SRWMD & SJRWMD aquifer recharge project update @ SRWMD 2025-07-08

A billion dollars to run Jacksonville and JEA treated wastewater through wetlands in the Suwannee River Basin and into the Floridan Aquifer: this proposal was presented to the SRWMD Board this month.

Nevermind that sewage effluent carries PFAS forever chemicals into wetlands. After contaminating all the wetland wildlife, PFAS would continue into the Florida Aquifer, from which we all drink.

[SRWMD & SJRWMD aquifer recharge project update @ SRWMD 2025-07-08, What about PFAS? and limits on water withdrawals?]
SRWMD & SJRWMD aquifer recharge project update @ SRWMD 2025-07-08, What about PFAS? and limits on water withdrawals?

A SRWMD Board member pointed out that desalination of seawater would cost less. Another pointed out that Jacksonville would just suck the water back out of the aquifer. More on board comments below.

Instead, how about Jacksonville and JEA treat their effluent to drinking water standards and reuse it for themselves? The money they save from pumping it to any of those recharge areas would be enormous. That would use less groundwater, so there would be less need for recharge.

The excuse for this project is increasing population needing more water.

You can see the presentation by SRWMD Deputy Executive Director for Water Resources Amy Brown in SRWMD’s own video at 1:08:40:
https://www.youtube.com/live/9pousRkUayc?si=R8KNhx524INgVNW-&t=4120

The slides she presented, received in response to a WWALS FOIA request, are on the WWALS website, with images below.

[Historic Water Use and Population -vs- Projected Water Demand and Population in NFRWSP]
Historic Water Use and Population -vs- Projected Water Demand and Population in NFRWSP
PDF

The NFRWSP is the North Florida Regional Water Supply Plan that we’ve been complaining about since 2016 and again in 2023.

[Not every demand needs water withdrawals]
Not every demand needs water withdrawals

Both times, SRWMD and SJRWMD ignored the suggestion by WWALS and others of producing a water budget and limiting withdrawals to stay under it.

There was no mention of limiting water withdrawals in this month’s SRWMD project plan presentation. Except in a statute that spells out that such projects are to “offset reductions in permitted withdrawals.” In other words, SRWMD and SJRWMD are working on spending a billion dollars over thirteen years to avoid limiting permitted water withdrawals from the Floridan Aquifer.

[Implementation Strategy Requirements]
Implementation Strategy Requirements
PDF

It’s a joint proposal between the Suwannee River Water Management District (SRWMD) and the St. Johns River Water Management District (SRWMD). A frequently-mentioned partner is the Jacksonville Electric Authority (JEA), along with “NE Florida utilities.”

[WATER FIRST NORTH FLORIDA]
WATER FIRST NORTH FLORIDA
PDF

How did the WMDs get to this humongous project?

According to Slide 12, Regional Project Development:

  • Investigation of potential source waters throughout the partnership:
    • Reclaimed water
    • Surface water
    • Storm runoff
    • Changes to silvicultural management
  • Districtwide investigation of potential storage and recharge locations:
    • Storage in the upper Suwannee and Santa Fe Basins
    • Recharge via injection well, rapid infiltration basin, or via high permeability zones, with appropriate permitting
    • Focus on optimizing regional benefits for the long term

[Regional Project Development]
Regional Project Development
PDF

But what did they actually investigate?

[North Florida Regional Recharge Project - Conceptualization]
North Florida Regional Recharge Project – Conceptualization
PDF

Let’s look at the table under “Comparative process to select project that results in aquifer recharge and flow restoration in Outstanding Florida Springs.” If you blow it up, you can pretty much read it.

[Table: Comparative Process]
Table: Comparative Process

One of only two mentions of silviculture is in row 2, Source “Buckman WRF Full,” Recharge Site “Initially Silviculture 3 – Move to Kirby Pit based on Hydrogeologic Analysis.” So as soon as silviculture is mentioned, it is dismissed.

What’s Buckman WRF? According to JEA, “Buckman Wastewater Treatment Facility: Our largest regional sewer plant with advanced nutrient removal.” That doesn’t say anything about PFAS removal.

Accordiog to Dodge Construction Network,

The Buckman Water Reclamation Facility (WRF), is a secondary wastewater treatment facility rated at 52 MGD ADF. The 3 part project consists of replacement of primary clarifier effluent weirs, addition of a side stream pump station and effluent piping, modifications to the aerations basins to included new effluent gates, floating mixers, four new air valves and actuators, baffle walls, overflow weir structure, enlarged sluice gates, scum collection and pump station, four recycle pumps and piping and associated structural, mechanical, electrical and instrumentation and controls work. New RAS flow meter with vault. Demolition and replacement of four secondary clarifiers mechanisms. Replacement of two clarifier dewatering pumps and valves. Addition of HVAC to Chem Scan Building. Ventilation of the new Secondary Building. Rehabilitation of the old Secondary Clarifier Control Building to include new MCC, HVAC, lights, stairs and all associated appurtenances. Construction of a new grit removal basin, consisting of 3 flow channels, conversion of the existing pre-aeration basin into a 3 channel grit removal basin. Influent flow distribution and effluent flow control. Installation of grit handling equipment.

Improvements to the installation of a grit drainage pad and pump station. Decommissioning of existing grit removal facilities. Electrical, instrumentation and controls. Conversion of the existing pre-aeration basin into a 3 channel grit removal basin. Electrical, instrumentation and controls. Removal and salvage of existing blower. Installation of three new turbo blowers. Installation of new stainless steel discharge piping, valves and appurtenances.

That’s all very good. But still no mention of PFAS removal.

On rows 4 and 5 the Source is “GRU WWTF Transfer.” So they also considered Gainesville wastewater, although that doesn’t appear on the map, so maybe it was rejected.

Rows 10 and 13 show Source “Suwannee River” at “Suwannee Bell” for “Lake City Parcel 1” and “Suwannee Branford” for “Silviculture 1”. This is the other mention of silviculture in this table, and those two sources also do not show up in the map.

These two rows may also refer to a previous SRWMD plan to pipe Suwannee River water to Falling Creek to recharge Ichetucknee springs.

[Map: Recharge %]
Map: Recharge % in SRWMD’s slides Prevention and Recovery Strategy for the Lower Santa Fe and Ichetucknee Rivers and Priority Springs.

So apparently SRWMD staff have rejected those previous boondoggles in favor of a much larger, more expensive, and likely more contaminating project.

The 2016 proposal Hamilton County Praticing Geologist Dennis J. Price to use wells at the bottom of planted pines to recharge the aquifer is nowhere mentioned.

[Map and Proposal]
Map and Proposal

That is among the topics Dennis discussed in Video: How Humans Affect the Aquifer, a WWALS Webinar by Dennis Price, 2025-06-19.

[How Humans Affect the Aquifer, WWALS Webinar by Dennis Price, Are we just a water tower for Jacksonville? 2025-06-19]
How Humans Affect the Aquifer, WWALS Webinar by Dennis Price, Are we just a water tower for Jacksonville? 2025-06-19

Comments by SRWMD Board members

Vice Chair Richard Schwab pushed back on the $1 billion price tag, and also on changing landscapes and land uses. For example, the prospective wetlands in Baker County are national forest. See Osceola National Forest in the Osceola Wildlife Management Area (WMA).

He wondered about funding sources.

Answer: electric utilities and the state.

He wanted to know if this project and other methods already in progress would get ahead of the shortfalls.

Presenter Amy Brown: yes.

Board member for the Upper Suwannee River Basin Larry Sessions said the water need is mostly on the coast and desalination is cheaper, at least to flush toilets and wash cars.

Board Chair Virginia Johns pointed out Jacksonville would be sucking the water back out ofthe aquifer.

Despite such comments, they all seemed to indicate they were in favor of the plan.

We’ll see what update they have next month.

Meanwhile, you may want to contact your SRWMD Board members, FDEP, the state of Florida, Jacksonville City, JEA, etc.

 -jsq, John S. Quarterman, Suwannee RIVERKEEPER®

You can help with clean, swimmable, fishable, drinkable, water in the 10,000-square-mile Suwannee River Basin in Florida and Georgia by becoming a WWALS member today!
https://wwals.net/donations/

Pics

[Amy Brown speaking to SRWMD Board, 2025-07-08 --jsq for WWALS]
Amy Brown speaking to SRWMD Board, 2025-07-08 –jsq for WWALS

LSFI-Water-Project-July-2025

You can see the presentation by SRWMD Deputy Executive Director for Water Resources Amy Brown in SRWMD’s own video at 1:08:40:
https://www.youtube.com/live/9pousRkUayc?si=R8KNhx524INgVNW-&t=4120

The slides she presented, received in response to a WWALS FOIA request, are on the WWALS website,

[Lower Santa Fe and Ichetucknee Project Update]
Lower Santa Fe and Ichetucknee Project Update
PDF

2 thoughts on “SRWMD & SJRWMD aquifer recharge project update @ SRWMD 2025-07-08

  1. Pingback: PFAS in sewage effluent used to restore wetlands 2025-07-18 | WWALS Watershed Coalition (WWALS) is Suwannee RIVERKEEPER®

  2. Pingback: Worse than Falling Creek: SRWMD wants to pipe Suwannee River water twice to Ichetucknee Springs 2021-06-08 | WWALS Watershed Coalition (WWALS) is Suwannee RIVERKEEPER®

Leave a Reply

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