Water Resources Planning in South
Florida during a Difficult Economy:
No Time for Unreasonable and
Unfunded Mandates
Thomas M. Missimer, Ph.D., P.G.
Robert G. Maliva, Ph.D., P.G.
Schlumberger Water Services
Fort Myers, Florida
Introduction




Florida is in an economic crisis that is perhaps the
worst in 50 years.
South Florida has lost population in the last two
years.
The ability of water supply utilities to implement
existing water supply plans is dependant on a
reliable, continuous revenue stream.
Costs of operations are up and overall net revenue is
down for many SW Florida public utilities.
Issues Facing Utilities during
This Economic Crisis





Reductions in future water use projections
Reductions in net revenue
Costs to complete planned infrastructure
Bond payments/reductions in ratings
Additional costs to comply with new
regulations
Some Measures Recently Taken by
South Florida Utilities to Reduce
Costs




Reductions in personnel
Deferment of projected capital improvements
and alteration of water planning documents
Deferment of some scheduled maintenance
Legal challenges to new regulations
Some Current Regulatory Initiatives
with Major Associated Costs




Year-round water conservation regulation
Application of water use permitting to
reclaimed water
Phasing out of ocean outfalls for disposal of
treated sewage effluent
Numerical standards for nutrient
concentrations in surface water
Year-Round Water Conservation
Regulation




Sounds reasonable
Can require considerable modification of the
water conveyance system to limit time of
water delivery
Limitation to one or two days for irrigation can
cause violations of state and federal laws
within the distribution system (pressures,
storage)
Reduces revenue collected for both water use
and wastewater treatment
Application of Water Use
Permitting to Reclaimed Water





Adds costly layer of bureaucracy
Can require expensive distribution
infrastructure
Can cause additional, expensive monitoring
mechanisms to monitor reclaimed water use
Comprehensive planning coordination with
local government utility plans
Can cause contract violations with consumers
Phasing Out of Ocean Outfalls for
Disposal of Treated Sewage Effluent




Will require new wet season disposal method, such
as deep injection wells
In certain cases it cannot to placed into the
reclaimed water system because of high salinity (i.e.
Miami-Dade north collection system).
Can cause billions of dollars in capital improvements
If wastewater is to be added to the reclaimed water
system, it will have to be desalinated which creates
another waste stream (concentrate requiring
disposal).
Numerical Standards for nutrient
concentrations in surface water



Causes re-design of numerous wastewater
treatment facilities (billions of dollars)
Will reduce concentrations of nutrients in
reclaimed water, thereby forcing additional
fertilizers to be used
Some utilities cannot afford the WWT
modifications and would have to reduce or
eliminate reclaimed water reuse
Combining Economic Downturn with
a Dubious Drought Declaration



Economy causes a reduction in use and
consummate reduction in both the water and
wastewater revenue streams
Implementation of Phase III drought
restrictions, not necessarily justified, causes
additional reductions in both revenue streams
Overall reduction in revenue has caused nearly
catastrophic economic impacts to some
utilities
Cost of Droughts When Not
Scientifically Justified

Political Drought – water is physically
available, but an agency regulating water acts
to create a situation to increase funding,
increase power, or otherwise exert greater
control over local governments and utilities.
SFWMD 2006 – 2007 Drought



2006 & 2007 set a new Districtwide record for low rainfall in
two consecutive calendar years.
District-wide rainfall total was
reported to be 83.6 inches
versus average of 105.6 inches
(52.8 inches/yr).
District-wide rainfall deficit = 22
inches.
SFWMD 2006 – 2007 Drought



Effects of 2006-2007 drought varied
considerably across the SFWMD area. There
was a large spatial variation in rainfall.
Local rainfall data for drought period was
compared against available historic data for
stations in the SFWMD.
Sources:
Southeast Regional Climate Center (SERCC)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA).
2006 & 2007 Rainfall Versus Historic Means
Station
2006
(in.)
2007
(in.)
Mean
(in.)
Avon Park
32.30
38.97
52.74
2006 &
2007 vs.
Mean
(in.)
-34.21
Orlando
36.35
38.49
50.18
-25.52
Fort Pierce
33.84
49.31
52.77
-22.39
Moore
Haven
Okeechobee
37.12
37.55
47.63
-20.59
30.45
41.50
44.99
-18.03
Historic
Min.
(in. &
year)
26.10
(2000)
30.38
(2000)
32.66
(1988)
29.63
(1981)
25.32
(2000)
2006 & 2007 rainfall versus historic means
Station
Miami Int.
Airport
West Palm
Beach
Fort
Lauderdale
Fort Myers
Hialeah
2006
(in.)
2007
(in.)
Mean
(in.)
64.67
63.97
60.01
2006 &
2007 vs.
Mean
(in.)
8.62
54.15
63.80
60.86
-3.77
61.87
66.43
66.43
-4.56
56.27
47.02
54.56
-5.83
59.46
64.77
65.96
-7.69
Historic
Min.
(in. &
year)
37.05
(1956)
32.66
(1988)
35.54
(1961)
32.83
(1964)
41.10
(1961)
SW Florida Water Levels
Lower Tamiami Aquifer Well C-391
SFWMD Drought Response



Implementation of Phase II Severe Water Shortage
Restrictions
Goal = 30% reduction in demand
Still in effect even though many areas do not have a
severe water shortage.
Implementation of Phase III Extreme Water Shortage
Restrictions (1/15/08 to 4/18/08)
Goal = 45% reduction in demand
Restrictions were essentially District-wide.
Drought Management Considerations





Magnitude of the precipitation shortage and spatial
variability in the deficits.
The available natural water in storage that could be
used during the drought.
Potential duration of the drought.
Economics of drought mitigation measures (impacts
to consumers, loss of revenues to
producers/utilities).
Potential economic, environmental, and water
resources impacts of non- or delayed implementation
of mitigation measures.
Reality of 2006-2007 Drought





Worst impacted area was the center of the District
from Lake Okeechobee area northwards.
Low rainfall in the Lake Okeechobee area and low
lake level limited exports to the east coast.
Coastal areas were less impacted by the drought.
Coastal Southwest Florida did not experience severe
drought conditions.
Water restrictions (Phase III Extreme Water
Shortage Restrictions) were emplaced in areas that
were not experiencing extreme drought conditions.
Impacts of Water Restrictions on Utilities



Most utilities do not have large budget excesses to
cover sudden unexpected drop in revenues. Large
utilities reported losses of revenues in millions
resulting in deferral of capital projects, reductions in
machinery and equipment purchases, staff lay-offs,
and water restriction surcharges.
Utilities that invested the most in costly alternative
water supply systems ironically faced the greatest
hardships as they must still pay for the expensive
systems even though revenues were suddenly
reduced.
Increase in peaking factors as residential water use in
concentrated into short periods of time.
Impacts of Water Restrictions on Utilities




Water utilities finance their operations through
the sale of water.
Wastewater fees are also commonly tied to
water sales.
Revenues must covered on-going operational
expenses and debt service.
Much of utility costs are fixed (debt service,
staff, maintenance, overhead) and still need to
be met irrespective of water sales.
Drought response issues
Appropriateness of universal responses to droughts





District-wide “one-size fits all” or “shared pain” response is
simpler to implement and in one sense appeals to a sense of
fairness (“we are all in this together”).
Results in some water users and utilities facing hardships that
are not necessary based on local hydrologic conditions.
Consideration should be given to degree of utility
implementation of AWS.
Restrictions have a variable benefit depending on freshwater
use and local climatic conditions.
Alternatives: restrictions based on County or utility service
area.
Drought response issues
Disincentives against utility drought protection methods

Drought-proofing efforts, such as the development of alternative water
supplies (desalination), and reuse systems in general did not yield utilities
and customers any direct benefits as far as maintaining normal water use
patterns.
▪ Reduced financial incentive to invest in AWS. Such investments may make
utilities more vulnerable to droughts as they must still be paid for during
water restriction periods.


The value of committing to the reuse system was also diminished as most
customers do not meet 100% of supply from reuse system and therefore
faced the same reductions as other water users.
Alternative – link water restrictions to use of fresh groundwater.
Drought response issues
Water restrictions as an education method
 Credibility Issue.
Noah - Any chance the Phase II Severe
Water Shortage Restrictions will be lifted soon?
Politics, Economics, and Droughts




This combination can cause very poor decisions to
be made that will have long-term, negative impacts
on utility planning and management (i.e. City of
Cape Coral situation)
Poor drought management based on political
expediency rather that science leads to severe
impacts on utilities.
By political question, it is meant that policy choices
are being made between different options that are
ultimately based on personal values and opinions.
People of good will may disagree.
Implementation of new regulations in an economic
downturn does have serious implications on utility
operations, management and planning.
Conclusions





Severe changes in the economy have serious effects
on utility planning and revenues.
Leeway must be given to utilities by regulatory
agencies during economic downturns to not disrupt
operations.
A moratorium on new regulations applied to utilities
during economic downturns is appropriate.
Implementation of water restrictions should be based
more on local hydrologic conditions and fresh water
use rather than political expediency.
Drought response plans should have incentives for
investment in AWS as a means of drought-proofing.