373.223
Conditions for a permit.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
373.223 Conditions for a permit.—
(1) To obtain a permit pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, the applicant must establish that the proposed use of water:
(a) Is a reasonable-beneficial use as defined in s. 373.019;
(b) Will not interfere with any presently existing legal use of water; and
(c) Is consistent with the public interest.
(2) The governing board or the department may authorize the holder of a use permit to transport and use ground or surface water beyond overlying land, across county boundaries, or outside the watershed from which it is taken if the governing board or department determines that such transport and use is consistent with the public interest, and no local government shall adopt or enforce any law, ordinance, rule, regulation, or order to the contrary.
(3) Except for the transport and use of water supplied by the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control Project, and anywhere in the state when the transport and use of water is supplied exclusively for bottled water as defined in s. 500.03(1)(d), any water use permit applications pending as of April 1, 1998, with the Northwest Florida Water Management District and self-suppliers of water for which the proposed water source and area of use or application are located on contiguous private properties, when evaluating whether a potential transport and use of ground or surface water across county boundaries is consistent with the public interest, pursuant to paragraph (1)(c), the governing board or department shall consider:
(a) The proximity of the proposed water source to the area of use or application.
(b) All impoundments, streams, groundwater sources, or watercourses that are geographically closer to the area of use or application than the proposed source, and that are technically and economically feasible for the proposed transport and use.
(c) All economically and technically feasible alternatives to the proposed source, including, but not limited to, desalination, conservation, reuse of nonpotable reclaimed water and stormwater, and aquifer storage and recovery.
(d) The potential environmental impacts that may result from the transport and use of water from the proposed source, and the potential environmental impacts that may result from use of the other water sources identified in paragraphs (b) and (c).
(e) Whether existing and reasonably anticipated sources of water and conservation efforts are adequate to supply water for existing legal uses and reasonably anticipated future needs of the water supply planning region in which the proposed water source is located.
(f) Consultations with local governments affected by the proposed transport and use.
(g) The value of the existing capital investment in water-related infrastructure made by the applicant.
Where districtwide water supply assessments and regional water supply plans have been prepared pursuant to ss. 373.036 and 373.709, the governing board or the department shall use the applicable plans and assessments as the basis for its consideration of the applicable factors in this subsection.
(4) The governing board or the department, by regulation, may reserve from use by permit applicants, water in such locations and quantities, and for such seasons of the year, as in its judgment may be required for the protection of fish and wildlife or the public health and safety. Such reservations shall be subject to periodic review and revision in the light of changed conditions. However, all presently existing legal uses of water shall be protected so long as such use is not contrary to the public interest.
(5) In evaluating an application for consumptive use of water which proposes the use of an alternative water supply project as described in the regional water supply plan and provides reasonable assurances of the applicant’s capability to design, construct, operate, and maintain the project, the governing board or department shall presume that the alternative water supply use is consistent with the public interest under paragraph (1)(c). However, where the governing board identifies the need for a multijurisdictional water supply entity or regional water supply authority to develop the alternative water supply project pursuant to s. 373.709(2)(a)2., the presumption shall be accorded only to that use proposed by such entity or authority. This subsection does not affect evaluation of the use pursuant to the provisions of paragraphs (1)(a) and (b), subsections (2) and (3), and ss. 373.2295 and 373.233.
(6) A new consumptive use permit, or the renewal or modification of a consumptive use permit, that authorizes groundwater withdrawals of 100,000 gallons or more per day from a well with an inside diameter of 8 inches or more shall be monitored for water usage at intervals using methods determined by the applicable water management district, and the results of such monitoring shall be reported to the applicable water management district at least annually. The water management districts may adopt rules to implement this subsection. In lieu of the requirements of this subsection, a water management district may enforce rules that govern water usage monitoring in effect on July 1, 2016, or may adopt rules that are more stringent than this subsection.
History.—s. 3, part II, ch. 72-299; s. 10, ch. 73-190; s. 10, ch. 76-243; s. 35, ch. 85-81; s. 4, ch. 98-88; s. 6, ch. 2005-291; s. 15, ch. 2010-205; s. 31, ch. 2015-2; s. 10, ch. 2016-1; s. 37, ch. 2023-154.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases, 1977–2012 · leading case: Southwest Florida Water Management Dist. v. Charlotte Cty.
Southwest Florida Water Management Dist. v. Charlotte Cty. (2001)
“1 regarding reuse is authorized under the reasonable-beneficial and public interest test, section 373.223 controls over § 125.01(1)(k)(1).”
Washington County v. Northwest Florida Water Management District (2012)
“Should an entity choose to undertake an identified water supply development project, it must eventually apply for a water use permit pursuant to section 373.223, Florida Statutes. The permit applicant must establish that its proposed water use “(a) [i]s a reasonable-beneficial…”
Osceola Cty. v. St. Johns River Water Mgt. Dist. (1986)
“(2) In deciding whether the transport and use of water across District boundaries is consistent with the public interest pursuant to Section 373.223, Florida Statutes, the Districts should consider the extent to which: (a) Comprehensive water conservation and reuse programs are…”
Harloff v. City of Sarasota (1991)
“§ 373.223, Fla. Stat. (1989). A "reasonable-beneficial use" means "the use of water in such quantity as is necessary for economic and efficient utilization for a purpose and in a manner which is both reasonable and consistent with the public interest.”
Marion County v. Greene (2009)
“223(1) of the Florida Statutes sets forth the core criteria for issuance of a CUP and specifies the statutory conditions as follows: § 373.223 Conditions for permit.— (1) To obtain a permit pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, the applicant must establish that the…”
Ass'n of Fla. Community Developers v. Dep (2006)
“§ 373.223(4), Fla. Stat. (2005). Section 373.”
City of St. Petersburg v. Southwest Fla. Water Management Dist. (1977)
“Section 373.223(1), Florida Statutes. A reasonable beneficial use was defined by the act as the use of water in such quantity as is necessary for economic and efficient utilization for a purpose and in a manner which is both reasonable and consistent with the public interest.”
City of Sunrise v. South Florida Water Management District (1993)
“The District adopted the findings of the hearing officer that Sunrise failed to show a substantial interest within the zone of protection of section 373.223, Florida Statutes, the permitting statute.”
Osceola Cty. v. ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAG. (1987)
“(2) In deciding whether the transport and use of water across District boundaries is consistent with the public interest pursuant to Section 373.223, Florida Statutes, the Districts should consider the extent to which: (a) Comprehensive water conservation and reuse programs are…”
Middlebrooks v. St. Johns River Water Management District (1987)
“However, the Petitioner has failed to submit an application concerning the use at the swimming area, so Section 373.223, Florida Statutes, and not Section 373.”
Friends of Fort George, Inc. v. Fairfield Communities, Inc. (1986)
“require the use of water which pursuant to Section 373.223(3), Florida Statutes, and Rule 40C-2.”
— 373.223(1) — 5 cases
Southwest Florida Water Management Dist. v. Charlotte Cty. (2001)
“1 regarding reuse is authorized under the reasonable-beneficial and public interest test, section 373.223 controls over § 125.01(1)(k)(1).”
Washington County v. Northwest Florida Water Management District (2012)
“Should an entity choose to undertake an identified water supply development project, it must eventually apply for a water use permit pursuant to section 373.223, Florida Statutes. The permit applicant must establish that its proposed water use “(a) [i]s a reasonable-beneficial…”
City of St. Petersburg v. Southwest Fla. Water Management Dist. (1977)
“Section 373.223(1), Florida Statutes. A reasonable beneficial use was defined by the act as the use of water in such quantity as is necessary for economic and efficient utilization for a purpose and in a manner which is both reasonable and consistent with the public interest.”
Marion County v. Greene (2009)
“223(1) of the Florida Statutes sets forth the core criteria for issuance of a CUP and specifies the statutory conditions as follows: § 373.223 Conditions for permit.— (1) To obtain a permit pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, the applicant must establish that the…”
Middlebrooks v. St. Johns River Water Management District (1987)
“However, the Petitioner has failed to submit an application concerning the use at the swimming area, so Section 373.223, Florida Statutes, and not Section 373.”
— 373.223(1)(c) — 1 case
Osceola Cty. v. ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAG. (1987)
“(2) In deciding whether the transport and use of water across District boundaries is consistent with the public interest pursuant to Section 373.223, Florida Statutes, the Districts should consider the extent to which: (a) Comprehensive water conservation and reuse programs are…”
— 373.223(2) — 3 cases
Osceola Cty. v. St. Johns River Water Mgt. Dist. (1986)
“(2) In deciding whether the transport and use of water across District boundaries is consistent with the public interest pursuant to Section 373.223, Florida Statutes, the Districts should consider the extent to which: (a) Comprehensive water conservation and reuse programs are…”
Marion County v. Greene (2009)
“223(1) of the Florida Statutes sets forth the core criteria for issuance of a CUP and specifies the statutory conditions as follows: § 373.223 Conditions for permit.— (1) To obtain a permit pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, the applicant must establish that the…”
Osceola Cty. v. ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAG. (1987)
“(2) In deciding whether the transport and use of water across District boundaries is consistent with the public interest pursuant to Section 373.223, Florida Statutes, the Districts should consider the extent to which: (a) Comprehensive water conservation and reuse programs are…”
— 373.223(3) — 2 cases
Marion County v. Greene (2009)
“223(1) of the Florida Statutes sets forth the core criteria for issuance of a CUP and specifies the statutory conditions as follows: § 373.223 Conditions for permit.— (1) To obtain a permit pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, the applicant must establish that the…”
Friends of Fort George, Inc. v. Fairfield Communities, Inc. (1986)
“require the use of water which pursuant to Section 373.223(3), Florida Statutes, and Rule 40C-2.”
— 373.223(3)(a) — 1 case
Washington County v. Northwest Florida Water Management District (2012)
“Should an entity choose to undertake an identified water supply development project, it must eventually apply for a water use permit pursuant to section 373.223, Florida Statutes. The permit applicant must establish that its proposed water use “(a) [i]s a reasonable-beneficial…”
— 373.223(3)(c) — 1 case
Southwest Florida Water Management Dist. v. Charlotte Cty. (2001)
“1 regarding reuse is authorized under the reasonable-beneficial and public interest test, section 373.223 controls over § 125.01(1)(k)(1).”
— 373.223(4) — 1 case
Ass'n of Fla. Community Developers v. Dep (2006)
“§ 373.223(4), Fla. Stat. (2005). Section 373.”
— 373.223(5) — 1 case
Washington County v. Northwest Florida Water Management District (2012)
“Should an entity choose to undertake an identified water supply development project, it must eventually apply for a water use permit pursuant to section 373.223, Florida Statutes. The permit applicant must establish that its proposed water use “(a) [i]s a reasonable-beneficial…”
— 373.223(l)(b) — 1 case
Middlebrooks v. St. Johns River Water Management District (1987)
“However, the Petitioner has failed to submit an application concerning the use at the swimming area, so Section 373.223, Florida Statutes, and not Section 373.”
— 373.223(l)(c) — 1 case
Friends of Fort George, Inc. v. Fairfield Communities, Inc. (1986)
“require the use of water which pursuant to Section 373.223(3), Florida Statutes, and Rule 40C-2.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.