September 28, 2015

Mr. Leising

noted that the majority of natural recharge to the basin is from precipitation that falls in the mountains to the east, where it permeates into the alluvium and flows downward to the valley aquifer. The rate of the flow or “head” is in direct relation to elevation change and the volume of water present. His assumption is that there is very little net entry of precipitation into the valley aquifer from the valley floor due to the presence of tightly packed soils. Confining lithographic layers between the fan and the valley floor also restrict the rate at which water flows into the valley aquifer. He related that this study was based upon the assumption that the Pahrump Basin may have identical attributes as that of the Las Vegas Valley where there exists and area of high transmisivity. If one were to find that “sweet spot” in the Pahrump Basin it might be possible, with ASR or injection, to put water back into the aquifer to help replenish diminishing water supplies.

Mr. Leising

discussed how the valley was divided into geographic sub-basins during this investigation. Approximately 30% of the valley has no development and therefore, no information is available. He feels that there might be more perennial yield than the 20,000 AF that the DWR has established. Mr. Leising briefly discussed climate datasets that he utilized to assess precipitation rates in various elevation zones. Upon questioning, Mr. Leising noted that there was no underground channel or river running into the valley aquifer from the mountains. Also, most valley water originates in the alluvium and not the deeper carbonate aquifer. There were very definite climate signals apparent in some of the hydrographs that he utilized for the study. Well levels were shown to increase and decrease depending upon the amount of precipitation for any given time period. He found that trends for wells in any given grouping or location were all very similar. Generally, water levels on the fan were rising while those on the valley floor were going down. He has estimated that the average usage for all domestic wells in the valley is between .5 -.7 AF annually based upon water pumpage information from the State Engineer’s data base covering the last 10 years. Mr. Leising’s study confirms that water levels are dropping in areas where the most pumping occurs, although there are some climatic variables. There was other discussion about importation of water and how that could help maintain a basin wide water balance. The study was unable to define a highly transmissive area in the valley floor, but with further study and gathering additional data it may still be possible to find a sweet spot.

Mr. Leising

strongly recommends continuing the Ground Water Evaluation program along with determining construction characteristics of the GWE wells. We also need to determine precisely how many domestic wells are currently being pumped. There were several other recommendations made by Mr. Leising as a follow-up to this study. 3 Nye County Water District Governing Board September 28, 2015 Greg Dann stated that he is seeing a distinct decrease in the number of domestic wells being pumped as people move away and vacate their properties. Mr. Leising discussed how an inventory could be taken by reviewing one quarter section at a time, but it would have to be done consistently on a routine basis. Noting that there were data gaps in the information that was gathered, Darrell Lacy asked what steps could be taken to fill the gaps and improve accuracy of findings. Mr. Leising suggested geophysical studies performed on the fan could give a more accurate picture of the depth to water. This would be helpful in a planning a pumping redistribution program. Upon questioning by the public, Mr. Leising related that a final written report will be forthcoming very soon. John Bosta had concerns that production wells on the valley floor were the major source of drawdown in the valley aquifer. This study has shown that this is not the case. Again, Mr. Leising stressed that water from the fan moves through the soil and not within any defined channel. He also clarified to one member of the audience that the source of water for the valley is the Spring Mountains to the east, and water does not just flow randomly around the valley aquifer. Upon questioning, Mr. Leising related that a particular drop of water could take thousands of years to reach the valley floor from the mountains based upon isotopic studies performed in the Las Vegas Valley. What is important is the amount of water that is flowing into the valley floor each year. This is the perennial yield which is estimated to be 20,000 AF as per the DWR. Greg Dann emphasized that the value of this study was in determining the source of water and where the majority of the valley water supply is located. With that information we may plan for future development and maintain a water balance in the valley. Darrell Lacy explained that with information obtained from the study, we now know that future development proposals will be expected to utilize water from wells located on the fan. He emphasized that infrastructure associated with development proposals should be financed by the developer. Greg Dann emphasized that we now have information to help guide individuals as to where they may want to build a home or how deep their well must be drilled. Amy Nelson related that now she had a good idea about how the findings from the study can be applied. Greg Hafen thanked the Water Board for allowing this study to take place. Mr. Hafen stressed that the majority of his water rights for Pahrump Utilities in the south end of the valley are pumped from the fan and noted that utility companies are not wholly responsible for declining water levels in the valley.

Mr. Leising

discussed some of the findings that will be incorporated into the final report. It should be available in the next few weeks. Greg Dann requested that Mr. Leising be present at the next Water Board Meeting so that he could answer questions during discussion of the Groundwater Management Plan, Stage 1. Oz Wichman requested that

Mr. Leising

simplify some of his language/tables in the final report so that the general public will be able to fully comprehend what it says.

Mr. Wichman

related some of the topics that will be presented during the program. It will address water issues specific to that part of the county which are very different from that of the Pahrump Basin. Horace Carlyle in Tonopah questioned why the board was quibbling over spending $3,000 for a program in northern Nye County when many thousands more have been spent on programs for the Pahrump Basin. Responding to comments from Dwight Lilly, Mr. Wichman emphasized that this class does not address the Pahrump Basin only those areas within a 100 mile radius of Tonopah. Mr. Lilly felt that a similar class should be held for the Pahrump area. Darrell Lacy clarified that a hydrographic basin and an artesian basin are one in the same. Both are geographic areas. John Bosta questioned the educational content of the class and offered some suggestions. There was discussion how to inform the public about the classes.

Ms. Fanning

was not present to make a report. Darrell Lacy noted that the financial status report is included in the back-up for today’s meeting and briefly addressed some of the items included in the report b. Board Reports I. LVVWD/SNWA – Darrell Lacy

Mr. Lacy

updated the board on recent activities during the Governor’ Drought Forum. He noted that the SNWA has pushed off into the future any activities regarding the importation of water from northern Nevada. The SNWA is also starting to consider that desalination may be a future source of water for the Las Vegas Valley. II. CNRWA Report of Activities - Frank Carbone 5 Nye County Water District Governing Board September 28, 2015 Activities at the Drought Forum were discussed along with of other important recent water activities. Mr. Carbone has more information available upon request. c. Staff Reports: I. Darrell Lacy For the benefit of all of new members now sitting on the Water Board, Mr. Lacy presented a brief PowerPoint to explain the history of the Water District. It was formed by the State Legislature in 2007 but it took 2 years to get everything set up and running before the first meeting was held in 2009. Grant money from congress helped pay for the first 2 years of operation (2009-2011) as well as some of the modeling programs, water level monitoring, outside studies and drilling of the fairgrounds well. Mr. Lacy discussed numerous other projects/studies that have been conducted and the impact that they have had upon increasing our knowledge of the waters in Nye County. With regard to tracking the flow of water in the Pahrump Basin, he noted that an isotopic study had already been conducted with some of the grant money. Operating with part- time staff and limited budget, the Water District has accomplished a lot over the last six years. In 2010, George Benesch, General Counsel for the Water District, determined that the district was not limited to collection of Ad Valorem taxes for payment of debt. He noted that a parcel fee is an appropriate source of revenue for organizational and operational expenses, and is an appropriate alternative for generating necessary funds. Mr. Lacy clarified that an open meeting law violation never occurred during discussion of the $5 parcel fee as per the Attorney General of the State of Nevada. II. Oz Wichman (Dan Sweeney excused himself from the meeting at this point)

Mr. Wichman

related that he is still devoting the larger share of his time to working on the Groundwater Management Plan. ` III. John Klenke None d. Project Status Report No comments. e. Board Liaison Report I. Dan Schinhofen Absent f. Report from other individuals, groups and or agencies regarding water-related issues: For informational purposes only. None