Title: Draft Materials Concerning Competing Water Use Permit Applications
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00004883/00001
 Material Information
Title: Draft Materials Concerning Competing Water Use Permit Applications
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Publisher: South Florida Water Management District
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
Abstract: Jake Varn Collection - Draft Materials Concerning Competing Water Use Permit Applications (JDV Box 39)
General Note: Box 29, Folder 6 ( Water Supply Coalition - 1996-1997 ), Item 5
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00004883
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

South Florida Water Management District

3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Florida 33406 (561) 686-8800 FL WATS 1-800-432-2045

CON 24-06-02

November 6, 1996

Mr. Jacob Varn, Esquire
Carlton, Fields, et al.
P. O. Drawer 190
Tallahassee, FL 32302-0190

Subject: Draft Materials concerning Competing Water Use Permit Applications

Dear Mr. Vain:

Enclosed please find the above referenced information which your office requested. Two years
ago, as an "off-shoot" of the Lower West Coast Water Supply Plan implementation efforts, the
District Governing Board requested staff to meet with interested members of the regulated
community to review issues surrounding competing water use permit applications. This group,
the "Competing Use Committee," met over the course of several months and had many
interesting and insightful discussions. The process was intended to provide guidance to the staff
and Governing Board as we develop rules to implement the Lower West Coast Water Supply
Plan. Due to further technical analysis and groundwater modeling, this rulemaking effort remains

The enclosed information package was recently transmitted to the members of the Committee and
includes staff's summary of major issues discussed at the Committee meetings as well as draft
rules. Out of respect to the many other participants in the Lower West Coast Water Supply
Planning process who have not reviewed this information, these draft rules have not been
distributed beyond the members of the Competing Use Committee. It is staffs intent to provide
this information to all interested parties in conjunction with presentation of technical analysis and
modeling results in the relatively near future.

In light of the above described context, it is obvious these documents are not final. In fact, we
welcome any comments which you may provide. If you are interested in becoming a member
of the Competing Use Committee, please let me know so that I may place your name on future
distribution lists. In any event, please feel free to contact either Scott Bums or myself to discuss

Governing Board:
Valerie Boyd, Chairman William Hammond Eugene K. Pettis Samuel E. Poole III, Executive Director
Frank Williamson, Jr., Vice Chairman Betsy Krant Nathaniel P. Reed Michael Slayton, Deputy Executive Director
William E. Graham Richard A. Machek Miriam Singer
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 24680, West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4680

Mr. Jacob Varn
November 6, 1996
Page 2

the content of these documents; we would be pleased to receive any input which you may care
to provide.


Eliabeth D. Ross
Sr. Attorney
Regulatory and Planning Section
Office of Counsel



South Florida Water Management District

3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Florida 33406 (407) 686-8800 FLWATS 1-800-432-2045

CON 24-06

July 10, 1996 DRAFT

Dear Competing Use Committee Member:

It has been nearly a year since I corresponded with you as a member of the Competing Use
Committee. As you will recall our group was created by the District Governing Board to
examine the complex issue of how to allocate water between competing consumptive use permit
applications. Staff has been working on redrafting technical documentation associated with
Lower West Coast rulemaking. These efforts, while not fully complete, are, at long last, coming
to fruition. I look forward to sharing the technical results and rule drafts with you in the near

On a parallel path, the Competing Use Committee reviewed the fundamental issues surrounding
the process of defining and processing competing water use applications in order to attain insight
into a variety of issues and community concerns. This letter encloses several sources of
information to refresh your memory of our discussions and presents, for discussion, a proposed
draft of rule changes which hopefully incorporates the concepts we discussed. As committee
members, I am providing you with this information in advance of widespread distribution. Please
review this information and provide either Cecile Ross, Beth Ross or I with written or verbal
comments by August 16, 1996. Based on your comments, I will schedule a meeting of the
Committee to discuss issues raised and hopefully complete a consensus draft. This draft is not
being distributed outside the committe-e-eathir-timethiremains a very rough d Iaft.-Iwould
appreciate if you would not distribute this draft until the committee has had a chance to ok a

After a final draft is produced, that language will be added to the Lower West Coast Water
Supply Plan rule revision package. I anticipate presentation of the Lower West Coast rules to
the Lower West Coast Water Supply Plan Advisory Committee in the early fall, with Governing
Board and public workshop presentations to follow. Staffs current expectation is for public
workshops concerning these draft "competing use" rules as well as the complete rulemaking
package associated primarily with Lower West Coast Water Supply Plan implementation to be
scheduled in October, 1996. Depending on public comment and Board approval, I hope to
successfully present the rules for adoption in early 1997.

Thank you, in advance, for your continued participation in this important process. If you
have any further questions please feel free to call me at (561) 687-6817.


Wm. Scott Bums, Director
Water Use Division

Governing Board:
Valerie Boyd, Chairman William Hammond Eugene K. Pettis Samuel E. Poole III, Executive Director
Frank Williamson, Jr., Vice Chairman Betsy Krant Nathaniel P. Reed Michael Slayton, Deputy Executive Director
William E. Graham Richard A. Machek Miriam Singer
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 24680, West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4680

Competing Use Issues Wordng Grup
Ron Hamel
Gulf Citrus Growers Assoc.
250 Lee Street
P.O. Box 1319
LaBelle, FL 33935
(813) 675-8087 fax
(813) 675-8087 phone

Jim Garner
Pavese, Garner
P.O. Drawer 1507
Ft. Myers, FL 33902
(813) 334-2195 phone
(813) 332-2243 fax

Steve Walker
Lewis, Longman, & Walker
2000 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd.
Suite 900
West Palm Beach, FL 33409
640-0820 phone
640-8202 fax

ValJean Haley
DuBois Farms
5450 Flavor Pict Rd.
Boynton Beach, FL 33437
(407) 498-3000 phone
(407) 498-5487 fax

Tom Jones
Barron Collier Co.
1320 N. 15th Street
P.O. Drawer K
Immokalee, FL 33934
(813) 657-3602
(813) 657-2337 fax

Hank Cord, Regional Supervisor
Florida Farm Bureau
11254 Pine Valley Drive
Wellington, FL 33414
(407) 793-5290 phone

Phil Leary
Florida Farm Bureau
P.O. Box 147030
Gainesville, FL 32614-7030

Jorge Rodriguez
Miami Dade Water & Sewer Authority
4200 Salzedo Street
Coral Gables, FL 33146
(305) 669-7602 phone
(305) 669-5796 fax

Phil Gilden
Ste. 1200
1645 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd.
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
(407) 471-3508
(407) 686-5442

Steve Lamb
MacVicar, Federico & Lamb
3713 Valley Parkway
Lake Worth, FL 33467
(407) 964-7802 phone
(407) 964-2074 fax

Phil Parsons
Landers & Parsons
310 W. College Ave.
Tallahassee, FL 32302
(904) 681-0311 phone
(904) 224-5595 fax

Ed Kerwin & Roy Reynolds
Broward County Office of Env. Services
2555 W. Copans Rd.
Pompano Beach, FL 33069
(305) 831-0912 phone
(305) 831-0708 fax

Pat Gleason
Montgomery Watson
2328 10th Ave. North
Fifth Floor
Lake Worth, FL 33461
586-8830 phone
586-8834 fax

Dan Mercer, Director
Utilities Department
City of Naples
275 13th Street North
Naples, FL 33940
(813) 434-4745 phone
(813) 262-5640 fax

Collier County Utilities
Michael McNees
3050 N.Horseshoe Drive
Suite 290
Naples, FL 33942
(813) 434-5040 phone
(813) 434-5039 fax

Paul Van Buskirk
Regional Water Supply Authority
1617 Hendry Street
Suite 310
Ft. Myers, FL 33901
(813) 332-5819 phone
(813) 332-5819 fax

Irene Quincy, P.A.
Pavese, Garner
4524 Gun Club Rd.
West Palm Beach, FL 33415
(407) 471-1366 phone
(407) 471-0522 fax

Fred Rapach
Palm Beach County WUD
2065 Prarie Rd.
West Palm Beach, FL 33406
(407) 641-3429 phone
(407) 641-3426 fax

Lee Worsham
Honigman, Miller, et.al.
222 Lakeview Ave.
Suite 800
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
(407) 838-4500 phone
(407) 832-3036 fax

SFWMD Employees
Dean Powell
Sharon Trost
Terry Clark
Tom Teets----
Dan Cary
Garth Redfield

. I

__ __ _~_~____ _~__ ____ __ _

~~ ` ~ r~
J r ; c (
r .


The Competing Use Committee met over the course of several months and had good
attendance from individuals representing numerous interest groups. The Committee's
discussions covered a variety of topics; efforts were made to build understanding and
consensus on these topics for the purpose of developing proposed rule criteria. Staff has
attempted to synthesize these lengthy and sometimes theoretical discussions into a workable
framework which will serve as the basis for rule drafts. District staffs goal for the rule
criteria is to develop a process for resolving competing use situations in an overall
framework that is sufficiently flexible to allow for District-wide use while also allowing for
basin and plan specific criteria. The following represents a summary of the major points
and issues which the Committee discussed. Full agreement on and endorsement of all
points was not a Committee goal. However, it is hoped, general consensus was achieved by
a majority of Committee representatives on identification of issues to be addressed in
developing criteria to resolve competition. Assimilating these major issues and discussion
points, staff drafted language for rule criteria. A copy of this proposed criteria language is
attached. Specific effort was made to draft the proposed criteria in light of Committee
discussions and to maximize inclusion of concepts on which the Committee seemed to
achieve some level consensus.

1. Renewal Permits / First in Time Issue:

a. A renewal permit is given a preference, if it first satisfies the proposed public
interest test.

b. Competing Applications may both be renewal applications. The Committee
discussed a concept whereby the District could review permit history,
determine the first user in time and how much water that user held first.
Questions then arise as to whether any modifications to increase allocations
occurred and whether such a modification occurred after the other competing,
renewal application was initially permitted. In this manner, the preference to
renewal permits becomes complicated.

c. First in time issues / preferences may arise in the context of the conditions
for consumptive use permit issuance, specifically the protection of legally
existing user condition. Is it an interference with a legally existing user to
allow subsequent users' combined drawdown to exceed criteria concerning the
level of certainty? Allowing more users can decrease the level of certainty for
other legally existing users. A minimum defined level of certainty should
prevent competition. Thus, allocation would stop at a specified level of
certainty to prevent the increased incidence of water shortages.

d. Potential, General Process of Competing Application Analysis:

1. Evaluation of applications under Basis of Review.

2. Public Interest test applied.

3. If application meets public interest test, then examine first in time
issues, for the entire permitting continuum.

e. Summary Point: A factor to address in criteria resolving competition
situations includes protection of permitted water rights according to the
priority of permit history.

2. What causes competition? The cause of competition may dictate the appropriate

a. More users?

b. District criteria change?

c. Unanticipated event, contrary to reasonable assurances?

3. Satisfaction of the Section 373.223(2) Test:

a. The 3 prong test defines the minimum acceptable standards which a user must
meet in order to attain a permit and be considered a competing application.

b. Should any extra credit be given for exceeding the minimum standards?
Should efficiencies be a part of the reasonable-beneficial test only? If a
competing applicant exceeds the minimum BOR standards, should a
preference be given in competing use public interest analysis?

4. Optimization Process: (See previous handouts and the BOR proposed language for
a description of what the optimization process would involve.)

a. LEU and Permit Applicants Issue: The typical competition situation involves
competing applications. If legally existing users are present but are not
currently applying for permit renewal, how can the District achieve
consideration of all affected users in an optimization process? Committee
discussions explored potential use of authority under section 373.171, Fla.
Stat., to require a legally existing user to file a modification application, if
resource harm is demonstrated. Also, in the absence of demonstrated
resource harm, the possibility of "feathering in" new resource protection
criteria, whereby users would cut-back their harmful withdrawals over time,
was discussed. In this manner, renewal applicants first would do their share
and subsequently expiring legally existing users would cut-back their share
upon their renewal.


b. Relationship of Priority in Time to Efficiency of Use Issue: The Committee
considered requiring competing users, regardless of how long a competing
user has been using water to be equally efficient in order to be able to
participate in competition. Thus, users would have to first compete equally
in an efficiency / public interest test. The first in time user preference issue
could come later in the process.

c. Fitting the Optimization Results into the Overall Planning Process: The
Committee spent a substantial amount of time discussing the role of District
water supply planning as a primary means of avoiding competition.
Integration of planning input (e.g. an identified, sub-basin use class
preference) with the optimization ranking process was one point of discussion.
(See following discussion on this point.) Optimization allows for identification
and ranking of users causing resource impact. The Committee discussed
whether or not optimization would be the sole process for resolving
competition. One hypothetical situation considered concerned a user with a
low contribution to the resource impact who may not be consistent with
overall water supply or land development plans. The use of the optimization
results was suggested as only information to be used in conjunction with
mediation and basin specific public interest determinations (e.g. zoning) made
in the planning process. In this manner, if the optimization process occurs
and fails, then the District could present the optimization ranking information
as well as additional matters to the Governing Board for their resolution of
the competition situation.

5. Planning:

The Committee discussed the role of planning at length with Dan Cary and Sharon
Trost. The Committee expressed hopes that planning would avoid as much
competition as possible through District alternative water supply and other means.

Committee members advised that District consumptive use permitting rules need to
be tied to plan development since users cannot fully grasp the impact of a plan until
rule criteria is developed. The Committee advised that without rules, users cannot
provide informed and committed input into the planning process.

6. Efficiency Standards:

This section examines the discussion the Committee had concerning the definition
of a public interest test concerning the efficiencies of competing users.

a. Efficiency Standard based on water use efficiency -- on a project by project
scale. "Resource efficiency"

b. Resource Efficiency from Optimization Standpoint: Defined as how water is
used with regard to regional optimal use of water. It is the suitability of use


to the source and gaining the maximum return on the use of the water
resource on a regional basis. This includes uses which "benefit" the water
resource or other users.

c. Ratio of water diverted v. water consumed or removed from the system. This
is analyzed only for LIKE USE CLASSES and examines the degree above the
reasonable-beneficial standard in the 3 prong test which the user proposes.
So, if the reasonable-beneficial standard is 70% for X irrigation type, and one
competing applicant uses 85% efficiency, then this user has a higher public
interest rating.

1. Resource Efficiency:

a. Optimization
b. Use of types of which support resource preservation

2. Water Use Efficiency:

a. Ratio: Water diverted : water consumed
-Project by project basis
-Only between like use classes who are competing

Examine the degree above the reasonable-beneficial standard
and the degree to which that additional efficiency positively
impacts the resource.

MARCH, 1994

1.0 Permitting Procedures
2.0 Water Need and Demand Methodologies
3.0 Water Resource Evaluations
4.0 Monitoring Requirements
5.0 Permit Conditions


1.1 Objectives -

Chapter 373, Florida Statutes (F.S.), enables and directs the District to regulate the use
of water within its jurisdictional boundaries. The purpose of the water use regulatory
program is to ensure that those water uses permitted by the District are reasonable-
beneficial, will not interfere with any presently existing legal uses of water, and are
consistent with the public interest pursuant to Section 373.223, F.S.

The District has adopted rules for regulating the consumptive use of water, which are set
forth in Chapters 40E-2 and 40E-20, Florida Administrative Code. The Basis of Review
is incorporated by reference into Chapter 40E-2. The Basis of Review must be read in
conjunction with Chapters 40E-2 and 40E-20, as applicable. The objective of the Basis
of Review is to further specify the general procedures and information used by District
staff for review of water use permit applications. All criteria in the Basis of Review
applies to processing individual permit applications, and specified criteria applies to
processing of general permit notices of intent. The criteria contained herein are flexible,
with the primary goal being to meet District water resource objectives.

In addition, procedures for processing water use permit applications are set forth in
Rules 40E-1.603.40E .604-and 40E-1.606. Rule 40E-1.610 provides procedures for
permit renewals and Rule 40E-1.6107 sets forth procedures for permit transfers.

1.2 Pre-application Consideration -

If the application is for a project which involves complex issues or if an applicant
requires assistance in completing an application, a pre-application meeting between the
Applicant and District Staff may be useful. A pre-application discussion may aid in
expediting the application evaluation process by identifying items and issues that need to
be addressed in more detail. This process allows the Applicant to submit a more
complete application and may prevent or avoid delays in processing the application.


Basis of Review for Water Use Permit Applications March. 1994

1.3 Other Factors Influencing Permit Applications -

1.3.1 Third Party Interests

Frequently, other governmental entities, organizations, or affected citizens have an
interest in the outcome of a permit action. Third party interests that would be
substantially affected by issuance of a requested permit will have the opportunity to
request an administrative hearing, pursuant to Rule 40E-1.521, prior to issuance of the
permit. In order to obviate any delays in permit issuance, discussions with such entities
regarding their water resource concerns prior to or during permit application review is
encouraged. Issuance of a water use permit by the District does not relieve the
Applicant of the responsibility to obtain all necessary federal, state, local, or other
District permits or authorizations.

1.3.2 Competing Applications Identifing Competing Applications an. e t. --f r:ie.tonhip between
legally existing users and new permit applicants

Competiou n toSetionL 373 F pli onan fiction ar affect sieret hae a implied r a water utse
permit or wi n sates that the prpsed use oedf water by two or more applicants, awlloca
to legally existing wuers. The Dissr'sser related goal in competition sitaions is to
maexceed time amount ofnab watber thial is availe f the wafor onsumptire. ve us, W after se permits ma
be availabied provlity is ded rsby applying water resource protection criteria arc satisfid, legally existing forces ar
penroee and the eel of cetaitty fe r the sijeo arnea is not diin uihed beminin th. lelof
ertantion as d foll in preveti r nes. I pedmittd water roesou n receive avl ful alocaion
as a result of a competition sit aton may apply for a permit modification at any time and
py rompte for additi l w r smits hey existing permitted uses from the affected surce bse

pursuant to Section 373.233, F.S.,applications are considered to be competing when Staff
evaluation indicates that the proposed use of water by two or more applicants will
exceed the amount of water that is available for consumptive use Water resource
availability is determined by applying water resource protection criteria for
environmental demands, saltwater intrusion/upconing prevention, aquifer mining
prevention and pollution prevention. In addition. water resource availability for
proposed demands is limited by existing permitted uses from the affected source based
on the permitted level of certainty. Water resource criteria is defined and applied
pursuant to Sections XXX of the BOR. All uses deemed competing must first have
satisfied applicable criteria in District rules regarding demand management. and other
reasonable-beneficial use criteria.

legal use oen~ern- as defined in the Bmis efReviwA- District st will determine when


pasis of Review for Wpter Use Permit Applicatio s

the above conditions occur and a notice of competing applications will be sent to permit
applicants during the permit review process. In id:t, me .. me..... a. kw .i.o. -DXi);

XXXiX. Conmrsetition with Permit Renewal Applications due to Subseuent Adopted Water
-o. r ad sely impadc leall existhi sers impat g.ater than 0. kt1 fo t.d4 ring

Resource Criteria
eDistrict's er resources proter n us iteria or Ditrict wors operation ma be a
oi n light of new technical information or poli considerations active 601. reducing the amount
om water available for consumptive use. New uses and increases in allocations must be

Thble tfllowin omp with theia will be usadoed tocriteria ato the timited wat permit issuance. Permits upwa
criteria alind mayi be deemed competing useswith other pidending afplications for the limited
sourcehall despite no chantioes to their historic uses or demands. Existing legal uses upon
rXXXl mCometition with Permit Renewal Appi cautions cdu hne to ub uentl Asoured Wate
Resource Criteria

Thresolve Districmpetin'swater resource protecon criteria or Ditrict woactrks operation mth be amended.
in light of new technical information or policy considerations. effectively reducing the amount
of water available fcir consumptivtances to use. New uses and increases in allocations must be
ablement inabilit to comply with ed criteria at the time of during issuance Permits m ustp
for renewal redu which were permitted under the previous criteria matted no longer meet ermin to ang
criteria and mtive our be deephased compshif with other ending lited source wions for the permited
source dpeite no chang roes to their historic uses or demands Exrse imats" al uses uowa
resnewl maw not be able to mmda te e re duce demands or change to a new source to
resolve compd. Reasona use issues due to econolude the use and technical factors. It is the District's
intent, in such circus sancesn to rant those ltat exionstd users. uon renewal who can
document inabisou y to come cyhe witeria a transition d period dur which the user mn st
reduce demands or shi resources to eratinf District cririao Such users must imlement a
scheduled reduction in withdrawals from the prev cautiously permitted soue or inr te ans
alloeative source i hi s wphsedil t e erm the affited h source ird not be pemited unless
wthe pe t cant provide reasonable assurances that "adverse iacts to thee t
resources will not occur through the permit duration while the affected source continues to be
utilized. Reasonable assurances include the use of conditions for preventing impacts such
as exotic removal or dry season withdrawal limitations. Reductions in demand from the
affected source shall be achieved within the ermit duration through the implementation of
alternative water supplies or overall demand reductions.

Unless otherwise provided for by rule. permit applications for future uses or increased
allocations by existing uses will not be permitted with phased reductions. but must comply
with the resource criteria at the time of permit issuance.


March 1994

Marrh IGGA/


Basis of Review for Water Use Permit ADppcations March, 1994 Public Interest Determination: General COiteria:

To resolve competition, the Governing Board has the authority to approve or modify
the application which best serves the public interest. Prior to Governing Board
consideration of competing applications, the applicants shall address the following:
(1) all basin rules which define public interest by source or otherwise designate
preference for specific use types by sources; (2) in the absence of basin-specific
criteria, or if basin-specifc rules do not resolve the competition, then the applicants
will be required to address the magnitude of their impacts on resource protection
criteria/ legally existing uses and compare their proposed demands to the optimal
resource yield of the area affected, defined above. This process will be referred to as
the optimization evaluation. Optimization Evaluation:

To facilitate the applicants' analysis, the District shall provide the parameters upon
which the optimization evaluation shall be conducted by: (1) defining specific
resource impact limitations, (2) defining the area and resolution of the evaluation
(e.g.model boundaries / gridsize) and (3) providing information on other
applications / legal existing user withdrawal points and demands for the specified
level of certainty. Based on this evaluation, the affected parties will be required to
document specific proposals geared at avoidance and minimization in order to satisfy
the conditions of permit issuance. In the event the parties successfully resolve the
competition situation through this optimization evaluation, the parties shall amend
their permit applications, as appropriate, and submit the same to District staff who
shall prepare a recommendation to the Governing Board in accordance with Rule
40E-1.603, F.A.C. In the event the optimization evaluation does not successfully
resolve the competition, then the competing applications shall be submitted to the
Governing Board for a determination of which use best serves the public interest. Governing Board Determination:

In the event the applications must be submitted to the Governing Board for a
determination of which use best serves the public interest, then the applicants shall, at
least 30 days prior to Governing Board consideration of the applications, submit
information concerning the following criteria upon which the Governing Board will
base its public interest determination:

1i -Whenevfr the toltl wit1,wal. and uses of !round or su..a.e water*
exceed the MAvailnlablo i-uppl.y based on the eCtablished resounre protectio limits. itnludint
wetand protection, saltwater irumsion. and aquifer- protection cr-itria. roeutin n
mompeting usa scna~nrio .nthe following eriter-ia shall be a"UMlied


Basis of Review for Water Use Permit Applications March. 1994

a Within similar use classes, where comparison of efficiency standards is
appropriate. the water use practices by the proposed end existing users, will
be evaluated to determine if the proposed afd- misti users are-eo-weau4
willbe using water in the most efficient manner in order to reduce the
water demands. (FYI need to define similar use classes more specifically.
)For example, the degree to which the competing uses are utilizing
available technology for efficient use of water will be evaluated and
whether such use results in an efficiency exceeding standards incorporated in
District criteria for the specific use type will be evaluated.

hb The reasonableness of use of water by the proposed and existing
users. For example, the suitability of the use to the source of water.
whether the competing use class is consistent with the surrounding land
uses. and the extent to which the competing use contributes to the
exceedence of the resource criteria above other competing uses. are
evaluated under this "reasonableness" criteria.

g The possible alternative sources of water supply available and
whether there are other feasible and practical means to provide water to
satisfy the reasonable needs of proposed and existing users from such
sources. For example, the availability of reclaimed water and lower quality
water supplies, the feasibility of storage and recovery or the development
of alternative sources, will be evaluated.

(d) FAdd optimum resource yield ranking consideration. The two
parameters: magnitude of the impact on the trigger and their ranking as
related. The 2 numbers could be combined into a scaler system and
weighting factors that could be representative of public interest factors
established in the rule -- If there is a non-resource criteria for optimization.
e.g. zoning preference or a 10 year phasing of allowed uses. = basin
criteria could factor in here.

CF^ -If modification of the existing or- proposed uses pur-suant to subseCtie4 (

the following er-iterte--

fW the value of the use. including:

L The economic value of the use] as determined by the
productivity of the uses. the user's investment in facilities. and the
profitability of enterprises dependent upon the use.

2. The social value of the use as determined by the extent to
which the use enhances or improves water resources in the area. the


2L the lone-term resource efficiency.

(gl the extent of water quality degradation caused as a result of the
discharge as a result of the user's activities.

(2 In the event that two or more competing applications qualify equally
under the above provisions of subseetioen (1 -and (2. the Governing Board
shall give preference to a renewal application over an initial application or
the use which was in existence first.

Geod faith effort must be s
applications as expeditiousl!
the application, the applicat
40E 1.603. Competing perry

h.wn by all applicant's to complete pending, competing
as possible. If geed faith effor-ts ec not made to complete
ion may be denied for lack of response pursuant to Rule
ait applications will be processed pursuant to Section 373.233




R9~ic n~ P19irur ~nr W~trr ~kr pprmit ~nnlirncinnn

economic benefit of the use to society. and benefits to public health
and welfare.

(fi the purpose of the use. including:

JL the long term viability of the use with respect to resource
availability and continued demonstration of need for the use at a
particular location and from a particular source.

March 1994

Ji^A k




Policy and Purpose
Basin Expiration Dates
Basin Application Dates and Permit Durations
Lake Okeechobee Basin
Permit Expiration Basin Descriptions
Basin Boundary Overlap

40E-24.011 Policy and Purpose
(1) This chapter addresses application procedures, and expiration of, Individual
Irrigation Use Class Water Use Permits during the District's transition from the use of
Basin Expiration Dates to permit durations based on rules promulgated pursuant to the
District's Water Supply Planning efforts.

(2) The rules in this chapter establish Permit Expiration Basins, Basin
Expiration Dates, Basin Application Dates, and application procedures for Individual
Irrigation Use Class Water Use Permits.

(3) The rules in this chapter supersede the provisions previously contained in
Section 1.7.2of the Basis of Review for Water Use Permit Applications Within the
South Florida Water Management District, November,1995.

Specific Authority 373.044,373.113,373.171 F.S. Law Implemented 373.226, 373.236 F.S.
History -New

Class Water

Permit Expiration Basin Geographic area where Individual Irrigation Use
Use Permits have a specified Basin Expiration Date.

(2) Basin Application Date The date, specified below in Rule 40E-24.121,
after which complete applications for Individual Irrigation Class Water Use Permits shall
be reviewed under rules adopted pursuant to the District's water supply planning efforts.

(3) Basin Expiration Date The date of expiration, specified below in Rule
40E-24.111, of Individual Irrigation Use Class Water Use Permits located in the specified
Permit Expiration Basin.

(4) Complete Application An Individual Irrigation Use Class Water Use

Permit Application is deemed complete when the applicant has complied with the
requirements of 40E-1.603(3), Fla. Admin. Code.

(5) Lower West Coast Rulemaking Effort The rulemaking effort associated
with implementation of selected recommendations contained in the District's Lower
West Coast Water Supply Plan.

Specific Authority 373.044,373.113,373.171 F.S. Law Implemented 373.226,373.236 F.S.
History -New

40E-24.031 Implementation
The effective date for rules established in this chapter is

Specific Authority 373.044,373.113,373.171 F.S. Law Implemented 373.226,373.236 F.S.
History --New

40E-24.111 Basin Expiration Dates
(1) An Individual Irrigation Use Class Water Use Permit shall expire on the
Basin Expiration Date for the Permit Expiration Basin in which the permitted project is

Permit Expiration Basin

Lower West Coast Basin A

Lower West Coast Basin B
(excluding projects located within
the Lake Okeechobee Basin)

Lower West Coast Basin C
(excluding projects located within
the Lake Okeechobee Basin)

Lower West Coast Basin D

Lower West Coast Basin E
(excluding projects located within
the Lake Okeechobee Basin)

Basin Expiration Date

240 days after the effective date
of District rules adopted pursuant
to the Lower West Coast
Rulemaking Effort.

360 days after the effective date
of District rules adopted pursuant
to the Lower West Coast
Rulemaking Effort.

480 days after the effective date
of District rules adopted pursuant
to the Lower West Coast
Rulemaking Effort.

600 days after the effective date
of District rules adopted pursuant
to the Lower West Coast
Rulemaking Effort.

720 days after the effective date
of District rules adopted pursuant
to the Lower West Coast
Rulemaking Effort.

Lake Okeechobee Service Area ____

Upper East Coast Basin

Palm Beach County Basin

Broward County Basin

Kissimmee Basin

Dade/Monroe Basin

April 15, 1997

April 15, 1997

April 15, 1997

December 15, 1997

December 15, 1997

(2) 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 pursuant to the Lower West Coast Rulemaking Effort.
Notice shall be made by mail or by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in
the affected area.

Specific Authority 373.044,373.113,373.171 F.S. Law Implemented 373.226,373.236 F.S.
History -New

40E-24.121 Basin Application Dates and Permit Durations
Individual Irrigation Use Class Water Use Permits issued pursuant to applications
that are completed after the following dates shall be reviewed under rules adopted
pursuant to rules adopted consistent with the applicable, regional water supply plan.
Individual Irrigation Use Class Water Use Permits issued pursuant to applications that
are completed before the following dates shall have a Basin Expiration Date as specified
in Rule 40E-24.111. Additional criteria applicable to projects located within the Lake
Okeechobee service area are detailed in Rule 40E-24.131. Permit applicants utilizing
water from surface water sources which designate Lake Okeechobee as the supply source
must anDlv for permit renewal within the time frame established by rule for
the Lake Okeechobee Basin.


Basin Application Date

Lower West Coast Basin A

Lower West Coast Basin B

Lower West Coast Basin C

INSERT DATE: 120 days after the
effective date of District rules adopted
pursuant to the Lower West Coast
Rulemaking Effort.

INSERT DATE: 240 days after the
effective date the rules adopted pursuant
to the Lower West Coast Rulemaking


DATE: 360 days after the
date of rules adopted
to the Lower West Coast

Rulemaking Effort.

Lower West Coast Basin D INSERT DATE: 480 days after the
effective date of District rules adopted
pursuant to the Lower West Coast
Rulemaking Effort.

Lower West Coast Basin E INSERT DATE: 600 days after the
effective date of District rules adopted
pursuant to the Lower West Coast
Rulemaking Effort.

Specific Authority 373.044,373.113,373.171 F.S. Law Implemented 373.226,373.236 F.S.
History --New

40E-24.131 Lake Okeechobee Basin *****Service Area?????
(1) All Individual Irrigation Use Class Water Use Permits for projects located
within the Lake Okeechobee Basin shall expire on separate
rulemaking_ .

(2) Permittees using watr from source e other than Lake OLkeh hobiC, thic

to either Lake Okeechobee or the Caleosha thee River, may elect to have their permit
applications reviewed concurrently with other water u e applications leeated within the
same Permit Expiration Basin. Permittees using water that oms from Lake

(2) Projects geographically located within the Lake Okeechobee Basin. which
use ground water sources. may elect to have the permit expiration and basin application
date associated with the Lower West Coast Basin designation where the project is
located. How to discuss the Upper East Coast date here?

M Projects geographically located within the Lake Okeechobee Basin. which
use both ground and surface water sources. may elect to apply for permit renewal
utilizing the basin application date associated with the Lower West Coast Basin
designation where the project is located. In such instance, the permit applicant must
document which portions of the project are irrigated with ground water and which
portions of the project are irrigated with surface water. The portion of the project
irrigated with ground water will be eligible for permit renewal in conjunction with the
applicable Lower West Coast Basin. The portion of the project utilizing surface water
will retain its original permit expiration date as designated in cite new. Lk.O. service
area rulemaking. In the event the permit applicant's use of surface and ground water is
intertwined such that segregation of surface and ground water irrigation areas is
impossible, the permit expiration date designated in cite new. Lk. 0. service area
rulemaking shall apply.

Specific Authority 373.044,373.113,373.171 F.S. Law Implemented 373.226,373.236 F.S.
History -New

40E-24.142 Permit Expiration Basin Descriptions
(1) Lower West Coast Basin A is described in Figure 2.

(2) Lower West Coast Basin B is described in Figure 3.

(3) Lower West Coast Basin C is described in Figure 4.

(4) Lower West Coast Basin D is described in Figure 5.

(5) Lower West Coast Basin E is described in Figure 6.

(7) Upper East Coast Basin is described in Figure 7.

(8) Palm Beach County Basin is described in Figure 8.

(9) Broward County Basin is described in Figure 9.

(10) Kissimmee Basin is described in Figure 10.

(11) Dade/Monroe Basin is described in Figure 11.

(12) Lake Okeechobee Basin is described in Figure 12.
Specific Authority 373.044,373.113,373.171 F.S. Law Implemented 373.226,373.236 F.S.
History --New

40E-24.152 Basin Boundary Overlap

(1) Geographic Overlap: For projects whose acreage extends Permit
Expiration Basin boundaries, the District shall assign a Basin Expiration Date and Basin
Application Date, based on the following criteria, and shall notify the permitted. A
project shall be assigned the Basin Expiration Date and Basin Application Date of the
Permit Expiration Basin where:

(a) the majority of the project's volume of water is withdrawn or;
(b) the majority of the project's irrigated acreage is located, if the volume of
water withdrawn is split equally between the basins.

If available, pumpage data will be used to determine the historical volume of water
withdrawn. In the absence of historical pumpage data, the number and capacity of
withdrawal facilities will be used.

(2) Withdrawal Impact Overlap: The District does not intend, by adoption of
these rules, to create a preference between users within different basins or planning

areas. However, it is possible that projects located in an adjacent basin having an earlier
Basin Expiration Date and Basin Application Date may affect user rights by having the
ability to apply, and obtain a permit, first. Thus, if due to basin boundary lines, user
rights are affected, a user may elect to have its permit application reviewed concurrently
with other water use applications within an adjacent basin by filing a permit renewal
application. In the event the permitted determines it is no longer necessary to
concurrently process its application with an adjacent basin's applications, the permit
applicant may withdraw its renewal application. The manner in which user rights may be
affected include contribution to cumulative drawdown impacts which may trigger water
resource protection criteria such that there may be insufficient water available for all
permit applicants.

Specific Authority 373.044,373.113,373.171 F.S. Law Implemented 373.226,373.233 and
373.236 F.S. History --New



C1HAPTE.R 4flR4 i'd1o~

Rules of the South Florida Water Management District
Chapter 40E-2



pursuant to

Policy and Purpose
Permits Required
Publications Incorporated by Reference
Content of Application
Conditions for Issuance of Permits
Duration of Permits
Modification of Permits
Revocation of Permits
Transfer of Permit
Limiting Conditions
Temporary Permits
Emergency Authorization
Permit Classification
Declaration of a Water Shortage (Repealed 5/30/82)
Change, Suspension or Restriction of Permits During Water Shortage
(Repealed 5/30/82)
Procedures Under Water Shortage (Repealed 5/30/82)
Declaration of Emergency Due to Water Shortage (Repealed 5/30/82)
Procedures Under Emergency Due to Water Shortage (Repealed 5/30/82)

Policy and Purpose.
It is the policy of the District to control all water uses within its boundaries,
the provisions of Chapter 373, Florida Statutes, and Chapters 17-40 and, Title

40E, F.A.C.
(2) The rules in this chapter implement the comprehensive water use permit
system contemplated in part II of Chapter 373, Florida Statutes.
(3) Additional rules relating to water use are found in Chapter 40E-20 (General
Water Use Permits), Chapter 40E-21 (The Water Shortage Plan), Chapter 40E-22 (Regional
Water Shortage Plans) and Chapter 40E-23 (Critical Water Supply Problem Areas).
(4) Standards for the construction, repair and abandonment of water wells are
found in Chapter 40E-3 (Water Wells) and Chapter 40E-30 (General Permits for Water
Specific Authority 373.044, 373.113, 373.171, F.S. Law Implemented 373.103(1), 373.203, 373-216-249, F.S.
History-New 9-3-81, Formerly 16K-2.01, Amended 74-82, 2-24-85, 11-17-91.

chapter are:

The effective dates for the water use permitting program established in this



40E-2.101 Content of Application.
(1) Applications for permits required by this chapter shall be filed with the
District. The application shall contain:
(a) The following parts of Form 0645 Surface Water Management Permit
Applications and/or Water Use Permit Applications, as incorporated by reference in Rule
1. Part RC-1A Administrative Information for Surface Water Management
Permit Applications and/or Water Use Permit Applications;
2. Part RC-1W Application for a Water Use Permit;
(b) The appropriate permit application processing fee required by Rule 40E-1.607;
(c) The information required in subsection 373.229(1), Florida Statutes; and
(d) Information sufficient to show that the use meets the criteria and conditions
established in Rule 40E-2.301.
(e) If the proposed water use is in conjunction with aquifer storage and recovery
or artificial recharge pursuant to Chapter 40E-5. the information required to satisfy the
conditions for permit issuance in Rule 40E-5.301. check to make form references
(2) The application must be signed by the applicant or the authorized agent of the
Specific Authority 373.044, 373.113, 373.171 F.S. Law Implemented 373.103(1), 373.219, 373.223, 373.229 F.S.
History-New 9-3-81, Amended 12-1-82, 2-24-85, 11-21-89, Repromulgated 1-4-93, Amended 4-20-94,, x-x-x.

40E-2.301 Conditions for Issuance of Permits.
(1) In order to obtain a permit, permit renewal, or permit modification under this
chapter, an applicant must give reasonable assurances that the proposed water use,
independently or when combined with other proposed and existing uses. at the time the
permit application is deemed complete:
(a) will not cause significant saline water intrusion;
(b) will not adversely impact offsite land uses;
(c) will not cause adverse environmental impacts;
(d) will not cause pollution of the water resources;
(e) is otherwise a reasonable-beneficial use as defined in subsection 373.019(4),
Florida Statutes, with consideration given to the factors set forth in Rule 62-40.410(2);--7-
(f) will not interfere with presently existing legal uses;
(g) is in accordance with the State Water Policy on water transport pursuant to
Rule 62-40.422 47-40.402;
(h) makes use of a reclaimed water source unless the applicant, in any geographic
location, demonstrates that its use is either not economically, environmentally or technically
feasible; or in areas not designated as Critical Water Supply Problem Areas pursuant to
Chapter 40E-23, F.A.C.,the applicant demonstrates reclaimed water is not readily available;
(i) is consistent with Sections 373.016,373.036, Florida Statutes, and otherwise
is consistent with the public interest as prescribed by Chapter 373 and this Chapter:and.
(jD will not violate the applicable minimum flows and levels in Chapters 40E-22
or 40E-8.



(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-
Mareh-1-994", incorporated by reference in Rule 40E-2.091(1), are met.

(3) All water use permit applications prior to being deemed complete, which are
requesting water from a source which is inadequate to supply all applicants, will be
rnneisiprnii rnmnptina nlrllant tn .erptinn '7A 3TA F .Q and Rnul. dE-p 6f.-l A nrnviddp

in the document incorporated by reference in Rule 40E-2.091(1).

i-\ f a permit applicanif is deemed meeting pursuant t,, Rule 40AE 1 6301. the
appliation fh-all ots be ddmed cfmplete until all pending completing mpplfiations Withfin-
the sub basnif arc deemed oomaleteo

Specific Authority 373.044, 373.113, 373.171 F.S. Law Implemented 373.023, 373.185, 373.219, 373.223, 373.226,
373.236 F.S. History-New 9-3-81, Formerly 16K-2.035(2), Amended 2-24-85, 1-4-93, 4-20-94.

~-L~ /



: /L. f^^^ -cf-. -
,2LA, -4b

---..- -------C -
V --^ ----T A-r (^-o--^c/A~~
^ ^U --- ^^ ^-"-- --5^
I -'- --- --f-T--- ---'--/dwp--- ^7 .^^~~f~
;t cl/^ ^a ^^' : '- ^tA-t-^-e--

': L~XL~t ~ L -~ -~
~ ~-"i`~;B-i~i~i ~i-,1o ~f' A4o~CO.

'cA' >PLr







The District.
The Governing Board.
General Description of District Organization and Operations.
Basins Within the District.
General Information Concerning the District.
Statutory Chapters and Rules.
Public Information and Inspection of Records.
District Clerk and Official Reporter.
Public Access. (Transferred)
Final Order Indexing.
Final Orders Required to be Indexed.
Listing of Final Orders.
Numbering of Final Orders.
Maintenance of Final Orders.
Public Access.
Complaints under the Americans with Disabilities Act.



Notice of Meeting or Workshop and Telecommunications.
Agenda of Public Meetings and Workshops.
Emergency Meetings.
Procedures for Abstaining from Voting Conflicts of Interest.



Commencement of Proceedings.
Notice of Proceeding and the Proposed Rules.
Content of Notice.
Petitions to Initiate Rulemaking Proceedings.
District Action on Petitions to Initiate Rulemaking Proceedings.
Rulemaking Materials.
Rulemaking Proceedings No Hearing.







Rulemaking Proceedings Hearing.
Incorporation by Reference.
Emergency Rule Adoption.


Purpose and Use of Declaratory Statement.
District Disposition.


Subpart A



Subpart B


General Provisions

Scope of Part V.
Computation of Time.
Appearances; Criteria for Authorized Representation. (Repealed)
Consolidation. (Repealed)
Joinder of Parties. (Repealed)
Filing and Service of Papers.
Complaints, District Investigations and Probable Cause
Point of Entry into Proceedings.
Other Applicable Procedural Rules.

Formal Proceedings

Initiation of Formal Proceedings.
Amendment of Petitions.
Answer. (Repealed)
Motions in Opposition to Petition.
Prehearing Conferences. (Repealed)
Discovery. (Repealed)
Notice of Hearing. (Repealed)
Continuances. (Repealed)
Dismissal and Default. (Repealed)
Witness Fees. (Repealed)
Order of Presentation. (Repealed)
















Subpart C


Burden of Proof.
Witnesses. (Repealed)
Post-Hearing Memoranda.
Recommended Order.
Exceptions to Recommended Order.
Final Order.

Informal Proceedings

Informal Proceedings.
Submission of Evidence.
Final Order.




Permits Required.
Procedures for Application for Individual Surface Water
Management and Water Use Permits.
T_--.-l---_ f_ T ------_ _f ItA,~T__: _. ^<^_f >ffrA Tn.Tt I>.>m i<^




Complaints. (Repealed)
Procedures for Application for General Surface Water
Management and Water Use Permits.
Permit Application Processing Fees.
Denial of Permit.
Suspension, Revocation and Modification of District Permits.
Permit Renewal.
Notification of Transfer of Interest in Real Property.
Transfer of Water Use or Surface Water Management Permit.
Emergency Action.
Administrative Enforcement Action.
Orders of Corrective Action and Consent Agreements.
Coordinated Agency Review Procedures for the Florida Keys Area
of Critical State Concern.
Forms and Instructions.


^f j -** ^ ,

(WTv W AT ND DlF~rnTD A 'TI A I LL .er 9d '3I


40E-1.603 Procedures for Application for Individual Surface Water Management and
Water Use Permits.
(1) Procedures for application for individual surface water management and water
use permits, pursuant to Chapters 40E-4 and 40E-2, respectively, shall be in accordance with
Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, this rule, and the provisions of Part V of these rules.
(2) An application for an individual permit shall be:
(a) filed with the District on the appropriate application form referenced in Rule
(b) accompanied by the appropriate fee in accordance with the schedule of fees
as established by the Board in Rule 40E-1.607. The failure of any person to pay the required
fee(s) shall be grounds for denial or revocation of the permit, and;
(c) accompanied by all information required in accordance with Rules 40E-2.101
or 40E-4.101, as appropriate, including public noticing information for surface water
management applications.
(d) filed and processed according to the procedures and requirements outlined in
this section and the Basis of Review for Water Use Permit Applications within the South
Florida Water Management District. 1996. which specifies procedures for renewal
of irrigation consumptive use permits, within the Lower W. et Cat Basin. -While -te-
general oroeeedures outlined below retain effectiveness within the Lower- West Coast Basni
th e' detailed in Rule 40 1 .6031 .re intended to elabrate un or s slde R., .b,
eroeeedurct detailed below which address the same subjec matef
(3) A permit application will not be deemed complete pursuant to Section 120.60,
Florida Statutes, until the number of copies of information required in paragraphs (2)(a)
and (2)(c) and sufficient responses to all requests for additional information are submitted
by the permit applicant. If the requisite copies are not submitted at the time of receipt of
the permit application, the first request for additional information shall request the
unsubmitted copies.
(4) Within a reasonable time period not to exceed 45 days after receipt of an
individual surface water management or water use permit application, the District shall
publish notice thereof in a newspaper having general circulation as defined in Chapter 50,
Florida Statutes. In addition, the District shall provide a copy of the notice to any person
who has filed a written request for notification of any pending applications affecting a


I nim'TA A ATIn PDii~IrTTTI Ai


particular designated area. Written requests for notice copies must be renewed every six
(5) Notice of receipt of a surface water management permit application shall be
posted pursuant to Section 373.413,Florida Statutes, at District headquarters and each office
of the District.
(6) Interested persons shall have the opportunity to inspect a copy of the
application and submit written comments, which shall be considered by the District if
received within 20 days of the first date of publication. The District shall require the person
submitting comments to furnish additional information reasonably necessary to ascertain the
nature of the comments. The District shall consider comments received after the designated
time period if proposed agency action has not been taken on the application. The District
shall provide the applicant with a copy of all comments received on the application.
(7) Publication of the notice of application pursuant to subsection (4) shall be
used as evidence of constructive notice of the permit application to all substantially affected
persons. Constructive notice is notice that imputes knowledge of the application to the
general public. Persons who wish to be advised as to proposed agency action regarding the
permit application and provided an opportunity to request an administrative hearing
pursuant to Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, shall file a written request for further notice
regarding the permit application by the date specified in the notice. Notices of proposed
agency action will be mailed only to persons complying with this subsection.
(8)(a) Within 30 days after receipt of an application, the District shall notify the
applicant if the application is incomplete and inform the applicant of the additional
information required to make the application complete. If additional information is not
supplied within 90 days after notice by the District, the application will be denied for lack
of completeness. Within 30 days after receipt of additional information, the District may
request that information needed to clarify such additional information or to answer new
questions raised by or related to such additional information. The subsequent request for
additional information shall include a request for information not previously provided in
response to any previous requests for additional information. If the application is still
incomplete after additional information is provided, the District shall so notify the applicant,
who shall have an additional 30 days to render the application complete or be denied for
lack of completeness. An extension of time may be granted by the District upon a showing
by the applicant that a good faith effort is being made to provide the additional information
and that additional time is required. Denial of an application for lack of completeness is
without prejudice to the applicant's right to file a new application on the same subject

beiftg deemed eamlete and are requesting water froem a limited source will be cotmdefed
omse1ine ufrsuant to Setion 373,;233. -.S. Iiam tna permit ~ arrl:oa~ n,... demed-
eEffletif l. ithin the Lower- West Cast Basin ahll b e or-,..d ,pursueat to Rule^ 40..
1603 1 Fr, I ll F or, en1 ether competing permit aeolieations. once a competing appliaition ha- b
dew toinhd to be -omple u applieation wifll net be consider-ed competian with
applieatioa filed after its ompletion d .e. A .4paer-mit application which-4 i ed after- g
mlct. ne33 dewnrtimfitin hma occurred ergardine eompeting application will not -be-




...mlete 1 whe ea...... to. ..r..est fr addition ifo,1-rmatio for- sech mp.., et
applications have been sufficiently provided to be deemed co~mplet

(b) If information submitted to the District by the applicant, either in response
to requests for additional information or independent of a District request, incorporates or
results in a substantial modification in the proposed activity for which the applicant seeks
a permit, the application will be considered an amended application. For purposes of this
subsection, the term "substantial modification" shall mean a modification which is reasonably
expected to lead to substantially different water resource or environmental impacts which
require a detailed review. The amended application shall be reviewed for completeness
under subparagraph (a). The District shall have 90 days from the receipt of a complete
application pursuant to subparagraph (a) to approve or deny the amended application.
(9)(a) The District shall notify the applicant of the date on which the application is
declared complete. The application for an individual permit is complete when it meets the
District's requirements pursuant to Rule 40E-4.101 (Content of Application) or Rule
40E-2.101 (Content of Application), as applicable.
(b) For projects which have filed an application for a letter of conceptual approval
for surface water management permits concurrently with an Application for Development
Approval (ADA) for a Development of Regional Impact (DRI), review of the application
will be tolled until the affected Regional Planning Council has determined that the ADA
is sufficient.
(c) After the application is declared complete, the District shall prepare a staff
report, which shall contain its recommendations regarding the subject application and which
shall constitute proposed agency action. A notice of proposed agency action together with
the staff report shall be furnished to the applicant and any persons requesting the same
pursuant to subsection (7). The notice shall state the District Staff's recommendation that
the Board approve, deny, or approve with conditions the permit application and the reasons
(10) Substantially affected persons shall have the right to request an administrative
hearing under Section 120.57,Florida Statutes, by filing a petition for administrative hearing
with the District Clerk within the timeframe set forth in Rule 40E-1.511. A petition for
administrative hearing shall be deemed filed with the District on the date of receipt by the
District Clerk and must be in substantial compliance with the provisions of Rule 40E-1.521,
a copy of which shall be provided with the notice. Failure to substantially comply with the
provisions of Rule 40E-1.521 or to timely request an administrative hearing shall constitute
a waiver of the right to a Section 120.57 administrative hearing.
(11) The Board shall consider the permit application at its next available regulatory
meeting following the mailing of notice of proposed agency action. The permit applicant and
other interested parties may appear before the Board to present informal argument in favor
of or against the proposed agency action. Appearance before the Board pursuant to this
subsection shall not provide a basis for appealing the decision of the Board pursuant to
Chapter 120, Florida Statutes.
(12) The Board may approve, reject or modify the proposed agency action, which
shall constitute final agency action, except for those instances when a valid petition for
administrative hearing has been timely filed. When a valid petition for administrative
hearing has been filed, the Board action shall defer consideration of the matter pending the


DR" T CHAPTER 40E-1 (3/94)


completion of the administrative hearing and the submittal of a recommended order, and
any exceptions to that order.
(13) Applicants and other interested parties not objecting to the notice of proposed
agency action should nevertheless be prepared to defend their position regarding the permit
application when it is considered by the Board for final agency action. In the event the
Board takes final agency action which differs materially from the proposed agency action,
the District shall mail a notice of final agency action to all persons who received a notice
of proposed agency action. Substantially affected persons who failed to request a Section
120.57 administrative hearing based upon the notice of proposed agency action shall have
the right to request such a hearing solely on issues involving the material change in
accordance with subsection (10).
(14) Applicants entitled to a hearing pursuant to Section 120.57(1), Florida
Statutes, may waive their right to such a hearing and request an informal hearing before the
Board pursuant to Section 120.57(2), Florida Statutes, which may be granted at the option
of the Board.
Specific Authority 120.53 F.S. Law Implemented 120.53(1), 120.60(2) F.S. History--New 9-3-81, Formerly
16K-1.08(1)-(8), Amended 7-1-86, 7-26-87, 11-21-89, 5-11-93.

Lower West C,1 .Basn N Gaometin Apl c iadt o

fl c D ure. fo... r renewal ..of i;rigati n.mptive use per..mits within the. .. wer.

West Coat Banin shall be in acrdane with Chapter 120. Florida States, this r-utle. and

the water resour-ee among renewal permit applifants the Distr-iet mast assur-e flim

review of ffetedpmi remni wl ma ppO l ae ino:a under- section 373.223 and 373.233. Fla. tat

Applicationt review sub basniins widtin the Lower- West GCeat Basin for renewal pf

pr,,.off aing enrccreated as shown eft Figutre X. The application review sub bnia wr

heated based upon rview of existinge permit numfnber 9 and withdrawal soures cnaie

irrigation onmtivO ----its arc deemed to c=pir-eJ this date supersedes the -r- -- --



.IHAPTER 40E-1 (31/94

Aexitine permit expiration date. -4h1 vrariun b basir an expiratione daefs neate a swtger-ing

of "h deadlinnes for asubmittal of all renewal napliations witrrhin thte antri TLower Wst Coast

DBain. The Distrit's intet is to one ent.ly press all renewal permast analia.atioan witr h

ff --An appliatiofnt for remnwal of an individual irrigation per-mit shl be filed

within a dav applicaion filing window which begins 14 davs befoo the sub basin

-pir-ation date. Holder ef i~ rrt, o stim, J sne*L npeml its within each sub-basin muast

,file a newal anlieatione, w;;ithin this 14A daln filing window to b tfrateA as- a-* enewer

anesliant and affrded the proetentions of tin eeni 3737233. Fla. Stmt.. in the ervesa

"en..ding" msetin apiations. A li ationem for-.. renewal shall not be aepoted f.-. filife

.rr: to the designated 14 dav, wid.. A,...liati,.s filed afr, thel 14 dAy window sha.,. be

processed as nefn renewal. initial apphieations ead will net be enfsidered "pefndinge" with anr

timely filed comp etinge aer pliationst tinhe desigkn*mad ub e1basin.t

f -Witin 30 days aftr:nr the application filing the District*si shall oegareta

preliminary review and tna tifl Al 1 ermit rrnewll apnlirnts within the approgprki at lsbbasin

who,. nr identified anl oten tally -mpetig fer limited rn.esounea the following r.. ur..

will ae-lv! Appliatiens for medification of the watr use activities under the e?'tm


r~lWDATP~ Ah P~fl ~ mr


ij CHAPTER 40E-1 (3/94

permit shall be treated an s i nofar as the modification metmmta an ineWa-ao in

allenation, change in withdrawmen serfe or sinaifinant change in withdArwal elation.

.. All otentily ,- -eometing r..enewa. l pli. ..latiens will be pr.. essed, using. -a

aelieation. Additie onarl review riteria for- aomeetina Dernit* appelications is soeifin-eden

Basis of DReview for Wlt er- Use Per-mit Appaliatnrs wit hi.n the South Flor id Watrs

Management Ditflr i.

fl2- All per-mit r-enewal applicants who ae i mpaetedi by a poential -reSeUee

eemtion t,,iVt ef ,;v. w will be atifie of the ot entetial resotir-e cIpM N etition int wte Difltr T .et: n's

request fr additioWal infrmnatie n. n fa potential resouree cfmp*etition is cited in h

reat,, fr.. addiion..atl i.fr.mation,, thef all imn;aeted er.mit rene-wal aplian.s wil

impacted renewal apmpliations arc comelete.

(e) -Requested infowr-maion amust be r-eceived by the DistTetrit fe later than 90 da

,after the date f the first reqTauest s for arrrdditioael inf rmeattion. Witin 30 days, aflFr-e

of additional information the Distriict mav request that information needed to elarifr gh

,additional information er- tontwr n* few qus*tie*.n raised bv ofr related to such addifional

information. The subsequent rees, t for- additinnrlnl -informant-in shalnll incluide a r-ut f

information neot revieusv provided inr v rre snse toa- revioms g r fuests foer- additional

f -If the aplic nr atioel s are still infmpl eteafte afradditioeal informaion is proidseo

the Disti ,t shall so netifv, t.he a.,li ,n ,,.wh 1 hallnr n have an additi,.., 30 dam to r..nt-

.,appliat.nr:. o....-te. -An exei-on f tie mav be .ra .td b1. ....th... a district an a 1- ei

-T J-,J ./L fA I .-A r

by the anpliarnt thsat a ood faith effort is being made to provide the additional information

and thwt additioWnl timo is rtiuied. Denial of an apphliatio for f la k of completeness is

.wihomt prejudice to the app elicnt'se rieht to file a noew .apli.atioe n -on the same mubjet

matter. If additional information is not supplied within the specified time periods an

apnlieation maw be deAnied for lack of nmpletenes or maw beo ennsidered to anet besat 9-.r

the ublin interest under seAnetin 3173.233. Fla. S .. unless the District. secifiallry waives this

reepome tifme.

f4l ) The Dinstrit shall notifyr the applicant of the date An wrrhih the @appntWiotias

denlarled complete. The pplikatieon fr an individual permit is complentee when it meets the

Distrient's rfnuirmenens purrsuanft t Rule 40E 2. l101 contentt of A ppliation),ana asaplicable.

Once the competing amplications aec deemed Aomplete. the or*cdu*mc found int Rule-4E-A

goeifie Author-it 120.53 12.8. Law bmismontd 120.63M. 12,0.60M21 FS. Hiai Nw 95.



40E-1.610 Permit Renewal.
(1) Holders of renewable permits shall make timely application as required by
Rule 40E-1.603 or Rule 40E-1.606, as applicable, for renewal so as to avoid expiration
during the renewal process. When timely application is made, the existing permit shall not
expire until final agency action, or if the permit is denied or the terms limited, until the last
day for seeking review of the District order or a later date fixed by order of the reviewing
(2) Application for a permit renewal is timely only if actually filed at the District
prior to expiration of the existing permit. Mailing the application does not constitute filing.
f^ -Applications for- renewal of individual irri n tive use permits
within the Lwr ~mPw~ West Coast Basin must follow the predefures Mapecifed in Rule 4dE-
Specific Authority 120.53(1), 373.044, 373.113 F.S. Law Implemented 120.60, 373.219, 373.239, 373.323, 373.413
F.S. History--New 5-11-93. Amended -9 .




change in resource
criteria or anticipated
impacts to resource

Competition Exists

Optimization Evaluation
(see attached chart)



Section 373.233 Public Int. Test -
1) Economic factors
2) Social factors
3) Optimization ranking



I. Define area to Optimize: (sub-basin scale)
a) Identify Competition Trigger
i) LEU
ii) Resource trigger
1. Saltwater
2. Natural System
3. Dewatering of Supply Source

b) Identify Users Influencing Resource or LEU Trigger
(>0.1' foot @ trigger)
i) Competing Applications
ii) Existing Legal Users (permits not up for renewal)

II. Generate Ranking/Score
a) Percent Impact on Resource or LEU Trigger
i) Function of Drawdown for GW or Volume for Surface Water
ii) Calculated for both competing apps and LEU
(permits not up for renewal)
LEU are "givens"?
LEU must compete?

b) Compare "actual" user's impacts against optimal water
use distribution matrix
i) Develop optimal water use distribution matrix
a) Area of optimization defined from I above
b) Constraints evaluated in Optimization
1) Wetlands impact
2) Saltwater intrusion
3) Dewatering of source
4) Other subjective criteria (eg: public interest
criteria source zoning) phased approach
ii) Compare actual water use distribution against the optimized
a) Evaluation factors
,._ --- --- -- ---' 1) location of existing facilities (percent impact)
2) impacts at or less than "optimal" yield on land are
S- ranked high, impacts in excess of optimal score
3) Combine 1 and 2 into a numerical ranking





1. Capital construction, ASR, RO,
2. Operational changes
stage & routing protocol
3. Local Government Interaction
(land use, water conservation
4. Land management/acquisition
(SOR, CARL, etc.)

Optimization Ranking
(see attached chart)

Change in withdrawal location

Change in source
Operation schedule

Optimize efficiency of use




Decrease in water supply due
to social benefit (decrease in
regional storage because of
min flows / reservation)




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