|
5.Alternatives
<br /> stability and the potential for excessive soil erosion with this alternative. The geology, soils and
<br /> seismicity impacts of the No Project Alternative would be less than those associated with the
<br /> project.
<br /> Hydrology and Water Quality
<br /> Under the No Project Alternative,existing on-site water wells would continue to be used for —
<br /> residential and agricultural irrigation purposes. Under the project,the on-site water wells would
<br /> be used for mining processes in addition to silt ponds. The potential to alter groundwater flows,
<br /> deplete groundwater levels, and contribute to local and regional groundwater overdraft would —
<br /> likely remain the same with the No Project Alternative due to continued agricultural uses.
<br /> Impacts to water quality would also be similar. Although no impervious surfaces would be
<br /> created and there would be less likelihood of contaminated runoff entering groundwater through —
<br /> fractured wells,the use and storage of hazardous materials associated with agriculture would
<br /> continue As noted in Section 4.11, Hazardous Materials,records obtained from the Agricultural
<br /> Commissioner's Office show that the following pesticides were permitted for use on the site for
<br /> the years 2000 to 2003: Amino Triazole,Sevin, Furadan, Dicamba, Guthion,Methomyl, Methyl
<br /> Parathion,Aluminum Phosphate,Strychnine,MCPA, Dimethyla, 2,4-DB, 2,4-D Amine,
<br /> Paraquat,Supracide,Disyston, Thimet,Goal 2XL,Princep Caliber 90,Glyfos,Magnify,No
<br /> Foam A, Gramoxone Extra, Surflan A.S., Bufferplus, Asana XL, Dipel DF, Nu-Film-P,Treflan
<br /> HFP, Rovral fungicide, Buffercide, Kocide 101, Super 94, Rocket DL, Hasten spray adjuvant,
<br /> Phostoxin, Silwet L-77, Buctril 4EC,Weedestroy AM-40 Amine salt, Rally 40W, New Century
<br /> Buffer, Ammonium Sulfate,Supracide 25-W,MSO concentrate, Omite 6E, Britz B-85,
<br /> Buccaneer, Orchard Star,Britz Silglow,and Weedar 64. In addition, there are above ground fuel _
<br /> tanks on the site that contain gasoline and diesel fuel. These are all farm tanks that are less than
<br /> 500 gallons in size and are exempt from the permitting process with the County Environmental
<br /> Health Department. The potential for water quality impacts due to the storage and use of —
<br /> hazardous materials would be significant under the No Project Alternative.
<br /> Biological Resources
<br /> Under the No Project Alternative, impacts to biological resources from existing agricultural
<br /> activities could still occur. However, the potential for on-site impacts to biological resources _
<br /> under the No Project Alternative would be less than those associated with the project due to the
<br /> lack of substantial physical changes to the site.
<br /> Cultural Resources
<br /> The No Project Alternative would allow continued agricultural use of the property. The potential _
<br /> for damage to archaeological and historic resources from deep excavations that could occur under
<br /> the project would not occur.
<br /> Hazards and Hazardous Materials
<br /> Agricultural chemical use associated with the current agricultural practices on the site would
<br /> continue under the No Project Alternative. As noted above and in Section 4.11, Hazardous
<br /> Materials, records obtained from the Agricultural Commissioner's Office show that the following
<br /> RMC Pacific Vernalis Quarry Mining and Reclamation Project 5-8 ESA!203015
<br /> Draft Environmental Impact Report May 2006
<br />
|