October 1, 2019

Commissioner Blundo

and Sheriff Wehrly were not present at this time. A 58-second period of silence was observed in honor of the 58 people who lost their lives in the October 1, 2017, shooting in Las Vegas.

Commissioner Koenig

asked the Clerk to double check John Bosta’s statement regarding notifying the Sheriff's Office about activities in his mobile home and RV park as Commissioner Koenig did not believe Mr. Bosta lived in a mobile home park.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to approve; seconded by Commissioner Strickland; 5 yeas. SITTING AS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

Commissioner Blundo

remembered the lives lost and the lives forever changed by the Route 91 October 1, 2017, tragedy.

Commissioner Cox

said there was still an issue with weeds at the Calvada Eye, the same ones she had mentioned for three meetings now.

Commissioner Wichman

said she received a phone call from Erika Gerling from Beatty.

Mrs. Gerling

extended her thanks to staff, Scott Lewis and everyone else who participated in making sure the County was prepared for the Storm Area 51 event. October 1, 2019 6. Commissioners'/Manager's Comments (This item limited to announcements or topics/issues proposed for future workshops/agendas)-Cont’d.

Commissioner Strickland

commented on the awesome job County employees did on the Fall Festival.

Commissioner Koenig

advised he sat with the Area 51 group starting all day Wednesday through part of Saturday. He was woken up at 2:45 a.m. on Friday and told that there were 50 people at the gate with guns and long rifles. Everyone gathered back at the emergency center and sat there for the rest of the day. He then said last week he attended the Central Nevada Regional Water Authority meeting on the same day as the first day of NACO. NACO ran for two days he got back sometime on Saturday. TIMED ITEMS

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 2019-30; seconded by

Commissioner Strickland

; 5 yeas.

District Attorney Chris

Arabia was not present. October 1, 2019 SITTING AS THE NYE COUNTY BOARD OF HIGHWAY COMMISSIONERS

Commissioner Blundo

assumed the Chair of the Board of Highway Commissioners.

Commissioner Wichman

said she was told the chip seal was done in Belmont and she thanked Public Works Director Tim Dahl for that.

Commissioner Koenig

asked about the durapatcher.

Mr. Dahl

said it was still sitting in the yard brand new. In the next week or so he would get some oil in it and get it out working. He would let the Commissioners know when he did that.

Commissioner Koenig

noted the speed limit signs had been taken down on Pahrump Valley Boulevard, but the lights were still flashing and he asked if they could be turned off.

Mr. Dahl

explained he would like to leave those on while they went through the motions of doing the speed limit study because he thought it would provide some extra caution to that area.

Mr. Dahl

then announced dates for upcoming encroachment permit workshops, which would entail reiterating that there was a Nye County Code for encroachment permits. It was not about penalizing anyone who had not done one in the past, especially before they came into play. The workshops would be about answering questions on what they were about, how to fill them out on-line, etc. The workshop dates were: e¢ Tonopah November 6, 2019, at 6:00 p.m. in Commission Chambers. e Round Mountain November 7, 2019, at 6:00 p.m. at the Hadley community center. e Pahrump November 15, 2019, at 6:00 p.m. in Commission Chambers. e Amargosa Valley November 21, 2019, at 6:00 p.m. at the community center. e Beatty November 22, 2019, at 6:00 p.m. at the community center.

Commissioner Strickland

noted the workshop was the day after the Commission meeting and asked if there was any way to make it the night before so possibly a couple of the Commissioners coud attend.

Mr. Dahl

said he would check the schedules for those dates instead.

Commissioner Blundo

asked Mr. Dahl how the on-line road report complaint system was working right now. October 1, 2019 11. General road report by Public Works Director-Cont’d.

Mr. Dahl

said as far as he knew it was doing fine. If Commissioner Blundo knew of some that were not getting answered he would entertain addressing those. He explained it could be an instance where the County did not own the right-of-way people want repaired, but he would make sure an ambulance, fire truck or the Sheriff could get to someone’s home regardless. Regarding the four-way stop warrants, Mr. Dahl advised Honeysuckle and Pahrump Valley Boulevard did not warrant one. He did receive a four-way stop warrant at Calvada and Dandelion due to the significant amount of accidents at that intersection and the recent alignment. Any speed Simits would be brought to the Board. SITTING AS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

Commissioner Koenig

assumed the Chair of the Board of County Commissioners. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS - These are items that Staff recommends for approval. The Board reserves the right to move any consent agenda item to the regular segment of the agenda should issues arise that need to be addressed. Discussion of any item from the Consent Agenda Items that needs review before a decision is made. 12. For Possible Action — Approval to: 1) Accept the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Brownfields Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) Award Agreement BF- 99T74801-0 in the amount of $800,000.00, with a $160,000.00 In-Kind match amount which will be made up from staff time and waiving tipping fees; and 2) Fund $800,000.00 from 10340 Grant Fund.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to accept; seconded by Commissioner Blundo; 5 yeas, BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 13. For Possible Action — Closure of meeting, pursuant to NRS 288.220 for purposes of conferring with the County’s management representatives regarding labor negotiations, issues and other personnel matters. This item was removed from the agenda. 14. Closed meeting, pursuant to NRS 288.220 for purposes of conferring with the County's management representatives regarding labor negotiations, issues and other personnel matters. This item was removed from the agenda. October 1, 2019 15. For Possible Action — Discussion and deliberation on labor negotiations, issues and other personnel matters presented in closed meeting. This item was removed from the agenda. 16. For Possible Action — Discussion and deliberation to ratify the Memorandum of Understanding between Nye County and Clark County Metro which was signed in conjunction with the emergency declaration for the Storm Area 51 event.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to ratify; seconded by Commissioner Strickland.

Commissioner Blundo

pointed out the signature from the District Attorney's Office was missing. Marla Zlotek explained both signatures from the Chair and the Sheriff were on the document prior to the District Attorney receiving it. NRS 277 listed the provisions that had to be complied with on contracts and the District Attorney approving as to form was not one of them. It was also a moot point as the agreement was already signed when received by the District Attorney's Office for review.

Commissioner Blundo

said section 2, Mutual Aid, stated each party agreed to provide upon request from another party hereto aid and assistance in responding to emergency situations occurring within the jurisdiction of the requesting party. “Emergency situations” was not defined in NRS, but “emergency” was. Commissioner Blundo asked if it was referring to NRS 414.035 where emergency was defined for the purpose of this agreement because emergency was defined differently under NRS 433.

Ms. Zlotek

stated the intent of the agreement was specifically for the emergency declared by the County, the Storm Area 51 incident. As such it would again be a moot point. It was over with and the Board was ratifying an agreement that allowed for the calling of assistance.

Commissioner Blundo

referred to the language in section 14, Duration, which stated the agreement shall remain in effect for a period of five years. He said he did not want to see a backdoor type event where Metro started pulling people over in Pahrump.

Ms. Zlotek

said because there was no date on the agreement, if it was ratified then pursuant to section 14 it could be terminated with 60 days notice. She explained that could not be fixed today as the agenda item was to ratify it as it was already signed.

Commissioner Cox

wondered since it was done and over with and the Board was only ratifying it if it would be appropriate to do away with section 14. October 1, 2019 16. For Possible Action — Discussion and deliberation to ratify the Memorandum of Understanding between Nye County and Clark County Metro which was signed in conjunction with the emergency declaration for the Storm Area 51 event- Cont'd.

Ms. Zlotek

reiterated it could not be amended and voted on as the agenda item was as stated. The Commissioners could take no action or ratify it and then later have an agenda item to revoke it. John Bosta was concerned with what might happen if it was not amended and it slipped through. He did not think the Board approved something on the basis to disprove it later. He thought it would be better to table it and bring it back at another meeting properly agendized so the Board could simply not approve it.

Commissioner Wichman

stated her motion stood.

Commissioner Strickland

stated her second stood.

Commissioner Wichman

pointed out the agreement did not talk about cost. Sam Merlino advised that was because there was no cost involved.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to approve; seconded by Commissioner Strickland.

Commissioner Blundo

asked if the County had previously been in a contract for these services with this organization.

Mrs. Merlino

responded no. She discussed the election security issues that everyone was worried about and explained this was testing through the Department of Homeland Security. Most of the counties had signed off and they had tested six or eight of the counties already.

Commissioner Koenig

said there was a discussion at NACO about this and listening to it was kind of scary. The recommendation was everyone should get this done. October 1, 2019 17. For Possible Action — Discussion and deliberation regarding approval to: 1) Enter the service with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for ordering Cyber Hygiene (CyHy) Vulnerability Scanning, Risk and Vulnerability Assessment (RVA), Remote Penetration Test (RPT) and Phishing Campaign Assessment (PCA); and 2) Delegate authority to the IT Director to complete and execute the documents-Cont'd.

Commissioner Blunde

was concerned with allowing them to test the vulnerabilities in the County's system. He thought it was redundant as organizations were previously approved to do this through IT and the Clerk’s Office.

Mrs. Merlino

said the State bought each county an Albert sensor, which notified them if someone was trying to attack the system so IT would be on it immediately. This one through the Department of Homeland Security was just to test the vulnerabilities in the County’s system now before the election year. There was also a bill out there that the Secretary of State's Office was required to make sure all counties had cyber security in place and training every year. Mrs. Merlino felt it was in the County’s best interest to have this done.

Commissioner Cox

said she was leery of Homeland Security and thought if the precautions were already in place the County was covered. She was also worried about being forced to spend money on equipment that the testing determined was needed.

Mrs. Merlino

said she would much rather have them test to find out if something was wrong before the 2020 presidential election rather than let it go and find out after the election something was wrong. Ammie Nelson said she was not for any big government coming into the County and asked the Board to vote against it. Horace Carlyle pointed out that just turning on a computer opened the user up to criminals. He thought the Commissioners’ posturing was irresponsible. IT Director Brad Adams said the intent of this was not to look at information. It was to identify vulnerabilities and make sure the County was applying best practices. He acknowledged that adhering to best practices might mean a cost if it was found that there was a better practice that should be followed.

Commissioner Blundo

said he could not find anything regarding cost and felt that left it open-ended.

Mr. Adams

confirmed there was no cost associated with it and it was sponsored by the Secretary of State’s Office for all counties. He said it was to make sure the County was meeting its obligations to protect that critical system. October 1, 2019 17. For Possible Action — Discussion and deliberation regarding approval to: 1) Enter the service with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for ordering Cyber Hygiene (CyHy) Vulnerability Scanning, Risk and Vulnerability Assessment (RVA), Remote Penetration Test (RPT) and Phishing Campaign Assessment {PCA); and 2) Delegate authority to the IT Director to complete and execute the documents-Cont'd.

Mrs. Merlino

thought if there was a requirement to fix something the County would want to get it fixed to make sure the election was secure.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to ratify; seconded by Commissioner Strickland.

Commissioner Blundo

wondered if the County Manager had any words as he made the selection. Tim Sutton said he had nothing in particular but was happy to go over the process. He advised about 35 applications were received and six were interviewed. There was a panel and a ranking process. Mr. Allen rose to the top because of his extensive educational credentials and history with the County. His most recent position was also exactly what the County job description entailed.

Commissioner Blundo

said there was a union that represented management, which he voted for because there were substantial gains. He asked if proactive steps were being taken as the Commissioners were now going to ratify an individual who would be protected by the very same union that they were working on removing some of the barriers from.

Mr. Sutton

advised this job description was already in the NCEA contract prior to Mr. Allen being hired.

Commissioner Blundo

asked if it was possible to have a sheet stating they were an at- will employee although they enjoyed the privileges of the union.

Commissioner Strickland

pointed out this was a replacement for an employee that was no longer with the County. There currently was no Facilities Director and she felt it was a very important position especially with all the anticipated new construction. She found

Mr. Allen’s

resume outstanding and hoped he would fit very well with Nye County and the projected growth. October 1, 2019 18. For Possible Action — Discussion and deliberation to ratify the County Manager’s selection of William Allen as Director, Facilities Operations-Cont'd.

Commissioner Blundo

believed department heads enjoyed several luxuries with their position and should be accountable to the Board.

Commissioner Koenig

said Mr. Allen worked for the County Manager and in his opinion the Commissioners had no right to meddle in those affairs.

Commissioner Cox

said it was her understanding that if this employee did not work out then the Commissioners go to the County Manager and he could be fired.

Commissioner Koenig

said yes and that was what happened last time.

Commissioner Cox

was concerned that he was from Tonopah and if he would be able to oversee everything going on in Pahrump on a regular basis since that was the area growing and his job would be down there.

Commissioner Strickland

said Jimmy Martinez was second in command and he had the ability to take this position. She said the choice was made at the manager level to have the director in Tonopah as they need help there.

Commissioner Wichman

also pointed out she had worked with Commissioner Cox for 11 years and she had covered Pahrump just as well as she had covered the rest of the County. Ammie Nelson discussed her experience with progressive discipline. There was a time period for each written or verbal discipline and it could take a year to fire someone, which was a long time for someone not doing their job. She felt there should be an agreement that the position was at-will

Mr. Sutton

advised the offer letter had a 12-month probationary period so Mr. Allen was an at-will employee. Dave Stevens thought more unions were needed. The motion to ratify passed with 4 yeas. Commissioner Blundo voted nay. 19. For Possible Action — Discussion, deliberation and direction to staff to pursue taking legal action against Storm Area 51 instigators.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to direct the District Attorney to pursue; seconded by Commissioner Strickland.

Commissioner Koenig

said he was still waiting to get the cost. October 1, 2019 19. For Possible Action — Discussion, deliberation and direction to staff to pursue taking legal action against Storm Area 51 instigators-Cont’d.

Commissioner Blundo

asked if this would come back to the Board with more details.

Commissioner Koenig

said yes if the District Attorney could flush some out.

Ms. Zlotek

asked that the motion be direction to staff in light of the Chair's statement that staff was waiting for the numbers.

Commissioner Wichman

restated her motion to direct staff to pursue; seconded by

Commissioner Strickland

; 5 yeas. PLANNING/BUILDING/CODE COMPLIANCE 20. For Possible Action — Status update regarding conditional approval of Marijuana License RM-2019-000052: Recreational Marijuana Establishment License (cultivation) located at 1261 E. Calvada Boulevard, Pahrump, NV. Assessor's Parcel Number 040-041-40. Howard N. Misle / ACC Enterprises, LLC — Applicant.

Commissioner Blundo

made a motion to approve RM-2019-000052 for the rest of the year; seconded by Commissioner Wichman. Planning Director Brett Waggoner advised he came across something the other day that indicated ACC Industries had actually sold to another company. He wanted to get that on the record and possibly have the applicant answer that. Per Nye County Code they were supposed to notify the Planning Department if something like that occurred and Planning had not received any notification. It was actually published in a news article.

Commissioner Blundo

thought that was outside the scope of this agenda item, but an inquiry could be done. He said there was talk, but until that process was initiated there was nothing to discuss. Antonio Guido explained they were in the process of transferring the license at the State level, but it was not finalized yet. John Bosta said in his opinion what the Board was doing was in violation of what the voters voted on and was still in effect until November 22, 2019. The Town of Pahrump had to tell the State they had been notified about and had approved the sale.

Commissioner Koenig

commented there had been no sale yet. Marla Zlotek advised this agenda item could move forward as it was stated as a conditional approval of a marijuana license. October 1, 2019 20. For Possible Action — Status update regarding conditional approval of Marijuana License RM-2019-000052-Cont'd.

Commissioner Blundo

made a motion to approve MM-2019-000074 and MM-2019- 000075 for the remainder of the license year; seconded by Commissioner Cox. John Bosta pointed out the Town of Pahrump had not approved this item and the County did not have the authority to issue the license by law. Valerie Small thanked the Board.

Commissioner Blundo

made a motion to conditionally approve for another 60 days.

Commissioner Koenig

thought the Board should go ahead with it.

Commissioner Blundo

amended his motion to approve MM-2019-000079 and RM-2019- 000051 for the remainder of the license year; seconded by Commissioner Wichman. John Bosta said the Town of Pahrump had not approved this license and the Board was in violation of what the voters voted on and stood until November 22, 2019. The LCB sent a letter to the County to turn the money over the towns, which had not been done, and the Board did not have the authority to issue the licenses.

Commissioner Strickland

made a motion to approve the marijuana establishment license annual renewal applications; seconded by Commissioner Wichman.

Commissioner Blundo

believed this applicant was issued a license for the full year when they were in front of the Board a couple of months ago.

Commissioner Wichman

said it was conditional upon the items listed in the back-up at that time. Brett Waggoner added the final action memo for that item at that time did have a conditional approval. John Bosta said this Board did not have the authority to issue the license. The town of Pahrump was to notify the State to issue or not issue. Additionally, the County owed the towns money. The LCB directed the County to return the money and the County refused to do so.

Commissioner Koenig

said towns could not issue licenses.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to approve; seconded by Commissioner Blundo; 5 yeas. The Board was in recess until 1:15 p.m.

Commissioner Cox

was not present. October 1, 2019 TIMED ITEMS 8. 10:00 — For Possible Action — Continued Public Hearing, discussion and deliberation pursuant to NRS 244.360 on a complaint alleging the existence ofa nuisance located in Belmont, Nevada, and adopt, amend and adopt, or reject Nye County Resolution No. 2019-31: A Resolution Finding the Existence of Nuisance Conditions; or Nye County Resolution No. 2019-32: A Resolution Finding Nuisance Conditions Do Not Exist. Neal Jones, Philip Kreitlein, legal counsel for Janice Berard and Neal Jones, and Arlette Newvine, co-counsel, were present.

Commissioner Koenig

reviewed what happened at the last meeting and asked for any additional proof to be offered by the complainant. Neal Jones said he had 11 additional pages.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to accept additional back-up; seconded by

Commissioner Strickland

; 4 yeas. The Board was in recess while the additional back-up was distributed.

Commissioner Cox

was present. Philip Kreitlein discussed the law that applied to this proceeding. During the Board meeting on September 17, 2019, Mr. Jones detailed his case for the existence of a nuisance in Belmont through the illegal installation of three separate wells and septic systems, each of which posed a separate threat to the underground aquifer that supplied water to Belmont. Mr. Jones presented names, dates, data, test results and reports. The respondents presented unsupported responses such as they did it out of necessity and they received permission from someone who lacked the authority to grant that permission. They presented no data, no science, no evidence and no proofs. The Board had now been presented with two competing resolutions, one finding a nuisance existed and one finding it did not exist. Both resolutions request the Board to carefully consider proofs offered to establish or controvert the existence of nuisance conditions. Given the lack of evidence or proofs given by the respondents to this complaint Mr. Kreitlein said there was only one resolution the Board could adopt — the finding of a nuisance and direct the District Attorney to take appropriate action to abate the nuisance. Neal Jones asked that his written statement be included in the minutes [see Attachment 2]. He felt he had provided evidence and legal precedence to establish that the property owners listed in his complaint had created a nuisance by their failure to abide by the laws put in place to prevent the occurrence of nuisances. He displayed a map showing the locations of the drills which Mr. Jones contended were in zones which State laws forbade drilling in. He said Donna and Rick Motis as well as Darrell Lacy October 1, 2019 8. 10:00 — For Possible Action — Continued Public Hearing, discussion and deliberation pursuant to NRS 244.360 on a complaint alleging the existence of a nuisance located in Belmont, Nevada, and adopt, amend and adopt, or reject Nye County Resolution No. 2019-31: A Resolution Finding the Existence of Nuisance Conditions; or Nye County Resolution No. 2019-32: A Resolution Finding Nuisance Conditions Do Not Exist-Cont’d. made false and misleading statements at the September 17, 2019, meeting. Mr. Lacy also acted illegally in his attempt to grandfather the septic system at the Belmont Saloon. Mr. Jones felt Mr. Lacy’s actions had put Nye County in a position of liability for the resulting contamination of the water aquifer in Belmont from the undocumented, non-conforming and illegal septic system and water well at the Belmont Saloon. Mr. Jones implored the Commissioners to rule that those persons had created a nuisance due to the evidence provided. Janice Berard asked that her written statement be included in the minutes [see Attachment 3]. She outlined all the community involvement she and Mr. Jones had in Belmont over the last four years until the town apparently turned on them because of their concern for the aquifer in Belmont. They were even told to start carrying protection and to increase the fire insurance on the home they were building simply because they were telling the truth and challenging the status quo. Ms. Berard said they had put the completion of their home on hold until they knew the future of Belmont’s water. They hoped that those who had jeopardized Belmont’s aquifer would finally take responsibility and do the right thing and the County and State would finally do the job of enforcing the laws that were in place to protect the health and safety of the Belmont community. Greg Dann, appearing on his own behalf, said he had been following this for quite a while. He feit Mr. Jones and Ms. Berard were very credible people and there were fairly extensive proofs given. The NACs and NRSs Mr. Jones quoted were all applicable to nis case. Mr. Dann said the Commissioners needed to do their job and address the situation. John Bosta thought Mr. Jones had established that there were violations of the law. He reminded the Commissioners that not only were they the Board for Nye County but they were also the Belmont Town Board. Mr. Bosta felt the Board should support the resolution to send this to the District Attorney to prosecute a nuisance. Ammie Nelson said there was a problem that seemed to be given a blind eye. She hoped the Commissioners would consider this issue not just in Belmont but all over Nye County. Bud Perchetti, Belmont Town Board member, said they all worried about this kind of stuff in Belmont and everywhere else. He did not have any record to prove it, but he advised he was there when the septic was put in the bar in 2005, not in 2008, and it had a good leach field. As far as the people working in the town and graveyard, they did a great job, but Mr. Perchetti said they forgot everybody in the town did the same thing, October 1, 2019 8. 10:00 — For Possible Action — Continued Public Hearing, discussion and deliberation pursuant to NRS 244.360 on a complaint alleging the existence of a nuisance located in Belmont, Nevada, and adopt, amend and adopt, or reject Nye County Resolution No. 2019-31: A Resolution Finding the Existence of Nuisance Conditions; or Nye County Resolution No. 2019-32: A Resolution Finding Nuisance Conditions Do Not Exist-Cont’d. especially his crew. He also advised that his son drilled a well on a small fot without a septic and because it was a drought season somebody at the State said they could do it and gave him the paperwork.

Mr. Jones

said they had done numerous open records requests for any records on the well and no one had provided any information in the four plus years they had been fighting this.

Commissioner Wichman

said Mr. Jones and Ms. Berard had built a house that overlooked Belmont, but that was not their primary residence.

Mr. Jones

said that was correct. Since Mr. Jones provided the March, 2017 version of the SRK report, Commissioner Wichman said she took the time to listen to the April, 2017, Belmont Town Advisory Board meeting. During that meeting the author of that report agreed that he had made assumptions that did not apply and failed to consider vacant land and roads in his acreage calculations. She asked Mr. Jones if SRK provided him with an updated report.

Commissioner Wichman

said in Mr. Jones’ written statement of April 22, 2017, to the Belmont Town Advisory Board it seemed clear he was seeking to encourage the community to be aware of the potential problems and minimize the possible effects in the future. She asked if that was a fair assessment of his intent.

Mr. Jones

said at that time yes.

Commissioner Blundo

asked Mr. Jones if he participated when NDEP and the Bureau of Safe Drinking Water offered a testing of water in Belmont.

Mr. Jones

said he did not since they had not pumped any water out of their well for almost a year and he did not want to possibly skew those results. He did provide NDEP certified copies of their water quality reports.

Commissioner Wichman

described Belmont, the former county seat, where there were six full-time residents in four separate households. Belmont was located near the top of a ridge separating Monitor Valley from Ralston Valley far above the valley floors. The water sources were hard rock fractured zones with no known water aquifer. There were October 1, 2019 8. 10:00 — For Possible Action — Continued Public Hearing, discussion and deliberation pursuant to NRS 244.360 on a complaint alleging the existence of a nuisance located in Belmont, Nevada, and adopt, amend and adopt, or reject Nye County Resolution No. 2019-31: A Resolution Finding the Existence of Nuisance Conditions; or Nye County Resolution No. 2019-32: A Resolution Finding Nuisance Conditions Do Not Exist-Cont’d. no commercial septic tanks installed after August 26, 2008, the delineation date spelled out in the NAC 445A.9704. The only commercial system in Belmont was located at the saloon which had been inspected several times and deemed to be in good operating condition with no signs of failure as described in NAC445A.962. There were also no proposed alterations or expansions of the system which would trigger the system to comply with current codes.

Commissioner Wichman

said with most nuisance complaints that came before the Board it was a struggle to find the balance between protecting private, quiet enjoyment rights of property owners and protecting the health, welfare and safety of the general public, but for this complaint it was much easier. There was no public water system in Belmont, there was no indication of sustained contamination in the private wells tested, and there was no evidence the commercial septic system had failed. Commissioner Wichman also pointed out that Mr. Jones had made accusations of unethical and illegal activities against everyone from Belmont to Carson City, none of which had proven to be accurate.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 2019-32, a resolution finding nuisance conditions did not exist; seconded by Commissioner Strickland.

Commissioner Cox

said she could see the concerns Mr. Jones and Ms. Berard had. She felt Mr. Jones had presented enough evidence to prove a nuisance did exist and if the County did not move forward it could be held guilty of negligence and the Commissioners personally held responsible. !f the resolution finding no nuisance conditions existed was adopted then the Commissioners were telling everyone to just ignore the law and do whatever they wanted to since they owned the property and the health and safety of the residents around them did not exist. Commissioner Cox would prefer to have this investigated by the District Attorney and move forward with his findings. She said she could not support the motion.

Commissioner Cox

did not think it was the County's privilege to keep that money. The towns had a right to have their share of the money and she thought they should be given some kind of deadline as to when that money would be released to them so they could make plans to use it for future growth and development. 27. ADJOURN

Commissioner Koenig

adjourned the meeting. APPROVED this ay day ATTEST: Of Novenber , 2019. Hair fo Nye County Clerk / Deputy roloiia 22 ATTACHMENT 1 Development Agreement Between Northern Nye County Hospital District and JML Holdings THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the “Agreement’) is entered on the day of , 2019 (the “Effective Date"), by and between NORTHERN NYE COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT (the “Hospital District"), and JML HOLDINGS, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company doing business as CENTRAL NEVADA REGIONAL CLINIC (the "Contractor")} (collectively, the “Parties’). Recitals WHEREAS, Hospital District is a county hospital district organized pursuant to NRS Chapter 450 to provide medical services to residents in Northern Nye County, Nevada. WHEREAS, the Hospital District seeks to provide every resident in the Hospital District with affordable, personal and quality healthcare services in an appropriate setting, and to enhance access and address barriers to healthcare services for residents in the Hospital District (collectively, the “Healthcare Issues’). WHEREAS, the Hospital District has developed a strategy to improve the health of its residents by establishing an integrated system of care of medical and behavioral health and ancillary facilities that utilizes both existing and new healthcare providers and resources. WHEREAS, the Hospital District seeks to contract with a private entity with the qualifications, experience, abilities, willingness and financial means to construct, develop, maintain and operate an Urgent Care/Clinic offering urgent care and related medical services to residents of the Hospital District as provided under Chapter 450 of the Nevada Revised Statutes; WHEREAS, the Contractor has the necessary qualifications, experience, abilities and willingness to provide urgent care services to the Hospital District consistent with the Hospita! District's strategy; and NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: Agreemen t 1. incorporation of Recitals. This Agreement consists of all parts of this document, including but not limited to the Recitals stated above and any attached exhibits. 2. Term of Agreement. 2.1. Effective Date. This Agreement will become effective upon execution by both Parties and approval by the Hospital District Board at a duly noticed meeting (the “Effective Date’). 2.2. Length of Term. As outlined in Section 3.1, this Agreement will consist of two (2) separate term timeframes. The initial term of this Agreement will commence on the first day on which the Contractor begins performing the Renown-Related Services (defined below) and will expire six (6) months after the first day on which the Contractor begins providing the Renown- Related Services, or when the Contractor is prepared to perform the Urgent Care/Clinic-Related Services (defined below). The second term of this Agreement will commence on the first day in which the Contractor begins performing the Urgent Care/Clinic-Related Services and will expire ten (10) years after the first day on which the Contractor begins providing the Urgent Care/Clinic- Page 1 of 7 Related Services (the “Commencement Date”), unless terminated earlier by the Parties as provided in this Agreement. 2.3. Meet and Review. The Parties agree to meet as needed following the Commencement Date to review this Agreement and, by mutual consent, renegotiate or modify the scope of services pertaining to this Agreement. 3. Contractor Obligations. 3.1. Medical Services. a. Renown-Related Services: The Contractor shall perform the medical services currently being performed by Renown, on the premises currently occupied by Renown, including, without limitation, urgent care and primary care related services (the “Renown- Related Services’), b. Urgent Care Services. The Contractor will develop and implement an Urgent Care/Clinic (the “Clinic’), that provides medical services as set forth in Exhibit A (the Urgent Care/Clinic-Related Services’). d. Additional Services: The Contractor will develop and implement additional services based upon anticipated demand, utilization, and economic feasibility pursuant to Section 2.3. The Contractor will work collaboratively with the District to add to or reduce the services available as deemed necessary and feasible by the Parties. 3.2. Provision of Medical Services. The Contractor will provide the Medical Services required in Section 3.1 as follows: a. Staffing. The Contractor will staff the Clinic with physicians, physician assistants, and advanced practice registered nurses, as well as necessary support personnel (nurses, medical assistants and administrative personnel) to carry out the activities of the Clinic. The Contractor will ensure that all Clinic staff are qualified by training and experience to perform their job duties in compliance with applicable laws, regulations and professional requirements. All Clinic staff will meet all vaccination requirements applicable to healthcare workers as recommended or required by federal, state and local laws and regulations. The Contractor will consider for employment any qualified and experienced local candidate for appropriate Clinic positions. This provision does not constitute a guarantee of employment for any local candidate. b. Hours of Operation. The Contractor anticipates that operations of the Clinic will be from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., with the potential for on-call, after hours, services. However, the Contractor reserves the right to adjust the anticipated time parameters based upon demand, utilization, and economic feasibility. 3.3. Reimbursement. a. Payor Contracting: The Contractor will use its best efforts to enter into provider contracts with the health insurers in the area served by the Hospital District, as well as Nevada Medicaid (including managed care). If unable to accept any one of those insurance providers, the Contractor will work with the District to remedy the gap. b. Renown-Related Services: The District will compensate the Contractor for the Renown-Related Services in a similar fashion to how the District currently compensates Renown. The purpose of the Renown-Related Services term is to provide time for the Contractor to evaluate demand and utilization in preparation for the Urgent Care/Clinic- Related Services to operate with no, or limited, compensation from the District. Page 2 of 7 c. Urgent Care Services: The District will compensate the Contractor for the Urgent Care/Clinic-Related Services by covering any outstanding costs or deficiencies in order to make the Contractor break even. The Contractor will provide the District with monthly reports with respect to any deficiencies. The ultimate intention of the Parties is to make it so the Contractor is able to function without receiving ongoing assistance from the District. 3.4. Reports to Hospital District. The Contractor will provide financial reports to the District only in conjunction with requests from the Contractor for compensation from the District. 3.5. Clinic Location. The Contractor will construct and maintain the Clinic building in a manner that complies with all federal, state and local codes and reguiations and meets applicable Emergency Preparedness guidelines established by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for comparable facilities. 3.6 Nondiscrimination. The Contractor and each staff member will provide the services required by this Agreement without regard to any individual's race, color, religion, age, sex, national origin, ancestry, marital status, sexual orientation, disability, financial status or participation in any private or governmental payor program or plan, or any other unlawful or impermissible criteria under the laws of the United States, the State of Nevada, or any other governmental authority with jurisdiction over the conduct of the Contractor and its staff. 4. Hospital District Obligations. 4.1. Facilitation and Support. The Hospital District will assist the Contractor in procuring grant funding and advocate on behalf of the Contractor, in a manner consistent with the obligations of the Hospital District imposed by Chapter 450 of the Nevada Revised Statutes, for future developments, improvements, and advances in the delivery of health services by the Contractor within the Hospital District. Specifically, the Hospital District will assist the Contractor in procuring the Certificate of Needs and Critical Point of Care documentation. 4.2. Provision of Housing. \f available, the Hospital District may provide temporary housing for eligible staff employed by or contracted with the Contractor who must commute to Tonopah, Nevada, to provide Medical Services. The Hospital District may provide the housing contemplated by this Section 4.2 in a reasonable manner, including but not limited to shared residential space for rotating shift schedules, individual furnished apartments, or traditional private residential housing. At no time will Hospital District house eligible staff in a commercial or industrial facility. For purposes of this Agreement, “eligible staff’ means qualified staffs, physicians, physician assistants, advanced practice registered nurses, and interns for those positions. Units available will be limited to four distinct and separate quarters, which can be occupied on a rotating basis to accommodate a higher number of commuting professionals, and will include housing, furnishings, and utilities. 4.3. Other Opportunities. The Hospital District will provide no economic incentive or benefit to any other contractors or entities, for the provision of medical services, located in the area served by the Hospital District, without the Contractor's consent, unless the scope of those medical services are outside of the perceived scope of services of the Contractor. The intended goal of the Parties to establish a Clinic, sustainable without any financial assistance from the Hospital District, is premised upon the Clinic’s ability to capture the demand of the residents within the Hospital District. 5. Independent Contractor Status. in performing all work, duties and obligations under this Agreement, the Contractor (including its staff) is acting and performing as an independent contractor of the Hospital District. The Parties do not intend for any provision in this Agreement Page 3 of 7 to be construed as creating an employer/employee relationship, an agency relationship, or a joint venture reiationship. The Contractor has no authority to contract for any liability on behalf of the Hospital District. The Hospital District will not exercise control, direction or supervision over the professional judgment, manner or methods by which the Contractor of its staff perform those services required by this Agreement. The Contractor will be responsible for compensation of all of its employees and contractors, any and all taxes payable on taxable revenue earned from services provided to patients and will timely file any tax returns and pay any taxes due as may be legally required, except for the compensation associated with the Renown-Related Services. 6. Default by Contractor. !f the Contractor ceases to provide the services required by this Agreement prior to the expiration of the term, the Contractor will pay mitigating compensation to the Hospital District in consideration of the necessity and cost to recruit, replace, or make provision for continuing healthcare services in Northern Nye County. If the Hospital District no longer exists at the time of a default by the Contractor, the Contractor will pay the above- mentioned sum to the Town of Tonopah. 7. Default by the Hospital District. if the District ceases to perform pursuant to this Agreement prior to the expiration of the term, the District will pay mitigating compensation to the Contractor. 8. Termination of Agreement. This Agreement may be terminated as follows: 8.1. Without Cause. a. Mutual Consent. The Parties may terminate this Agreement by mutual written consent at any time. b. By One Party: Either Party may terminate this Agreement without cause upon giving the other Party written notice of at least one (1) year (365 days) in accordance with the notice requirements contained in this Agreement. However, if the noticing Party is in default of any of its obligations under this Agreement at the time it serves such notice, the notice will be voidable by the other Party in its sole and absolute discretion. c. By The Contractor: The Contractor may terminate this Agreement without cause upon giving the District written notice of at least thirty (30) days in accordance with the notice requirements contained in this Agreement, if the Contractor has ceased to receive any compensation from the District in relation to the Urgent Care/Clinic-Related Services. 8.2. For Cause. Either party may terminate this Agreement if the other party materially breaches or defaults (collectively “breach”) in the performance of its duties and obligations, and the breaching party fails to correct that breach within thirty (30) days of receipt of written notice describing the breach. Additionally, the party exercising its right to terminate this Agreement may take any other action to enforce its legal and equitable remedies. 9. Hospital District Ownership of Proprietary Information. Any data, documents, or information provided by the Hospital District to the Contractor during the term of this Agreement (“District Materials”) will be and remain the exclusive property of the Hospital District. The Contractor will deliver all District Materials to the Hospital District upon expiration or termination of this Agreement. 10. Public Records. Pursuant to NRS 239.010, information or documents provided by the Contractor to the Hospital District may be subject to public inspection and copying. The Hospital District has a legal obligation to disclose such information or documents unless a particular record is made confidential by law or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. The Contractor may label specific parts of an individual document as a “trade secret” or “confidential” in accordance with NRS 333.333, provided that the Contractor agrees to indemnify and defend the Hospital District Page 4 of 7 for honoring that designation. The failure of the Contractor to label any document as a “trade secret” or “confidential” in accordance with NRS 333.333 that the Hospital District subsequently releases will constitute a complete waiver of any and all claims for damages caused by the release of those records, unless the Contractor notifies and remedies the confidential identification of the information or documents prior to the release or disclosure of those records.

Ms. Motis

claimed that they called “State Water” on April 30, 2015 and spoke with Mr. Joe Pollock. She further claimed they were given permission to drill their wells which are in violation of the health, sanitation and water laws of the State of Nevada. Ms. Motis did not provide any proof of this permission to dril! the illegal wells. A. Commissioner Strickland should know that the only person in the State that can grant a waiver for a water well is the State Engineer. That would have been Mr. Jason King, not

Mr. McGill

Pollock. B. Mr. Joe Pollock does not and did not work for “State Water”. Mr. Pollock was the Deputy Division Administrator for Nevada Division of Public and Behavioral Health. Attached to this statement are the organizational flowcharts for Division of Water Resources and Division of Public and Behavioral Health.

Mr. Pollock

had no authority or jurisdiction over water, wells or the drilling of wells. Included with this statement is an e-mail from Ms. Cindy Ulch, Program Manager for Environmental Health Regulatory and Planning Services (EHS). Ms. Ulch was Mr. Pollock’s deputy. Ms. Ulch stated, in writing, that EHS was unaware of the situation in Belmont and that the well driller and the wells had basically violated the law with their disregard for the requirements set forth in NAC 444, the sanitation laws of the State. Mr. Joe Pollock was copied on this e-mail from Ms. Ulch. According to State law, this would constitute the creation of a nuisance. YO So obviously, Ms. Motis has no evidence that they were granted a waiver from any person of authority and is making fraudulent, mendacious claims of receiving permission to have their wells drilled. Wells that are obviously in violation of the existing State laws. This is clearly creating a nuisance.

Ms. Motis

appears to feel that they and Mr. Dessauer are above the laws and that they should now be rewarded for their failure to abide by the laws. The undocumented and deceitful statements made by Ms. Motis do not lend credibility to anything that she has stated in this public hearing. Without documentation to support her statements, they should be considered false as we have shown her unverified and fabricated claim of receiving permission to have their wells drilled. The wells in question are illegal and have created a nuisance according to State law. The Commissioners are to base their decision on if a nuisance has been created solely upon the evidence provided at this public hearing. Not on the false and misleading hearsay of the respondents. The Commissioners have a legal, morai and ethical responsibility to uphold the laws and to protect the community from the nuisances created by these property owners. The nitrate levels in the waters in Belmont do not establish the nuisance but are a by-product of the illegal actions of the property owners, which creates the nuisance.

Mr. Lacy

on the other hand, decided to argue that because there are nitrate issues in Pahrump, this is somehow justification for the illegal drilling of the wells in Belmont and for the Belmont Saloon to operate illegally. Nitrate levels in Pahrump have no bearing on the creation of a nuisance in Belmont.

Mr. Lacy

decides to cherry pick which portions of the laws he wishes to reference when he claims that he has the authority to grandfather the septic system at the Belmont Saloon. Mr. Lacy does not have this authority.

Mr. Darrell

Lacy holds no licenses or certifications in the State of Nevada to take responsibility for or make decisions on the adequacy of the septic system at the Belmont Saloon. At the September 17, 2019 BoCC meeting, Mr. Lacy stated that the septic system for the Saloon was in existence prior to 2008. A. To the contrary, exhibit 2, page 15 of section 7 of your evidence package shows that Nye County claims to have no records of the septic system at the Belmont Saloon or when it was installed.

Mr. Lacy

stated that the Assessor’s Office added the septic system in 2008. A. Another discrepancy, according to the evidence package, section 7, exhibit 9, page 3. Mr. Lacy there states that the Assessor’s Office does not have any records of when the system was installed and that the 2008 date was added in 2016. This backdating of information conveniently works with Mr. Lacy’s attempt to grandfather this system in.

Mr. Lacy

stated that he could “grandfather” the septic system at the Belmont Saloon, because in his opinion there were no issues. A. Mr. Lacy provided no documentation that he has this statutory authority to override State laws. B. The law Mr. Lacy cited claiming the ability to grandfather the system was NAC 445A.9704, which has the magical date of August 26, 2008 as the cutoff date. No wonder why the Assessor’s Office chose 2008 as the unverified date to backdate the septic system. C. Mr. Lacy claimed that the septic system at the Belmont Saloon was permitted as a General Permit. In the evidence package, section 7, exhibit 6, Mr. Lacy states that this general permit is for new systems and acknowledges that the system at the Belmont Saloon does not have the proper documentation to conform to the application specifications, but he will allow them to apply anyway. Mr. Lacy does not have this authority to waive any requirements for this septic system. D. There is no documentation that a disposal field or leachfield even exists for the septic system at the Belmont Saloon, E. The State told Mr. Lacy that the location of the leachfield would be required for granting of a permit for the system. This is shown in section 7, exhibit 7 of the evidence package. This information is required for any septic system installed anywhere in this State. F. Without this documentation that the disposal field even exists, the system cannot be deemed to be adequately treating the sewage. This would constitute a failure of the system in accordance with the NAC (NAC 445A.962 (2)). G. Again, contrary to Mr. Lacy’s statements on September 17, NAC 445A.9704 prohibits the “grandfathering” of this system if the system fails according to the law. (NAC 445.962). H. As is shown in the evidence package, numerous alterations of the septic system at the Belmont Saloon have occurred in the past few years. These alterations are: i. The addition of (3) RV hookups in 2017. ii. The addition of a bunkhouse in 2017. iii. |The greywater from the Saloon, was to be re-routed into the septic system. This had previously just been dumped onto the ground. This was noted by State Health in its inspection report of September 26, 2017 I. These alterations to the system would preclude it from being grandfathered, in accordance with the law, as Mr. Lacy claimed it could be. (NAC 445A.9704 (1)(c)). J. Per the law that Mr. Lacy claims to be enforcing, (NAC 445A.9704 (2)), the failure of or any alterations to the system, the Saloon owner MUST obtain the services of a design engineer to evaluate the system. Mr. Lacy is not a licensed design engineer in the State of Nevada. This is not an optional activity for the Saloon owner. These requirements are not something that Mr. Lacy or Nye County have the statutory authority to waive or ignore. K. NDEP requires that any additions, modifications and/or repairs to any OSDS system SHALL be designed by a professional engineer certified by the State of Nevada. Documentation of this requirement is attached to this statement. Mr. Lacy is not a professional engineer in this State and cannot waive this requirement. Also attached to this statement is an e-mail between numerous State and County officials and myself, requesting the State provide documentation to support its claim that the septic system at the Belmont saloon was in existence prior to 2008 and capable of being “grandfathered”. The State’s response was to punt on attempting to deal with this situation with any integrity and to just ignore my requests.

Mr. Lacy

has acted illegally in his attempt to “grandfather” the septic system at the Belmont Saloon in. Evidence of all this has been provided to you in your evidence package and as an attachment to this statement.

Mr. Lacy

claimed that there have been numerous conversations with State agencies with respect to the Belmont Saloon. Mr. Lacy did not provide documentation of any of these conversations or communications, to be submitted as evidence for this public hearing. We do not know what was said to these State agencies and what their response was. Mr. Lacy’s statements are all hearsay, not evidence.

Mr. Lacy

does not have the statutory authority to take the actions he has, nor does Nye County.

Mr. Lacy’s

illegal actions have put Nye County in a position of liability to be held responsible for the resulting contamination of the water aquifer in Belmont from the undocumented, non- conforming and illegal! septic system and water well at the Belmont Saloon. Why does Commissioner Strickland ask Mr. Lacy’s opinion if the actions are legal? Instead, she should ask the County DA, here in this public hearing, if Mr. Lacy’s actions are legal? Why is the Belmont Saloon allowed to operate outside of the laws that everyone else is required to follow and abide by? Why do Nye County employees repeatedly violate the laws to allow this business to continue to operate, instead of attempting to get this business in conformance with the laws? Why is there a double standard when it comes to the enforcement of and conformance with the laws of this State and County when it is the friends of some Commissioners instead of their political rivals and adversaries. The laws are to be applied equally to all persons.

Commissioner Wichman

was very clear in her speech of August 7, 2018, that she felt Mr. Dennis Hof was required to know and abide by all the laws. Also, that the Commissioners were abide by the letter of the law. Commissioner Koenig was supportive of those statements and positions at that time, he should be in favor of upholding the laws now. The County Commissioners are to be the fair and impartial party for this public hearing. We implore the County Commissioners to: 1. Cease these illegal actions by County employees. 2. Protect the health and safety of the community of Belmont. 3. Protect the waters in Belmont from contamination and degradation due to the illegal actions of the property owners listed in the nuisance complaint, 4. To rule that these persons have created a nuisance due to the evidence provided to you. Thank you. I will attempt to answer any questions you may have. Division of Water Resources Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Jrganization Chart F¥2014 - Updated April 13. 2015 Adasory Bosra [ I 1 Depry Admuvivalor Deputy Aceranentr ator Opty Adrrarusiaior Rick Felling Swan Joseph-Tryer Kebin Hickenbottom Las Vegas Branch Office Adwidlcatlons Dam Safety Office {OCHRE Hydrology Hésring Sequien Procetping Section Water Rights Tile Section Oriting Regularion and Waier Planning Eine Geanch Flscat Services Admin Seecites Hotormation Technology I i L H I J I [ J i I Supenmsor Profetuonal Chet, Hyar s Chet, Heanny § Superetor Profenoral Manage 2 Prolespona e Tech 4 Engren 7 ory Adam Suttiven Keston Geddes Kark€enmier ‘Mack Shepylan Tien Woe Eddy Quaglert gona Sui I I i I I I I I I J Wiel Suparvrior ‘Myteotogt un pened Profezuonal Engnoet Enpereeng Tecweran t Praleasonal Engunect Prate Water Ct Téchrecat 1 Agren ALLslan 2 1 Proline 3 Ostives Brantley Jon Benedict meee Wilton Mike Randall Kathryn Streeter ‘Hamiton Reed Nike Andenon Lantion Haeris Rota Mayhak Jenga Waonite Vacant I [ I I ] I I t I Veet Supervace Ware Resource Speoehal 2 Water Resource Specumst Z Profesuonat Engencer oe Supenetor acy Geter Man Billors Maen Beulner ‘vacant ‘Aprit Hol: 3 4 ‘State Frocdplan Manegar Witter Conmiinneonat Acme Aspuiand 3 Adrun Anaiant } 0 Protetsonal 2 Rab Palmer Steve DelSoldaty Shaneon Wenn Sve Githerl Ant blige ] _I i j J [ I I [ Wel Superson ‘Wet Saperaser Aaderen ALISON Z Wun Retource Spanasst 2 Enguneenng Techmama < Pine (ngnes Slatt | Associate Degeerer Weer Racource Speci | Aaa ASH D Wnt Supernsor Stree Maninay osm Temple duanlta Mordhorst Shannon McDaniel Guar Bekswrell Katherine Mellon ‘Vacont Ryle Wott Sue Sox Samual Moopnich f { I I I [ [ I Wen Supernsor 1 Tanna 5 Wate Resource Specraiet 2 Enpnsenng Teehetasts 3 ‘ware Resource Specianst ? Protestonal Engneer Agen. A Su sIEe 3 Adan Asner 3 Christ Cooper Shawn Rucdy ‘Steve Sheti Mati Hein Men Hattey Ken Davie Sunshine Morgan Cenna Lama i I { I [ I [ Wee Superesor Well Sugernsar winter Resourta Spocupat 2 Engeneonng Techrecian 3 Ergreensg Terheagan $ Water Resouces Specs? ‘Cary Wicgand Bunny Souza Menaa Matt Dan Zampero Tom Fyeatic Luke Opperman Aten Avusiend 7 Catherine Oepilte I I I I I T Astod Asati 2 Wane Resource Specraval 2 ‘Veet Supatnnet Wel Superwior Water Resourca Spociaial | Agen Aayilart 2 Purite Wiliams Reed Cozens Shawnee Clayzon dake Echeverria tan Kone Amanita Ciminekl I I i Ware Resource Gesowty 8 Supeteaor Ware @evarce Soc | Aone Mspaute 2 Chels Thorson amanda Brownlee Oun Randies Cennn Ramirez i I = Wars Resoures Spoceain + Water Revouie Specusal 7 Agmun Aastant 2 Colette Easier an Taytor ‘Sean Crristensen ff I al Wipiet Fakeuce Specurbal 1 Wiest Resowtce Specubr 3 Karna Aten 1 Enc Sthideh Tony Eng ‘Brenda McCarty } 1 Wate Retource Specks! 2 Engneenny Teche 4 Lynette Jeringor Gaau Parker Well Superwior Engearinng Titentegue Kerry Garcia Vatant k nistrator(U) O/FTEICC Environmental Health Program _ October, 2016) Barrett Evans Environmental Health Specialist 4, Gr. 38 3194/0013/1.0 FTE/CG Teresa Hayes Public Health Rating & Survey Officer, Gr. 37, 3194/0011/4.0 FTE/CC se e Environmenta! Health Specialist 3, Gr. 36 {Underfill, Env. Health Specialist 1, Gr. 34) 3194/0003/4.0 FTE/CC Vacant Les (Michael) Oravetz Environmental Health Specialist 3, Gr. 36 Environmental Health Specialist 2, Gr. 34 3194/0055/1,.0 FTE/EK 3194/0005/1.0 FTE/EK Marlea Stout Environmental Health Specialist 1, Gr. 32 2 3194/0038/1.0 FTE/FA Katherine Doty Environmental Health Specialist 3, Gr. 36 3194/0006/1.0 FTEIFA Paul Gohen Environmental Health Specialist 3, Gr, 36 3194/0009/1.0 FTE/CC Ellen Kunz Environmental Health Specialist 3, Gr, 36 3194/0004/1.0 FTEAVI Mark Ports Bob Stula¢ . Environmental Health Spectalist 3, Gr. 36 Environmental Health Specialist 3, Gr. 36 underfill Grade 32) 3194/0075/1.0 FTE/CS ( Brandon Vickery —~S«Y WhitnieTaylor Environmental Health Specialist 3, Gr. 36 Environmental Heaith Specialist 3, Gr. 36 {underfill, Env. Health Spec 2, Gr 32) 3194/0100/1.0 FTE/LV 3194/0082/1.0 FIE/EL Joseph Roller Environmental Health Specialist 1, Gr. 36 3194/0002/4,.0 FTE/CG Vacant Environmental Health Specialist 1, Gr. 36 3194/0032 .0 FTE/CC Jamie Kitchens Administrative Assistant 2, Gr. 25 3194/0059/1.0 FTE/CC Karla Alttizer Administrative Assistant 1, Gr. 23 3194/0072/0.51 FTE/CC Connie Foraman Administrative Assistant 1, Gr. 23 3194/0044/1.0 FTE/LV Loretta George Administrative Assistant 4, Gr. 23 (CHN) 3224/0072/0.51 FTEANI f Cygy Phinney, Adminigtrajor A-1LA~1 bo Date 9/20/2018 Gabbartandwoods.com Mail - Open records request - Public Health s (, @M a [ | Neal Jones <neal@gabbartandwoods.com> by Caourghe Open records request - Public Health Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 2:09 PM To: Neal Jones <neal@gabbartandwoods.com> Cc: “Barrett M. Evans" <bevans@heaith.nv.gov>, "Joe L. Pollock" <JPOLLOCK@health.nv.gov>, Lindsey Doolittle <Idoolittle@health.nv.gov>, Teresa Hayes <thayes@health.nv.gov> Good Day Mr. Jones — The email that | recollect sending to Mr. Wilson has not been found. Despite that, let me summarize the situation in Belmont from my standpoint and clarify the approach to this issue that the EHS (Environmental Health Services) Program would suggest as a remedy. The situation as | know it is that a quasi-municipal or other community water system existed in Belmont for the residents there. The system quit producing an 1 | also explained that typically a plot plan is submitted for development of residential lots in advance of any ISDS or well installation and that during that process the setbacks, lot sizes, residential foot print, water source, and back up areas for ISDS alternative fields are all identified so that wells are not installed on top of ISDS’s which is apparently the situation created by the well driller in Belmont. Shortly after the conversation with Mr. Wilson, Barrett Evans of EHS met with several Water Resources Division staff in person and clarified the process of how to develop a lot and install an ISDS to them which included an explanation of the requirements under NAC Chapter 444. They also discussed how to work more collaboratively between the two agencies to improve communication with the end goal being to keep this situation in Belmont from recurring in other areas of the state. EHS did discuss as well a strategy to deal with septic failures on undersized lots in Belmont. The consensus was that each failure situation would be dealt with individually. | had a discussion with Deputy Administrator Joe Pollock about the situation as it exists now in Belmont. He suggests that Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) and Division of Water Resources work together to define the boundaries of the hydrologic basin in the Belmont area, count the number of residents that presumably have an ISDS, and calculate the septic density. This is the same type of study that was inferred by Mai Lin of NDEP, but ! can assure you that no such study has yet to be conducted to my knowledge. The point of this density study would be to ensure that the residential septic density is not exceeded. After such determination, EHS would support a blanket variance before the State Board of Health for the existing residents living in the basin. Any new residential lot development in Belmont after a variance would be required to fully comply with all applicable provisions. It's notable that today Nye County Planning called Barrett Evans to inquire about the approval of an under sized lot in Belmont. Barrett Evans communicated in writing to Nye County Planning that this approval was not acceptable. In closing let me state for the record that it is not the intention of EHS to mandate that the owners of undersized lots in Belmont that have wells and ISDS installations be forced to abandon those properties or do away with any improvements on those properties. This is viewed as a unique situation that a State Board of Health variance might be helpful in dealing https://mail.google.com/mail/u/07ik=2994ce364b8 view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A 154 79290228576977 50&simpl=msg-f%3A15479290228... 1/3 9/20/2019 Gabbartandwoods, com Mail - Open records request - Public Health with. The variance could potentially serve as a place marker for strategies for dealing with existing undersized lots with the clear understanding that ali new development be done in full compliance with all applicable codes, rules and laws. | hope this clarifies the position of EHS. If you have questions, please contact Barrett Evans at 75-687-7539. Thank you. Cindy L. Ulich [Quoted text hidden] {Quoted text hidden] [Quoted text hidden] [Quoted text hidden] [Quoted text hidden} [Quoted text hidden] (Quoted text hidden] [Quoted text hidden} [Quoted text hidden) _» http: //gabbartandwoods.com/assets/logo.gif 1680 Montclair, Suite B Reno, Nevada 89509 775-323-6633 Fax 775-323-6716 » http//gabbartandwoods.com/assets/logo. gif 1680 Montclair, Suite B Reno, Nevada 89509 775-323-6633 Fax 775-323-6716 > Nttp://gabbartandwoods.com/assets/logo. gif 1680 Montclair, Suite B Reno, Nevada 89509 775-323-6633 Fax 775-323-6716 hitos mail aanale com/mailfu/07ik=2994ce364b&8view=ot&search=all&oermmsaid=msa-f%43A1 547 929022857697 7508simol=msa-f%3A 15479290228... 2/3 From: Bruce Holmoren To: My-Linh Nouyen; Alexander Mayorga; Jacob Echeverria Subject: FW: FW: Belmont water sample results Date: Monday, June 12, 2017 8:09:13 AM Attachments: Parcel 004-535-30 Septic System. odf Response from Mr. Jones. Reply suggestions are welcome, From: Neal Jones [mailto:njones14791@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 9:09 PM To: Bruce Holmgren <bholmgre@ndep.nv.gov> Ce: Oscar <ohwichman@gmail.com>; Darrell Lacy <llacy@co.nye.nv.us>; Jason King <jking@water.nv.gov>; Jennifer Carr <jcarr@ndep.nv.gov>; philip@kreitieinlaw.com; jonjreno@aol.com; dschinhofen@co.nye.nv.us; lawichman@gmail.com; pwebster@co.nye.nv.us; davidtl147@gmail.com; gkrause@nyecountywaterdistrict.net; Tim Donahoe <tdonahoe@srk.com>; Bradley Crowell <bcrowell@dcnr.nv.gov> Subject: Re: FW: Belmont water sample results

Mr. Holmgren

, Thank you for your response to my questions. Please see below for (in red) some additional questions and requests for clarity from your comments. What is the progress of NDEP in regards to the septic density issue that was raised in SRK's report that was submitted and delivered to Director Crowell's on April 11, 2017? What is NDEP doing about this? Please provide a status report. There is another meeting of the Belmont Town Advisory Board on June 24, 2017. The subject of the wells and water issues was an agenda item at this Board's last meeting on April 22, 2017. I have asked the Board to maintain the subject of the wells and water issues in Belmont as an agenda item, under old business, and will provide to the Town Board any and all information that the State shares with me. There will be total transparency of all information and actions on our side of these issues. Thank you, Neal Jones, P.E. On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Bruce Holmgren <bholmgre@ndep.ny.goy> wrote:

Mr. Jones

, Responses to your 06/01/17 emailed questions are provided below. if you have any further questions regarding these matters, please contact me. Sincerely, Bruce Holmgren Sruce Holmgren, PE, Chief Bureau of Water Pollution Control Nevada Division of Environmental Protection 901 South Stewart Street, Sulte 4001 Carson City, NV 89701 Pp: 775.687.9433 f: 775.687.4684 NDEP "™ From: Neal Jones [mailto:njones14791@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2017 11:25 AM To: Jennifer Carr <jcarp@ndep.nv.gov> Ce: Bruce Holmgren <pholmere@ndep.nv.gov>; Oscar <phwichman@gmail.com>; lacy@co.nve.nv.us; dschinhofen@co nye.nv.us; Jawichman@email.com; Pam Webster <pwebster@co,nye.nv.us>; David Hall <davidt1147@gmailcom>; Geri Krause <gkrause @pyecountywaterdistrict.net>; Tim Donahoe <tdonahoe@erk. com>; Jason King <jking@water.nv.gov>; philip@kreitleinlaw.com; jbnjreno@aol. com Subject: Re: Belmont water sample results Thank you Jennifer. A few questions regarding these activities and the people involved. 1) Who is the design professional in change of the examination, establishment and corrections to the septic system at the Belmont Saloon? Per NAC 445A.9704, an on-site sewage disposal system in operation before 08/26/08 may continue to operate until the system fails, groundwater is affected by the system, expansion or alteration of the system is proposed, or a community sewerage system is available. This “grandfathering” allowed existing OSDSs that may not meet the 08/26/08 regulations to continue to operate. Since it has not been determined that the Belmont Saloon OSDS has failed or affected groundwater and is not proposed for expansion or alteration, a design professional has not been required. Please provide documentation to show the septic system at the Belmont Saloon was in operation prior to August 26, 2008. According to Nye County records (attached) the septic system at the Belmont Saloon was installed in 2008. NAC 444.8302 requires commercial septic systems to submit plans for review to the Division of Environmental Protection of the State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. This requirement has been on the books since 1998. The records of Nye County also show that a "bunkhouse" was added to this property in 2017. The added load to the existing on-site sewage disposal system would constitute an alteration to the system, which by NAC 445A .9704(1)(c} would exempt this system from the "protections" that you have stated and would necessitate the services of a design engineer. Does State law allow multiple sewage sources to be applied to at single on-site sewage disposal system? What documentation exists to show that this alteration to the system conformed to NAC 445A.9608 - 9614? Please provide all documentation regarding this on-site sewage disposal system and its design, construction, alterations and the design professional(s) responsible for it. Have the waters (illegal well and spring) of the saloon been tested for possible contamination? How can the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection claim that an on-site sewage disposal system that is on a 1/3 acre parcel, that serves a bar, bunkhouse and RV (all on the same 1/3 acre) and has an illegal well, could not be a possible threat to the public health by inadequately treating sewage or by creating the potential for direct or indirect contact between the sewage and the public and the contamination of the groundwater? This would constitute "a failure" of the system, in accordance with NAC 445A962(2). What information, mapping, etc. is in possession of NDEP that shows that this on-site sewage disposal system is not a public health hazard? Additionally, two adjacent wells are within the State mandated 100 foot separation zone of the on-site sewage disposal system of the Belmont Saloon. Please provide the documentation used by NDEP to show how you established that there is no threat to the public health and that Goal | 1, Transparency, informing the public about environmental issues of concern; and the mission and purpose of NDEP of “acting with integrity” are being upheld. 2) Since it has been clearly established by the State that the well at the Belmont Saloon does not exist (AV 188) or if it does exist, there is no legal water right associated with this well, what is the State doing about this illegal well? Between July 2016, when NDWR looked into the water source question and April 2017 when NDEP “determined that [the Belmont Saloon] private well is not a public water system (PWS) at this time,” circumstances surrounding the Saloon water supply may have changed. DCNR is following up on this question. Please refer to my Request to Investigate Alleged Violation (RLAV, to be referred to as AV- 188), attached. In the response from Nevada Division of Water Resources, the owner of the Belmont Saloon states that there is no well on the property of the Belmont Saloon, parcel 004-535-30. This fact was corroborated by Nevada Division of Water Resources (please see page 3 of AV-188) and in the field investigation performed by NDWR on July 19, 2016. Furthermore, in Mr. Thomas C. Pyeatte Jr's response to a complaint that I filed against him with the State Board of Engineers and Land Surveyors, he states "a well was never drilled on the property; this was confirmed by Division staff as indicated in the field investigation memorandum dated July 19, 2016." (page 4) Mr. Pyeatte further states "there is no well on APN 005-535-30..." (the incorrect parcel number is as listed in Mr. Pyeatte's response, attached). My response to Water Resources "notice", dated August 12, 2016, is also attached to this e-mail. Since it has been clearly established, not by me, but by Nevada Division of Water Resources, that there is no legal well and no legal water right associated with the well that the saloon owner now admits exists on the property of the Belmont Saloon, existing State law (NAC 534.427) gives very clear direction as to what is to occur with this well. The Belmont Saloon is a commercial! establishment, the well on this property is required to have a legal water right associated with it. It is not a "private well”. 3) Since Oz repeatedly told us at the meeting of the Belmont Town Advisory Board on April 22, 2017 that we “don't have a dog in this fight", and that we should not be involved: a) As Director Crowell asked in the May 17, 2017 meeting; who is Oz? 1) He does not own property in Belmont. 2) He does not live in Belmont. 3) He does not work for Nye County. 4) He does not work for the State of Nevada. b) As General Manager of the Nye County Water Board (if that still exists), there is no jurisdiction or authority of this body over wells and septic systems in Belmont. c) Is Oz now a consultant for the State or Nye County? d) What is his official position related to Belmont and the water, health and safety concerns we have brought up?

Mr. Wichman

and Mr. Lacy have assisted NDEP in various capacities over the years. NDEP and the Nye County residents mutually benefit from this longstanding relationship. As you are aware, Oscar Wichman is the General Manager of the Nye County Water District. The NCWD website includes information regarding the District formation, purpose and goals. Please contact Dave Hall, NCWD Chair, or Mr. Wichman for additional information regarding the jurisdiction and authority of the NCWD. [am very well aware of who Mr. Oscar (Oz) Wichman is. In October of 2015, after the illegal wells had been drilled in Belmont, I had an opportunity to seek Mr. Wichman's counsel on this subject. I would have only done this if I valued and respected the opinions of Mr. Wichman and the man himself. | assumed that Oz was aware of the situation regarding the wells in Belmont, it is a small community, none the less I phrased the conversation as a hypothetical situation, so as not to use any names of the people in Belmont. My question to Oz was simple, “should we be concerned with the wells that were drilled on 1/3 acre parcels that have existing septic systems?" His answer was also simple, "Yes, we should be concerned." My question to the State still stands: "What is Mr. Wichman’s official position related to Belmont and the water, health and safety concerns we have brought up?" This is pretty much the same question Director Crowell had in the May 17, 2017 meeting. 4) As we all know, the waters of the State of Nevada belong to the people of the State of Nevada. a) Since the septic system at the Belmont Saloon is never going to meet the criteria for a commercial septic system (without some very "special considerations") and this system will never be a minimum of 100 feet from the illegal well on this property or the well placed on the adjacent property (parcel 004-335-22) the possibility of this system contaminating our waters is very real. Whatever work is being done by Nye County in conjunction with BWPC needs to be fully shared with the community of Belmont, before anything is approved by anybody. All information regarding these activities needs to be and remain open, clear and transparent for everybody in the Community of Belmont. As a pre-08/26/08 OSDS, the setback requirements of the current regulations do not apply to this system. The separation requirements (NAC 444.792(2)) between wells and the perimeter of the components of any on-site sewage disposal system have been on the books since at least 1972. For Nevada Division of Environmental Protection to try and claim that because some law was added in 2007, that this very critical separation is not required to be maintained. It does not sound, to me, that NDEP is very concerned with following their own stated Agency Goals (GOAL 2, Clean Water. Protect the waters of the state from the discharge of pollutants and contaminates to protect the groundwater...) NDEP will continue utilize local resources to the maximum extent possible. In Belmont, we have been assisted by NC WD and Nye County. Mr. Wichman has had wells sampled by a licensed County water operator and analyzed at a State-certified lab for Belmont residents who volunteered to participate in this effort. Sources of public or private funds for a second round of private well sampling in 2017 to inform the community of local groundwater quality should be discussed. The analytical data received to date has been shared. 5} Please keep all lines of communication open with the community of Belmont, so that we can be assured that our waters are being protected from contamination and degradation, with the utmost concern and oversight. DCNR will continue to keep all lines of communication open with the community of Belmont. To facilitate this effort, Belmont residents that may be interested in this matter are encouraged to notify me of their interest at bholmgre(@nden.ny.gov to be added to a project specific mailing list that will be maintained by BWPC. Thank you. 6) Once the excessive level of nitrates was established in Mr. Numa Dessauer's well by Nye County Public Works, Oz asked for direction from NDEP on what to tell Mr. Dessauer regarding this information. Since this contamination may soon affect other wells or sources of water in Belmont, what was NDEP's response to this request? What was told to this well owner regarding these levels of nitrates is his wel! that he had drilled in the middle of his septic system? When NDEP received the analytical data for the “Belmont Domestic Well @ Numa’s,” NDEP communicated with the private well owner through Mr. Wichman. Exactly, what information / communication was shared with the private well owner through Mr. Wichman? NDEP would provide the following as standard advice to any private residence with nitrate above. or approaching. the public water system regulatory standard of 10 mg/L: Nitrates in drinking water over 10 mg/L can pose a heaith risk to infants. Water with this level of nitrates should not be given to infants, and formula should not be made with the water. Women in the household who are pregnant should consider drinking bottled water, AS a precaution, a private well owner could follow this advice when nitrates are approaching 10 mg/L. due to the general lack of sampling frequency by private well owners. The homeowner should consider a program of routine monitoring, at least annually, until the source water quality is understood, The NDEP website at http://ndep.nv.gow/bsdw/wells.htm has information for private well owners from UNR Cooperative Extension. 7) Once the excessive level of nitrates was established in Mr. Numa Dressauer's well by Nye County Public Works, I asked if the State had any concerns regarding this information. I have never received any type of response to my question. ls the State of Nevada concerned with excessive levels of nitrates in a 2 year-old well that was drilled illegally? See response to question 6. My question still stands; “is the State concerned with the excessive levels of nitrates in a 2-year old well that was drilled illegally?” 8) At the meeting on May 17, 2017 you had mentioned a "report" that NDEP had done regarding the public water system in Belmont, and that you were "still looking" for this report. What is the status of this report? | had asked then for a copy of this report. Reportedly, an evaluation of the Belmont water system had been conducted by the State Health Department in the mid-1990s. Upon further search, such a document could not be located. Records related to a “Belmont TP” in Clark County appear to have been mistaken for Belmont, NV. Ms. Carr was quite clear in the meeting of May 17, 2017, that the report she referenced was about Belmont (Nye County) and was directly related to the number of connections that exist at the Belmont spring and that this report proved there was no public water system in Belmont. Can you piease provide us with a copy of this other report that would show how this was misconstrued to be applied to Belmont (in Nye County)? Attached is the 2017 information documenting that Dirty Dick’s Belmont Saloon is not a public water system. At no time has anyone claimed that the water at the Belmont Saloon constituted a "public water system" (PWS). The claim has been that the existing water distribution system (described as such in vested water right V-04546, held by Nevada Division of Conservation and Natural Resources) in Belmont, Nye County, Nevada, coming from the Belmont spring would constitute a PWS due to the 16 vested water right that are on file in the State Engineers office and the claim in the proofs of these vested rights that there exists a distribution system of the waters of the Be!mont spring that serves at least 20 parcels, for irrigation, domestic and quasi-municipal uses. The Belmont Saloon would be part of this PWS and is served with water from the Belmont spring for quasi-municipal and domestic purposes through Proof of Appropriation ¥V-04533. Nevada Division of Water Resources has set the precedent that since the Belmont Saloon is supplied with water under Proof of Appropriation V-04533 and there exists an un-adjudicated claim of vested right appurtenant to that parcel (APN 004-535-30) solely through the existence of V-04533. Therefore, all other claims; V-04528 - V-04541 and V-04544, submitted at the same time (en-masse) and making the exact same claims should be treated equally as is claim V-04533. This would meet the requirements for a public water system as is stated in NRS 445A.235. What documentation does NDEP, NDWR and/or NDCNR have that questions the validity of these claims or shows that any or all of these claims were based upon false information? What documentation existed to show that these claims for vested rights to the waters of the Belmont spring were false at the time that the illegal welis were drilled in Belmont? Please provide this documentation. So some of the very same people who claimed that this system existed (since 1867) so that they could obtain these rights to the waters of the Belmont spring are now claiming that this system does not exist? Again, we have asked to be part of all communications regarding the protection of the waters in Belmont. The community of Belmont needs to be made aware of the activities that are occurring that may have an affect on the quality of our waters. Any information that you can share with us regarding what the State of Nevada and/or Nye County is doing to protect our waters from contamination and degradation, as well as protecting the health and safety of the community would be appreciated. All this information will be shared with the community of Belmont. Thank you. Neal Jones, P.E. On Thu, Jun 1, 2047 at 8:50 AM, Jennifer Carr <jcarr/@ndep.ny.goy> wrote: Good morning, Neal. I had a phone conference with Oz and Darrell. We are working on a date in June for the NDEP to visit Belmont and sample the spring. As soon as we have a date established, | will let you know. The BWPC continues to work with Darrell and the Saloon on oversight of the commercial septic system. Sincerely, Jennifer Carr Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone socneen Original message -------- From: Neal Jones <pjones1479 |(@gmail.com> Date: 06/01/2017 6:00 AM (GMT-08:00) To: Jennifer Carr <jcarr@ndep.ny.gov> Cc: Bruce Holmgren <bholmere@ndep.nv.gov>, Oscar <ghwichman@gmail.com>, llacy(@co.nye.ny.us, dschinhofen@co.nye.nv.us, lawichman@email.com, Pam Webster < <pwebster@co,nye.nv.us>, David Hall <davidtl147@gmail.com>, Geri Krause <gkrause(@nyecountywaterdistrict.net>, Tim Donahoe <tdonahoe@srk.com>, Jason King <jking@water.ny.gov>, philip@kreitleinlaw.com, ‘jbnireno@aol.com Subject: Re: Belmont water sample results All As was discussed in the meeting with Director Crowell on May 17, 2017, | was asked to back off for a couple of weeks to allow the State to coordinate and work with Nye County to address the water issues in Belmont. Two weeks have passed and no information has been shared with us regarding any actions taken or any progress made by either the State or Nye County. We have asked in the past to be included in all conversations and communications regarding the actions taken regarding the waters in Belmont, the potential contamination thereof and the actions being taken to establish and rectify the existing conditions and necessary corrections taken to protect our waters from becoming contaminated. Can we please get a current update as to the situation in Belmont; was actions have been taken, are planned to be taken and where we sit with the mapping and collection of data, etc. that has occurred and is planned on being done? Thank you. Neal Jones, P.E. STATE OF NEVADA iin civtons, covernor Oe TROUMENTAL PROTECTION Department of Conservation & Natural Resources Alten Biaggi, Director proseaing tre Fula fersesnsravons DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Leo M. Drozdoff, RE., Administrator May 8, 2009 Onsite Sewage Disposal Systems Program New General Permit: GNEVOSDS09 Commercial Septic Program Subject: New Onsite Sewage Disposal System (OSDS) General Permit: GNEVOSDS09 The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) is currently operating its commercial septic system program (OSDS program) under general permit: GU9201-40xxx; this permit will expire on July 22", 2009. As a result, NDEP will be issuing a new general permit to govern its Onsite Sewage Disposal Systems (OSDS) program for the next five (5) years; this permit will be issued under the denomination: GNEVOSDS09. Permitted facilities that are currently operating under the general commercial septic permit GU9201- 40xxx will be transferred to this new permit GNEVOSDS09. General permit fees remain the same. A copy of this permit will be placed at the following web link: http://ndep.nv.gov/bwpc/bwpc01.htm Copies of this permit are also available upon request by contacting Alexi Lanza, P.E. Bureau of Water Pollution Control at (775) 687-9468, or at alanza@ndep.nv.gov. Please note that this general permit (GNEVOSDS09) is for the treatment & disposal of domestic sewage only; industrial waste disposal is strictly prohibited. In the case of emergency repairs, the responsible party shall notify the NDEP within one (1) business day, and in writing in five (5) business days of the reason for repairs and actions taken. If you have any questions about this new permit or the Nevada OSDS program, please contact me at (775) 687-9468. Respectfully; Abe dE Alexi Lanza, P. E. Permits Branch - Bureau of Water Pollution Control Nevada Division of Environmental Protection ATTACHMENT 3 Agenda Item #8 Statement: BoCC Meeting October 1, 2019 My name is Janice Berard. | request that this statement be placed in the minutes of this meeting. In the year 2000, Neal Jones and | purchased property in Belmont, NV with the intentions of building a home and eventually living there permanently. Meanwhile we were residing in Reno, working full time jobs and taking care of family. Our weekends were spent traveling, a 9 hour round trip to Belmont, to work on the construction of our home, as well as socializing with Belmont friends and volunteering much of our time to the community. We were enamored by the place, not only for its natural beauty and history, but what appeared to be a town that had a great sense of community. Over time the natural beauty and history continued to impress us. The sense of community not so much. For what we discovered, was a dark side of Belmont that in many ways has broken our hearts. Since Neal and | began our journey in protecting the waters of Belmont, there have been repeated attacks against our character, insinuations that we are un- neighborly and that we do not care about the town. At the BoCC meeting on September 17, 2019, our efforts were criticized by Ms. Motis who thought it okay to drill a well on her 1/3 acre property, despite it being too close to her septic system. Apparently Ms. Motis’ did not take into account how these actions threatened not only her own water quality, but her neighbors and the community's as well. What is especially interesting is that the Motis’ appeared to have also encouraged their neighbor, Mr. Dessauer to do the same. In 2015, her husband Rick Motis asked Neal if we would sell our adjacent property to Mr. Dessauer, so that he could then have enough acreage to legally drill a well on his 1/3 acre parcel. We did not agree to sell for reasons that | will discuss shortly. Point is, the Motis’ &

Mr. Dessauer

were well aware that a one acre parcel was required to house both a legal well and septic system. Like the Motis’, Mr. Dessauer chose to ignore this aspect of the law and drilled a well on his less than one acre parcel anyway. So much for Mr. Dessauer’s statement, at the last BoCC meeting, that he drilled his well in “good faith” and believed he was following the law. It also appears that Ms. Motis’ real message was, for us to mind our own business, quit “harassing” her and allow her to do as she darn weil pleased, with no regards to the resulting damage. Thus | would like to state that what has been said about Neal and | over the past several years is not only hurtful, but also untrue. We did participate heavily in the Belmont community, but it never was to simply make ourselves look good as Ms. Motis suggested. We did it because we enjoyed the work, wanted to protect Belmont and cared about what would happened to it in the future. So | do intend to mention what Neal and | have done to show how much we cared. Some of the projects that | wil! mention can be found in our evidence binder in section 10. 1. From 2008 to 2014: | was a dedicated member of the Belmont Town Advisory Board (BTAB), rarely missing a meeting despite living in Reno. | was active in many community projects especially in the idea and planning stages. My partner, Neal Jones also attended these meetings regularly. 2. Together we did extensive cleanup and restoration of the historic Belmont Cemetery. We re-built and installed several of the cemetery ‘cribs’, with the assistance of the Tonopah Conservation Camp and Nye County. Neal also took great efforts in surveying the cemetery, since no such information existed. He then voluntarily drew a map which identified all the burial plots; followed by the building of a kiosk to house this map. 3. From 2011 to 2012: | was a Board member of the Friends of the Belmont Courthouse (FOTBCH). | was involved in historical research, photography of the building, design of promotional material and the search for individuals qualified to do historical preservation work. | also went through a grant writing program with Truckee Meadows Community College so | could write grants for restoration funding.

Mr. Jones

was also involved in supporting the FOTBCH. He offered his construction and engineering expertise by working with the FOTBCH, the Nevada State Park Service & Nye County in the replacement of the Courthouse roof. He drew up detailed drawings of the Courthouse as well as reported on the building’s structural damage. Neal and | also purchased a membership becoming the organization’s 2™ lifetime members. 4. Neal voluntarily drew up location maps of all the properties in Belmont for the Nevada Division of Forestry in case of fire or medical emergencies. 5. We both trained as volunteers for the Belmont Fire Department as well as taking CPR instruction. We also assisted in many of the activities during the Belmont July 4" and Labor Day celebrations. 6. Neal also drew building plans for two of his Belmont neighbors, one a complete house, the other a re-modeling addition. He frequently spent his time helping many of our neighbors with their home improvement projects, as well as frequently delivering food and supplies from Reno to the owners of the Belmont B & B. Over time we parted with the BTAB & FOTBCH for we were beginning to feel uncomfortable with some of the disturbing activities that we were witnessing. We had no interest in participating in anything that was possibly illegal or unethical. Our concerns came into sharp focus when two of our Belmont neighbors approached Neal, questioning the illegal well drilling that was being done in Belmont in 2015. Those conversations proved, without a doubt, that things in Belmont were not as they seemed. So we began to back off with our volunteer work. 1. We no longer wanted to work with those who chose to discuss Belmont’s important issues behind closed doors rather than openly at the Town Advisory Board meetings? 2. We no longer wanted to participate with individuals who preferred to operate under the premise that it is better to ask forgiveness rather than permission? 3. We no longer felt inspired to offer our time, money and support to those who felt it necessary to resort to name calling, hostility and intimidation when you did not agree with them. 4. We no longer wanted to be told to be quiet about the questionable behavior that we were witnessing by those who supposedly represented us. 5. We no longer cared to support individuals that defended Rosenlund Drilling who knowingly conducted illegal well drilling that jeopardized our entire community? 6. We no longer wanted to associate with those who thought it was perfectly okay to drill their wells too close to a septic system or knowingly to operate a commercial business that threatened the health and safety of property owners and visitors alike. 7. Nor did we want to get further involved with those who used their powerful connections to get away with what we considered unethical conduct; the well & septic issues as one prime example. 8. Lastly, we did not want to participate with those who threatened us by stating that Neal and | should start “carrying” protection and to increase the fire insurance on the home that we were building.....simply because we were telling the truth and apparently challenging the status quo? What we did not back off of though, is protecting what we consider Belmont’s most precious resource....it’s aquifer that all of us in Belmont depend upon. Being off the grid, Belmont homeowners do not have the option of hooking up to a public water utility when our wells go bad. The public spring water system is hardly something the entire town can rely on. In fact, the overflow from this spring showed dangerous levels of e-coli in 2017. Also fecal coliform showed up in some of the residential homes that depended upon this spring. So those of us in Belmont who rely solely on our well water cannot afford to have irresponsible individuals threatening that resource. That is why Nea! and | have been trying to protect Belmont’s groundwater from the unconscionable behavior of Rosenlund Drilling and those who think it is okay to ignore and twist the health and sanitation laws of the County and State. We have been accused of being un-neighborly for not wanting to sell some of our vacant parcels to those who have needed the additional acreage to legally drill a well or to expand their septic systems. First: We have never been averse to selling our parcels, but our primary criteria has always been that the potential buyers be honest brokers. So far that has not been the case. Second: There has been doubt that the work would be done properly, lawfully and with integrity and transparency. In fact, considering how things have transpired to date, there has been little assurance that even with the acquisition of our property, the potential! contamination issues would still not be rectified.

Mr. Bilyeu

, the Saloon owner is one of these individuals who we have been hesitant to sell to. In 2018 he requested that the County grant him a ‘special utility easement’ on nearby property that the County owned. This request was shut down when Neal filed an Open Meeting Law complaint against the BoCC, citing how this request was mishandled in terms of transparency. Note that on this County property is the historic Belmont generator house which curiously Mr. Bilyeu is now interested in restoring. Perhaps we all need to pay close attention to his generous offer, since possibly another ‘creative’ way to solve the Saloons illegal well and septic system issues, could be in the works. There are people who have also asked us; rather than complaining about the situation why don’t you give suggestions as to how to fix it? Truly fixing the problem would require taking some very difficult steps: steps that are written in jaw; law which apparently both the County and State have not cared to enforce. In addition, most actions would require the guilty individuals to admit they made some terribly poor decisions and then ultimately take full responsibility for their actions. It was stated at the last BoCC meeting by Ms. Motis that she felt she was “entitled” to a domestic well. My question to Ms. Motis is: Do you think you are also entitled to break the law by threatening the health and safety of your neighbors and that of the entire community? Does Mr. Dessauer and Mr. Bilyeu feel the same as you do? If so, that is unfortunate for this sort of self-serving mindset does not seem to look out for the best interest of Belmont. Perhaps many listening think that Belmont is filled with not so nice people. Not so. There are many good people in Belmont who are concerned about the same issues as we are. Some | know are here in spirit, but perhaps are not as courageous to speak out. Fear of retribution is an issue that some in Belmont are deeply concerned about. Others are simply uninformed and perhaps choose to believe what the so called ‘experts’ or those in power falsely tell them. Possibly there are some who are okay with the threat of contaminated water, who only drink bottled water while in Belmont......just like those customers in the Saloon are offered....just in case. Meanwhile, Neal and | have put the completion of our home on hold. At least until we know the future of Belmont’s water. We can only hope that those who have jeopardized Belmont’s aquifer finally take the responsibility to do the right thing. And the County and State will finally do their job of enforcing the laws that are in place to protect the health and safety of the entire Belmont community; rather than kicking the can down the road and waiting for the proverbial ‘poop to hit the fan’. in conclusion, please ask yourself: Do we seem to be individuals who would volunteer large amounts of time to Belmont community projects if we did not care? Would we dedicate 4+ years of our lives and personal income addressing the illegal well and septic issues that threatened to contaminate Belmont’s aquifer? Would we be traveling vast distances to BoCC meetings to address the serious water issues that confront a place that we love? Would we be bringing these issues out of the shadows, in hopes that our nuisance complaint will be taken seriously and those who have threaten the health and safety of Belmont’s waters be held accountable? Of course not. Thus we ask that we are viewed as individuals whose only fault seems to be fighting for clean, safe water in a town that we have dedicated much of our lives to. Thank you.