Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

KAY-ONE GROVE, LTD. vs. CENTRAL AND SOUTH FLORIDA FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT, 75-001635 (1975)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 75-001635 Visitors: 13
Judges: DIANE D. TREMOR
Agency: Districts
Latest Update: Mar. 21, 1977
Summary: Grant agricultural water use permit.
75-1635.PDF

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


IN RE: APPLICATION NUMBERS ) 22039, 22046 AND 23238 BY ) KAY-ONE GROVE, LTD. FOR )

AGRICULTURAL WATER USE ) CASE NO. 75-1635 AND SURFACE WATER )

MANAGEMENT PERMITS - )

DOCKET NUMBER 63. )

)


RECOMMENDED ORDER


Pursuant to proper notice, an administrative hearing was held before Diane

  1. Tremor, Hearing Officer, Division of Administrative Hearings, on September 11, 1975, at the Agricultural Center at the Fort Pierce Airport.


    APPEARANCES


    Mr. E.D. Holcomb, Jr. General Manager of Applicant


    Mr. Kenneth A. Harris

    Consulting Agricultural Engineer


    Steven Walker, Esquire Attorney for the Central and

    Southern Florida Flood Control District


    Mr. Doug Winter Hydrology Division

    Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District


    FINDINGS OF FACT


    1. The subject applications request permits from the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District (FCD) for the agricultural irrigation and drainage of 1,780 acres of citrus lands. Received into evidence without objection were the public notices of hearing appearing in The News Tribune, Fort Pierce, Florida, and The Stuart News, Stuart, Florida; the three permit applications submitted on behalf of Kay-One Grove, Ltd., and the Revised Staff Report of the FCD.


    2. The amount of water requested by the applications is 2,670 acre-feet per year with a maximum monthly withdrawal of 600 acre-feet. The Revised Staff Report, prepared by Doug Winter, a Civil Engineer with the Hydrology Division of the FCD, recommended an annual allocation of 1,619.8 acre-feet with a maximum monthly withdrawal of 574.8 acre-feet. This Report is attached hereto.


    3. Mr. Kenneth Harris, a consulting engineer for Kay-One Grove, Ltd., gave a summation of the applications and corrected page 1 of the Revised Staff Report, under the first paragraph of "A", to change "Township 37 South" to "Township 38 South". The summation was substantially the same as that set forth

      on pages 1 and 2 of the Revised Staff Report. The existing facilities were also represented to be as set forth in the FCD Report.


    4. Mr. Doug Winter testified that he evaluated the subject applications and prepared the Revised Staff Report, and testified as to its contents. As to the drainage aspects of the applications, Mr. Winter testified that there would be no adverse effect on the receiving water body since the drainage capacity of the applicant's land is within the FCD's limitations. As to the agricultural uses of the water, Mr. Winter used three criteria to determine the appropriate allocation. These three criteria were the adjusted basin yield, the supplemental crop requirement for citrus and the quantity requested by the applicant. The allocation is normally the lesser of these three quantities. It was determined that the adjusted basin yield was the limiting criteria and the amount of water available for annual allocation is 10.92 inches per acre per year for the C-23 basin, which equates over the applicant's 1,780 acres to be 1,619.8 acre-feet. The FCD uses this 10.92 figure for all allocations within the C-23 basin. The maximum monthly pumpage figure based on the amount of water which would be needed in the driest month to offset a 2 in 10 year drought, modified by an 80 percent application efficiency, was determined to be 3.875 inches par acre per month, or 574.8 acre-feet or 187.3 million gallons for the entire tract of 1,780 acres. This is in contrast to the 4.0 inches per acre maximum monthly withdrawal requested by the applicant, which would equate to 600 acre-feet. As to the use of ground water from three wells located on the property, Mr. Winter determined that the allocation would be the same as for the C-23 withdrawals since the recharge of these wells would be the same as the recharge of the surface water source. Mr. Winter then reiterated the conclusions and recommendations set forth in the Revised Staff Report. It was recommended that a water use permit be issued pursuant to Application Numbers 23238 and 22046 for an annual allocation of surface water and/or ground water in the amount of 1,619.8 acre-feet, which represents 10.92 inches per acre per year, with the condition that the maximum monthly withdrawal of surface water and ground water for the combination of the two not exceed 187.3 million gallons (which represents 3.875 inches per acre or 574 acre-feet) during times of adequate water level or moderate drought conditions. Should severe drought conditions occur, the FCD will issue an order requiring a reduction of water withdrawal rates based on a water shortage plan developed by the FCD. It was recommended that a surface water management permit be issued pursuant to Application No. 22039 for the operation of a system consisting of ditches, dikes, pumps and culverts as described in the application with the conditions set forth on page 11 of the Revised Staff Report. Finally, it was recommended that a right-of-way permit be issued authorizing a 48 inch culvert connection through the FCD's south right-of-way of C-23 adjacent to Project Culvert 15 and the use of Project Culvert 13.


    5. Mr. Harris then sought a clarification of the maximum monthly pumpage amount and was assured that the applicant could apply for emergency authorization of further withdrawals under the FCD's rules and regulations, provided extreme drought conditions were not existent. It was explained that the monthly quantity allowed here, the 3.875 inches, was based on reports of the average rainfall for the Fort Pierce area and the crop requirements.


    6. The Hearing Officer then asked Mr. Harris to explain his objections, if any, to the Revised Staff Report. Mr. Harris explained that the difference between the amount of water requested and that received in the Report is small, less than 10 percent. His only other objection was to the maximum allowable runoff figure. He would like this to be increased from the recommended 2.2 inches to 4 inches. It was explained that the allowable figure is based upon

      the maximum capacity of the canal. Mr. Harris stated that the applicant would probably make further application for additional run-off in the future.


      CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


    7. . The applications at issue herein have been fully reviewed and evaluated by the technical staff of the Central and South Florida Flood Control District.


    8. The procedural requirements of Chapter 373, Florida Statutes, and the rules promulgated pursuant thereto have been complied with as they pertain to these applications.


    9. The reports of the applicant and of the FCD, as well as the testimony presented at the hearing, reflect recommended uses which are reasonable and beneficial, will not interfere with any legal use of water and are consistent with the public interest, all in accordance with Chapter 373 of the Florida Statutes and Chapter 16K of the Florida Administrative Code.


RECOMMENDATION


Based upon the above findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is recommended that the permits requested and the right-of-way permit be issued in accordance with the recommendations set forth on pages 9 through 11 of the attached Revised Staff Report.


Respectfully submitted this 7th day of October, 1975, in Tallahassee, Florida.


DIANE D. TREMOR, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304

(904) 488-9675


COPIES FURNISHED:


Mr. E.D. Holcomb, Jr. General Manager

Kay-One Grove, Ltd.

Post Office Box 1120

Fort Pierce, Florida 33450


Stephen A. Walker, Esquire Attorney for the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District

Post Office Box V

West Palm Beach, Florida


Docket for Case No: 75-001635
Issue Date Proceedings
Mar. 21, 1977 Final Order filed.
Oct. 07, 1975 Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED.

Orders for Case No: 75-001635
Issue Date Document Summary
Nov. 14, 1975 Agency Final Order
Oct. 07, 1975 Recommended Order Grant agricultural water use permit.
Source:  Florida - Division of Administrative Hearings

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer