacts to offsite land uses, or does not otherwise raise issues
requiring a Staff determination of whether such impacts would
occur pursuant to the "Basis of Review for Water Use Permit


5084 Section I Proposed Rules


Florida Administrative Weekly


Volume 23, Number 38, September 19, 1997




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