176

1 Division of Administrative Hearings

2 Department of Administration, State of Florida

3

SUGAR CANE GROWERS COOPERATIVE )

4 of FLORIDA; ROTH FARMS, INC.; and )

WEDGWORTH FARMS, Inc., )

5 Petitioners )

V ) DOAH Case

6 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT ) No. 92-3038

DISTRICT, an agency of the State )

7 of Florida; et al., )

Respondents. )

8

FLORIDA SUGAR CANE LEAGUE, INC.; )

9 UNITED STATES SUGAR CORPORATION; )

and NEW HOPE SOUTH, INC., )

10 Petitioners, )

V ) DOAH Case

11 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT ) No. 92-3039

DISTRICT, an agency of the State )

12 of Florida; et al., )

Respondents. )

13

FLORIDA FRUIT and VEGETABLE )

14 ASSOCIATION; LEWIS POPE FARMS; )

W. E. SCHLECHTER & SONS, INC., )

15 and HUNDLEY FARMS, INC., )

Petitioners, )

16 V ) DOAH Case

SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT ) No. 92-3040

17 DISTRICT, an agency of the State )

of Florida; et al., )

18 Respondents. )

19

VOLUME II

20 DEPOSITION OF WOSSENU ABTEW, Ph.D.

21 Taken before Rachel W. Bridge, Professional

Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of

22 Florida at large, pursuant to notice of taking

deposition filed by the Plaintiffs in the above

23 cause.

- - -

24 Friday, January 8, 1992

319 Clematis Street, Suite 500

25 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

9:15 a.m. - 2:20 P.m.

 

177

1 APPEARANCES:

2

On behalf of the Petitioners Florida Sugar

3 Cane League, Inc., United States Sugar Corp.,

and New South Hope, Inc.:

4 Peeples, Earl & Blank, P.A.

One Biscayne Tower, Suite 3636

5 Two South Biscayne Boulevard

Miami, Florida 33131

6 By: MARK T. KOBELINSKI, ESQUIRE

7 On behalf of the Respondent SFWMD:

South Florida Water Management District

8 3301 Gun Club Road

West Palm Beach, Florida 33416-4680

9 By: JACQUELYN W. BIRCH, ESQUIRE

10 On behalf of Sugar Cane Growers:

Hopping, Boyd, Green & Sams

11 123 South Calhoun Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

12 By: GARY V. PERKO, ESQUIRE

13 Also Present: Andrew MacNeil

 

178

1 - - -

2 I N D E X

3 - - -

4 WITNESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS

5 WOSSENU ABTEW, Ph.D.

6 BY MR. KOBELINSKI 179

BY MR. PERKO 320

7

8

9 - - -

10 E X H I B I T S

11 - - -

12 NUMBER PAGE DESCRIPTION

13 ABTEW EXHIBIT 13 198 Figure 2, Study area

14 flow control structures

15 ABTEW EXHIBIT 14 287 Memo of 10-24-91 from

J. Obeysekera to Tony Federico

16

 

179

1 P R O C E E D I N G S

2 - - -

3 CONTINUED CROSS (Wossenu Abtew, Ph.D.)

4 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

5 Q. Good morning, Dr. Abtew. This is a

6 continuation of your deposition we commenced

7 yesterday.

8 I would remind you that you are still under

9 oath and we will be following the same procedure

10 where I will be asking you questions to find out

11 essentially what information you have, all right?

12 A. All right.

13 Q. If we could, just a couple of quick

14 clean-up items.

15 If I could draw your attention to what was

16 marked as Exhibit 5 to your deposition yesterday,

17 which is the Draft Everglades Research Plan, which

18 has various Bates numbers, but commencing at 0946742.

19 In particular, I believe you had identified

20 at Bates page 0946793 two projects that you had --

21 I'm not sure if the term is designed or developed.

22 If you could perhaps turn to that and refresh my

23 recollection in that regard, and those were 2.A.2 13

24 and 2.B.2 21.

25 Do you recall that?

 

180

1 A. Yes. Developed.

2 Q. When you say developed, does that mean you

3 did the design program for it or what exactly does

4 developed mean in this context?

5 A. Developed plan for these projects.

6 Q. The research plan?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Okay. With regard to project number 2.A.2

9 13, what does that 13 refer to? And I'm referring to

10 that second row where it says Project

11 Number/Priority.

12 A. I don't know. I didn't put this document

13 together. Maybe it is a reference to a page or

14 something.

15 Q. Drawing your attention to page B-22, which

16 I believe in the final row on the page we were

17 looking for is the reference page for project 2.A.2,

18 and that page bears Bates number 0946809, and that

19 page is entitled Chemical Mass Balance --

20 MS. BIRCH: Note my objection as to

21 relevancy related to the Everglades Research

22 Plan.

23 MR. KOBELINSKI: Okay.

24 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

25 Q. Is this one of the plans that you have

 

181

1 developed the plan for?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Is this an ongoing study that's already

4 taken place?

5 A. It's not yet started.

6 Q. Drawing your attention to approximately the

7 middle of that page where it says Task Description,

8 and to the right there is essentially a flow chart

9 showing what tasks are to be completed and conducted

10 during what years, the first task mentioned is

11 assemble data.

12 Has that already commenced?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Is this chart incorrect then?

15 MS. BIRCH: Objection to relevancy.

16 I'd like to have a standing objection to

17 relevancy related to this testimony about the

18 Everglades Research Plan.

19 THE WITNESS: It didn't go according to the

20 plan.

21 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

22 Q. Has any data been assembled as yet?

23 A. Not to my knowledge.

24 Q. So there has been no data collection or

25 analysis of data at this point in time?

 

182

1 A. With regard to this project, yes.

2 Q. Okay. The third task is develop water

3 budgets.

4 What water budgets would be referred to in

5 that particular task?

6 A. The water budget is a reference to the area

7 covered by EPA, Everglades Protection Area.

8 Q. And have any of those water budgets been

9 commenced?

10 A. Not with regard to this project.

11 Q. To your knowledge, have any water budgets

12 been done for the EPA by the District?

13 A. For the EAA, I know I have done one.

14 Q. And we discussed that yesterday.

15 To your knowledge, have any water budgets

16 been done for the EPA?

17 A. Not that I can recall.

18 Q. Okay. The next task is develop nutrient

19 budgets.

20 Have any nutrient budgets been prepared for

21 the EPA?

22 A. Not according to this project.

23 Q. When you say not according to this project,

24 are there going to be, are there separate nutrient

25 budgets prepared for each individual project or does

 

183

1 the District prepare one budget and use it for its

2 various research projects?

3 A. I don't know what the District's plan, what

4 are the plans in the District with regard to the EPA.

5 With regard to the project I have

6 developed, nothing yet has been done.

7 Q. Okay. Under Contracts there, do you see

8 that in approximately the middle of the page?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. What is FTEs under that? What does FTE

11 stand for?

12 A. Full-time employee.

13 Q. And what do the Es indicate to the right of

14 FTE after Professor .60, et cetera?

15 A. Stands for existing employee.

16 Q. In other words, no new employees are

17 intended to be hired for this plan?

18 A. That's right.

19 Q. Do you know when this plan is supposed to

20 be commenced?

21 A. I don't know exactly when it's going to be

22 started.

23 Q. Did you develop the flow chart as far as

24 the timing for the tasks that you see, for year

25 91-92, for year 92-93, with the bars showing when the

 

184

1 task is to be complete?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Have you revised that?

4 A. I have revised both projects, but I can't

5 tell you what changes I have made.

6 Q. When did you prepare this flow chart?

7 A. Before July 10, 1992. I don't remember the

8 specific date.

9 Q. Was it during 1992?

10 A. During 1992.

11 Q. Well, given that it was during 1992, your

12 flow chart shows the task had commenced in '91.

13 A. I don't remember exactly when I put this

14 chart together.

15 Q. Do you believe it was prior to July of

16 1991?

17 A. I don't want to make a guess. I have to

18 refer to my schedule or documents to see when exactly

19 this chart was made.

20 Q. Does this help refresh your recollection

21 that you did not do this in 1992?

22 A. I don't remember when it was put together.

23 I don't remember the exact date.

24 Q. I understand you don't remember the exact

25 date. A few minutes ago you testified it was during

 

185

1 1992.

2 Is it still your testimony it was during

3 1992?

4 A. No, I would not like to speculate that way.

5 I don't remember exactly when it was put together.

6 Q. Do you recall when you were given the task

7 of putting together the draft research plans for the

8 Draft Everglades Research Plan?

9 When was this document which is marked as

10 Exhibit 5, when did they start working on this?

11 A. I don't remember the exact date when.

12 Q. I'm not looking for an exact date. Just

13 generally.

14 A. I don't remember the month either.

15 Q. Do you remember what year they started

16 working on it?

17 A. I'm not sure. Could be end of '91 or the

18 beginning of '92. I'm not certain.

19 Q. But it would have been either the end of

20 '91 or the beginning of '92?

21 MS. BIRCH: Objection, argumentative.

22 THE WITNESS: I don't want to make a guess.

23 MR. KOBELINSKI: Could you read back his

24 prior answer?

 

186

1 (Thereupon, a portion of the record

2 was read by the reporter.)

3 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

4 Q. Is that statement correct?

5 A. That's correct.

6 Q. All right. What information did you base

7 this bar chart on that's on page 0946809?

8 A. I don't understand your question.

9 Q. When does the bar chart show that the

10 assembled data task would commence?

11 MS. BIRCH: Objection, relevancy.

12 THE WITNESS: I don't understand the

13 question.

14 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

15 Q. I'm just asking you to read the chart, sir,

16 for me.

17 When does the assembled data task, when is

18 it scheduled to commence in the document that you

19 prepared?

20 A. According to the chart, it will be in 1993.

21 Q. The assembled data task?

22 A. There will be documents of the events.

23 Q. I'm asking about the first task, assemble

24 data, sir.

25 A. By 1992.

 

187

1 Q. It starts in 1992?

2 A. It starts at, it starts 1991. According on

3 the chart, that's what it shows.

4 Q. When in 1991?

5 A. There is no specific month specified in the

6 chart.

7 Q. Is the chart divided by quarters or halves?

8 A. It's divided by number. I can't tell from

9 this chart the number of divisions in the year.

10 Q. Well, does the chart have heavy black lines

11 and then lighter black lines in between?

12 A. No. It's just one line.

13 Q. I'm referring, sir, to the vertical lines.

14 Are there heavy, light, light light, heavy,

15 light, light, light, heavy, light light light, heavy?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Would that be divided into four

18 corresponding quarters for each year?

19 A. I have to check with my original draft.

20 Q. You can't tell from this whatsoever?

21 A. I can't tell from here. This is edited by

22 someone else, so I have to check with my draft to see

23 what --

24 Q. Do you believe someone changed the dates

25 that you had listed for the tasks to be commenced?

 

188

1 A. I'm not saying that.

2 Q. Is it your belief that someone has?

3 A. I didn't say that.

4 Q. I'm not asking if that's what you said.

5 I'm asking is it your belief that someone has?

6 A. I didn't say that.

7 Q. Sir, I know you didn't say that. I'm

8 asking you.

9 Is it your belief that someone has changed

10 the dates for the starting or commencement of those

11 tasks?

12 A. There is no reason to believe that way.

13 Q. Okay. If those are divided up into four

14 equal quarters, does that show that the assembled

15 data task was supposed to start in the second quarter

16 or the end of the first quarter of year '91?

17 MS. BIRCH: Objection, asked and answered.

18 THE WITNESS: I have to check my original

19 document.

20 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

21 Q. Do you have your original document in that

22 regard?

23 A. I have to check.

24 Q. Sorry, just so I understand, you have to

25 check to see if you still retain the original; is

 

189

1 that what you are saying, sir?

2 A. I have to take my time and remember what I

3 did when I designed the research plan.

4 Q. How would you go about doing that?

5 MS. BIRCH: Continuing objection to the

6 relevancy of the Everglades Research Plan.

7 Dr. Abtew is designated as an expert

8 witness as to the EAA water budget, not the

9 research plan.

10 THE WITNESS: I have to go back and take my

11 time and see all of the reference so I can

12 recollect how I set up the project.

13 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

14 Q. What is the purpose of the project?

15 It says under Objective "develop nutrient

16 budgets for the major subsystems of the EPA."

17 Is that to develop an historical nutrient

18 budget?

19 A. It's objective, as stated in the document,

20 develop nutrient budgets for the major subsystems of

21 the EPA.

22 Q. Is that an historical nutrient budget?

23 A. Current and historical. It's not

24 specified.

25 Q. You developed the plan, though; is that

 

190

1 correct?

2 A. That's right.

3 Q. So you would know whether it's historic or

4 a model for developing hypothetical or a model that

5 could be used for a management alternative; is that

6 correct?

7 A. The plan has shown that to be the current,

8 but if you need the historical to make conclusions

9 with regard to the current results, then you will do

10 the historical analysis, too.

11 Q. Does the District currently have a nutrient

12 budget for the EPA?

13 MS. BIRCH: Objection, asked and answered,

14 objection to relevancy.

15 THE WITNESS: I don't know.

16 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

17 Q. Is that something you looked into when you

18 were developing your research plan?

19 A. I don't have control of the District, every

20 department's plans or what's being done.

21 Q. Does this research plan, is it a

22 multi-departmental or is it just within one

23 particular division or department of the District?

24 A. One division of the District.

25 Q. And when the division -- well, which

 

191

1 division is that?

2 A. Everglades Systems Research Division.

3 Q. And these are all research projects that

4 will be undertaken by the Everglades Systems Research

5 Division?

6 A. That's right.

7 Q. In developing the research plans, are those

8 to address research needs of the division?

9 A. Will you repeat your question?

10 Q. Perhaps I'll rephrase it.

11 When the division goes ahead and prepares a

12 research plan, is it to address issues or research

13 that they see are required, are necessary?

14 A. I am not in that capacity to answer for the

15 division. The division director is the one who knows

16 what the reasons are.

17 Q. What is your understanding of it?

18 MS. BIRCH: Understanding of what?

19 THE WITNESS: Understanding of what?

20 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

21 Q. What is your understanding of what research

22 or why the Everglades System Research Division

23 develops a research plan?

24 MS. BIRCH: Objection.

25 THE WITNESS: The reasons are explained in

 

192

1 the document itself. You can refer to the

2 sections why such plan is developed.

3 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

4 Q. Is it generally to address research that's

5 needed within the area covered by the Everglades

6 System Research Division?

7 A. My answer is again the objectives for the

8 research are stated in the document itself.

9 Q. I'm asking for your understanding of it,

10 sir.

11 MS. BIRCH: Objection, assumes he has an

12 understanding on the research plan.

13 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

14 Q. Do you have any understanding of why the

15 division prepares a research plan?

16 A. It is stated in the research plan and I can

17 get to the page and read for you.

18 Q. Okay, if you could identify that for me,

19 please.

20 A. Starting from page 0946748 to page 0946776.

21 Q. Essentially the entire document less its

22 appendices; is that correct?

23 A. Yes, you have to read that to get the

24 objectives and the details why the project is in the

25 research plan.

 

193

1 Q. I'm sorry, perhaps you misunderstood my

2 question.

3 My question is not why each particular

4 project is in the research plan. I'm asking a

5 general question.

6 Are projects planned by the Everglades

7 System Research Division of the South Florida Water

8 Management District, the research plan, to address

9 areas that they have recognized require additional

10 research?

11 MS. BIRCH: Objection, asked and answered.

12 MR. KOBELINSKI: I agree it's been asked.

13 I'm not sure if it's been answered.

14 MS. BIRCH: You might not like the answer,

15 but he has answered.

16 THE WITNESS: In the pages I already

17 stated, the objectives and the details of why

18 this research is done is documented.

19 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

20 Q. And what is your understanding of what

21 those pages state?

22 MS. BIRCH: Objection, assumes facts not in

23 evidence.

24 MR. KOBELINSKI: The witness can tell me he

25 has absolutely no understanding of how he

 

194

1 planned the research.

2 MS. BIRCH: He hasn't. That wasn't the

3 question.

4 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

5 Q. Do you have any understanding of why the

6 research plan was prepared?

7 A. Yes, as it is stated in those pages. I can

8 read it for you.

9 Q. Without reading it, do you have any

10 understanding?

11 A. Understanding of what?

12 Q. Of why the division prepared a research

13 plan.

14 A. It is stated in the pages that I already

15 mentioned for you.

16 Q. I understand that, and I'm saying without

17 reading it, do you have any understanding of why the

18 research plan was prepared?

19 A. As it is stated in the document, I

20 understand it that way.

21 Q. And what does the document say?

22 Could you summarize that for me, sir?

23 MS. BIRCH: Objection, argumentative. It's

24 not relevant to Dr. Abtew's designated area of

25 expertise.

 

195

1 Dr. Abtew, if you have a general

2 understanding of the purpose of the research

3 plan, you can answer, but if you don't --

4 THE WITNESS: I can read it, the objective,

5 from the document for you.

6 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

7 Q. Again, sir, I'm not asking for a verbatim

8 reading of the objectives. I'm just asking do you or

9 don't you have a general understanding of why a

10 research plan was prepared?

11 A. As it is stated in the document in the page

12 I already mentioned for you.

13 Q. Okay. Now have you read those pages?

14 A. I have read those pages.

15 Q. Okay. And are you capable of generally

16 summarizing then the purpose for the research plan?

17 A. I would rather read the objective to

18 represent it as it is than give my basis of

19 recollection of what I read.

20 Q. Let's set this aside for a moment, doctor.

21 Was the Holey Land included in your study

22 area for the draft water budget for the EAA which has

23 been marked as Exhibit Number 2 to your deposition?

24 A. No, it was not included.

25 Q. And why not?

 

196

1 A. It is a separate basin by itself, leveed

2 around and separate from the ag area.

3 Q. Is it geographically part of the Everglades

4 Agricultural Area?

5 A. Geographically it is at the corner of the

6 ag area, but it is not agricultural land.

7 Q. What other portions of the geographic

8 Everglades Agricultural Area were not included in

9 your study which is Exhibit 2 to the deposition?

10 A. What do you mean was not included?

11 Q. Were there any other geographic portions of

12 the Everglades Agricultural Area that you did not

13 include in your study area for the water budget

14 analysis of the Everglades Agricultural Area?

15 A. It is included in the study. There is a

16 map which shows that the Holey Land is part of the

17 study, but it is not considered as agricultural land.

18 Q. Is there a specific study area that was

19 studied for Exhibit 2, the water budget analysis for

20 the Everglades Agricultural Area?

21 A. On page 0900255, and the Holey Land is

22 included in the study area, but not as agricultural

23 land, as wetland, impoundment.

24 Q. Did you then include the rainfall data,

25 evapotranspiration and all the other data from the

 

197

1 Holey Land in preparing the water budget that is

2 reflected in Exhibit 2?

3 A. You didn't understand how it is calculated.

4 There is no water getting into -- you have to read

5 the whole document to find out what exactly is, how

6 the water budget is computed.

7 Q. I'm not really asking how the water budget,

8 the entire document explains the water budget.

9 My question is I'm attempting to determine

10 what the study area was that is reflected in

11 Exhibit 2, your water budget for the EAA.

12 Were the Holey Land and the Rotenberger

13 land tracts, were they included in the study area?

14 A. Yes, they are in the study area.

15 Q. Did you, for instance, when you were

16 collecting rainfall data and conducting your analysis

17 with the, I believe it's called Thiessen weighted

18 averages, did you include that area in calculating

19 the rainfall for the EAA?

20 A. Yes, because it is in the study area.

21 Q. Did you include that area for

22 evapotranspiration?

23 A. Let me check.

24 Yes, it was included.

25 Q. Okay.

 

198

1 MR. KOBELINSKI: Could you mark that as an

2 exhibit?

3 (The document was marked

4 Abtew Exh. No. 13.)

5 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

6 Q. Dr. Abtew, I'm showing you what's been

7 marked as Exhibit Number 13 to your deposition, which

8 is draft page 13 of what's previously been marked as

9 Exhibit 2 to your deposition, so it likewise bears

10 Bates number 0900255, and of course it's a two-sided

11 document, so the back page is 0900256.

12 Could you explain to me how do you prepare

13 or how is it you go about doing Thiessen weighted

14 averages for rainfall given the nine stations'

15 rainfall gauges you had in the EAA?

16 A. It is stated in the document in detail. I

17 can refer you to the page where it is mentioned.

18 Q. Please do.

19 A. From Exhibit 2, page 0900252 to page

20 0900254.

21 Q. In preparing a Thiessen average, is it

22 necessary to draw a diagram using the rain gauges to

23 determine the areas that will be averaged?

24 A. Not always.

25 Q. In what circumstances don't you have to?

 

199

1 A. You can use a computer program which can

2 take all that into account and compute the weights,

3 like which is done in this document.

4 Q. So in this document, which is Exhibit 2,

5 and the reference pages you provided, 0900252 through

6 254, you used a computer program to prepare the

7 Thiessen areas in the weighted averages where you

8 calculated?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. What computer program was that?

11 A. It's referenced on page 0900253 at the last

12 paragraph.

13 Q. And that's the Shih and Hamrick's model?

14 A. That's right.

15 Q. When you are using that model, does it

16 actually show you the areas that each gauge covers?

17 Does it graphically -- are you able to see that?

18 A. No, you don't see it graphically. You get

19 the proportion of the area covered by each station.

20 You don't see it graphically.

21 Q. And is there somewhere in the document

22 which indicates the area covered by each station?

23 A. On page 0900254, Table 4.

24 Q. How would I go about figuring out what area

25 was covered by each station using that table?

 

200

1 A. You can multiply the whole area by each

2 coefficient. Then you find out how much area offhand

3 is covered by each station.

4 Q. In doing so, to the right of the station

5 there is a title Computed Weight, and then there are

6 three rows, all stations, station dropped and station

7 dropped.

8 Could you explain to me what those three

9 rows are and how they would affect the area covered

10 by each station?

11 A. The first column, all stations, those are

12 the proportions that each station covers if all the

13 stations have data.

14 Second column is station MRF182, doesn't

15 have data for some time, and it is dropped.

16 Then the remaining eight stations shares

17 and covers that area, so we have a new set of

18 coefficients.

19 Q. And I would only use those coefficients

20 whenever I came across MRF182 with missing, with an

21 entire month of missing data; is that correct?

22 A. When you get missing data for that station,

23 use those coefficients for that period.

24 Q. And likewise, I would use the right-hand

25 column only when I have missing data for MRF98?

 

201

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. With regard to the five new stations that

3 is referenced in the bottom of that page 0900254 of

4 Exhibit 2, when have those stations been installed,

5 or have they as yet?

6 A. I don't know when they are installed and

7 how many of them are installed, but the

8 responsibility was another division which is not

9 where I am.

10 Q. Was it your understanding when you drafted

11 this that five new stations would be installed?

12 A. Yes, and I think some of them for sure are

13 installed. I'm not sure when and if all of them are

14 installed right now.

15 Q. Do you know approximately where they were

16 intended to be installed or are installed?

17 A. Have to see the map where they are actually

18 designed to be before estimating where they are.

19 Q. Have you ever seen that map before?

20 A. I am the one who designed the network.

21 Q. Given the fact that you designed the

22 network, would you be able to tell just generally

23 where they are?

24 Are they on the perimeter as the other

25 gauges are?

 

202

1 Are they on the interior?

2 A. They are on the interior.

3 Q. Are they along the major canals?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Are all of them along the major canals?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Which canals are they along, all four major

8 canals?

9 A. Yes, four major canals I think have one

10 station close to one of them along the route.

11 Q. Do you recall at all generally where,

12 approximately in the middle or the north or south

13 ends of, for instance, the Miami Canal?

14 A. Generally they are located in the middle of

15 the EAA all the way from the west to the east, but I

16 can't tell exactly where each one is.

17 Q. Given your reference to five stations and

18 then there are four major canals, does one canal have

19 two new gauges or was there a fifth gauge placed away

20 from a canal zone?

21 (Thereupon, Mr. MacNeil left the

22 deposition.)

23 THE WITNESS: I have to see the map to

24 exactly locate those stations.

 

203

1 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

2 Q. I'm not looking for a map. I'm just trying

3 to get a general idea where they are.

4 A. That's all I can tell you right now.

5 Q. Do you recall when you designed this

6 network and designed where these new stations will

7 go?

8 A. I don't remember the date.

9 Q. I'm not looking for a date. Generally.

10 A. I don't remember. Within the last two

11 years. I'm certain it was within the last two years.

12 Q. Okay. Do you recall whether it was in

13 1992?

14 A. I don't remember the exact date, no.

15 Q. Have you seen any data from any of the new

16 rainfall gauges?

17 A. I haven't seen any data yet.

18 Q. Are you still reviewing data from the

19 existing rainfall gauges, rainfall for the EAA?

20 A. Yes, I have been reviewing, I have been

21 dealing with that from the stations.

22 Q. For what purpose?

23 A. Update my files and in some instances for

24 U.S. Sugar Cane's request, had to update our rainfall

25 data.

 

204

1 Q. You stated update your files.

2 Do you actually keep in your files, your

3 computer files the rainfall data from these nine

4 gauges?

5 A. Just put them in on a diskette and I think

6 give it to legal.

7 Q. Is that something you have already done? I

8 sort of lost track of where that came from.

9 MS. BIRCH: I think what he said, he is

10 updating his files, and could provide them to

11 legal at the League's request.

12 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

13 Q. Do you have in your files a complete set of

14 the rainfall data that's reflected in Exhibit 2?

15 A. It's in the District database, the one

16 official data which is in, the appendix is in the

17 District database.

18 Q. Do you also have it in your database?

19 A. I could have it on my hard drive, too. I

20 have to check.

21 Q. When preparing this study, did you use the

22 data that you had recorded onto your hard drive from

23 the District database?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Do your computer records on your hard drive

 

205

1 reflect all of the adjustments you made for missing

2 data?

3 A. I don't think so.

4 Q. Have you kept that in hard copy?

5 A. Not to my memory.

6 Q. Have you kept any type of working papers on

7 that?

8 A. How it is filled is documented in

9 Exhibit 2, how those numbers are estimated.

10 Q. I know the exhibit tells me how you did it.

11 I'm asking did you keep your working papers on the

12 actual calculations for estimating?

13 A. No. I don't think so.

14 Q. In reference to the -- if you could keep

15 Exhibit 2 in front of you, but in reference to the

16 Holey Land analysis which is contained in Exhibit 10,

17 did this analysis include the Rotenberger tract or is

18 this solely of the Holey Land?

19 A. It's only of the Holey Land.

20 Q. There is reference in Exhibit 10 to seepage

21 from the Holey Land.

22 In what directions did seepage take place?

23 MS. BIRCH: Objection to relevancy.

24 THE WITNESS: For the time of the study,

25 the direction is shown in Exhibit 10, page

 

206

1 0957263.

2 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

3 Q. Is that Table 4 you are referring to?

4 A. Yes, Table 4.

5 Q. All those numbers are shown as negative.

6 Why is that?

7 A. Negative indicates flow from the Holey Land

8 to outside.

9 Q. Given the fact that the Holey Land was part

10 of the water budget study which is contained in

11 Exhibit 2, flow going east, west and north would have

12 just merely flowed right back into the study area

13 from the study area; is that correct?

14 MS. BIRCH: Object to form.

15 MR. KOBELINSKI: Would you like me to

16 rephrase that?

17 THE WITNESS: All right.

18 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

19 Q. As I understand your prior testimony, the

20 Holey Land is part of the EAA study area which is

21 reflected in Exhibit 2; is that correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. All right. And we are discussing seepage

24 now, which is reflected in Exhibit 10, Table 4, at

25 page 0957263 of Exhibit 10.

 

207

1 And my question is since the Holey Land is

2 part of the study area for the EAA water budget, the

3 fact that there is seepage from the Holey Land into

4 other portions of the EAA, i.e., to the east, west

5 and north of the Holey Land, would have no impact on

6 that water budget, would it?

7 A. As long as it is part of the study area, it

8 won't affect the water budget.

9 What happens inside does not affect water

10 budget.

11 Q. Does seepage to the south affect the water

12 budget?

13 A. Seepage to the south can affect the water

14 budget if the flow is not through the controlled

15 structures.

16 Q. Does Table 4 in Exhibit 10, which is

17 referred to as seepage, reflect flow through control

18 structures?

19 A. Once it seeps out of the Holey Land, it

20 doesn't show control structures.

21 Q. So then does seepage to the south from the

22 Holey Land impact the water budget?

23 A. It's a very small number. It won't make a

24 significant change in the water budget.

25 Q. That's given the fact that, for instance,

 

208

1 on this study here in Table 4, there is only 6,201

2 acre feet; is that correct?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And given the other numbers involved,

5 that's a small number?

6 A. That's a very small number.

7 Q. Okay. Yesterday you were referring to

8 seepage into the water conservation areas as also an

9 unimportant number. I forget the term that was used.

10 Is seepage into the water conservation

11 areas -- excuse me, seepage into the EAA from the

12 water conservation areas an important factor in the

13 water budget?

14 A. I was not asked that question yesterday.

15 Q. Okay, then I'll ask it.

16 Is seepage from the water conservation

17 areas into the EAA a factor in the water budget?

18 A. It was estimated to be negligible when

19 every seepage in and out through the perimeter of the

20 ag area is considered.

21 MR. PERKO: Excuse me, could you read back

22 that answer, please?

23 (Thereupon, a portion of the record

24 was read by the reporter.)

 

209

1 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

2 Q. In what areas of the EAA would you

3 anticipate that there would be seepage out of the EAA

4 into, for instance, the water conservation areas

5 other than the Holey Land which we have discussed?

6 A. I haven't studied that.

7 Q. In what areas of the water conservation

8 areas would there be seepage into the Everglades

9 Agricultural Area?

10 A. I haven't studied that either.

11 Q. Then how were you able to estimate that the

12 two balanced out?

13 A. This was general knowledge of the area.

14 Q. Is there a head differential between Water

15 Conservation Area 1 and the EAA?

16 A. It depends what the time period is and what

17 the condition is.

18 Q. Given the general knowledge of the area you

19 just referred to, is there normally on almost a

20 year-round basis a head differential between Water

21 Conservation Area 1 and the Everglades Agricultural

22 Area?

23 A. I have to see the data.

24 Q. I'm referring to the general knowledge that

25 you referred to a moment ago.

 

210

1 A. The general knowledge is there is no

2 massive flow of water through seepage in or out of

3 the ag area as a whole.

4 Q. Did you review the data on head

5 differential from Water Conservation Area 1 to the

6 EAA?

7 A. I have reviewed the stage data, but I don't

8 remember what the numbers were.

9 Q. Did you review that head differential in

10 making the determination that there was no seepage or

11 it was equaled with any seepage out of the EAA when

12 preparing the water budget?

13 A. I didn't say there was no seepage in any

14 direction.

15 What I said is overall, seepage in or out

16 of the EAA can be stated as zero to do water budget

17 study of this level.

18 Q. All right. Could you indicate for me on

19 Exhibit Number 13 perhaps with this green marker

20 anywhere that you believe that there is, on an annual

21 basis you would experience a head differential where

22 there would be a higher water level in the EAA than

23 in the surrounding areas?

24 MS. BIRCH: I'm going to object to the

25 extent that it calls for the witness to draw

 

211

1 conclusions or speculation without having a

2 sufficient documentation that's already been

3 presented during the deposition.

4 If there is a map to indicate that, then

5 the witness can direct us to that. If not, what

6 he believes is not relevant. Giving an opinion

7 based upon facts that he has testified to is.

8 MR. KOBELINSKI: Counsel, he made a

9 judgment that seepage is not a factor in the

10 water budget. His actual testimony is on the

11 water budget. I'm just trying to determine how

12 he made that judgment call.

13 MS. BIRCH: You are asking him to indicate

14 what he believed. If he has something to base

15 that belief on and can testify to that, I have

16 no objection to that, but for him to speculate --

17 I mean he can give an opinion, but you are

18 asking him to guess.

19 MR. KOBELINSKI: No, counsel, he stated he

20 did this not based upon review of the data, but

21 on his general knowledge of the area. He stated

22 he made his estimate that there is a balancing

23 of seepage in and seepage out. Since he did not

24 review specific data, I'm reviewing that general

25 knowledge of the area.

 

212

1 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

2 Q. Dr. Abtew, on Exhibit 13 could you state

3 for me where you would expect to experience a head

4 differential where you would have higher water

5 elevations within the EAA than in any of the

6 surrounding areas?

7 A. I have to see the data of stage at the site

8 which changes with time and make conclusions based on

9 that temporal scale. It depends on the time.

10 Q. Did you do that in preparing your water

11 budget?

12 A. I have inspected the stage data records. I

13 don't remember what the numbers are inside or outside

14 the EAA.

15 Q. Did you review stage records in preparing

16 the water budget?

17 A. I have reviewed the stage records.

18 Q. I understand, sir, that you reviewed stage

19 records while you have been at the District.

20 My question is have you reviewed stage

21 records in preparing this water budget which is

22 reflected in Exhibit 2?

23 Is that some of the data that you have

24 reviewed in preparing Exhibit 2?

25 A. I don't remember that I exactly used it for

 

213

1 doing the writing, but through my studies of the EAA,

2 I have reviewed the stage data, and I don't remember

3 at what period of time what the stage is anywhere

4 around there.

5 Q. Can you tell me exactly what process you

6 used to make the judgment that seepage in and out of

7 the EAA balances out and need not be considered in

8 the water budget which is Exhibit 2?

9 What data did you review for what period of

10 time?

11 MS. BIRCH: Objection to the

12 mischaracterization of his testimony.

13 THE WITNESS: I can't specify the exact

14 data. It is a combination of general knowledge

15 that is obtained through reading the different

16 documents on the EAA and different data,

17 conversation with different people.

18 All that combination resulted in the

19 conclusion that there is no massive seepage out

20 or in to affect the water budget analysis that

21 was reached.

22 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

23 Q. What people did you have these discussions

24 with?

25 A. I don't remember, I don't remember the

 

214

1 people that I discussed.

2 Q. And what data was it that you just referred

3 to?

4 A. The District database on stage flow, stage

5 data.

6 Q. You said stage flow. What exactly are you

7 referring to there, sir?

8 A. Flow is flow, flow through the District

9 canals and stage data in the canals, outside the

10 canals and all the stage data.

11 Q. Okay. During what period of time did you

12 research the study that's reflected in Exhibit 2?

13 Not the study period.

14 During what time did you actually spend

15 conducting this research and drafting the report?

16 A. How long did it take?

17 Q. How long did it take? When did you start?

18 I realize you are still in the process, because it's

19 a draft.

20 A. I am not certain, but probably started a

21 year and a half ago.

22 Q. Approximately July of 1991?

23 A. Earlier, a little earlier.

24 Q. Sometime during 1991?

25 A. Sometime during 1991.

 

215

1 Q. Okay. From that period forward, have you

2 reviewed the stage or head differential between the

3 water conservation areas and the EAA?

4 A. Not recently.

5 (Discussion held off the record.)

6 (Thereupon, a recess was taken.)

7 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

8 Q. Doctor, drawing your attention back to the

9 questions we were just discussing, a few moments ago

10 you had stated that you had commenced the study which

11 is reflected in Exhibit 2 approximately sometime in

12 early or mid 1991.

13 And my question is have you reviewed

14 subsequent to early or mid 1991 any data on the stage

15 or head differential between the water conservation

16 areas and the Everglades Agricultural Area?

17 A. Not recently.

18 Q. Doctor, I'm afraid I really just don't

19 understand your answer, because I was asking about a

20 particular period and you are saying not recently.

21 Does that not recently mean the entire

22 period?

23 A. On the process of the study, there are

24 times where stage data were reviewed, which is quite

25 sometime back.

 

216

1 Q. But you have reviewed then stage data from

2 approximately early '91 through today's date in

3 reference to this study which is Exhibit 2?

4 A. No, during the period of the study, the

5 stage data during the period of study, which is '79

6 to '90. That's what I reviewed.

7 Q. I appreciate -- I'm not asking what the

8 period of the stage data covered. I'm asking whether

9 or not you reviewed stage data during the time you

10 were researching and preparing this document, which

11 is Exhibit 2.

12 In other words, have you reviewed stage

13 data since early 1991 through today's date in

14 reference or in preparation of this study, Exhibit 2?

15 A. I have been exposed to stage data in and

16 around the EAA. I can't remember the time and how

17 much I have used to make conclusions, how much of

18 that data was used to make my conclusion.

19 Q. Is there any way for you to identify the

20 stage data that you reviewed in determining that

21 seepage was not a factor or not an important factor

22 to be considered in the water budget?

23 A. I don't remember.

24 Q. Well, what data would you look at now to go

25 about making that determination?

 

217

1 If I had to do it, how would I go about

2 determining whether or not seepage would be an

3 important factor?

4 A. Have to go back and see the database, there

5 are a lot of stage readings, and select which one I

6 was looking at, so it will be a process that will

7 take time. Have to study the database in the whole

8 area.

9 Q. What would you be studying? What would you

10 look for to make a determination about seepage?

11 A. I haven't planned how to do that kind of

12 test or research, and I can't tell you exactly what I

13 will do to test if there is seepage through the

14 levees.

15 Q. Well, you already did something to make the

16 determination that you have in this Exhibit 2, which

17 is that seepage is not an important factor.

18 What was that? Walk me through -- what

19 should I do to recreate and make a determination or

20 analyze that judgment? What data do I look at?

21 A. I told you it's based on general knowledge

22 and general information, which is a combination of

23 conversations with individuals who have knowledge of

24 the area and review of stage data in the area, which

25 I don't remember which stage stations were, and the

 

218

1 general topography of the area.

2 So a combination of a lot of factors

3 determine to make a conclusion that seepage, the net

4 seepage was not a big factor in the water budget of

5 the Everglades Agricultural Area.

6 Q. Why was seepage included in the water

7 budget of the Holey Land?

8 MS. BIRCH: Asked and answered.

9 THE WITNESS: The head differential is

10 considerable. It is an impoundment.

11 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

12 Q. Is the Water Conservation Area 1 an

13 impoundment?

14 A. Yes, it is an impoundment.

15 Q. Is there a considerable head differential

16 between Water Conservation Area 1 and the EAA?

17 A. I have to see the data for different

18 periods of time and make comparison of the stage at

19 various points to make that conclusion. I didn't

20 study that for seepage purpose.

21 Q. In preparing Exhibit 2, you did not study

22 that?

23 A. I made a general conclusion that seepage

24 was not very important and didn't make detailed study

25 on how much was coming, leaving the EAA through

 

219

1 seepage.

2 MR. KOBELINSKI: Could you go back? I need

3 an answer approximately two questions ago.

4 Could you read back the answer two answers back?

5 (Thereupon, a portion of the record

6 was read by the reporter.)

7 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

8 Q. If the head differential between WCA-1 and

9 EAA on an annual basis is the same as the head

10 differential between the Holey Land and the

11 surrounding areas, would that be indicative to you

12 that there would be seepage?

13 A. Have to study the area in general to

14 determine if there will be seepage, if seepage will

15 be important.

16 Q. I'm not asking whether it will be important

17 seepage. I'm asking if the head differential was the

18 same or greater between Water Conservation Area 1 and

19 the EAA as the head differential between the Holey

20 Land and the EAA, would there be seepage?

21 A. That's a hypothetical question, but I have

22 to study the topography of the area and the boundary

23 between impoundment and the EAA, how long it is, and

24 the soil and the levees between the EAA and the Water

25 Conservation Area.

 

220

1 So I have to study a lot of things if you

2 want to calculate how much seepage is coming out.

3 Q. How does the topography impact seepage?

4 A. If there is a levee between the areas,

5 seepage will be small. If the levee is compacted or

6 if it is just the natural system, it will be

7 different.

8 Q. You had mentioned three factors to be

9 considered, topography, levee and soil under the

10 levee, other than the head differential which we have

11 been discussing.

12 And I understand the levee, which we will

13 be getting to in a moment, but how does topography,

14 how is that a factor in seepage?

15 A. I already answered the question.

16 Q. And you had made mention to the levee.

17 With regard to levee, how is the levee a

18 factor?

19 A. Levee puts resistance. The compacted

20 levee, you will have more resistance for seepage.

21 Q. Is there a difference between the factor

22 that you have listed as topography and the factor

23 that you have listed as levee?

24 A. As part of the topographical feature of the

25 area, whatever there is on the land.

 

221

1 Q. But other than a levee then, is there

2 anything about the topography that's a factor in

3 seepage?

4 A. The gradient, the position of the areas

5 with respect to each other.

6 Q. Based upon the general knowledge and

7 information you had made reference to, what's your

8 understanding of the gradient between EAA and Water

9 Conservation Area 1?

10 A. I have to look at the data, at the maps and

11 features at different times of water stage to

12 determine which direction seepage is going or what

13 feature will affect seepage.

14 Q. But referring now just to topography, are

15 you talking about the land surface when you mentioned

16 topography?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Well, the head differential or the water

19 stage doesn't impact what the ground elevation is,

20 does it?

21 A. Well, the ground elevation determines the

22 water stage, too.

23 Q. It's a factor in it, but the ground

24 elevation does not change just because water stage

25 changes, does it?

 

222

1 A. No.

2 Q. As far as, within a five-year period, for

3 instance, essentially the ground elevation, is it

4 constant?

5 A. I can't say that. Depends on deposition on

6 what you already have on the bottom, what's building

7 up in the reservoir.

8 Q. Is it your understanding that the area

9 within the EAA is generally flat?

10 A. Yes, generally flat.

11 Q. Is it your understanding that the area

12 within the WCA-1 is generally flat?

13 A. There is a slope, gentle slope to the

14 south.

15 Q. Is there any type of slope in the EAA?

16 A. It is, the EAA is divided into sub-basins

17 and you have to have a specific area and request.

18 Just can't make that statement.

19 Q. What about the sub-basin that is adjacent

20 to WCA-1 of the EAA?

21 A. I have to look at a topograph map to tell

22 you exactly what the gradient is and which way it is

23 going.

24 Q. Whatever that gradient would be, it's not

25 any type of a high or great degree of gradient, is

 

223

1 there, if there is one at all?

2 A. No, it won't be high.

3 Q. Do you have any general information or

4 knowledge as to whether or not the ground elevation

5 on one side of the levee that's on the EAA and the

6 other side of the levee that's on Water Conservation

7 Area 1, as to whether there is a difference in the

8 soil elevation on either side of the area there?

9 A. Have to refer to topographic map before I

10 answer the question.

11 Q. Did you do so in making the determination

12 about seepage?

13 A. I told you I didn't do detailed study of

14 the area to calculate seepage.

15 Q. But you based it upon your general

16 knowledge; is that correct?

17 A. I have answered this question before.

18 Q. Given that general knowledge, is it your

19 understanding that there is a difference in the

20 ground elevation on one side of the levee which is in

21 WCA-1 and the other side of the levee, which is in

22 the EAA?

23 A. I have to see the topographic map of the

24 area to answer this question.

25 Q. You have no knowledge of it without looking

 

224

1 at a topographic map, no general knowledge

2 whatsoever?

3 A. I have to refer to topographic map.

4 Q. My question is do you have any general

5 knowledge with regard to that whatsoever?

6 A. With regard to what?

7 Q. Whether or not there is a difference,

8 substantial, minimal or otherwise, between the ground

9 elevation on the EAA side of the levee and the ground

10 elevation on the Water Conservation Area 1 side of

11 the levee.

12 A. I have to refer to topographic map to

13 answer this question.

14 Q. So you do not have general knowledge on

15 that topic; is that correct?

16 MS. BIRCH: Objection, argumentative, asked

17 and answered.

18 THE WITNESS: I don't have specific

19 knowledge on the specific question.

20 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

21 Q. I'm not asking for specific knowledge. I'm

22 asking for general knowledge. You have stated you

23 made a judgment based upon your general knowledge.

24 I'm trying to understand what your general knowledge

25 is.

 

225

1 Do you have general knowledge on that?

2 A. I have to refer to topographic map to

3 answer that specific question.

4 Q. Let me make the question more general.

5 Absent a levee, would there be a slope

6 between Water Conservation Area 1 and the EAA?

7 A. I have to look to topographic map to answer

8 that question.

9 Q. You do not have any general knowledge in

10 that regard?

11 A. That's your opinion.

12 Q. I'm asking a question, sir.

13 Do you have general knowledge in that

14 regard, any general knowledge in that regard?

15 A. To the specific question, I don't have

16 specific knowledge.

17 Q. Do you have any knowledge whatsoever of

18 slopes or ground elevations, not specific to mean sea

19 level, not to within a foot, not to within a yard, do

20 you have any general knowledge on the slopes between

21 or the EAA and Water Conservation Area 1, general

22 knowledge?

23 MS. BIRCH: Objection, asked and answered.

24 THE WITNESS: I don't have specific

25 knowledge of the difference in elevation between

 

226

1 the two.

2 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

3 Q. I'm not asking for specific knowledge.

4 General knowledge.

5 A. I don't have the specific knowledge of --

6 Q. I'm not asking about specific knowledge,

7 sir. General knowledge.

8 Do you have any general knowledge?

9 A. What is the meaning of general knowledge?

10 Q. Sir, you have described you made a judgment

11 call based upon your general knowledge.

12 What do you consider general knowledge?

13 A. I have already answered that question what

14 information I have based in making the decision that

15 seepage will not be a factor in the water budget.

16 Q. I wasn't asking about seepage.

17 What do you consider general knowledge?

18 A. It depends on what subject you are asking

19 on.

20 Q. What do you consider general knowledge

21 regarding seepage?

22 Would general knowledge regarding seepage

23 be about the four factors you stated are important

24 for seepage, head differential, topography and soil

25 under levee?

 

227

1 A. General knowledge is information you have

2 gathered through time, through reading, through

3 conversation with people who know about the area and

4 various sources that you can't recall where you get a

5 piece of information to conclude that there is no

6 massive flow of water in or out of the ag area to

7 imbalance the water budget.

8 That's what general knowledge is.

9 Q. Okay. Now, given that definition, do you

10 have any information gathered through time, through

11 reading, through conversations with other people or

12 from various sources that you can't recall

13 specifically where, what the topography or whether

14 there is any substantial difference between the

15 ground elevation in the EAA on one side of the levee

16 and Water Conservation Area 1 on the other side of

17 the exact same levee?

18 A. I can't quantify that.

19 Q. I'm not asking you to quantify it.

20 Do you have any knowledge of it?

21 A. I don't have that specific knowledge.

22 Q. Not specific. Do you have any knowledge,

23 given the four factors you just gave me, general

24 knowledge?

25 A. I can't recall all the specific information

 

228

1 that I have gathered to come to a conclusion that

2 there is no massive seepage in or out from the ag

3 area to any of the directions.

4 Q. Sir, my question is not with regard to

5 whether you recall specific information on seepage.

6 My question is given your definition of

7 what general knowledge is, do you recall any general

8 knowledge on ground elevations between Water

9 Conservation Area 1 on one side of the levee and the

10 EAA on the other side of the levee?

11 MS. BIRCH: Counsel, we are getting to the

12 point where you are badgering the witness. You

13 have asked a question, he has given an answer.

14 It may not be the answer you like, but you are

15 entitled to an answer.

16 MR. KOBELINSKI: He is answering a question

17 I haven't asked.

18 MS. BIRCH: You are becoming argumentative.

19 We have been on this at least five minutes and

20 it's not getting us anywhere.

21 I would suggest that we move on to an area

22 where Dr. Abtew can answer questions about his

23 expertise on the EAA water budget.

24 MR. KOBELINSKI: This is a factor in the

25 water budget.

 

229

1 Well, I'll move over it for a moment.

2 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

3 Q. Dr. Abtew, did you consider the four

4 factors, the head differential, the topography, the

5 levee and the soil under the levee for the seepage

6 calculation in the Holey Land?

7 A. The head difference is in the equation and

8 the characteristic of the water movement through the

9 levees is in the equation and the topography is

10 reflected in the stage data.

11 Q. How is the ground elevation reflected in

12 the stage data?

13 A. Well, determines the depth of water.

14 Q. Doesn't flow in and flow out upon an area

15 determine the depth of water?

16 A. The stage region depends how high the

17 ground is underneath it or how low it is underneath

18 it. So it's considered.

19 Q. For seepage -- what did you look at then to

20 determine whether or not there was a difference in

21 topography between the Holey Land and the surrounding

22 EAA?

23 A. This question is answered in Exhibit 10,

24 page 0957260 to page 0957263.

25 Q. And where specifically is it considered in

 

230

1 those two pages?

2 A. You have to read the whole thing to

3 understand how it's computed.

4 Q. Drawing your attention to 0957261, the top

5 of the page where you state, "With the available

6 limited data, seepage was estimated in the four

7 directions assuming that the gradient is the same in

8 one direction (east, west, north and south)."

9 Did you just assume that the gradient was

10 the same for this seepage study?

11 A. In one, in east, west, north or south

12 direction, yes.

13 Q. Well, was there a particular direction you

14 assumed it was not the same?

15 A. There is not.

16 Q. I didn't understand the answer, sir. Maybe

17 I missed it.

18 A. In east, west, north and south direction,

19 in one specific direction, in a single day the

20 seepage is assumed to be one way rather than along

21 the north going in and out from one end to the other

22 end, which is a reasonable assumption.

23 Q. When you refer to gradient there, what

24 gradient are you talking about?

25 A. The gradient of the land surface in one of

 

231

1 those directions.

2 Q. Well, the gradient of the land surface

3 doesn't change each day, does it?

4 A. It doesn't change each day, but it can

5 change from one corner of the east side to the other

6 corner of the east side.

7 Q. And in this instance you just assumed that

8 the gradient was the same?

9 A. Yes, either it is one way or the other way

10 in the four directions.

11 Q. Okay. And did you determine what the

12 gradient was?

13 A. The head differential, the stage of water

14 outside and inside the Holey Land shows that gradient

15 at the measurement point.

16 Q. You can calculate the ground elevation from

17 the stage elevation?

18 A. Well, the water surface elevation is

19 measured at certain points on both sides and that

20 difference shows the gradient of whichever direction

21 it's going to be.

22 Q. That's the gradient of the water; is that

23 correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. I'm talking about the gradient of the soil.

 

232

1 I'm just trying to determine if that is an important

2 factor here.

3 A. Well, it is considered when you measure the

4 water depth, automatically the ground level is

5 incorporated with it, because it is designed with the

6 water.

7 Q. Are these measurements to mean sea level or

8 are they measurements to the soil level?

9 A. The data is referred to mean sea level in

10 the database.

11 Q. So whether or not the soil was one foot

12 higher on one side or the other, as long as there was

13 a head differential in the water level, you would

14 still have seepage; is that correct?

15 A. That's right.

16 Q. All right. So I'm just trying to

17 understand then how you took into consideration the

18 soil level gradient, if any.

19 A. If you have a levee with topographic

20 features to block, depending on what you put inside

21 the levee.

22 Q. So the levee then is the important factor

23 that should be considered, not topography?

24 A. Well, levee is part of the topography.

25 Q. Other than the levee, is there any other

 

233

1 feature of the topography I need to be considering?

2 A. Maybe some topographic features.

3 Q. Any that you are aware of in the EAA that I

4 need to be considering?

5 A. For seepage calculation, it is stated in

6 those pages, what is used and what is not used.

7 Q. And in these calculations could you point

8 out to me where soil elevation is included in the

9 calculation?

10 Would that be in 8, 9, 10 or 11, which are

11 on Exhibit 10, Bates number 0957261? Those are

12 numbered equations.

13 A. I didn't say soil elevation would be

14 included in the equation.

15 Q. Is elevation then not a factor that you

16 considered in determining the seepage out of the

17 Holey Land?

18 A. The water surface elevation is what is

19 considered.

20 Q. But not the soil surface elevation?

21 A. It is inside, when you measure the water

22 surface elevation, it automatically is in the bottom,

23 so it comes into play how high it is or how low it

24 is.

25 Q. Okay. Now with regard to the levee, what

 

234

1 studies, if any, did you do on the levee surrounding

2 the Holey Land?

3 A. I covered, it is covered on this previous

4 page.

5 Q. What page would that be, sir?

6 A. That would be page 0957260 to page 0957263

7 in Exhibit 10.

8 Q. And what are the features of the levee that

9 you considered or studied?

10 A. The details are shown on those pages.

11 Q. Could you point out to me what details you

12 are referring to?

13 A. I have to read from page 0957260 up to page

14 0957263

15 Q. Please walk me through those pages

16 indicating where the levee or the type of levee it

17 was, the soil under the levee were considered in

18 making the seepage calculation.

19 MS. BIRCH: What was the question?

20 (Thereupon, a portion of the record

21 was read by the reporter.)

22 THE WITNESS: On page 0957260 subtitled

23 Simulation Model, line number three, "The

24 seepage losses were calculated using an equation

25 developed from a seepage study data of 1975."

 

235

1 You have to read that document which is in the

2 reference to see how the soil comes into play

3 with regard to seepage.

4 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

5 Q. Did you read that to determine how the soil

6 and the levee was constructed and what features of

7 the levee there were?

8 A. You have to read that document to see how

9 soil factors are considered in calculating seepage

10 rate of the area.

11 Q. Did you read that document to determine

12 whether or not the features of the levee were

13 considered?

14 A. I read that document.

15 Q. Were the features, the construction and

16 type of levee and soil under the levee considered in

17 that document?

18 A. I don't remember the details, but it is a

19 detailed seepage rate study in the area.

20 Q. The report was dated 1975; is that correct?

21 A. That's right.

22 Q. Were all the levees that you did the

23 seepage calculation on constructed as of 1975?

24 A. I don't remember when they were

25 constructed.

 

236

1 Q. Would you be able to use that same study

2 and the same calculation to determine seepage between

3 WCA-1 and the EAA?

4 A. I have to study that.

5 Q. Well, in what circumstances wouldn't you be

6 able to use that same equation?

7 A. I have to study the problem first.

8 Q. I'm just asking you what possible factors

9 would result in your not being able to use the

10 equation?

11 A. I have to read that document, read the

12 document and see its application.

13 Without reading it, I can't say anything.

14 Q. Well, the document just provides you with

15 this factor; is that correct, the .746?

16 A. And details of where it was tested, how it

17 was tested, and it's one report. You have to read it

18 all before you determine where to use it.

19 Q. In doing the Holey Land seepage between, in

20 the southern direction, that's between the Holey Land

21 and Water Conservation Area 3, there is a levee there

22 dividing the two; is that correct?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And I draw your attention to what's been

25 marked as Exhibit 13.

 

237

1 A. Yes, there is levee.

2 Q. Is it the exact same lineal levee that

3 divides, if you follow it along up to the east, water

4 Conservation Area 1 from the EAA?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Do you know if there is a difference

7 between the manner of construction of the levee that

8 divides Water Conservation Area 1 from the EAA and

9 the Holey Land from Water Conservation Area 3?

10 A. I don't know. I haven't studied that.

11 Q. When did you make the conclusion that it

12 was appropriate to use the seepage calculation

13 referred to in Exhibit 10 for the Holey Land water

14 budget?

15 A. Before May 1992, sometime before May 1992.

16 Q. Did you make that determination before or

17 after you made the determination that seepage within

18 the EAA was not a factor to be, important factor to

19 be considered in the EAA water budget?

20 A. After I made that conclusion.

21 Q. Did you revisit that conclusion with regard

22 to the EAA water budget after studying the Holey

23 Land?

24 A. I haven't revisited it, since this is a

25 draft document. If there is enough technical

 

238

1 information that convinces me to see if seepage is,

2 if seepage doesn't fit the water budget of the EAA, I

3 will look at that.

4 Q. Is there any information that you don't

5 have comparable to the information you had when doing

6 the Holey Land water budget regarding seepage?

7 A. I didn't study. I don't try to compute

8 seepage from the EAA, so I can't say how much

9 information is there if I want to calculate.

10 Q. You said if you had sufficient information,

11 you would study it to see if it is an important

12 factor. You would revisit it if necessary.

13 What information do you need to revisit it?

14 A. First information is to, if it is

15 worthwhile doing the study, if you try to change the

16 water budget, if there is significant amount of water

17 coming in and leaving the area.

18 Q. How would you go about making that

19 determination?

20 A. I could say right now there is no massive

21 movement, so unless someone comes up with convincing

22 idea or just for interest of doing the study. There

23 is no reason to go back and do this kind of study

24 right now.

25 Q. Well, how did you make the determination

 

239

1 that seepage had to be considered in the Holey Land?

2 A. Because the data is available.

3 Q. Is the same data available for the EAA?

4 A. I am not sure.

5 Q. Well, I go back to what data do you need to

6 make the determination?

7 MS. BIRCH: Objection, asked and answered.

8 THE WITNESS: First I have to be convinced

9 that I have to do this work.

10 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

11 Q. Well, how did you get convinced that you

12 had to do the Holey Land work? You said it was just

13 because the data was available.

14 Is that all that convinced you to do the

15 work?

16 A. And it was an impoundment. I have stated

17 that.

18 Q. But you have already testified that there

19 are impoundments surrounding the EAA; is that

20 correct?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. So you know that there are impoundments,

23 and the question is do you have the same comparable

24 data available?

25 A. You have to look at how much data is

 

240

1 available to, if you have to quantify seepage or

2 whatever the amount is.

3 Q. If the data is available, is that

4 sufficient then to warrant a study of seepage?

5 MS. BIRCH: Objection to form.

6 THE WITNESS: It depends on your objective.

7 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

8 Q. If your objective was a water budget?

9 A. It doesn't affect significantly the water

10 budget of the EAA whether to include that seepage

11 that may be left right now.

12 Q. Did seepage affect significantly the water

13 budget of the Holey Land?

14 A. The Holey Land is a completely different

15 environment than the Everglades Agricultural Area,

16 and the seepage that was calculated is given on page

17 0957263.

18 Q. All right. Was it significant in the Holey

19 Land?

20 A. Yes, it is significant. It is a reasonably

21 high number.

22 (Thereupon, a recess was taken.)

23 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

24 Q. Dr. Abtew, with regard to the structures,

25 the water control structures that separate or

 

241

1 connect, whichever you would like to view it as, the

2 EAA and Water Conservation Area 1, are you familiar

3 at all with those structures?

4 A. Which structures are they?

5 Q. That would be the S-5, the various

6 structures there.

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. When water is moved from the EAA into Water

9 Conservation Area 1, how is that done?

10 A. It's written in the document.

11 Q. Is it pumped?

12 A. Will you repeat the question?

13 Q. Is the water pumped from the EAA into Water

14 Conservation Area 1?

15 A. Yes, there is pump station two.

16 Q. Is there any type of a gravity flow

17 structure for water to flow out of the EAA into Water

18 Conservation Area 1?

19 A. Yes, there is a gravity structure.

20 Q. Is that for water to flow from the EAA into

21 Water Conservation Area 1?

22 A. Sometimes it has happened. It is not

23 frequent. Sometimes water flows by gravity from the

24 EAA to Water Conservation Area 1.

25 Q. Did it happen at any time during your study

 

242

1 area, study period from 1979 to 1990 that there was

2 gravity flow through the S-5 structures there from

3 the EAA into Water Conservation Area 1?

4 A. I am not sure if it is for that period or

5 from 1973 to 1991. There are periods where water

6 flows through gravity from the EAA to Water

7 Conservation Area 1.

8 Q. Would you say that happened 50 percent of

9 the time?

10 A. A few times.

11 Q. A few times over a span of approximately 18

12 years?

13 A. I don't remember the exact number of days

14 or months. I know it is a few times.

15 Q. Of the flows between Water Conservation

16 Area 1 and the EAA, approximately what percentage,

17 just rough approximation, what percentage would have

18 been gravity flow from the EAA into Water

19 Conservation Area 1?

20 A. I don't have enough information to put any

21 approximate number on the proper --

22 Q. Given the fact you said it happened a few

23 times over an 18-year span, would you say that it was

24 greater than 30 percent, less than 30 percent?

25 A. I have to check District database how many

 

243

1 times it flowed in that direction, so I don't want to

2 put any number without checking the database.

3 Q. Do you know how many times or whether the

4 majority of the times it was pumped from the EAA into

5 Water Conservation Area 1?

6 A. Most of the time it was pumped.

7 Q. Is there any type of a pump structure which

8 would allow water to be pumped from Water

9 Conservation Area 1 into the EAA, or is that merely a

10 gravity structure, gravity flow?

11 A. I have to check.

12 Q. Do you know?

13 A. I have to check if there were instances, if

14 there was back-pump.

15 Q. You are saying using the same pumps to

16 back-pump, is that what you are referring to?

17 A. Yes. I have to check if that has occurred.

18 Q. Do you recall in your research any instance

19 of that occurring?

20 A. Not that I remember.

21 Q. Have you spoken with any of the

22 agricultural interests that border Water Conservation

23 Area 1 to determine whether or not any of their

24 pumping practices are instigated or influenced by any

25 type of seepage from Water Conservation Area 1?

 

244

1 A. No, I haven't done any study with regard to

2 seepage.

3 Q. I'm not referring to a study. I'm just

4 talking about conversations with people.

5 Have you spoken with anyone with any

6 agricultural interests or anyone else from the

7 District with regard to whether or not pumping on the

8 agricultural fields bordering Water Conservation

9 Area 1 is influenced by seepage?

10 A. I haven't talked to the ag people on how

11 seepage influences their pumping practice.

12 Q. Have you talked to anyone in the District

13 about that?

14 A. I don't have the specific knowledge.

15 Q. I'm just trying to understand, doctor.

16 Sometimes you refer to specific knowledge. Sometimes

17 you refer to general, and I'm not sure if you are

18 just using the terms for no particular purpose or if

19 you are saying you don't have specific knowledge,

20 which means you do have some general knowledge.

21 In this instance do you have any

22 recollection or just no specific recollection?

23 A. Repeat the question, please.

24 Q. The question was do you recall speaking

25 with anyone at the District about whether or not the

 

245

1 seepage from Water Conservation Area 1 into the EAA

2 impacts the pumping practices of the agricultural

3 interests bordering that area.

4 A. I don't remember.

5 Q. Do you recall speaking to anyone as to

6 whether or not the seepage from Lake Okeechobee into

7 the agricultural areas surrounding Lake Okeechobee in

8 the EAA influences their pumping practices?

9 A. I don't remember.

10 Q. Have you ever looked at the stage

11 differential between Lake Okeechobee and the waters

12 within the EAA?

13 A. I don't remember that specific comparison

14 of those two stages.

15 Q. Do you recall a general comparison? I'm

16 just trying to understand, because again, you use

17 from time to time the term specific.

18 Do you recall just generally a comparison

19 of the stage elevations or the head differential

20 between Lake Okeechobee and the EAA?

21 A. Since those things are dependent on time,

22 it's very hard to say that I came up with some data

23 which shows this way or that way. Just depends on

24 the period where you are comparing stages.

25 Q. Well, is there data showing on a daily

 

246

1 basis what the elevation of Lake Okeechobee is?

2 A. Yes, there is data in the District

3 database, but I don't work with that data.

4 Q. That was my question.

5 Have you ever looked at that data or talked

6 to anyone about that data to make a determination

7 whether there is normally a head differential between

8 the EAA and Lake Okeechobee?

9 A. I haven't studied that.

10 Q. I recognize you haven't studied it. Have

11 you talked to anyone about it?

12 A. I don't remember.

13 Q. Okay. Dr. Abtew, yesterday you mentioned

14 that you will be using a, I believe it was called a

15 lysimeter to be studying evapotranspiration within

16 the ENR project; is that correct?

17 A. That's correct

18 Q. Could you describe for me essentially what

19 are the components of a lysimeter?

20 A. It's a plastic tank --

21 MR. PERKO: Could you spell lysimeter?

22 THE WITNESS: L-y-s-i-m-e-t-e-r.

23 MR. PERKO: Thank you.

24 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

25 Q. Plastic tank of approximately what

 

247

1 capacity?

2 A. A little over 2,000 gallons. Pumps, water

3 level recorders, data recorders, weather station,

4 evaporation pan, generally those are the instruments

5 which will be in and around the lysimeter.

6 Q. The lysimeter itself, the plastic tank, is

7 that just sitting on the ground or is it partially

8 submerged? How does it functionally work?

9 A. Submerged in the water. It will be under

10 water. Most of it will be under water.

11 Q. And is the concept that you control the

12 flows, inflows of water and outflows of water?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Is the inside of the tank, is part of it

15 filled with, in this instance I guess would be muck

16 soils or peat?

17 A. Yes, soils from the surrounding --

18 Q. Do you know whether or not you will be also

19 attempting to determine the evapotranspiration of the

20 vegetation that will be used in what is referred to

21 as the polishing cells of the ENR project?

22 A. I don't know what types of vegetation we

23 are going to put in it yet.

24 Q. Have you had any discussions about the

25 types of vegetation?

 

248

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. What are the types of vegetation you have

3 discussed?

4 A. Cattails and the rest of wetlands

5 vegetation which exists around there. I don't

6 remember the names.

7 Q. Was there any discussion of using the

8 lysimeter with just a predominantly algae community?

9 A. I haven't heard that.

10 Q. Sir, drawing your attention to what's been

11 marked as Abtew Exhibit Number 3, which is a document

12 titled Draft, title is Water Budget Analysis For The

13 Everglades Agricultural Area, An Organic Soil

14 Drainage Basin, and drawing your attention to the

15 second page of that document, which is in fact

16 labeled one at the bottom of the page, the third

17 sentence therein states, "The EAA is a highly

18 productive high water table organic soil irrigation/

19 drainage basin with water quality problems."

20 Is it your understanding that there are

21 water quality problems within the EAA?

22 A. Will you repeat the question?

23 Q. Is it your understanding that there are

24 water quality problems within the EAA?

25 A. Yes.

 

249

1 Q. Where are the water quality problems?

2 A. It's referenced in a document which I

3 cited, and you can read from there.

4 Q. What document is that, sir?

5 A. On page four, second paragraph, "The

6 phosphorus in the drainage water has resulted in

7 accelerated eutrophication of Lake Okeechobee and in

8 the degradation of the Everglades ecosystem."

9 This is a paper written by Izuno, 1991, and

10 is referenced in the end.

11 Q. Is Lake Okeechobee part of the EAA?

12 A. What kind of question -- its geographic

13 location?

14 Q. Yes. Is Lake Okeechobee part of the EAA?

15 A. Lake Okeechobee is on the north side of the

16 area.

17 Q. Is it within the EAA?

18 A. Not the definition that I know.

19 Q. With regard to the Everglades ecosystem

20 referenced by Izuno, is that within the EAA or is he

21 referring to the conservation areas in the Everglades

22 National Park?

23 A. He is referring to the drainage areas that

24 leaves agricultural area and it's pumped to Lake

25 Okeechobee and to the south to the Everglades

 

250

1 ecosystem, which includes water conservation areas.

2 That is his reference.

3 Q. My question to you, sir, is are you aware

4 of whether there are water quality violations within

5 the geographic EAA? Not within the EPA, not within

6 Lake Okeechobee.

7 Are there water quality violations within

8 the EAA?

9 MS. BIRCH: Objection, this witness is not

10 competent to testify as to what violations are

11 in the EAA. That's a legal determination,

12 counsel. You know that.

13 MR. KOBELINSKI: Makes reference to water

14 quality in his document, violation of the EAA.

15 I would like to know whether that's his belief

16 and what his basis is.

17 MS. BIRCH: He cited to you where he found

18 that statement.

19 THE WITNESS: I cited the reference where

20 it is stated there is problems with the water in

21 the agricultural area.

22 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

23 Q. Is it your understanding there are

24 violations of the water quality in the EAA?

25 A. I don't use the term violation or

 

251

1 non-violation, but the term I used is there is water

2 quality problem with water quality degradation which

3 is cited in that scientific study.

4 Q. On the second page of that Exhibit 3 --

5 again, the bottom of the page is listed actually as

6 one -- it says, "During dry periods supplemental

7 water is used for irrigation and in rainy periods --"

8 A. Which part?

9 Q. I'm reading the following sentence to the

10 one I read before.

11 A. Okay.

12 Q. "During dry periods supplemental water is

13 used for irrigation and in rainy periods excess water

14 with phosphorus content has to be pumped out off the

15 basin to the environmentally sensitive Everglades

16 ecosystem."

17 First of all, you make reference that it

18 has to be pumped out.

19 Can it be gravity flows out of the EAA?

20 A. Yes, it could be gravity flow.

21 Q. In your study period were there any gravity

22 flows out of the EAA during the rainy season?

23 A. I don't remember that detail.

24 Q. This states that the water has to be pumped

25 out to the environmentally sensitive Everglades

 

252

1 ecosystem.

2 Can't the water be pumped into the West

3 Palm Beach Canal and down to the, out to the urban

4 communities?

5 MS. BIRCH: Objection, lack of foundation.

6 This witness isn't competent based on the

7 testimony previously given as to the operation

8 of pumps.

9 MR. KOBELINSKI: Counsel, the document

10 states it has to be pumped in a certain

11 direction. I'm trying to explore why the

12 witness has that statement in his own work.

13 MS. BIRCH: That wasn't the question. So

14 what's the pending question?

15 THE WITNESS: What is the question?

16 MR. KOBELINSKI: Please read it back.

17 (Thereupon, a portion of the record

18 was read by the reporter.)

19 THE WITNESS: Which way the water is

20 flowing I think refers to the later sections of

21 the report, if it is relating to different

22 direction.

23 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

24 Q. My question, doctor, is does the water have

25 to be pumped into the water conservation areas?

 

253

1 A. You can see on reference figure the

2 distribution of outflows from the Everglades

3 Agricultural Area. This is the figure which is

4 labeled as figure 3B, percentage distribution of

5 canal outflows from Everglades Agricultural Area from

6 1973 to 1991.

7 Q. I understand that's the percentage for the

8 study period.

9 My question is in reference to your

10 statement in the report that the water has to be

11 pumped into the Everglades, does the water have to be

12 pumped into the Water Conservation Areas?

13 Is that the only option?

14 A. That's where it is pumped to.

15 Q. Does it have to be pumped there, as the

16 document states?

17 A. The pumps do not pump to West Palm Beach

18 Canal.

19 Q. Which pumps don't pump to the West Palm

20 Beach Canal?

21 A. All the pumps which are at the perimeter of

22 the Everglades Agricultural Area.

23 Q. But those pumps don't need to be turned on

24 either, do they?

25 A. Not to West Palm Beach Canal.

 

254

1 Q. My question is can water be diverted to the

2 West Palm Beach Canal as opposed to the Water

3 Conservation Areas?

4 A. Yes, water can be diverted to West Palm

5 Beach Canal.

6 Q. Do you recall, doctor, whether the study

7 area for Exhibit 3 is the same study area for

8 Exhibit 2?

9 A. Yes, it is the same.

10 Q. I draw your attention then, continuing on

11 with Exhibit 3, at the introduction section, which is

12 the third page of the document but on the bottom it

13 states page 2, the second sentence states, "The basin

14 area is over 1100 square miles lying in western Palm

15 Beach, eastern Hendry and western Broward Counties.

16 The area in this study includes the sub-basins S-2,

17 S-3, S-5A, S-6, S-7 and S-8, which cover 926.5 square

18 miles."

19 Is the entire EAA covered by this study

20 area?

21 A. The area covered is stated as sub-basins

22 S-2, S-3, S-5A, S-6, S-7 and S-8.

23 Q. What portion of the EAA was not covered by

24 the study?

25 A. The rest of the portions of the EAA are not

 

255

1 covered.

2 Q. I draw your attention to Exhibit 13.

3 Can you indicate for me what portions are

4 not covered?

5 A. I know the L-8 basin and --

6 Q. Where is that L-8 basin, sir?

7 A. Anything out of this thick line is not

8 included.

9 Q. Well, what portion of the EAA is outside of

10 that thick line, if you could just indicate it for

11 me?

12 A. I can't tell from this map.

13 Q. Is there another map within the exhibits we

14 have marked where you would be able to identify that?

15 A. I don't remember.

16 Q. Other than the L-8, is there any other

17 portion of the EAA that's not covered by the study?

18 A. The area on the northwest side of the

19 conservation area and the other basins, the basins on

20 the northwest side of the study area are not included

21 in the study.

22 Q. Why were those excluded from the study

23 area?

24 A. I don't remember how the area of study was

25 determined for us to do the study. That was the area

 

256

1 of study given for me to do the study.

2 Q. You weren't involved in the decision

3 regarding the study area?

4 A. I haven't decided to leave out any of the

5 area.

6 Q. Do you know who did make that decision?

7 A. I don't remember who did.

8 Q. Do you know why the decision, why the

9 decision was made to leave out portions of the EAA

10 from the study area?

11 A. I don't know. The area I studied is shown

12 on the map.

13 Q. Drawing your attention to page 4 of the

14 Exhibit 3, which on the bottom of the page is stated

15 page 3 --

16 MS. BIRCH: Is it 3 or 4?

17 MR. KOBELINSKI: Actual page 4, but for the

18 record, on the bottom of the page it's listed as

19 3. It's actually the fourth page of the

20 exhibit, though.

21 MS. BIRCH: I see.

22 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

23 Q. In that first full paragraph the final

24 sentence says, "The primary system is designed to

25 remove .75 inches of excess water per day from the

 

257

1 service area."

2 Are you referring to all pumps including

3 the pumps that pump into Lake Okeechobee in that

4 reference, or just the pumps on the southern and

5 southeastern side of the EAA?

6 A. This is referenced from the original design

7 of the primary canals. That was the capacity to

8 remove three quarters of an inch of runoff from the

9 service area.

10 Q. That would include pumping into Lake

11 Okeechobee?

12 A. I know it is the capacity of the canals,

13 but I am not sure if it included the pump station

14 capacity on both ends. I have to check on that.

15 Q. Is that the capacity on both ends?

16 A. Primarily it is the canal capacity. I'm

17 not sure if the pump capacity is included in this

18 design.

19 Q. Dr. Abtew, what was the entire database for

20 rainfall in the District's computers?

21 MS. BIRCH: Asking him to his knowledge?

22 MR. KOBELINSKI: Yes, and if it shows

23 within this document.

24 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

25 Q. Perhaps I would refer you to page 6 of the

 

258

1 document, which on the bottom of the page is

2 indicated as page 5. The second to last sentence

3 says, "The average historical (1929-1990) annual

4 rainfall for the EAA is 52.33 inches."

5 Did you obtain that from the District's

6 database?

7 A. The data from 1929 to 1972 is referenced on

8 page 21, Table 1, a document written by Sculley,

9 1986, which is in the reference.

10 The data from '73 to 1991 is from the

11 District database.

12 Q. Do you know where Sculley obtained his

13 information?

14 A. I presume it is from the District database,

15 but you can refer to that document to find out where.

16 Q. How did you make the determination to do a

17 study period from 1973 through 1991 as opposed to the

18 entire database or from 1929 through 1991?

19 A. There was flow data available from '73 to

20 '91. That's one reason, flow data from the area.

21 And second, for many reasons, it was

22 determined 1973 was referred and was a starting point

23 to study that area. So you can say flow data

24 availability.

25 Q. Is there flow data availability prior to

 

259

1 1973?

2 A. There could be.

3 Q. Does the District have flow data prior to

4 1973?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Does the USGS, United States Geological

7 Society have flow data prior to 1973?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Is there a difference in the availability

10 prior to '73 than there is subsequent to '73 of flow

11 data?

12 A. I have to check the specific date.

13 Q. Would the period of record that the study

14 encompasses, did using a cut-off from 1973 to 1991

15 have any impact upon the results?

16 A. I don't understand the question.

17 Q. Okay. With regard to your final study

18 which we have been discussing off and on, Exhibit 2,

19 the study area is 1979 to 1990; is that correct?

20 A. That's right.

21 Q. All right. And we have in that same report

22 and in various of your reports you have made

23 reference to the fact that the eighties were

24 generally a lower rainfall period; is that correct?

25 A. That's right.

 

260

1 Q. Okay. Did the fact that your study, the

2 predominant number of years in your study were a low

3 rainfall period, did that have any impact upon the

4 results of the study?

5 A. There is no results of study. There is

6 documentation in Exhibit 2 for that period. The flow

7 rainfall and other hydrologic parameters are

8 documented.

9 Q. But within Exhibit 2, your study, you do

10 then calculate average rainfall and average yields,

11 which I believe is what you refer to as the net

12 amount of water that's discharged from the EAA as

13 opposed to the net, as compared to what has inflowed

14 into the EAA.

15 You do prepare averages over the period of

16 study; is that correct?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Does the period of study selected impact

19 those averages?

20 A. When you change the period of record, the

21 numbers change, but I haven't done a comparison of

22 the '73 to 1990 study and the 1979 to 1990 study to

23 see the magnitude of change because of the changing

24 period of record. I didn't do that comparison.

25 Q. Would you anticipate that the averages for

 

261

1 the 1979 to 1990 period, given the fact that you

2 recognize that they are generally dryer years, would

3 have resulted in lower averages of rainfall and lower

4 averages of what you refer to as yield from the EAA?

5 A. I have to compare the numbers to make

6 conclusions.

7 Q. You wouldn't be able to make that

8 conclusion without specifically comparing all the

9 numbers?

10 A. I can't make that conclusion without

11 comparing the numbers.

12 Q. Is the yield generally rainfall driven?

13 A. The yield is the net runoff from the ag

14 area, which is the difference between the total

15 runoff minus the irrigation water they pulled off of

16 the canals.

17 That difference is the net runoff of the

18 water generated from the area, which the source is

19 rainfall.

20 Q. So in a dryer year then, would the yield be

21 less because there is less rainfall?

22 A. Depends on the distribution of the

23 rainfall.

24 Q. Given what you have seen of the general

25 rainfall patterns, would the yield be generally less

 

262

1 in a lower rainfall year?

2 A. Yes, those are the indications observed in

3 general.

4 Q. Dr. Abtew, in your research with regard to

5 the water budget of the EAA study area, you have

6 listed a number of inflow points or stations, water

7 management structures.

8 Are there other water management structures

9 which add water into the EAA that were excluded as a

10 result of the, not including the entire geographic

11 EAA in the study area?

12 MS. BIRCH: Would you read that question

13 back for me?

14 (Thereupon, a portion of the record

15 was read by the reporter.)

16 THE WITNESS: Not that I know of.

17 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

18 Q. Drawing your attention to Exhibit Number 3,

19 page 14, which again at the bottom would be listed as

20 number 13, the first paragraph there of that page

21 refers to the phosphorus loads from different sources

22 of water; is that correct?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. What does the phosphorus loads of the water

25 have to do with the water budget?

 

263

1 A. Reference of water quality is pertinent in

2 water resource studies.

3 Q. Well, does the quality of the water impact

4 the water budget?

5 A. The answer is, again, water quality

6 features of water resource studies can be included in

7 water budget. It is at the discretion of the author.

8 Q. Why did you include it?

9 A. Because it makes, it explains the system

10 better with water quality.

11 Q. To what purpose? Does it benefit, for

12 instance, use as a management tool in some fashion?

13 A. Water resource management part is water

14 quality and the other one is water quantity.

15 Q. Did you conduct any study of water quality?

16 A. Yes, I have referenced where I have

17 conducted study, read documents to get this

18 information.

19 Q. But did you yourself conduct any research

20 or studies other than just where the document is

21 referenced?

22 A. No, I don't have to do that to make that

23 statement.

24 Q. Why did you only reference phosphorus and

25 not any other water quality parameters?

 

264

1 A. Because that is the interest mentioned most

2 in the literature I read.

3 Q. What literature?

4 A. The literature cited earlier by Izuno and

5 literature cited here, which is a Draft Technical

6 Document in Support of Chapter 40E-63, F.A.C., South

7 Florida Water Management District, March 3, 1992

8 document.

9 Q. What is that Draft Technical Document that

10 you just referred to about?

11 A. It has a section on the amount of

12 phosphorus that leaves or gets into the Everglades

13 Agricultural Area. That's where this is referenced

14 from.

15 Q. When you were given the assignment of

16 preparing the water budget, was providing also the

17 phosphorus loads within the basin and out of the

18 basin also one of the assignments that is to be part

19 of the water budget?

20 A. It was not my assignment.

21 Q. Whose assignment was it?

22 A. I am not sure who started or finished up

23 that whole document.

24 Q. No, I'm asking were you instructed to add

25 this section to the water budget?

 

265

1 MS. BIRCH: Object to form.

2 THE WITNESS: I am the author of the

3 document and I am the one who selects what

4 sections make sense in my article. And it is my

5 decision that referring water quality will give

6 meaning to my paper, for it is an important

7 issue for that area.

8 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

9 Q. Are there any other water quality

10 parameters that are important to the area?

11 A. There could be, but I didn't, it was not

12 cited as primary in those documents.

13 Q. Those documents as being the Izuno and this

14 Draft Technical Document you referred to?

15 A. Yes, I read those documents.

16 Q. Have you read the SWIM Plan?

17 A. I haven't read the SWIM Plan, but I have

18 gone through sections of interest.

19 Q. What would those sections be?

20 A. I glanced through the material, and I

21 haven't made a thorough reading to refer to it. And

22 maybe it is referenced in here that I can check and

23 tell you what section I have referenced in this

24 document.

25 Yes, it is referenced in here and you can

 

266

1 go to the section and see which part I concentrated

2 on. It is referenced in the document. Apparently

3 there is a section where it is mentioned.

4 Q. Do the phosphorus loads and the phosphorus

5 percentages have any impact upon the water budget?

6 MS. BIRCH: Asked and answered.

7 THE WITNESS: For what time period?

8 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:

9 Q. For the time period of your study.

10 A. On page 14 as it is labeled here, page 14,

11 on the last paragraph the SWIM Plan is cited as a

12 reference where water quality has forced the decrease

13 of pumping to the lake through the Interim Action

14 Plan. So you can see water quality has at least

15 influenced the movement, the direction of water flow.

16 Q. Is that the SW