1/10/1979 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I • � � r upon completion of the well containing such information as depth, geologic formations encountered, pump size, etc. A County Well Inspector then inspects the installation and verifies the accuracy of the log. A water sample is taken and analyzed at a county maintained laboratory. Some of the parameters tested include chlorides, metals, total dissolved solids, calcium carbonate, and magnesium carbonate. The County transcribes the information onto a computer form and sub- mits it to the U. S. Geological Survey Office in Orlando. The USES stores the information on their computer, analyzes pertinent data, and supplies the County with summaries and so forth. Copies are submitted to the SJRWMD. monthly. The cost of Volusia County's program is roughly $35,000 a year. Permit fees make the program self-supporting. Initial outlay by the County was about $3,000 for lab facilities, plus salaries. In Indian River County,.there are approximately 1200 - 1500 2" diameter (average) shallow wells drilled each year. There are less than 100 4" or larger wells drilled, and we expect this number to decrease as development of new citrus land slows and well construction costs rise. Almost all of these 4" and larger wells also require consumptive use per- mits from the SJRWMD. The landowner must get a consumptive use permit before applying for a construction permit regardless of the agency permit- ting construction. The SJRWMD consumptive use permitting procedure is, at present, rather involved. Once the permit is granted, the construction permit is almost a formality. The inspection of the 4" and larger wells is also quite involved as most penetrate the Floridan Aquifer (artesian) at a depth of 600-1000 feet. Proper inspection requires knowledge of geologic formations, shallow and deep aquifers, engineering, etc. Detailed logs and on-site inspection are required by SJRWMD. In our opinion, the County has three alternatives: .1. Permit all wells, regardless of size. 2. Permit only 4" or larger wells as required by the SJRWMD. 3. Allow permitting program to be handled by SJRWMD. Alternative 1 would require regulation of an industry which is not currently•regulated. The program required would be extensive and involved. Since we have little salt water intrusion problem and there are no permit- ting requirements for small wells, the necessity of a program of this type is, at present, questionable. In the future, however, a program may be desirable as an aid for regulating development and other reasons. Alternative 2 would not be self-supporting without exhorbitant per- mitting fees. The number of wells is small and the personnel requirement high. Alternative 3 seems the most feasible at present. Since persons desiring to drill large, deep wells must acquire a consumptive use permit,. the construction i�armit could be easily handled at f'ne saute time by the SJ=MD. The SJid= also has qualified staff which could properly handle inspections. . t Our recommendation is that the Board request the SJRWMD to retain permitting authority for the present with the proviso that if the County finds it desirable to implement a full permitting program in the future, they will be allowed to reconsider an agreement. In addition, it would probably be to the County's advantage to request copies of all well con- struction and/or consumptive use permits granted by the SJRWMD in Indian River County. This would allow the County to track development and have the information on hand for future use. Tripson i !J Jim Huff Pete Spyke v i M 00 RGE JU9 JAN 101979