Title: Water Supply Development Core Group - Issue Identification and Potential Solutions - January 2, 1997 Draft
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00004627/00001
 Material Information
Title: Water Supply Development Core Group - Issue Identification and Potential Solutions - January 2, 1997 Draft
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Jake Varn Collection - Water Supply Development Core Group - Issue Identification and Potential Solutions - January 2, 1997 Draft (JDV Box 70)
General Note: Box 24, Folder 3 ( Water Supply Development and Funding - 1996-1997 ), Item 29
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00004627
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





Water Supply Development Core Group
Issue Identification and Potential Solutions
January 2, 1997, Draft


Potential Recommendations for Further
Discussion:


Water Planning Process


C-1. There is a need for simplification of the water
planning process (AT A MINIMUM, REVISE THE
STATUES TO PROVIDE FOR ONE PLAN AT THE STATE
LEVEL).


State-level Role With Regard to Water Supply
Planning

C-2. There should be more focus on water supply
than currently exists in state-level planning (NOT
HANDS-ON INVOLVEMENT, BUT GUIDANCE).


C-3. Water supply development should be
addressed more adequately in Florida Water Plan
(FWP) and State Water Policy (SWP) rule.












Regional Water Supply Planning

C-4. Lack of water supply planning is not the
problem, lack of plan implementation is the
problem.


D-1. Discuss subcommittee proposal for
simplification of the process.







D-2. Either a new entity or better implementation
by DEP with more resources.



D-3 Include timeframes in the Florida Water Plan
with regard to water supply planning and
development.

D-4. Include policy guidance in the FWP and SWP
rule adequate for FLWAC to deal with related
appeals.



D-5. Identify needs and sources in a single,
statewide document.


Planning Issues,
Consensus Recommendations:









Planning Issues,
Consensus Recommendations:


Regional Water Supply Planning (cont.)

C-5a. There is a need for consistency in regional
water supply planning, needs and sources
assessments, with regardfor regional variations.

b. Use conventions committee approachfor
achieving consistent process/format among WMDs
in developing regional water supply plans
(RWSPs), similar to conventions process for
District Water Management Plans.

c. Achieve also through DEP general supervisory
authority and guidance of Governor's Office--See
Ex. Order 96-297.


C-6. "Water resources development" and "water
supply development" should be distinguished from
each other and defined


Potential Recommendations for Further
Discussion:


D-6 Proposed Definitions:

"Water resources development" means the
development and implementation of integrated
water resources management strategies using
aquifers and watershed basins as the planning units
and including the following: surface water and
groundwater data collection and evaluation; the
preparation of strategic plans; construction,
maintenance and operation of major public works
facilities to provide for flood control, surface and
underground storage, groundwater recharge
augmentation, and sustainability of all reasonable
and beneficial water uses: and supportive
interaction with tosupport private and public water
users and water suppliers.

"Water supply development" means the planning,
construction, maintenance, and operation of public
and private facilities for extraction of water from
watersheds and aquifers for local treatment,
transmission, and distribution for resale or end use.









Planning Issues,
Consensus Recommendations:


C-7 The function and effect of RWSPs should be:

a. To identify a menu of options for water supply
development from which to choose.

b. To provide action-oriented steps, with
flexibility but as much surety as possible for users.

c. To guide funding of water supply projects. For
instance, if a project is consistent with the plan, it
is eligible for specified funding. ("Consistent" is
not the legal chapter 163 meaning, but in concert
with the plan, not at cross purposes with the plan,
compatible.)







C-8. Local governments should be encouraged to
use sources identified in regional water supply
plans

C-9. (Consistent with D-7) Portions ofRWSPs
could be adopted by rule, as appropriate, or rules
could be developed or amended to implement the
plan, to the extent of the WMDs' statutory
authorities. (The plan would not confer authority
but would reflect strategies that could be
implemented under-existing authorities.)


C-10. There should be a linkage between regional
water supply planning and water regulation (e.g.,
A consumptive use project would have to be
consistent with the rule-adopted portions of the
plan in order to be permittable.).


Potential Recommendations for Further
Discussion:


D-7. Regarding the general function of RWSPs,
consider language similar to that in s. 187.101, F.S.,
such as:

A regional water supply plan does not create
regulatory authority or authorize the adoption of
rules, criteria, or standards not otherwise authorized
by law. The provisions of the plan shall be
reasonably applied where they are environmentally,
economically, and technically feasible and no
specific goal or policy in the plan shall be construed
or applied in isolation from the other goals and
policies in the plan. The objective of the plan shall
be to meet the water supply needs of all existing
and future legal uses within the planning region in a
manner which sustains water resources and related
natural systems.

D-8. Statement of objectives for water supply
planning (Discuss subcommittee proposal).










Planning Issues,
Consensus Recommendations:


C-11. Needs of self suppliers, including projected
future uses, should be addressed in WMD regional
water supply plans. It should be made clear that it
is a role of the WMDs to do this.


C-12. The RWSP should identify means of
implementing nonregulatory parts of plans (e.g.,
actual development of supplies)--a forcing-action
type of planning.



Relationship between Local Government
Comprehensive Plans (LGCPs) and RWSPs.

C-13. LGCP potable water supply element* needs
to indicate sources of water, based on regional
water supply plan or other best available data.

*"general sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage,
potable water, and natural groundwater aquifer
recharge element"



Coordination among local governments in water
supply planning.


Data for local water supply planning.

C-14. Data shoulateome from the WMDs, unless
better data is available. WMD should be primary
source of data, but this would not preclude a local
government from using more accurate data.


C-15. At a minimum, DCA should rely on the
WMDs for identification of sources.


Potential Recommendations for Further
Discussion:


D-9. Require a water supply element in LGCPs.

D-10. Require that LGCPs be consistent with
RWSPs (rule-adopted portions, data?)

(Is there really a need for a statutory linkage
between LGCPs and RWSPs? Or is it more
effective to focus on increased communication and
technical assistance--and financial assistance where
possible--between local governments and WMDs?)



NO RECOMMENDATIONS DEVELOPED


I


I










Development Issues Potential Recommendations for Further
Consensus Recommendations Discussion

State Role in Water Supply Development

C-16a. The state should assure protection of water
resources on state lands.

b. The state could enhance the acquisition of lands for
recharge.


WMD Role in Water Supply Development

C-17. The proper WMD role in water supply is planning
and water resource development. WMDs are not
primarily in the water supply development business, but
are not precluded from providing assistance with water
supply development. (See consensus definitions when
finalized)

C-18. WMDs should account for cumulative impacts on
the resource, especially in critical areas, and manage the
impacts to achieve sustainability of the resource.

C-19. WMDs could make WMD lands available for
water supply, with appropriate safeguards.


Reuse

C-20. Florida should maximize reuse. DEP, the WMDs,
and HRS need to coordinate reuse criteria and efforts.


Local Role in Water Supply Development

C-21. The proper local role (including local
governments, regional water supply authorities, and
private utilities) in water supply is water supply
development and not primarily water resource
development (see consensus definitions when finalized).
However, this does not preclude local assistance with
water resource development.










Development Issues Potential Recommendations for Further
Consensus Recommendations Discussion

Minimum Flows and Levels

C-22. MFLS should be integrated into District Water
Management Plans (IN CONJUNCTION WITH
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS FOR MFLS AND FOR
WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT) and directed to
areas where water is being or will be developed.
(Already being done. See Ex. Order 96-297)

C-23. The "goal" ofMFLs should be to help us
understand what is happening to the resource in
sufficient time to focus efforts and money to provide
additional water supplies, IN ORDER TO PROVIDE
ADEQUATE WATER FOR ALL REASONABLE-BENEFICIAL
USES WHILE MAINTAINING NATURAL SYSTEMS.










Regulatory Issues Potential Recommendations for Further
Consensus Recommendations Discussion
Regulatory constraints on the development of
sustainable water supplies

C-24a. There should be a presumption of correctness
or prudence by the PSC ifDEP "approves" an
improvement by a utility.

b. The PSC should allow a reasonable time for cost
recovery (length of planning period on which to base a
calculation of prudent costs)

c. Perhaps have a DEP/PSC list of qualified reuse and
other equipment.

d PSC/DEP/WMDs Need to Coordinate Timeframes
for Compliance and Cost Recovery (especially for
reuse).

C-25. Explore the use of the new APA waiver and
variance provisions to expedite changes in rules to keep
up with changes in technology.

C-26. Work with EPA to solve technical and related
legal obstacles for ASR, etc.


C-27. DEP and the WMDs Need to Coordinate
Feasibility Requirements and Criteria for Reuse. (The
Reuse Coordinating Council meets regularly to address
such issues.)

C-28. WMDs should identify the common boundary
areas where they have conflicting regulatory criteria
and plans and should coordinate with each other to
reduce or eliminate such conflicts; statutory
impediments to such coordination should be removed
and, if necessary, specific statutory authority (and
direction?) should be provided to assure it (possibly
allow delegation between WMDs).










Regulatory Issues Potential Recommendations for Further
Consensus Recommendations Discussion

Technical constraints on the development of
sustainable water supplies.


C-29. There should be accelerated research by WMDs,
Universities, and others (cooperative efforts where
possible) to remove technical obstacles to the
development of alternative sources.




Scientific peer review

C-30. There should be scientific peer review at the
front end for research and development, and for other
processes, e.g,. technical aspects of planning, MFLs.


Consumptive use permit terms

C-31. Long-term consumptive use permits are
acceptable where: (a) long-term sources are available
or being developed, (b) changes over time can be
addressed.



Wellhead Protection


D- 1. Discuss subcommittee proposal for
long-term CUPs.





D-12. Discuss subcommittee proposal.









Tom's chart:

S*MFLs do not cause great concern in areas with adequate projected supply.

S *Significant harm should be clearly defined.

3 *Assuring supply reduces other concerns

4- *We may need more supply for the environment and people.

5 *WMD identifies problem areas and indicates menu of sources in the RWSP, makes a program
with timetable for having supply to meet projected demand--avoid immediate reductions in
supply. (Jake/Terry to work on--??)



(Implementation of MFLs?)




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