The Florida Chamber's
..,V 0 6 1996
NOTICE Cr o Talahassee
Jacob D Varn
November 1, 1996
Please find the following items for inclusion in your EN notebooks:
1. Bulletin. File behind Bulletin tab in Newsletter, Calendar, Bulletin Section.
2. St. Johns River Water Management District Governing Board Roster and
Key Personnel Roster. File behind WMD tab in Agency Roster section.
(3. New EPA? What New EPA? Changes to the Rulemaking Process by
Lawrence E. Sellers, Jr., Holland & Knight. File behind Special Topics tab.
4. DEP 1997-1998 Legislative Budget Request. File behind Special Topics tab.
5. Briefing on Reclaassification of Surface Waters as presented to the ERC.
File behind Special Topics tab.
6. Water Supply Development and Funding Working Group Meeting Summary.
File behind Special Topics tab.
S 857 EAST PARK AVENUE TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32301 (904) 681-2550 FAX (904) 224-0279
The Florida Chamber's
November 1, 1996
WATER SUPPLY GROUP
The Water Supply Group has announced its future meeting dates as follows:
November 8, 1996
December 6, 1996
December 18, 1996
January 8, 1997
January 31, 1997
All meetings will be in the Tallahassee area but exact locations will be announced prior to each
A meeting was held on October 17. See attachment for information on what occurred at that
QUARTERLY WATER RESOURCES COORDINATION MEETING
The quarterly meeting of this group composed of the Lt. Governor, Executive Officers of DEP and
the WMDs, chairs of the governing boards of the districts, Executive Officers of DCA, Game and
Fresh Water Fish Commission, Department of Agriculture and PSC was held on October 28, 1996.
The agenda was as follows:
10:30 Opening Remarks Virginia Wetherell
10:35 Annual schedule for quarterly water resources coordination meetings
10:45 Discussion of signed Executive Order on water resources (96-297)
Update on water supply development and funding working group (Estus
Update on report on implementation of Water Management District
Review Commission recommendations (SWFMD)
11:00 Presentation by PSC on Rate Setting
( 11:30 Annual Water Resources Workplan (DEP) Discussion of final draft
11:45 Briefing from each water management district and state agencies on current
water resources issues
857 EAST PARK AVENUE TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32301 (904) 681-2550 FAX (904) 224-0279
12:15 Presentation by Investor-owned utilities on Public Service Commission rate
setting (Due to a conflict of interest, PSC representatives will not be present
Future agenda items
Other calendar items
DEP PERSONNEL CHANGES
Janet Llewellyn, formerly Assistant Director of the Division of Environmental Resource Permitting,
has moved to the position of Acting Director, Division of Water Policy. Terry Pride is Assistant
Director of the Office of Water Policy.
Mike Ashey, former chief Bureau of Submerged Lands & Environmental Resources, has become
Assistant Director, Division of State Lands. Diana Dartland has moved to Greenways/Trails as an
environmental administrator. Mark Glisson moves to Ecosystem Management as an environmental
Effective November 1, 1996, the Bureaus of Mine Reclamation, Submerged Lands and Environmental
Resources and Beaches and Coastal Systems will be under the umbrella of the Division of Water
Facilities headed by Director Mimi Drew. It is believed that the Bureau of Aquatic Plant
Management will move to State Lands.
GAME & FRESH WATER FISH COMMISSION
The Game and Fresh Water Fish commission has scheduled a workshop and meeting. The workshop
will be November 14 at 1:00 p.m. and the Public Meeting will be November 15 at 9:00 a.m. in the
Farris Bryant Building, Tallahassee.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
The Endangered Plant Advisory council conducted an emergency public meeting on September 4,
1996, in Gainesville, Florida to hear concerns and receive additional information from interested
parties on Halophilajohnsonii. Based on the additional information received during the meeting and
the need for further research on Halophilajohnsonii, it was the recommendation of the Endangered
Plant Advisory Council that Halophilajohnsonii be removed from the Regulated Plant Index.
On October 1, 1996, the Division of Plant Industry received a written request for a public hearing to
introduce documents and testimony from experts in the field of seagrass biology and to present
substantial evidence on why Halophilajohnsonni should not be removed from the Regulated Plant
Based on this request, a public hearing was held Wednesday, October 23, 1996, in the Doyle Conner
The Department will hold a public meeting to discuss the development of the State Management Plan
for Pesticides in Ground Water on December 5, 1996 from 9:00 a.m. 12:00 noon at the SFWMD's
Storch Room in West Palm Beach.
The Department has also announced a meeting of the Pesticide Review Council on December 6, 1996
from 9:00 a.m 12:00 noon at the SFWMD's Storch Room. Contact the Bureau of Pesticides,
Room 169, Doyle Conner Building, 3125 Conner Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1650 for
AIR BUBBLE RULE
DEP has scheduled a workshop on November 6, 1996 as a continuation of the workshop held on
October 8, 1996 where attendance was impeded by Tropical Storm Josephine. This rulemaking will
amend rule chapter 62-212.710 authorizing the creation of air emissions bubbles and to establish
requirements for such bubble. This rulemaking will address applicable restrictions to and permitting
requirements for air emission bubbles. The workshops will be held at 9:00 a.m. at 111 S. Magnolia
Drive, Suite 23, Tallahassee. Contact Bill Leffler at 904/488-1344 for a copy of the proposed rule
or additional information.
RISK BASED PRIORITY COUNCIL
The Risk Based Priority Council will meet on November 20, 1996 at 10:00 a.m at the University of
Miami's Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences, Miami The council was created
by the Legislature to recommend guidelines for state agencies to use in conducting risk analyses for
proposed rules. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss comments received concerning the second
draft report and to finalize the Council's report to the governor and Legislature. It is anticipated that
this will be the Council's final meeting. Copies of the September 12th draft may be obtained from
Ed Montanaro, Economic and Demographic Research Division, Joint Legislative Management
Committee, 576 Pepper Building, 111 W. Madison Street, Tallahassee, FL 32399-1400.
SUSTAINABLE SOUTH FLORIDA
The following four public meetings have been announced:
Sustainable Agriculture Committee
Wednesday, November 6, 1:00 5:00 p.m
Energy Advisory Committee Supply Task Group
Wednesday, November 6, 9:00 a.m. 5:00 p.m.
Energy Advisory Committee Consumption Task Group
Wednesday, November 6, 12:00 noon 6:00 and
Thursday, November 7, 8:30 4:00 p.m.
Energy Advisory Committee
Thursday, December 5, 9:00 a.m. 5:00 p.m.
Friday, December 6, 8:30 a.m. 5:00 p.m.
Agriculture Committee will meet at South Dade Government Center, Room 202, Miami
Supply Task Group meets at the Public Service Commission Office, 2540 Shumard Oak Blvd.,
Consumption Task Group meets at the Governor's Commission Office, 1550 Madruga Avenue, Suite
220, Coral Gables
Energy Advisory Committee meets at Metro-Dade Cultural Center, 101 W. Flagler St., Downtown
'' "M. NT
^aQtr R Worse Assarl- 6,E-c;u*-w^ 'i 3 **t-
Cnal' es .-v a' .'.
POST OFFICE BOX 1429 PALATKA, FLORIDA 32178-1429
-E:r HDJl804SM-329.453: P-:'CCM KCd-S340-4:
';3 04.3 9.-l: TOO33 SU:;C;A 66C-4450
.,VVX F 1diJ213.: A;'- 'C2 C1d ft'v :Dn-
407-W<30~o JaIcaamwv. %1o 3%:CF MatwcM. onc JInCs 1.20 ma.,' Pu 37a.1:c5M
D 40"- 7- ; 6'14-?30-2?t S 4-43"14,( 407.244- !.:
TO 90S*.7 -7,,'C T3 d3a7.-?2 .-3l '00 li-.25-1 03
ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
GOVERNING BOARD MEMBERS
Jim T. Swann
Patrioia T. Harden
Griffin A. Grene
James H. Williams
955 Stonewood Lane
Maitiand, Fl 32751
P.O. Box 728
Femandina Beach, Fl 32035-0728
13 Christopher St.
St. Augustine, Fl 32095
P.O. Box 3767
Cocoa, FI 32924
174 WekIva Park Dr.
Sanford, FI 32771
P.O. Box 590
Daytona Beach, FI 32115
6828 Linford Lane
Jacksonville, F, 32217
2075 38th Ave.
Vero Beach, Fi 32960
P.O. Box 2077
Ocala, FI 34478
MAU=--- *A------ *i TI= **-
Key Personnel List
P.O. Box 1429
Mary Jane Angelo
Asst. Executive Director
Asst. To Exec. Dir.
Deputy Asst. Exec. Director
Dir. Legal Services
Dir. Public Information
Dir. Information Resources
Dir. Planning & Acquisition
Dir. Resource Management
Dir. Water Resources
Dir. Human Resources
Dir. Div./Proj. Works
Asst. Gen. Counsel II
Asst. Gen. Counsel II
Dir. Div/Trans & Equip.
Asst. Dir. Operations
Dir. Div/Land Acq.
Chiet GIS Officer
Dir. Div/Gen. Serv.
. 10-24 is:-,6 :31'3 4E.02 07-
John W. Williams
Service Center Dir./Jax.
Asst. Service Center Dir./Orl.
Dir. Div/Land Mgt.
Asst. Dir. Water Res.
Asst. Dir. Res. Mgt.
Dir. Div/Project P1.
Service Center Dir./Melb.
Dir. Div/Lab Services
Chief Info. Res. Officer
Dir. Div/Water Use Compl.
Dir. Div/Permit Data Ser.
Dir. Div/Env. Sciences
Dir. Div/Env. Res. Mg.
Dir. Div./Ground Wtr.
Pro. Mgr. Haz. Waste
Asst. Gen. Counsel II
Dir. Div/Surface Wtr. Mngt.
Dir. Div/Finance & Acct.
Dir. Div./Contracts Adm.
Asst. Dir. Div/Grd. Wtr.
Dir. Div/Policy & PL.
Asst. Gen. Counsel II
Dir. Div/Project Mgt.
Dir. Div/Water Use Reg.
Service Center Dir./Orl.
Dir. Div/Needs & Sources
Asst. Dir. Res. Mgt.
Sr. Asst. Gen. Counsel
Dir. Div/Env. Res. Compl.
HOLLAND & KNIGHT A Partnershp including Professional Corporations
315 South Calhoun Street Atlanta Orlando
Suite 600 Fort Lauderdale St. Petersburg
P.O. Drawer 810 (ZIP 32302-0810) Jacksonville Tampa
Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Lakeland Washington, D.C.
904-224-7000 Miami West Palm Beach
NEW APA? WHAT NEW APA?
CHANGES TO THE RULEMAKING PROCESS
Lawrence E. Sellers, Jr.
Holland & Knight
During the 1996 Regular Session, the Florida Legislature enacted
substantial changes to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). These changes became
effective on October 1. This article discusses some of the principal changes to the rule
development phase of the rulemaking process.
Agencies Must Publish Notice of Rule Development.
The 1996 legislation makes several changes that are designed to further
encourage informed public participation in the rulemaking process, particularly during
the early stages of that process. One of these changes requires agencies to provide
advance notice of the development of proposed rules by publishing a "notice of rule
development" in the Florida Administrative Weekly.
The notice must describe the subject area to be addressed, and it must
include a short explanation of the purpose and effect of the rule development, cite the
specific legal authority for rule development, and include the preliminary text of the
proposed rule, if available. The notice of rule development thus provides the public
with considerable information at an early stage, and it affords interested persons an
opportunity to learn more about the proposal. Perhaps just as importantly, the advance
notice provides interested persons with an opportunity to seek to inform the agency of
relevant matters while the agency is still developing its rule.
Agencies May be Required to Hold Public Workshops.
Public workshops historically have been one of the principal public forums
that some agencies have used in developing rules. Public workshops provide agencies
with an opportunity to explore alternatives and gather necessary information in an
informal setting with interested persons. Agencies have long been authorized to conduct
public workshops; however, agencies were not expressly required to conduct public
The 1996 legislation recognizes the benefits of providing an early
opportunity for public participation by requiring an agency to hold public workshops
if requested in writing by any affected person, unless the agency head explains in
writing why a workshop is unnecessary.
Agencies Must Insure That Responsible Persons Present.
The 1996 legislation also recognizes that meaningful public participation
is best accomplished when knowledgeable agency personnel are present to explain the
agency's proposal and to respond to questions or comments regarding the rule being
developed. The legislation requires that, when a workshop or public hearing is held,
the agency must ensure that the persons responsible for preparing the proposed rule
are available to explain the agency's proposal and to respond to questions or comments
regarding the rule being developed.
Watch this space next month for a summary of some of the other changes
to the rulemaking process.
Department of Environmental Protection
Trust Fund Priorities Operations
1997-98 Legislative Budget Request
1 Manatee Protection
2 Management of Properties Aquired
by the CARL Program
3 Underground Storage Tanks
Drycleaning Cleanup Program
4500300 Waste Management
Drinking Water Programs
6 Upland Exotic Plant Control
7 State Lands Records Modernization 1,234,516 2.0
Grants & 4500100 Admin. & Tech.
Don. 2339 4500200 Water Facilities
Department of Environmental Protection
General Revenue Priorities Operations
1997-98 Legislative Budget Request
Environmental Resource Permitting
2 Environmental Resource Permitting
3 Environmental Resource Permitting
4 Law Enforcement TF Deficit
5 Law Enforcement COPS Matching
6 Distributed Decision Support
System Data Center
7 Florida Keys/Florida Bay Program
and Sustainable South Florida
8 Law Enforcement Replacement
Equipment, Motor Vehicles &
9 District Offices Rent/Equipment
10 Water Management Districts
Permitting Subsidy Increase
11 Law Enforcement 800 MHZ
12 Additional Marine Patrol
13 Park Patrol Officers & Equipment
14 Investigative/Quality Review Staff
15 Environmental Education Consortium
Amount FTE Issue Code(s)
4,580,842 5900700 &
4.098,373 55.0 4300300
:9o49215217 3't T8 1 X:21
Florida Department of
Memorandum Environmental Protection
TO: Chairman and Members
Environmental Regulation Commission
FROM: Virginia B. Wetherel, Secretary
DATE: October 22, 1996
SUBJECT: Briefing on Reassification of Surface Wters
Rule 62-302.400, F.AC.
A. Rulemakin History
The Federal Clean Water Act requires all states to.adopt a classification system of surface waters
based on their present and future most beneficialuse. Rule 62-302400, Florida Administrative
Code (FA.C.), contains Florid's classifiation system and provides for the reclassification of
surface waters (Attachment 1). The reclassifcation requirements contained in Rule 62-302.400,
F.A.C., are as follows:
8) All reclassifications of water ofthe State shall be adopted, after public notice and
public hearing, only upon an affirmative fading by the Environmental Regulation
(a) The proposed reclassifcation will establish the present and future most
beneficial use of the waters; and
(b) Such a reclassification is clearly in the public interest.
9) Reclassfication ofwater.of.theState which establishes more stringent criteria than
presently established by this Chapter sall be adopted, only upon additional affirmative
finding by the Environmental-egulation Commission that the proposed designated use
is attainable, upon consideration of environmental, technological, social, economic,
and institutional factors.
This language allows for public input and addresses the issue of attainability. This language has
been used for several reclassifications in the past decade, which were conducted either at the
.o.Eax:9O4921321? I 14: 21
Department's initiative or in response to reclassification petitions for rulemaking. Some of the
more recent reclassifications include. Manatee River and tributaries to Lake Manatee (changed
from Class III to Class I, effective 1981), Brade River tributaries (changed from Class III to
Class I, effective 1991), Fenholloway River (changed from Class V to Class III, effective 1997),
and a statewide reclassification of Class HI waters to Class II to match with State-approved
shellfish harvesting areas (effective 1990). The Department has recently begun an analysis of
Class H marine waters, comparing them for consistency with areas that have been approved for
shellfish harvesting by the Division of Marine Resources.
During the previous Triennial Review of state surface water quality standards, the Legal
Environmental Assistance Foundation (LEAF) requested that Rule 62-302.400, F.A.C., be
amended (Attachment 2). LEAF's proposal would require reclassification of a water body if it
could be shown that there was an "existing use" consistent with a more protective classification.
LEAF's proposal was discussed within the Department and concerns over "incidental use" of a
water body were expressed. Due to the significance of these concerns, the Department presented
a modification to the rule amendments (as proposed by LEAF) at a public workshop on May 25,
1993. Neither the regulated community nor LEAF supported the Department's language.
Subsequently, the Department withdrew father consideration of the proposed amendments and
denied LEAF's petition on June 23, 1994 (Attachment 3).
The Department requested the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region IV
office in Atlanta to review and comment on LEAF's proposed language, particularly with regard
to whether the existing reclassification language was consistent with Federal requirements. EPA
responded with a letter dated September 14, 1994 (Attachment 4). The EPA letter stated:
"To my knowledge, there have been no instances of the State's implementation of these
[reclassification] provisions which are inconsistent with the Clean Water Act or 40 CFR
Part 131. Therefore, EPA believes that the existing language in these sections of the
Florida Administrative Code complies with all Federal requirements."
During the Environmental Regulation Commission (ERC) adoption hearing for Triennial
Review on September 22, 1994, LEAF submitted its proposed rule revisions to the
ERC. The ERC took no action and instead requested that the Department take LEAF's
unmodified language to public workshop and report back to the Commission with a
"white paper." Attachment 5 contains the-relevant portions of the minutes from the
September 22, 1994 ERC hearing.
The Department conducted a public workshop on February 21, 1995 in Tallahassee which
specifically addressed LEAF's proposed rule revisions. A number of written comments were
submitted to the Department in the weeks following the public workshop which reflected
comments made at the public workshop (Attachment 6).
FDEP*BSUMW*TFLL x:9049215217 c-. 28 1 :: P. :"_'.6
B. Class I vs. Class MI (marine) Criteria
LEAF has stated that it believes the major effect of the proposed revisions will be the resultant
reclassification of a number of Class III (marine) water bodies to Class II ("approximately
Class II waters have a designated use of"shellfish propagation or harvesting." Class III waters
have a designated use of "recreation, propagation and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced
population offish and wildlife." There are five water quality parameters which differ between the
two classifications: fecal coliform bacteria, total conform bacteria, fluorides, manganese, and
odor (Attachment 7). Of these, total coliform bacteria, fecal coliform bacteria, and manganese are
human health-based standards, fluoride is an aquatic life-based standard, and odor is an aesthetic
criterion for the benefit of shellfish consumers. The Class m fluoride criterion (5.0 mg/L) was
passed by the ERC as protective of aquatic ife.
There is no evidence that any of the Class II (marine) criteria pose a threat to shellfish. There is,
however, the potential that the Clauss HI(marine) criteria could be less protective for shellfish
consumers due to less stringent coliform bacteria levels.
Rule 62-600.510, F.A.C., prohibits any discharge of domestic wastewater to Class II waters. If a
Class Il water body is reclassified to Class II, domestic wastewater dischargers may be forced to
seek other disposal options.
C. EPA and "Existing Use"
40 CFR 131.3(e) defines "existing uses" as "those uses actually attained in the water body on or
after November 28, 1975, whether or not they are included in the water quality standards." EPA
is in the midst of a comprehensive review of its surface water quality rules (Advanced Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking or ANPRM). EPA has stated that one of the issues that may be addressed
is "existing uses." One possible outcome of the EPA effort is a change in "existing uses" and how
the language is implemented at the state level. EPA has already collected public comment on a
previously released scoping draft and is preparing to release a more substantive draft.
A. Causes) of Water Quality Deradation
Reclassification of a water body may not address the causes) of past and present water quality
degradation. For example, a bay used for shellfishharvesting in,the late 1970's may have been
subsequently closed to shellfish harvesting due-to increased coliform bacteria levels. These
increased levels may be a result ofnonpoint source pollution. In this case, reclassification would
not address the cause of the degradation. Instead, some point source dischargers may need to
spend significant sums of money to meet Class II criteria, but this would not solve the problem.
FDEP*BSWIM+TALL -.ax: 9049215217 OcT 2S-6 14: "" P.";5
Rule 62-302.400(9), F.A.C., requires that the Commission find that "the proposed designated use
is attainable, upon consideration of environmental, technological, social, economic, and
institutional factors." The rule amendments as proposed by LEAF do not provide for
consideration of the sources) of water quality degradation.
B. Impact to Public Process
The proposed rule revisions appear to eliminate the current opportunity for public input and
economic analysis, and additionally removes agency (and ERC) discretion for reclassifying water
C. Premature Timing of Reuest
EPA has only recently begun a comprehensive review of its surface water quality rules, which will
continue to have a significantly determinative impact on Florida's surface water rules. The EPA
review will include considerable public input. It is therefore premature to revise rules which are,
according to EPA, currently in All compliance with all federal requirements.
D, The Environmental and Economic Costs and Benefits
The potential environmental and economic costs andbenefits of the proposed rule revisions are
largely unknown. They could beinconsequential, or they could be enormous. Considering the '
discharge prohibitions associated with.Class II waters, some facilities will be forced to investigate
alternative discharge options and implement them, if any are available. Future facilities may be
precluded from discharging to a water body that does not support shellfish harvesting due to
nonpoint sources. Benefits might include more stringent water quality protection and, therefore,
better water quality. There are, however, also benefits from industrial uses of waters.
In some cases, reclassification might protect a shellfish resource in an area which is still suitable
for and used for shellfish harvesting.. (There are estuarine areas which the Division of Marine
Resources has yet to classify for shellfish harvesting. These areas may both be used for shellfish
harvesting and have Class I water quality.)
On October 21, 1996, the Department met with Mr. David Ludder, representing LEAF, to review
and discuss the Department's decision regarding LEAF's proposed rule amendments. The
Department expressed its commitment to reviewing the current Class II and Class III waters and
comparing them with areas that the Division of Marine Resources has opened to shellfish
harvesting. This review has already begun and involves close coordination between the Division
of Water Facilities and the Division of Marine Resources. in addition, the Departmen is looking
at other areas which are currently Class In waters, but which may have future potential as Class II
FDEP*BSWM*TALL x:9049215217 Ocr. "'S 17:'3 P. 0" 0
The Department does not recommend rule amendments to the reclassification requirements
contained in Rule 62-302.400, F.A.C. IfEPA revises its policies regarding "existing uses," the
Department will move expeditiously toward complying with all Federal requirements. This may
involve amending Rule 62-302.400, F.A.C., in the future.
The current language in Rule 62-302.400, F.A.C., provides a balanced approach to water body
reclassification. The current rules allow for public participation and careful consideration of
environmental, technological, social, economic, and institutional factors. Furthermore, EPA has
approved the current rule language and concluded that it is consistent will all Federal
Water Supply Development and Funding Working Group
"Revised" Problem Statement (10/17/96)
Improvements to existing water supply development and
funding mechanisms may be necessary to achieve affordable and
sustainable water supplies and protection of the environment,
both of which are fundamental to ensuring Florida's quality of
life. While the implementation of mechanisms may vary from
region to region, improved implementation of these mechanisms
is essential throughout the State.
Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group
"Revised" Assumptions and Basic Principles Worksheet
Please review the revised set of Assumptions, and Principles that were based on your comments and suggest
refinements and additions to accurately describe the principles that can guide decision-making by the work
group and others working on water issues. REVISED OCT. 29. 1996
Assumptions: Group's perception of current conditions and trends.
1. Growth L inevitable. Increased demand for water is inevitable given Florida's
projected growth rates.
2. We must ensure.an adequate, affordable and sustainable water supply for domestic,
industrial, and agricultural uses, and naturalsystem the environment.
3. We must protect the environment and public health.
4. Unless mutually acceptable solutions are found, one or all sides of the issue may lose.
Presently all sides are in jeopardy. We either continue this high-risk game or work
together to resolve the issue.
5. Adequate water supply development and funding is the solution to both aspects of the
issue, ensuring that water is available for growth, and that increased water use as a
result of growth will not degrade the environment.
Basic Principles: Guiding principles to be used in evaluating group recommendations.
1. Recommendations will address meeting the present and future water supply needs of
water Florida without adversely affecting its quality of life. and while recognizing the
necessity to address these issues on a regional basis throughout the State.
2. The basic principles of Florida water law will be maintained (i. water is a state
resource, managed by a reasonable-beneficial use standard, etc.).
3. Recommendations will support the development of adequate, safe, and dependable
water supplies in a manner which sustains water resources and natura y-stems the
4. Recommended funding options will consider the actual costs and benefits to major
5. Recommendations will recognize the relationship between water supply and land use
WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT AND FUNDING
OCTOBER 17, 1996
WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS
Dan Stengle opened the meeting with the following points:
* Want to break into two committees one on water supply development and one on water supply funding
* Each committee will have a core group of members representing each interest group with specific members
(elected by the interest parties) who will be expected to attend each meeting
* However, other participants can be involved with either committee that they wish and can actively participate
* Today in full group, trying to seek consensus on a set of work group process guidelines that are part of
* Overall objective, in addition to formulating recommendations, is to have a core group that EOG and the
Legislature can always turn to for input on these issues in order to seek consensus and resolution of the water
* Page 2 of handout has the draft process plan with meeting dates (Nov.8, Nov. 26, Dec. 18, Jan. 8, Jan. 31,
and a Feb. Joint Workshop with Legislators)
* Each committee may have additional meetings beyond these
* Send any comments and constructive criticisms on how well this process works to Estus Whitfield
WORK GROUP PROCESS GUIDELINES
Facilitator Tom Taylor went over the handout of the proposed working group process, which was generally
* The guidelines are important to help us have an established set of guidelines to form consensus on what can
we agree upon
* Not only looking at what the Legislature can do on these issues; also looking at what we can do about these
Not a lot of time for a large group to deal with these issues, so we need to develop a workplan on what is it
that we can accomplish in three more meetings
" By January, we want staff to have draft legislation for the group's consideration for amendments during the
two meeting in January
See Guidelines on page 3 of the handout; 2 committees proposed: one on water supply development and one
on water supply funding, with 14 and 13 core members respectively (note error on handout: water suppliers have
2 representatives on each committee); each committee will elect a chairman and either a co- or vice-chair
Core representatives selected by each interest group
Core representatives are responsible to sharing information and soliciting input from constituents
Other participants actively participate either through core member or when recognized by chairman
Facilitators will work with the chair to set agenda, prepare reports, etc.
Staff will provide information as requested by chairs; prepare meeting reports & materials; lead staff for the
funding committee Paula Allen (EOG); lead staff for the water supply development Terry Pride
Tom Taylor facilitated discussion of the problem statement
On page 5 of handout is a draft'problem statement; how could this be said better:
Adequate water supply and funding mechanisms are not currently in place in Florida. Without
these, Florida's development is threatened by environmental concerns, and the environment is
threatened by growth impacts on water and related land resources.
Generally, the group was dissatisfied with the problem statement. Concerns included:
-- The term "development" is too narrow; the economy of the State is much broader than this.
-- The mechanisms are in place but are not being adequately utilized.
-- Need broader view: Florida's economy and quality of life are threatened; the need for an adequate,
affordable supply for all existing and future residents.
-- 1st statement: need to address "sustainable" water, "private property concerns" and "quality of life."
-- What we're missing is how to "improve on" existing water supply development and funding
-- The environment is being threatened right now in the state and needs to be corrected.
-- Don't know what "related land resources" means.
-- We keep trying for one size fits all solutions; this approach doesn't deal with regional nature of
VOLUNTEERS TO WORK ON THIS OVER LUNCH: Jake Varn; Kathryn Mennella; Yvonne Gsteiger, Fred
Tom Taylor facilitated discussion of the draft guiding principles/assumptions. The group got into a protracted
discussion of the first assumption regarding growth. Because of time constraints, the facilitator suggested that
group participants turn in further comments to staff for consideration at the next meeting.
DIRECTIONS TO COMMITTEES
Tom Taylor facilitated general discussion of the committee charges. Full group comments are below. The (
committees discussed these further (see committee summaries).
FULL GROUP COMMENTS (specific to the charges)
Water Supply Development
-- Ic: Add: "and protection of water resources"
-- la: Need to include who makes the determination (of feasibility)- like sci. peer review
-- 1.c: should be reversed; water supply planning takes into consideration the land uses, not vice versa
Lead in assumes that this will lead to legislation. May not need to be legislation
-- Water supply authorities only look at water supply availability should come from WMD, not water
Lead in says regulatory; items imply planning; regulation is not specifically identified; regulatory
obstacles and incentives needed
-- This committee should not be constrained by existing institutions consider other institutions
Need to consider ways of developing traditional water supplies, e.g., to store, capture surface water.
4: Add: "consistent with the protection of the environment"
Consider what WMDs are doing with regional water supply plans under the Executive Order what
are the relationship to this work, to the WMD efforts?
-- Need to address development that's authorized but not built
-- 5: Recommend policies and goals that public and private property should not be harmed excessively
-- If: Add: "research and development of demand management alternatives and new supply
Ic: "water resources protection" there are flood protection, natural systems, and water quality
protection that also have to be considered
-- I e: "feasibility"-- need to focus in on term definition
-- Ib: continue establishment and enforcement of MFLs
Water Suoolv Funding
-- 3: Include "who" should be eligible
7: "funding" option
-- 2: Include cost distribution to private utilities ability to develop sources
-- 3: ADD: review existing funding inadequacy
-- 1: What is "true cost" clarify, including private property, etc.
-- 7b: and regulatory obstacles
-- 1: true cost of any options that are identified
Instead of "true cost" use "full-cost accounting"
-- 1: consider cost to suppliers and users
-- 5: who determines structure for options
-- 2: wastewater and reuse
-- 7b: Don't understand what it means. Inverted rate structures wouldn't necessarily increase fees
-- 5: Need to relate to federal funding sources
2: Need to evaluate who's using the water & how much
The full group broke for represented interests to choose who they wanted on each core committee, and then for
CORE COMMITTEE MEMBERS *
DEV. Jake Varn: Wade Hopping
FUNDING Keith Hetrick; Gene Adams
DEV. Butch Calhoun; Chuck Littlejohn
FUNDING Mercer Fearington; Phil Parsons
DEV. Eva Armstrong; David Guest
FUNDING Debbie Drake; Casey Gluckman
DEV. Oel Wingo; Bram Canter
FUNDING Sonny Vergara; Steve Walker
DEV. John McCue; Fred Rapach
FUNDING Jane Hayman; Roy Reynolds
DEV. Mike Slayton
FUNDING Bill Seagal
DEV. Janet Llewellyn
FUNDING Pam McVety
DEV. Charles Pattison
DEV. Chuck Aller
FUNDING John Williams
*Address, phone and faxes for all core group members included in this information packet
The two committees met from 1:00 to 3:00 and worked on setting priorities for developing recommendations (
according to the proposed schedule. At 3:00, the full group reconvened, held general discussion, and received a
report from each committee.
The following revised problem statement was distributed and agreed to:
Improvements to existing water supply development and funding mechanisms may be
necessary to achieve affordable and sustainable water supplies and protection of the
environment, both of which are fundamental to ensuring Florida's quality of life. While the
implementation of mechanisms may vary from region to region, improved implementation of
these mechanisms is essential throughout the state.
WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT
This committee elected a chair (Jake Varn) and vice chair (David Guest).
The committee set an immediate task for its core members: A one-page paper, representative of each interest
group on the core committee, which lists the perceived problems related to water supply development. Core
committee representatives are to submit the paper to Terry Pride by October 28, so she can consolidate them
into a paper for discussion by the committee at the November 8 meeting. State agencies will collectively
prepare a single paper. Other core committee representatives will present a paper according to the interest area
breakdown (e.g., env./citizen will do one paper, business/industry/development will do one paper, etc.)
The committee also discussed:
OTHER TASKS needing discussion
* they fall into: PLANNING, REGULATORY, IMPLEMENTATION
* Delivery Systems (Hardware)
WHAT ARE THE ROLES IN WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT
NON-EXISTING (needed) ROLES
ISSUES DISCUSSED DURING 1996 SESSION
Integration of Land/Water planning
Regional Water Supply Planning
Minimum Flows & Levels; scientific peer review (Reg)
Rate Structure; public vs. private utilities
Local Sources first (Reg.)
Permit duration competing permits
Source security (Reg.)
Water to meet all needs
Note: Not all of these were necessarily recommended for the committee to address, but as an illustration of the
range of issues that had been opened up, but not resolved, during session.
NEXT WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT MEETING:
*Look at Planning, Regulation, Implementation
what roles played at state, regional, local & private levels (matrix)--DEP staff are putting together a
background paper on existing roles in water supply development and funding. A draft of this should be
available before the next meeting. An agenda will be sent out by November 1.
WATER SUPPLY FUNDING COMMITTEE REPORT
This committee selected a chair (Sonny Vergara) and a co-chair (Phil Parsons).
The committee reviewed and refined their draft tasks, reviewed and refined criteria to prioritize tasks, prioritized
tasks to accomplish and identified information and actions needed for each task.
The top three tasks the committee identified from the committee charge worksheet were # 5, #7, and #1, with a
commitment to include all the tasks in the overall workplan. Some modifications were made to the wording of
the tasks. (see committee summary) The committee noted the interrelatedness of various tasks and the need to
confer with the water supply development committee on certain ones.
Committee representatives are to pull together existing information on funding options and send it to Paula
Allen by November 1(1501 Capitol, phone (904)488-5551, fax (904)922-6200). The information will be used
to develop background materials for the committee. The chair and staff will develop a graphic or flow-chart
depicting the elements to consider in identifying, evaluating, and implementing funding options and will
summarize the tasks and action steps the committee proposed for the workplan.
FULL GROUP WRAP-UP
* We would like two committees to find the solution to water problem in Florida, BUT we might fall slightly
short of that SO whatever we can put together for the Legislature will help;
* If the Executive Order addresses Minimum Flows and Levels and water supply planning adequately for now,
then this group can focus on water supply development and funding and resolve that issue;
* Governor is trying to encourage a process here and opportunity for getting this issue done and resolved
Nov. 26 meeting date was changed to Dec. 6 because of the Thanksgiving holidays.
The process for distributing materials will be to send full meeting summaries, agendas, and mailing list of core
membership to all participants. Committee meeting agendas and materials will go to core committee
representatives, who will then distribute to their constituents.