STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

IN RE: Application No. 28610 )

By Dressell Company, Inc. for ) CASE NO. 76-1074 a Water Use Permit. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, K. N. Ayers, held a public hearing in the above styled case on September 15, 1976 at Sebring, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Respondent: John Wheeler, Esquire, Staff Attorney

Central & Southern Florida Flood Control District

Post Office Box V

West Palm Beach, Florida

For Petitioner: Richard Dressell

Post Office Box 398 Avon Park, Florida

By application filed September 24, 1975, Dressell Company, Inc. (Petitioner or Dressell) seeks a water use permit so as to authorize the usage of up to 4032.53 acre feet of water per year for agricultural purposes. Respondent, Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District (C&SFCD) recommended approval of an allocation of 958.57 acre feet per year water usage and Petitioner requested this hearing. At the hearing one witness testified on behalf of Petitioner, one witness was called by Respondent, and 4 exhibits were admitted into evidence.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Petitioner seeks to irrigate 450 acres of pasture land. In preparing its application Petitioner consulted the soil conservation office to obtain the amount of water required under extreme drought conditions.

   
   

2. Petitioner's maximum pumping capacity is 2,500 gallons per minute, 108 million gallons per month, or 5.56 gallons per acre per minute.

   
   

3. The longest period in which applicant recalls running its pumps continuously was 3 weeks. This occurred during a drought period and after the pumps had been out of operation for an extended period.

   
   

4. During normal drought conditions Petitioner would expect to run its pumps 18 days per month. At the pumping capacity available to Petitioner this would amount to 64.8 million gallons of water per month. The maximum monthly allocation recommended by Respondent was 66 million gallons.

5. The source of water from which an allocation is sought is the Florida aquifer and none of the water removed therefrom by this Petitioner will return. The Florida aquifer for which the water herein requested will be obtained is presently being mined, i.e. more water is being withdrawn therefrom than is going back into the aquifer.

   
   

6. In evaluating the application the C&SFCD engineer took the 30 to 40 years annual rainfall, the consumptive water use for the crops to be grown and the difference between these figures as the annual supplemental irrigation required. Correcting these figures for evapotranspiration rates and allowing for drought conditions occurring 2 out of 10 years the figures of 66.5 million gallons, or 263 acre feet per month maximum usage was reached.

   
   

7. Respondent proposed two special conditions upon the Petitioner. One, that Petitioner submit a water quality analysis from the pump discharge in May and October of each year. The second condition was that a measuring device be installed upon the pump to measure the amount of water pumped. The water quality analysis will cost Petitioner approximately $70 per year for the test alone. An hours of operation clock on the pump will suffice for the water measuring device.

   
   

   CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

   
   

8. Chapter 373 F.S. was enacted to provide, inter alia, for the management of water resources of this state. Section 373.219(1) F.S. provides in pertinent part:

   
   

   "The governing board or the department may require such permits for consumptive use of water and may impose such reasonable conditions as are necessary to assure that such use is consistent with the overall objectives of the district or department and is not harmful to the water resources of the area."

   
   

9. Section 373.223 F.S. establishes conditions for the issuing of consumptive water use permits and provides in pertinent part:

   
   

   "(1) To obtain a permit pursuant to this chapter the applicant must establish that the proposed use of water:

   1. Is a reasonable beneficial use as defined in s. 373.019(5); and

   2. Will not interfere with any presently existing legal use of water; and

   3. Is consistent with the public interest."

      
      

10. Here the Petitioner has applied for use of more water than it has the capacity to pump and for more water than, by its own testimony, is needed.

    
    

11. The use recommended by the staff of the C&SFCD is deemed adequate for the needs of the Petitioner for agricultural uses and a consumptive use of more water was not shown to be in the public interest. This is particularly so due to the fact that more water is presently being withdrawn from the aquifer than is being replaced.

12. With respect to the special conditions proposed by the staff the condition to measure the amount of water withdrawn pursuant to the permit is a reasonable condition necessary to insure that excess water is not withdrawn.

    
    

13. The proposed condition to require Petitioner to submit two water quality analyses annually, one in May and one in October, poses a more difficult question. Rule 16K-2.05 F.A.C. pertains to conditions for a permit and has been repealed. Section 373.219 F.S. above quoted provides that the agency granting the permit may impose such "reasonable conditions as are necessary to assure such use is consistent with the overall needs of the district." While submitting chemical analyses of the water pumped from the aquifer will provide the district with information that will be beneficial to the district in monitoring the chemical qualities of the water at this location, the use of this water by Petitioner will not affect the chemical quality of this water. Therefore there is no authority to impose this condition upon the Petitioner as a condition to the granting of the consumptive use permit. It is therefore,

RECOMMENDED that a consumptive water use permit be granted to Dressell Company, Inc. upon the following conditions:

1. Maximum Monthly use shall not exceed 5.43 inches which is equivalent to

   66.35 million gallons. This is an allowable withdrawal figure which represents maximum monthly withdrawal rate based on certain drought conditions and concerning a reasonable application efficiency. The maximum withdrawal rate is not to be construed as an allocation or allotment for irrigation usage. It is specified to serve as an indicator to the permittee as to what the District accepts as a reasonable withdrawal rate during times of adequate water level and moderate drought conditions. The permittee should recognize that it may be necessary for the District to issue an order requiring a reduction in the water withdrawal rate in accordance with a water shortage plan developed by the District.

   
   

2. This permit shall expire on July 15, 1978.

   
   

3. One well with a total installed capacity of 2500 gpm.

   
   

4. The permittee shall install a measuring device on the well. Pumpage records shall be promptly submitted to the District at the end of May each year.

DONE and ENTERED this 15th day of October, 1976, in Tallahassee, Florida.

K. N. AYERS Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304

(904) 488-9675

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 15th day of October, 1976.

COPIES FURNISHED:

John Wheeler, Esquire Post Office Box V

West Palm Beach, Florida

Richard Dressell Post Office Box 398 Avon Park, Florida

Docket for Case No: 76-001074

Orders for Case No: 76-001074