SU0004098 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

10/17/2007 14.36 FAX 2084683163 SJC_COMM_CEV @1003/013 Raymond Hoo April 9;2007 Page 2 the placement of gates. The conditional useit should include P� these items. For your I convenience we oncloso a copy of the Contract between the Applicant and the Kosters. The Draft EIR at ES-4 states that the Operator may elect to wet minc the site. Wet mining should be prohibited. It subjects the groundwater to contamination. At the very least,the EIR should analyze In detail the possible effects of wet training. To protect the groundwater,the micomum depth of excavetion must be IS feet short of the groundwater. There is no analysis in the EIR of the likelihood of contaminat on over a continuing period from the reduction or elimination of a reasonable cover over groundwater. Being careful during excavation is not gufcient mitigation for the firnre after mining nor is there adequate and sufficient analysis of possible contamination during mining and the possible effects. At ESS and 3A-11 it indicates that fill may be brought to the site as backhaul from job sites. Backhaul should be prohibited. If permitted,arty such backhaul must be tested. It alone could cause groundwater contamination. At ES-9 it mentions a recycling plant. The Draft EIR should specify the mazerial I recycled and discuss the possible effects on surface and groundwater. At Table ES-1 (page 8)it states that there is no significant impart to Peak Traffic ` p Volumes on SR 132. It alone does not recognize that dangerous conditions coast at the `I p intersections of Koster Road and SR 132, This should be analyzed. AT 3.13-10 it states that the reclamation plan includes an appmdruately 25-acre agicultutal pond. The pond must be lined to prevent contamination of the groundwater. (� It states that the operator may ciccx to backfill the area with imported overburden. I Imported overburden must be tested to prevent grotutdwater contamination at the contemplated levels. At 3.B-13 it states that it is anticipated that the project will not have any negative impact I on the surrounding uses in tatms of water supply. This assumes that the project will use sur fhce water. Any use of groundwater will affect the quantity and quality of the groundwater and must be properly analyzed. At 3.0-7 we note that General Plan Policy 11 requires water projects to mitigate erosion I l and seepage to sdjaceard lands. The policy does not require mitgation of seepage to the groundwater. The Draft SM should include necessary studies of practical measures to protect the groundwater. 4206553 i+ta.orw