During the Household Hazardous Waste Collection Strategy Discussion, R
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
During the household hazardous waste collection strategy discussion, R. Kryder explained that Nye County recently completed a recycling and household hazardous waste (HHW) management plan, and the management strategy referenced that plan. No changes were made to the welihead protection sign strategy. R. Kryder reminded the Team that the use of CSWP signs would remain an option for each individual PWS. Christensen suggested a new management strategy be included called intra-agency coordination, in addition to the interagency coordination strategy, some of the agencies included in intra agency coordination were: • Nye County National Resources Department • Nye County Public Works (Recycling and HHW Management Plan) • Nye County NWRPO (managing the brownfields coalition grant) • Nye County Emergency Services Department • Nye County Water District No changes were made to the public education strategy. R. Kryder stated additional and more detailed resources were included in the CSWP Plan. L. Kryder informed the Team of the upcoming Project WET (Water Education for Teachers) workshops, which were to be held on January 27 and 28, 2012, in Pahrump. Several Team members, Nye County staff, and school teachers were expected to participate. Sausman informed the Team he had been invited by Desert Research Institute (DRI) to participate in their February 3, 2012, Las Vegas workshop. The purpose of the workshop was to train people for DRI’ s “teach the teachers” program. Borgzinner asked what the topics of the workshop would be, and Sausman replied topics were to include teaching, training and obtaining funding for programs, but the workshop was not entirely water-focused. Sausman said he would be attending the workshop, and would try to bring relevant information back to the Team. Christensen suggested the public education strategy be coordinated with the NCWD to maximize benefit, and R. Kryder responded that cooperation and coordination with the NCWD had been discussed during previous Team meetings, and it had been agreed that the Team would coordinate closely with the NCWD for educational outreach. There was some discussion regarding the flyer referenced in the public education and outreach portion of the management strategies, and the Team decided the NDEP source water education website would be referenced in the public education strategy in place of the flyer. Commissioner Hollis requested a strategy be included addressing the use of drilling fluids and chemical additives in the drilling process for mineral exploration, oil and gas well development, and water wells. Commissioner Hollis stated he was concerned these chemicals may affect thinking water in Nye County. Borgzinner asked how such a management strategy would function, and Christensen suggested Nye County could request notification of new drilling permit applications, then they could contact drillers directly to discuss the issue. B-108 R. Kryder explained the Plan review process. The Plan would be uploaded to NDEP’s ftp server, and the Team would then have three weeks to review and provide comments. Comments would then be addressed and revisions incorporated into the Draft Plan in preparation for the final Draft Plan. McCall asked if a map had been developed which included all the SWPAs, and R. Kryder replied a number of area maps show the SWPAs for PWSs included in the Plan. R. Kryder also gave a brief summary of the methods used for SWPA modeling. Action Items: • Contact individuals to review the management strategies (BEC). • Obtain Douglas County source water impact checklist (BEC). • Obtain link to the NDEP source water education website (BEC). • Add intra-agency coordination strategy to the management strategies (BEC). • Complete CSWP maps (L. Kryder). Next Steps: • Complete the draft CSWP Plan (BEC). • Update the management strategies to include comments and suggestions from this Team meeting (BEC). Next Meeting: The next Team meeting was tentatively scheduled for 10:00 a.m. Febmary 22, 2012. The meeting was expected to be held in Pahrump Nevada. Respectfully submitted, Name: John Yvon Date: March 20, 2012 Title: Resource Specialist Project: Nye Community Source Water Protection Project No. 018.08.24B B-109 Nye County Community Source Water Protection Plan CSWP Team Meeting Agenda Friday, May 4, 2012 — 10:30 AM 2100 E. Walt Williams Dr. BoCC Chambers Pahrump, NV Videoconference/teleconference locations accessible to the public: Tonopah, Nevada: Board of County Commissioners Chambers, 101 Radar Road Pahrump, Nevada: Board of County Commissioners Chambers, 2100 E. Walt Williams Dr. (Host Location) Beatty, Nevada: Beatty Justice Center, 426 C. Avenue South There may be a quorum of the Nye County Water District Governing Board and/or Pahrump Nuclear Waste and Environmental Advisory Board present; however, no deliberations shall occur, and no action shall be taken. All agenda items are for presentation and discussion only. 1. Public Comment 2. Discuss Draft CSWP Plan Comments 3. Discuss Presentations to Boards 4. Confirm Action Items for next Team Meeting 5. Schedule next Team Meeting 6. Public Comment B-hO Nye County Community Source Water Protection Team Meeting May 4, 2015 Meeting Summary 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. Meeting Participants: Participatingfrom Pahrump: Tim McCall, Nye County Water District Governing Board (NCWDGB) John MacLaughlin, NCWDGB Levi Kryder, Nye County Nuclear Waste Repository Project Office (NWRPO), Nye County Natural Resources Scott Lewis, Pahrump Valley Fire and Rescue Elizabeth Enriquez, Nye County NWRPO Walt Kuver, Nye County Water District (Consultant) Jose Nunez, Utilities Inc. of Central Nevada (UICN) George Sausman, Pahrump Nuclear Waste and Environmental Advisory Board (PNWEAB), Anchor Inn Mobile Home Park Kim Borgzinner, Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) Rachel Kryder, BEC Environmental, Inc. (BEC) John Yvon, BEC Eileen Christensen, BEC Participatingfrom Tonopah: There were no meeting participants in Tonopah Participatingfrom Beatty: There were no meeting participants in Beatty Agenda Focus/Meeting Purpose: This was the tenth Nye County Community Source Water Protection (CSWP) Team meeting. The purpose of this meeting was to address questions and comments from Team members concerning their review of the Draft CSWP Plan, and to discuss the process for presenting the Plan to the Nye County Water District Governing Board and Board of County Commissioners (BoCC). Summary: The Team began the meeting by discussing specific comments regarding the Draft Plan. L. Kryder stated he thought it was important to specifically designate a person to be responsible for keeping the Plan updated and active. He added the planning role should be formally specified in the Plan. Borgzinner added the designated responsible party can be a position, rather than a specific individual. L. Kryder also suggested the Team present this suggested designation (or list B-ill of potential candidates) to the Water District Governing Board and BoCC for approval. L. Kryder added this designation should be included in the Executive Summary as well. The Team discussed the Work Plan next. L. Kryder suggested the Plan be more specific for item G, Public Education, relative to who would provide training for water system operators. Borgzinner suggested listing a number of agencies that may be able to provide training. Sausman suggested providing cost estimates for items listed in the Work Plan, and the Team discussed some pros and cons to providing cost estimates. R. Kryder agreed to work on obtaining cost estimate ranges for Work Plan options, to have available upon request. The Team discussed how to best present the contaminant management strategies, so those reading the Plan would not be overwhelmed by the exhaustive list of options. The Team was concerned readers may think the Plan was stating all possible management strategies would be acted upon, which was not the intent. The Team decided the Work Plan should be emphasized within the Plan and Executive Summary, not just in the applicable appendix. Borgzinner added the appendices should be listed within Section 1.1 of the Plan, in conjunction with the Plan sections already listed. The Team also discussed making it very clear that not all of the items identified in the Work Plan have to be done, but implementation measures cannot be considered by NDEP for funding unless they have been included in the Work Plan. Borgzinner added there should be a clearer correlation between the highest risk potential contaminant sources and items identified in the Work Plan. The Team discussed striking a balance between assuring various board members and communities there were no potential contaminant sources identified that posed an immediate threat to ground water quality, but to maintain the importance of the program and the need for action in recommending the Plan and supporting implementation activities. Sausman asked Borgzinner what commitment NDEP will expect from the communities once the Plan is endorsed. Borgzinner stated the program is voluntary, and while NDEP encourages as much action as possible, they understand the limits of local budgets and political will, and expect the communities to integrate implementation as they can. L. Kryder suggested emphasizing the potential for funding opportunities when presenting the Plan to various boards. Nunez provided some input from the perspective of water system operators, and suggested he would be able to get the most participation from UICN by dealing directly with NDEP and