seacoast utility authority

Seacoast Utility Authority, a regional water and wastewater utility, furnishes potable water service to 47,494. MUG OF COFFEE AND CUP OF WATER to his right, Rim Bishop sat at his Seacoast Utility Authority desk, reading an electronic news release from. ▽. Public Works Resources · Florida Department of Transportation · Florida Power and Light · Seacoast Utility Authority · Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach. seacoast utility authority

Seacoast Utility Authority

Main SIC Category

  • Real estate agents and managers
  • Business Services
  • Educational services
  • Membership organizations
  • Eating and drinking places
  • Miscellaneous Services, Not Cla.
  • Non
  • Engineering, accounting, resear.
  • Miscellaneous retail
  • Home furniture, furnishings, an.
  • Wholesale trade
  • Printing and publishing
  • Building construction
  • Social services
  • Amusement and recreation services
  • Health services
  • Personal services
  • Hotels, rooming houses, camps. .
  • Building materials, hardware, g.
  • Construction
  • Executive, Legislative, and Gen.
  • Nondepository credit institutions
  • Insurance agents, brokers, and .
  • Automotive dealers and gasoline.
  • Communications
  • Post Service
  • Depository institutions
  • Legal services
  • Security and commodity brokers.
  • Motor freight transportation an.

Navigation:Home > Florida > Palm Beach Gardens > Seacoast Utility Authority

Seacoast Utility Authority is a company Located at Palm Beach Gardens,Florida,United States with a telephone number 5616272900, (561)627-2900.Provided Electric, gas, and sanitary services products and service.


Map of Seacoast Utility Authority, address:P.O. BOX 109602,Palm Beach Gardens,Florida,United States.

  • Seacoast Utility AuthorityWater Use Permit Steven Memberg, Section LeaderWater Use Regulation Division, Water Supply DepartmentJanuary 26, 2009

  • Seacoast Utility Authority Loxahatchee River Seacoast Utility Service Area

  • Seacoast Utility Authority • Utility Service Area includes: Palm Beach Gardens North Palm Beach Juno Beach Lake Park Unincorporated areas of PBC Hood Road Wellfield PBG Wellfield NPB Wellfield Burma Road Wellfield

  • Seacoast Utility Authority • Originally permitted in 1976 • Current Allocation • Population 101,664 (2005) • Per Capita 190 • Annual 19.31 MGD • Proposed Allocation • Population 102,423 (2012) • Per Capita 190 • Annual 19.46 MGD

  • Minimum Flows and Levels (MFL) covers: Northwest Fork of the Loxahatchee River (G-92 to River Mile 6) Consumptive Use Permit Rule Protections for the Loxahatchee

  • Minimum Flows and Levels (MFL) covers: Northwest Fork of the Loxahatchee River (G-92 to River Mile 6) Including tributaries: Kitching Creek Hobe Grove Ditch Cypress Creek Consumptive Use Permit Rule Protections for the Loxahatchee

  • Minimum Flows and Levels (MFL) MFL violation occurs when an exceedance occurs more than once in a six year period. Flows over Lainhart Dam decline below 35 cfs for more than 20 consecutive days. Average daily salinity concentration on a 20-day rolling average exceeds two parts per thousand at river seacoast utility authority 9.2 Northwest Fork is not currently meeting the MFL, therefore rule requires implementation of a recovery strategy Consumptive Use Permit Rule Protections for the Loxahatchee

  • Recovery Strategy One component of recovery strategy is the implementation of the Regional Water Availability Rule Consumptive Use Permit Rule Protections for the Loxahatchee • “requested allocation will not cause a net increase in the volume or cause seacoast utility authority change in the timing on a monthly basis of surface and ground water withdrawn from …the North Palm Beach County / Loxahatchee River Watershed Waterbodies over that resulting from the base case”

  • Seacoast Utility Authority Loxahatchee River Seacoast Utility Service Area Loxahatchee River Watershed Waterbodies

  • Regional Water Availability Calibrated groundwater flow model Annual requested withdrawal of 8,084 MG modeled to accommodate two operating plans: Prime Scenario – Hood Road Wellfield Alternate 1 – Palm Beach Gardens Wellfield Transient model using a 27-month scenario simulating 1-in-10 drought conditions Seacoast Utility Authority

  • Seacoast Utility Authority

  • Regional Water Availability No net increase in the volume or change in timing on a monthly basis of surface and ground water withdrawn from the “Waterbodies” Minimum Flows and Levels (MFL) No direct or indirect withdrawal from MFL body No contribution to existing MFL violations Other environmental considerations Drawdown impacts and mitigation for wetlands in the wellfields’ cone of influence are still under evaluation. Staff Evaluation

  • Источник:

    94-002903 Seacoast Utility Authority vs. Pga National Golf Club And Sports Center, Ltd., And South Florida Water Management District

     Status: Closed
    Recommended Order on Monday, February 6, 1995.





    13Petitioner, )


    16vs. ) CASE NO. 94-2903






    40Respondents. )



    45Pursuant to notice, a formal hearing was conducted in this matter on

    57September 22, 1994, in West Palm Beach, Florida, before J. Stephen Menton, a

    70duly designated Hearing Officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings.


    81For Petitioner: Nathan E. Nason, Esquire

    87Nason, Gildan, Yeager, Gerson and White

    931645 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard

    98Suite 1200

    100West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

    105For Respondent Cecile I. Ross, Esquire

    111South Florida Office of the General Counsel

    118Water Manage- 3301 Gun Club Road

    124ment District: West Palm Beach, Florida 33416-4680

    131For Respondent

    133PGA National E. Lee Worsham, Esquire

    139Golf Club and Honigman, Miller, Schwartz and Cohn

    147Sports Center, 222 Lakeview Avenue, Suite 800

    154Ltd.: West Palm Beach, Florida seacoast utility authority OF THE ISSUE

    164The issue in this case is whether Seacoast Utility Authority's challenge to

    176the South Florida Water Management District's proposed issuance of a water use

    188permit to PGA National Golf Club and Sports Center, Ltd. in a critical water

    202supply area should be upheld. As discussed below, the parties have stipulated

    214that, in deciding to issue the permit, the South Florida Water Management

    226District has not evaluated or considered whether the use of reclaimed water was

    239either economically, environmentally or technically infeasible.


    247On April 12, 1994, the staff of the South Florida Water Management District

    260(the "District") recommended renewal of water use permit #50-00617-W (the

    "271Permit") issued to PGA National Golf Club and Sports Center, Ltd. ("PGA") for

    287golf course irrigation. The existing and proposed source of the water was the

    300ground water table. The staff recommendation did not include a requirement for

    312PGA to use reclaimed water as part of its golf course irrigation system.

    325On April 28, 1994, Seacoast Utility Authority ("Seacoast") filed a Petition

    338for Formal Administrative Hearing challenging the staff's recommendation to

    347renew the Permit. The District forwarded the Petition to the Division of

    359Administrative Hearings to conduct proceedings pursuant to Section 120.57(1),

    368Florida Statutes. The case was initially assigned to Hearing Officer Joyous D.


    381By Notice of Hearing dated June 23, 1994, Hearing Officer Parrish scheduled

    393a formal hearing for September first hawaiian bank lahaina hours through 22, 1994. Prior to the hearing, the

    407parties raised a number of legal issues. PGA filed a Motion to Dismiss

    420Seacoast's Petition and a Motion to Stay and for a Protective Order. The

    433District filed a Motion to Strike/Motion to Limit the Issues. Seacoast filed a

    446Memorandum in Opposition to the South Florida Water Management District's Motion

    457to Strike/Motion to Limit Issues and a Memorandum of Law in opposition to PGA's

    471Motion to Stay and for Protective Order. Hearing Officer Parrish conducted a

    483telephone conference hearing on September 6, 1994 on the various legal issues

    495raised by the parties. The parties apparently agreed during the telephone

    506conference hearing to bifurcate fifth third bank car loan login hearing process to address certain threshold

    517legal issues raised in the various motions before embarking on extensive

    528discovery and hearing preparation.

    532Following the September 6 telephone conference hearing, Hearing Officer

    541Parrish entered an Order Granting Motion to Limit Issues dated September 14,

    5531994. That Order provided as follows:

    5591. The hearing. . scheduled for September 22, 1994, shall be limited to

    574a determination of whether the South Florida Water Management District's

    584procedures for reviewing water use permits concerning use of reclaimed water

    595comport with applicable rules.

    5992. As the resolution of the foregoing issue may be dispositive of the

    612matter, a recommended order may be entered with jurisdiction being relinquished

    623to the agency. However, if the resolution of the foregoing does not result in a

    638recommended order, jurisdiction may be retained to allow further hearing on the

    650applicant's request for a water use permit (50-000617-W).

    658Shortly before the commencement of the formal hearing, the case was

    669transferred to Hearing Officer J. Stephen Menton, who conducted the hearing as

    681scheduled. During the hearing, the parties agreed that the issue of Seacoast's

    693standing to challenge the District's proposed issuance of the Permit should also

    705be resolved in the first phase of the proceeding. Thus, at the hearing on

    719September 22, all parties were afforded an opportunity to present evidence and

    731legal argument on the standing issue as well as on the question of whether the

    746District's procedures for reviewing water use permit applications comports with

    756the applicable statutes and rules. The parties have deferred presentation of

    767evidence and argument on the other issues raised by the Petition and the various

    781motions that have been filed. PGA specifically reserved its right to assert an

    794entitlement to a backup source of water if it is required to utilize reclaimed


    809At the hearing, Seacoast presented the testimony of one witness, Rim

    820Bishop, the executive director of Seacoast. The District presented the

    830testimony of William Scott Burns, the Director of the Water Use Division for the

    844District's Regulation Department, who was accepted as an expert in water use


    857At the request of the District, official recognition has been taken of Part

    870II of Chapter 373, Florida Statutes, Chapter 40E-2, Florida Administrative Code,

    881the Basis of Review of Water Use Permit Applications within the South Florida

    894Water Management District (the "Basis of Review") and Chapter 17-40, Florida

    906Administrative Code (the "State Water Policy"). The District's composite

    916Exhibit 1 includes all of the matters that were officially recognized. The

    928parties also submitted a document entitled Stipulated Facts which was marked as

    940the District's Exhibit 2 during the hearing. Seacoast utility authority Exhibit was accepted without


    953A transcript of the hearing has been filed. All parties have submitted

    965proposed recommended orders in accordance with the schedule established at the

    976conclusion of the hearing. In addition, Seacoast filed Seacoast Utility

    986Authority's Post-Hearing Memorandum which addresses a number of the legal issues

    997raised in this case. All of the submittals have been reviewed and considered in

    1011the preparation of this Recommended Order. A ruling on each of the parties

    1024proposed findings of fact is included in the Appendix to this Recommended Order.


    1040Based upon the evidence adduced at the hearing and the entire record in

    1053this proceeding, the following findings of fact are made:

    10621. Seacoast is a publicly owned water and sewer utility which operates a

    1075wastewater treatment facility in Palm Beach County, Florida. Seacoast's service

    1085area is bounded on the south by Riviera Beach and on the north by the Town of


    11032. Seacoast operates four treatment plants: two water plants and two

    1114wastewater plants.

    11163. Seacoast's regional wastewater facility currently generates

    1123approximately six (6) million gallons per day ("MGD") of reclaimed water and is

    1138permitted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection ("DEP") as an

    1151eight (8) MGD wastewater treatment plant.

    11574. As discussed in more detail in the Conclusions of Law below, the

    1170Florida Legislature and DEP have sought to encourage the reuse of reclaimed

    1182water. This policy is one of the many sometimes competing goals that are

    1195supposed to be taken into account in the water use permitting process.

    12075. Until a few years ago, the treated effluent from one of Seacoast's

    1220wastewater plants was directly discharged to nearby surfacewater. During the

    1230last four years, Seacoast installed a pumping station and five miles worth of

    1243transmission lines to deliver all of its treated effluent to its regional

    1255wastewater facility. Seacoast claims that these efforts were prompted by its

    1266interpretation of changing regulations and a perceived regulatory preference for

    1276reuse of water.1 Although Seacoast claims that there has been a change in

    1289regulatory emphasis in favor of reuse of reclaimed water, Seacoast is not under

    1302a mandate from any court or agency to sell or utilize any specific amount of

    1317reclaimed water. It does appear that a deep injection well used by Seacoast for

    1331disposal of wastewater is not or was not operating as designed. Seacoast was

    1344apparently obligated to construct reclaimed water facilities at its wastewater

    1354treatment plant as part of its permit from DEP for the injection well. There

    1368was no requirement that the reclaimed water be sold or otherwise utilized.

    13806. The intended primary disposal for Seacoast's reclaimed water is reuse.2

    1391Seacoast's wastewater treatment plant provides irrigation quality reclaimed

    1399water. Seacoast tries to sell the reclaimed water for irrigation use in an

    1412effort to recoup the costs incurred in constructing the facilities necessary to

    1424reclaim the water. Backup disposal is achieved through injection down a 3300

    1436feet deep injection well into the boulder zone. Once the reclaimed water is

    1449injected down the well, it is unavailable for reuse.

    14587. The evidence suggests that there are other possible utilizations

    1468available for Seacoast's reclaimed water including sale to another utility

    1478and/or backup recharge to preserve wetlands during periods of high pumpage. For

    1490example, Seacoast is apparently in the process of applying for the necessary

    1502permits to utilize a portion of its reclaimed water to prevent harm to wetlands

    1516adjacent to its Hood Road Well Field by constructing an hydraulic barrier.

    15288. At all times pertinent to this proceeding, only approximately 1.2 MGD

    1540of the reclaimed water generated by Seacoast was being reused. The remaining

    1552approximately 5 MGD was disposed of through the injection well.

    15629. PGA owns and operates three (3) golf courses in Palm Beach County

    1575within Seacoast's service area. PGA's golf courses are located within an area

    1587that has been designated by the District as a Critical Water Supply Problem

    1600Area. Critical Water Supply Problems Areas are geographical regions where the

    1611available water supply due to the potential for saltwater intrusion, wetland

    1622impacts, or impacts to existing legal uses, is predicted not to meet water

    1635demands that are projected during the next 20 years. See, Chapter 40E-23,

    1647Florida Administrative Code. The use of reclaimed water is not mandated in such

    1660areas. However, the District's Rules seek to insure the optimal utilization of

    1672alternative sources of water in such areas to minimize the potential harm newburyport five cents savings bank resources.

    168710. It is not clear from the evidence presented in this case when PGA

    1701first obtained the Permit from the District for golf course irrigation. The

    1713Permit allows PGA to use the groundwater table as the source of water for its

    1728irrigation. Before its expiration, PGA timely sought renewal of the Permit.

    173911. On April 12, 1994, the District staff recommended renewal of PGA's

    1751Permit. The staff recommendation would allow PGA to continue using the

    1762groundwater table as the source of its water. The recommendation did not

    1774contain a requirement for PGA to use any reclaimed water as part of its golf

    1789course irrigation system.

    179212. Seacoast became aware of PGA's application to renew its Permit through

    1804a routine review of all water use permit applications made to the District by

    "1818potential reclaimed water users in [its] service area." Seacoast filed a

    1829Petition for Formal Administrative Hearing challenging the District staff's

    1838recommendation to renew PGA's Permit.

    184313. In its Petition, Seacoast alleged that its substantial interests would

    1854be affected by the renewal of the Permit because Seacoast's ability to achieve

    1867the State of Florida's goals of conservation and environmental protection

    1877depends upon PGA, and other similar country clubs, being required to consume

    1889reclaimed water. Seacoast contends that the staff recommendation immediately

    1898eliminates a major potential consumer of Seacoast's reclaimed water which

    1908purportedly impairs Seacoast's ability to meet state objectives for reuse of

    1919reclaimed water and results in the undesirable continued disposal of reclaimed

    1930water via deep well injection.

    193514. In connection with its challenge to the proposed renewal of PGA's

    1947Permit, Seacoast has stipulated that PGA's proposed withdrawals from the

    1957groundwater table would not cause harm to the water resources of the District.

    197015. Seacoast also admits that it has never evaluated whether it would be

    1983environmentally injured by PGA's withdrawals from the groundwater table and/or

    1993whether the proposed use by PGA is wasteful.

    200116. The District does not currently have any goals for the utilization of

    2014reclaimed water on a regional basis. Instead, the District oversight of the

    2026utilization of reclaimed water is done on a permit by permit basis.

    203817. As a general policy, the District will not accept a water use permit

    2052application in an area of critical water shortage unless a reuse feasibility

    2064determination is included. The District's rules do not currently contain any

    2075guidelines as to how the determination of feasibility is to be made, nor are

    2089there any criteria for reviewing an applicant's determination of feasibility.

    2099As discussed below, the District does not even consider the applicant's reuse

    2111feasibility determination unless the proposed withdrawal is projected to result

    2121in harm to the resources of the District. Even when harm to a resource is

    2136projected, the District accepts an applicant's feasibility determination

    2144regarding the use of reclaimed water without question or analysis. For the

    2156other consumptive use criteria set forth in Rule 40E-2.301, the District

    2167independently evaluates the applicant's conclusions to confirm that they are


    217818. In frost bank hours corpus christi words, the District treats reclaimed water as an alternative

    2190source of water in the event that an applicant's proposed water use is projected

    2204to cause harm to the water resources of the District. If no harm is expected to

    2220occur to water resources as a result of a proposed use, the District does not

    2235review the applicant's determination of whether or not to use reclaimed water.

    2247If harm is projected, the applicant is required to look at alternatives like

    2260water conservation or utilization of water sources other than those proposed

    2271(such as reclaimed water). The applicant is free to select any alternative that

    2284mitigates the harm. Thus, even in a Critical Water Supply Area, an applicant

    2297can mitigate concerns about harm to the resource without utilizing reclaimed


    230919. In sum, under the District's current procedures, the use of reclaimed

    2321water is never required. It is simply one alternative an applicant can utilize

    2334to offset or mitigate projected harm to water resources (such as saltwater

    2346intrusion, contamination, wetland drawdowns or existing legal use impacts) from

    2356a proposed withdrawal. Even when the District staff concludes that an

    2367applicant's proposed use will result in harm to water resources, the staff does

    2380not critically review the applicant's determination of whether the use of

    2391reclaimed water is economically, environmentally, or technically infeasible.

    2399With respect to PGA's Permit, the District staff concluded that no harm to the

    2413resource was predicted as a result of PGA's proposed use. Thus, PGA's

    2425determination not to use reclaimed water was not evaluated or even considered.

    243720. The District explains that its implementation of the permitting

    2447program is based upon its interpretation that its primary responsibility is to

    2459prevent harm to water resources. The District points out that there are a

    2472number of factors to be considered in utilizing reclaimed water. These factors

    2484include, but are not limited to, the cost of the reclaimed water, the cost of

    2499retrofitting an irrigation system, the long-term availability of the reclaimed

    2509supply and the availability of a back-up supply.


    252021. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the

    2530parties to and the subject matter of this proceeding. Section 120.57(1),

    2541Florida Statutes.

    254322. The Water Management District has been granted the authority to design

    2555and implement a permitting program for the consumptive use of water. See,

    2567Section 373.219(1), Florida Statutes.

    257123. In deciding whether to issue a water use permit, the District must

    2584apply the criteria set forth 1st financial federal credit union routing number Part Seacoast utility authority of Chapter 373, Florida Statutes. The

    2598statutory conditions for issuing a permit are set forth in Section 373.223(1).

    2610Under that statute, an applicant must establish that the proposed use is a

    "2623reasonable-beneficial" use as defined in Section 373.019(4), that the use will

    2634not cause adverse impacts to legally existing users, and that the use is

    2647consistent with the public interest.

    265224. A "reasonable-beneficial use" is defined in Section 373.019(4) as "the

    2663use of water in such quantity as is necessary for economic and efficient

    2676utilization for a purpose and in a manner which is both reasonable and

    2689consistent with the public interest."

    269425. DEP has the adopted the State Water Policy, Rule 17-40.401, et. seq.,

    2707Florida Administrative Code,3 which delineates a number of factors which a water

    2720management district must consider in determining whether a proposed use is

    "2731reasonable-beneficial." Among the factors to be considered are "the extent and

    2742amount of harm caused," "whether the proposed use would significantly induce

    2753salt water intrusion," "the amount of water which can be withdrawn without

    2765causing harm to the resource," "the demonstrated need for the water," the long

    2778term yield and suitability of the water source, the potential for flood damage

    2791and public health impacts, and the "practicality of mitigating any harm by

    2803adjusting the quantity or method of use." See, Rule 17-40.401(2)(b), (c), (e),

    2815(f), (g), (l), (m), (n), (o), (p), and (q), Florida Administrative Code. In

    2828addition, Subsection (j) provides that consideration should be given to "the

    2839availability of reclaimed water for and the practicality of reuse, or the use of

    2853waters of more suitable quality."

    285826. To implement its permitting duties under the statute, the District has

    2870adopted Rule 40E-2, Florida Administrative Code, which incorporates by reference

    2880the Basis of Review For Water Use Permit Applications within the South Florida

    2893Water Management District (the "Basis of Review").

    290127. In reviewing permit applications, the District Water Use Division

    2911applies the conditions for permit issuance set forth in Rule 40E-2.301, Florida

    2923Administrative Code. This Rule sets forth a series of factors that the District

    2936considers in determining whether an application satisfies the statutory


    294628. Many of the considerations delineated in the State Water Policy have

    2958been directly incorporated in the District's Rule. See, e. g., Rule 40E-

    29702.301(1)(a), (c), and (d). In fact, Subsection (e) of the District's Rule

    2982specifically provides that the factors set forth in the State Water Policy

    2994should be considered.

    299729. Subsection (f) of the District's Rule incorporates the protection

    3007against interference with presently existing legal uses which is set forth in

    3019the statute. Similarly, Subsection (i) incorporates the "public interest"

    3028considerations provided for in Section 373.223, e t u t a t S a d i r o l F  s .

    305130. In applying the criteria set forth in the Rule, the District

    3063emphasizes the impact of the proposed water use on the water resources of the

    3077District. According to the District, this is the crux of the determination of

    3090whether a proposed use is "reasonable-beneficial." Thus, Subsections (a), (b),

    3100(c), and (d), of Rule 40E-2.301(1) require an applicant to provide reasonable

    3112assurances that the proposed use will not cause movement of saline water, will

    3125not adversely impact off-site land uses, will not cause adverse environmental

    3136impact (such as wetland impacts) and will not cause pollution of the aquifer.

    314931. The main issue in this case is Seacoast's contention that the District

    3162has not required PGA to meet the criteria of Subsection (h) of the District's

    3176Rule and the specific provisions of the Basis of Review. Subsection (h)

    3188provides that an applicant must give reasonable assurances that the proposed

    3199water use:

    3201(h) makes use of a reclaimed water source

    3209unless the applicant, in any geographic

    3215location, demonstrates that its use is either

    3222not economically, environmentally or techni-

    3227cally feasible. . .

    3232The District's Basis of Review (March 1994),

    3239which is expressly incorporated in the District's

    3246Rules, provides:

    3248In those areas of the District which are designated

    3257as critical water supply problem areas pursuant to

    3265Chapter 40(E)-23, reclaimed water is required to

    3272be used unless it is demonstrated by the applicant

    3281that its use is either not environmentally,

    3288economically or technically feasible.

    329232. Seacoast claims that the District ignored the quoted provisions from

    3303the District's Rule and its Basis of Review when it processed PGA's application

    3316for renewal of its Permit without analyzing the applicant's determination not to

    3328use reclaimed water.

    333133. Seacoast also claims that the manner in which the District is

    3343implementing its program contravenes a number of statutory provisions. The 1994

    3354Florida Legislature passed legislation specifically encouraging the reuse of

    3363reclaimed water. See, Chapter 94-243, Laws of Florida codified in part at

    3375Section 373.250, Florida Statutes. Section 373.250(1), Florida Statutes,


    3384The encouragement and promotion of water conserva-

    3391tion and reuse of reclaimed water, as defined by

    3400the Department, are state objectives and considered

    3407to be in the public interest.

    341334. The Statute directs each water management district to adopt rules to

    3425implement this policy. As of the date of the hearing in this matter, no such

    3440rules have been adopted by the District. It should be noted that Subsection 4

    3454of Section 373.250 provides that "nothing in this Section shall impair a water

    3467management district's authority to plan for and regulate consumptive uses of

    3478water under this chapter."

    348235. The 1994 Legislation also amended Section 403.064, Florida Statutes,

    3492to specifically recognize that the encouragement and promotion of reuse of

    3503reclaimed water was in the public interest. As amended, Section 403.064,

    3514Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent part:

    3520Reuse of Reclaimed Water.

    3524(1) The encouragement and promotion of water

    3531conservation, and reuse of reclaimed water, as

    3538defined by the Department are state objectives. . .

    3548* * *

    3551(11) In issuing consumptive use permits, the

    3558permitting agency shall take into consideration

    3564the local reuse program.

    356836. It is not clear at this point what changes, if any, the District will

    3583implement to its permitting program as a result of the 1994 Legislation. The

    3596District does not currently have any ruels implementing a reuse program.

    360737. DEP has incorporated a policy to encourage reuse in its rules which

    3620direct the water management districts to require "a reasonable amount of reuse

    3632of reclaimed water from domestic waste water treatment facilities. . within

    3645designated critical water supply problem areas unless such reuse is not

    3656economically, environmentally or technically feasible." See, Rule 17-40.401(5),

    3664Florida Administrative Code.

    366738. Without question, the statutes and rules set forth above incorporate a

    3679number of important and sometimes conflicting goals into the water permitting

    3690process. These potentially conflicting goals necessarily require some difficult

    3699policy choices. For the reasons set forth below, it is concluded that these

    3712choices are not appropriately made in this Section 120.57 proceeding regrading

    3723the renewal of PGA's permit.

    372839. There is no dispute that the District has not independently evaluated

    3740whether the use of reclaimed water by PGA is environmentally, economically or

    3752technically feasible. In fact, the District has not even analyzed PGA's

    3763feasibility determination. There is also no dispute that PGA's proposed

    3773withdrawal is not projected to result in any harm to the resources of the

    3787District. For this reason, the District will not second guess Seacoast's

    3798decision not to utilize reclaimed water for irrigation.

    380640. The District explains that its review of a permit application focuses

    3818on the extent of harm expected from a proposed withdrawal. This approach by the

    3832District has been followed since at least January 1, 1993. Thus, if a requested

    3846withdrawal is projected to result in increased salt water intrusion, the

    3857District will more closely scrutinize an applicant's consideration of

    3866alternative sources available to alleviate the resource harm. If no capital one activate a credit card to the

    3879resource is predicted, the District does not critically review an applicant's

    3890decision not to use reclaimed water. The manner in which the District is

    3903applying the criteria in its Rule is not clearly articulated in the Rule itself.

    3917Indeed, it is difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile the District's

    3928procedures with the literal language of the Rule and the 1994 legislation which

    3941mandates that more emphasis be placed on reusing reclaimed water.

    395141. Seacoast has not challenged the District's application of its Rule

    3962under Section 120.535, Florida Statutes, nor has Seacoast sought a mandamus

    3973action to compel the District to comply with its statutory obligations.

    3984Instead, Seacoast has initiated this proceeding to challenge the issuance of a

    3996permit by the District to a potential user of its reclaimed water. Essentially,

    4009Seacoast is seeking to force the District to take a more critical view of the

    4024applicant's determination not to utilize reclaimed water. This is not the

    4035appropriate forum for Seacoast's attempt to significantly modify the District's

    4045implementation of the regulatory scheme so that it complies with Seacoast's

    4056interpretation of the statutory and Rule requirements.

    406342. In order to have standing in a formal proceeding pursuant to Section

    4076120.57(1), Florida Statutes, a petitioner must allege that its substantial

    4086interests are being determined by the proposed agency action. The Petitioner

    4097must show that the proposed agency action will result in an "injury in fact" of

    4112sufficient immediacy that is within the "zone of interest" protected by the

    4124requested proceeding.

    412643. The "zone of interest" is defined by the particular statute

    4137authorizing the challenged proposed agency action. See, Agrico Chemical Company

    4147v. Department of Environmental Regulation, 406 So.2d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).

    4159The District contends that the "zone of interest" in a proceeding for a water

    4173use permit pursuant to Part II of Chapter 373, Florida Statutes, is limited to

    4187resource related issues involving conservation and protection of water

    4196resources. This argument ignores Section seacoast utility authority, Florida Statutes, which

    4205specifically encourages and promotes the reuse of reclaimed water.

    421444. There can be no real dispute that at least part of Seacoast's

    4227motivation in filing this action was to protect its economic interests. As

    4239noted in City of Sunrise v. South Florida Water Management District, 615 So.2d

    4252746, 747 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), "competitive economic considerations do not fall

    4264within the zone of protection that the District is authorized to consider."

    4276Consequently, the economic interests of Seacoast in selling its reused water is

    4288not a proper factor to be considered in the permitting process.

    429945. Seacoast claims that it is not only seeking to protect its economic

    4312interests, but that it is also seeking to further the environmental policies

    4324established by the legislature and DEP. Specifically, Seacoast contends that it

    4335is seeking to foster the legislative goal of encouraging the utilization of

    4347reused water which is set forth in Section 373.250, Florida Statutes. According

    4359to Seacoast, the specific statutory recognition of this goal distinquishes this

    4370case from City of Sunrise, Supra.

    437646. Even if it is assumed that Seacoast's interests in furthering the

    4388utilization of reclaimed water is within the zone of interest protected by

    4400Chapter 373, Seacoast's claim of injury is not sufficiently immediate to entitle

    4412it to protection in this Section 120.57 proceeding. The possibility that PGA

    4424could potentially purchase reclaimed water from Seacoast is pure speculation.

    4434There are numerous reasons why such reuse may be economically, environmentally

    4445or technically not feasible. Any injury to Seacoast will depend upon a number

    4458of intervening factors. See, Boca Raton Mausoleum v. Department of Banking and

    4470Finance, 511 So.2d 1060, 1063 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). It is not the agency action

    4485itself, i.e., the issuance of a renewal permit to PGA, which will cause the

    4499injury. Village Park Mobile Home Association, Inc. v. Department of Business

    4510Regulation, 506 So.2d 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). In sum, the potential injury

    4523claimed by Seacoast is too remote to be afforded protection within the context

    4536of a proceeding regarding PGA's Permit. Seacoast can not show a substantial

    4548injury of a sufficient immediacy in fact which is of a type or nature that the

    4564proceeding is designed to protect against. See, Agrico Chemical Company v.

    4575Department of Environmental Regulation, 406 So.2d 478 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981), rev.

    4587denied, 415 So.2d 1359 (1982); Town of Palm Beach v. Department of Natural

    4600Resources, 577 So.2d 1383 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991).


    4609Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is

    4622RECOMMENDED that the South Florida Water Management District enter a Final

    4633Order dismissing the Petition filed by Seacoast challenging the renewal of

    4644Permit Number 50-00617-W to PGA for golf course irrigation.

    4653DONE AND ENTERED in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida, this 6th day of

    4665February 1995.



    4671Hearing Officer

    4673Division of Administrative Hearings

    4677The DeSoto Building

    46801230 Apalachee Parkway

    4683Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550

    4686(904) 488-9675

    4688Filed with the Clerk of the

    4694Division of Administrative Hearings

    4698this 6th day of February 1995.


    47051/ As discussed in the Conclusions of Law below, Seacoast points to certain

    4718provisions in Chapter 373, the State Water Policy and the District's rules to

    4731support its claim that the regulatory structure requires it to develop the

    4743capacity to make treated effluent available for reuse.

    47512/ The utilization of reclaimed water can not be the sole means for disposing

    4765of wastewater because customers will not utilize the reclaimed wastewater during

    4776times of heavy rainfall. Accordingly, a back-up system of disposal, such as a

    4789deep injection well, is necessary.

    47943/ At the hearing, the parties stipulated that the Hearing Officer should take

    4807Official Recognition of Chapter 17-40, Florida Administrative Code. Those rules

    4817have subsequently been transferred to Chapter 62, Florida Administrative Code.


    4831All parties have submitted Proposed Recommended Orders. The following

    4840constitutes my rulings on the proposed findings of fact submitted by the


    4853Petitioner's proposed findings of fact

    48581. Adopted in substance in Findings of Fact 1 and 3.

    48692. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 8.

    48783. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 6.

    48874. Rejected as vague and overly broad.

    48945. Subordinate to Finding of Fact 7.

    49016. The first two sentences are adopted in substance in Finding

    4912of Fact 5 and Endnote 1. The last sentence is addressed in

    4924Finding of Fact 3 and in the Conclusions of Law.

    49347. Rejected as vague and overly broad.

    49418. Subordinate to Findings of Fact 16-20.

    49489. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 18.

    495710. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 15, and in the

    4969Conclusions of Law.

    497211. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 9.

    498112. Addressed in the Preliminary Statement and in Finding of

    4991Fact 11.

    499313. Adopted in substance in Findings of Fact 11 and 18.

    500414. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 12.

    501315. Addressed in Finding of Fact 13, and in the Conclusions of


    502616. Rejected as constituting argument. This subject is

    5034addressed in the Conclusions of Law.

    5040Respondent, South Florida Water Management District's proposed findings of fact

    50501. Adopted in substance in the Preliminary Statement and

    5059Findings of Fact 9-11.

    50632. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 1.

    50723. Rejected as unnecessary and as a summary of testimony rather

    5083than a finding of fact.

    50884. seacoast utility authority Adopted seacoast utility authority substance in Finding of Fact 13.

    50975. Adopted in substance in Findings of Fact 12, 14 and 15.

    51096. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 13, and in the

    5121Conclusions of Law.

    51247. Rejected as unnecessary and as constituting argument rather

    5133than a finding of fact.

    51388. Adopted in substance in Findings of Fact 14 and 15.

    51499. Adopted in substance in Findings of Fact 7 and 8.

    516010. Addressed in Finding of Fact 5.

    516711. Rejected as unnecessary and constituting argument rather

    5175than a finding of fact.

    518012. Rejected as unnecessary.

    518413. Rejected as unnecessary.

    518814. Addressed in the Conclusions of Law.

    519515. Addressed in the Conclusions of Law.

    520216. Addressed in the Conclusions of Law.

    520917. Addressed in the Conclusions of Law.

    521618. Addressed in the Conclusions of Law.

    522319. Rejected as vague and ambiguous.

    522920. Addressed in the Conclusions of Law.

    523621. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 9.

    524522. Subordinate to Findings of Fact 17-20.

    525223. Subordinate to Findings of Fact 17-20, and addressed in the

    5263Conclusions of Law.

    526624. Adopted in substance in Findings of Fact 17-20.

    527525. Rejected as unnecessary.

    527926. Subordinate to Finding of Fact 17.

    528627. Rejected as unnecessary.

    529028. Addressed in the Conclusions of Law.

    529729. Rejected as unnecessary.

    530130. Adopted in substance in Findings of Fact seacoast utility authority. Adopted in substance in Findings of Fact 17-20.

    531932. Rejected as unnecessary.

    532333. Adopted in substance in Findings of Fact 14 and 15.

    533434. Subordinate to Finding of Fact 19.

    534135. Rejected as unnecessary and beyond the scope of this


    535236. Rejected as unnecessary and beyond the scope of this


    536337. Rejected as unnecessary and beyond the scope of this


    537438. Rejected as unnecessary and beyond the scope of this


    538539. Rejected as unnecessary and beyond the scope of this


    539640. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 7.

    5405Respondent, PGA National Golf Club and Sports Center, Ltd.'s proposed findings

    5416of fact

    54181. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 1.

    54272. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 9.

    54363. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 3.

    54454. Addressed in the Preliminary Statement and in Finding of

    5455Fact 10.

    54575. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 11.

    54666. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 11.

    54757. Adopted in substance in Findings of Fact 17, 18 and 19.

    54878. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 19.

    54969. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 14.

    550510. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 9.

    551411. Adopted in substance in Findings of Fact 1, 2 and 5.

    552612. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 3.

    553513. Rejected as unnecessary.

    553914. Subordinate to Finding of Fact 6.

    554615. Subordinate to Finding of Fact 13.

    555316. Rejected as vague, ambiguous and unnecessary.

    556017. Subordinate to Finding of Fact 7.

    556718. Adopted in substance in Endnote 2.

    557419. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 2.

    558320. Adopted in pertinent part in Finding of Fact 7.

    559321. Rejected as unnecessary and beyond the scope of this


    560422. Rejected as unnecessary and beyond the scope of this


    561523. Rejected as unnecessary.

    561924. Adopted in substance in Findings of Fact 17-20.

    562825. Subordinate to Findings of Fact 17-20.

    563526. Rejected as unnecessary.

    563927. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 17.

    564828. Addressed in the Findings of Fact 17, 19 and 20, and in the

    5662Conclusions of Law.

    566529. Rejected as unnecessary and beyond the scope of this


    567630. Rejected as chase total checking 200 offer and unnecessary.

    568231. Adopted in substance in Findings of Fact 17-19.

    569132. Subordinate to Finding of Fact 14.

    569833. Subordinate to Finding of Fact 19.

    570534. Rejected as unnecessary.

    570935. Adopted in substance in Finding of Fact 16.

    571836. Rejected as constituting argument.


    5725Tilford C. Creel

    5728Executive Director

    5730South Florida Water Management District

    5735Post Office Box 24680

    5739West Palm Beach, Florida 33416

    5744Nathan E. Nason, Esquire

    5748Nason, Gildan, Yeager, Gerson

    5752and White

    5754Suite 1200

    57561645 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard

    5761West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

    5766Cecile I. Ross, Esquire

    5770Office of the General Counsel

    57753301 Gun Club Road

    5779West Palm Beach, Florida 33416-4680

    5784E. Lee Worsham, Esquire

    5788Honigman, Miller, Schwartz and Cohn

    5793222 Lakeview Avenue, Suite 800

    5798West Palm Beach, Florida 33401


    5809All parties have the right to submit written exceptions to this Recommended

    5821Order. All agencies allow each party at least 10 days in which to submit

    5835written exceptions. Some agencies allow a larger period within which to submit

    5847written exceptions. You should contact the agency that will issue the final

    5859order in this case concerning agency rules on the deadline for filing exceptions

    5872to this Recommended Order. Any exceptions to this Recommended Order should be

    5884filed with the agency that will issue the final order in this case.


    Seacoast Utility Authority

    Is this your business? Customize this page.Claim this business
    General Info
    Seacoast Utility Authority is a regional water and wastewater utility that provides potable water service to more than 37,000 households and over 1,600 commercial establishments. It provides wastewater collection, treatment and disposal services to more than 34,000 residential dwellings and 1,300 businesses. The authority's service area, which covers over 65-square-miles, consists of unincorporated areas of Palm Beach County, and the incorporated areas of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, the Village of North Palm Beach, the Towns of Lake Park and Juno Beach, in northern Palm Beach County in Florida. Seacoast provides safe drinking water to family and business through more than 40 deep wells from which the water is transmitted to its two treatment plants. Its plants aerate, filter and disinfect water, and pump it through water distribution mains and service lines to homes and businesses.
    BBB Rating

    BBB Rating and Accreditation information may be delayed up to a week.

    Regular Hours
    Mon seacoast utility authority Fri:
    Water Purification System Installation
    Payment method
    debit, amex, cash, discover, master card, visa
    Other Links

    Other Email

    Email Business

    Public Utility Consultants
    Other Information

    Services: Water Purification System Installation


    Be the first to add a photo!

    Add a Photo



    Seacoast Utility Authority Login

    Login page for seacoast utility authority login is presented below. Log into seacoast utility authority login page with one-click or find related helpful links.

    Last Updated: 7th October, 2021

    Seacoast Utility Authority: Login, Bill Pay, Customer .

    Seacoast Utility Authority: Login, Bill Pay, Customer .
    Seacoast Utility Authority was added to the directory by a user on November 19, 2009. doxo is a secure, all-in-one bill pay service enabling payments to thousands of billers. doxo is not an affiliate of Seacoas.
    Contact Us Form - Seacoast Utility Authority

    Contact Us Form - Seacoast Utility Authority
    Seacoast is here to serve you 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. If you have any problems with a sewer backup, you must call us first! Seacoast must investigate the problem prior to calling an outside service compa.
    Payment Home - Seacoast Utility Authority

    Payment Home - Seacoast Utility Authority
    Account LoginExpress Pay. Any links to our former online payment site that you may have saved or bookmarked as a favorite will no longer be valid and should .
    Customer Contact Form -

    Customer Contact Form -
    Seacoast Utility Authority. Contact information for customers currently served by Seacoast. Contact Information * Name * Account #: * Customer #: Telephone * Primary Secondary Email ; Submit Seacoast Utility A.
    Seacoast Utility Authority Employee Self Service

    Seacoast Utility Authority Employee Self Service
    Employee Self Service (ESS) is a convenient, secure, and user-friendly resources accessed online through the Munis portal. It will not only enable Authority staff ibc tanks near me see their individual records, but also provi.
    Seacoast Utility Authority Home - SUA employee

    Seacoast Utility Authority Home - SUA employee us bank national association insurance department
    The Human Resources department is responsible for coordinating the Authority's human resources programs including benefits administration, employee relations, seacoast utility authority and compensation, recruitment, train.

    Seacoast Utility Authority - Palm Beach Gardens, Florida .

    Seacoast Utility Authority - Palm Beach Gardens, Florida .
    2014/08/25  · Posts about Seacoast Utility Authority. Tina McClain Hale is at Seacoast Utility Authority. August 25, 2014 · Palm Beach Gardens, FL · Paying bills with the money God gave me.I know my sou.
    Seacoast Utility Authority - New and Improved Payment .

    Seacoast Utility Authority - New and Improved Payment .
    In order to better serve you, Seacoast Utility Authority has launched a new & improved payment portal for your SUA account. You will need to create a profile to set up your account in the new portal.
    No preview available yet

    My Account - Bill2Pay
    When paying your utility bill, please be aware of the following terms and what they mean. The Amount Due: Is the total amount due including current and any previous amount owed. Payment Due Date: Is the due dat.
    No preview available yet

    AquaHawk - Login
    Please upgrade your browser. This application uses the latest technology to provide the best user experience. Unfortunately, your browser does not support the .

    1 Replies to “Seacoast utility authority”

    1. Sar Mera transaction password 6 mahine ke bad expire Ho Gaya hai kaise update karo please bataiye

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *