JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report

8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report

1/85

PREPARED FOR:

DOWNEY BRAND ATTORNEYSROSEVILLE CALIFORNIA

Jesse Morrow Mountain MineHighway 180

Fresno County, California

PRELIMINARYSLOPE STABILITY ASSESSMENT


2/85

Project No. S9631-06-01September 15, 2011

Mr. Braiden Chadwick

Downey Brand Attorneys

1420 Rocky Ridge Dr., Suite 250

Roseville, California 95661

Subject: PRELIMINARY ROCK SLOPE STABILITY ASSESSMENT

JESSE MORROW MOUNTAIN MINE

HIGHWAY 180

FRESNO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

Dear Mr. Chadwick,

We have prepared this Preliminary Rock Slope Stability Assessment Report for the proposed Jesse

Morrow Mountain Mine in Fresno County, California. The project area consists of approximately 824

acres of which under permit Alternative 4 approximately 198 acres are planned for development as asurface mine and materials processing area to produce construction aggregate.

The accompanying report presents our findings, conclusions, and recommendations regarding rock slope

and waste pile stability issues on the site as they affect the proposed project. On the basis of the preliminary

data presented in this report and our professional judgment, we conclude that if the recommendations

presented within this report are followed, the project mining slope stability factor of safety will be adequate

for the proposed end use (agriculture and grazing) in compliance with the requirements set forth in the

California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA). The currently proposed reclamation slopes for

the Jesse Morrow Mountain Mine will be benched rock slopes ranging from an average of 0.5:1 to 1:1

horizontal to vertical.

Please contact us should you have any questions concerning the contents of this report or if we may be of

further service.

Sincerely,

Geocon Consultants, Inc.

David W. Bieber, PGP, CEG, CHG

Senior Geologist

Gary Luce, PE

Senior Engineer


3/85

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PRELIMINARY ROCK SLOPE STABILITY ASSESSMENT Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE .................................................................................................. 12.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.................................................................................................................. 13.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES....................................................................................................................... 24.0 FIELD EXPLORATION..................................................................................................................... 25.0 GEOLOGY........................................................................................................................................... 2

5.1 Site Geology ...........................................................................................................................35.2 Offsite Investigation ...............................................................................................................45.3 Groundwater ...........................................................................................................................4

6.0 SEISMICITY........................................................................................................................................ 47.0 PRELIMINARY SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES........................................................................ 5

7.1 Mining Slopes.........................................................................................................................57.2 Waste Pile Slopes ...................................................................................................................67.3 Reclamation Slopes ................................................................................................................7

8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................. 88.1 Testing and Observation Services.......................................................................................... 88.2 Recommendations for Additional Work during Quarry Development ................................88.3 Slope Maintenance .................................................................................................................9

9.0 LIMITATIONS .................................................................................................................................. 1010.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................... 11FIGURES

1. Vicinity Map

2. Site Plan

3. Site Geologic Map

4. Aerial Image of Piedra Quarry

PHOTOGRAPHS

Cover Photo Aerial image of the Jesse Morrow Mountain Mine Site

1 through 4. Typical outcrops exposures observed on the Site

5. Joint set crossing the Site.

6 through 8. Slopes exposed in the Piedra Quarry

APPENDICES


4/85

PRELIMINARY ROCK SLOPE STABILITY ASSESSMENT

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

This report presents the results of our slope stability assessment for construction of the project, which

consists of the proposed Jesse Morrow Mountain Mine (the Site), and has been prepared for Downey Brand

Attorneys on behalf of the project proponent, Cemex. The proposed project is located north of Highway 180

in Fresno County, California, approximately 20 miles east of Fresno, California. The approximate location

of the Jesse Morrow Mountain Mine project site is depicted on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1.

The purpose of our services was to prepare a pre-mining rock slope stability assessment and provide

preliminary recommendations for mitigation of slope hazards for mine planning and reclamation planning.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Site is comprised of approximately 824 acres of undeveloped land located on Fresno County

Assessors Parcel Numbers 158-203-15, 185-020-01, 33-450-16, -18, -19, -23, and -26, 333-240-22, -24,

and -26, and 333-100-32, -44, and -46 within sections 11, 12, 13, and 14, Township 14 south, Range 23

East of the Wahtoke, California, USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. Of the total acreage making

up the Site, under the permit Alternative 4 scenario only approximately 198 acres will be developed for

the project (100 acres for mining, 56 acres for fill material storage and berms, and 40 acres for the

processing facilities). The remaining acreage would act as a buffer between the mining and processing

areas and surrounding land uses. There are not currently any buildings on the Site which is now being

used as grazing land. Land surrounding the Site is used for livestock grazing and farming. The proposedJesse Morrow Mountain Mine limits and surrounding features are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2.

The proposed project will consist of a new open pit type quarry for construction aggregates. Site

elevations range from 450 (valley floor) to 2,000 (ridgetop) feet above mean sea level (MSL). The

applicant proposes to mine the Site for aggregate material as an open pit mine to a bottom elevation of

approximately 375 feet MSL yielding approximately 75 million tons of aggregate material from the

Site over a 50-year period. Final reclamation pit slopes will be benched slopes cut into the native rock

with overall slopes ranging from 0.5:1 to 1:1 horizontal to vertical. The configuration of the mine

during the mining phases and the proposed final reclamation configuration are shown on the conceptual

mining plans in Appendix A. We understand that the post-mining end use for the Site will be

agriculture and grazing.


5/85

3.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES

We performed the following scope of services in preparing this report:

Reviewed published geologic maps, aerial photographs, in-house documents, and otherliterature pertaining to the Site to aid in evaluating geologic conditions and the regional

geologic regime for use in the stability analysis. A list of referenced material is presented in

Section 10.0 of this report.

Performed a site reconnaissance to review general site conditions, performed onsite geologicobservations, and collected visible jointing and fracture data.

Visited the Piedra Quarry located approximately six miles north-northeast of the Site toobserve exposed slope conditions in similar geologic materials.

Prepared this report presenting our preliminary findings, conclusions, and recommendationsregarding slope stability conditions as they may affect the proposed project.

4.0 FIELD EXPLORATION

We performed our field reconnaissance on July 22, 2011, which consisted of performing onsite

geologic observations, the collection of joint orientation data where systematic joint features were

observed on the Site, and the collection of limited Schmidt-hammer rock strength data on the Site. Joint

orientation data was collected as dip and dip direction with a Cocla geologic compass (also known as a

Clarr Compass), set with a 15-1/2-degree east magnetic declination. Limited rock strength data was

measured using a Humboldt Manufacturing Company Model N Schmidt-Hammer.

5.0 GEOLOGY

Information concerning the geologic conditions in proximity to the Site was obtained from a review of

the Geologic Map of California, Fresno Sheet,California Geological Survey (CGS) map, 1965, and

from the draft environmental impact report (EIR) for the Site.

The Site is located on the boundary between the Sierra Nevada Geomorphic Province and the Great

Valley Geomorphic Province. The Sierra Nevada Geomorphic Province consists of an approximately

400-mile tilted fault block trending northwest to southeast. The western portion of the Sierra Nevada

G hi P i (f thill ) i t f lti l lith l i i l di thi k P l i d


6/85

5.1 Site Geology

A review of the CGS geologic map indicates that Site is underlain by Mesozoic basic intrusive rocks.According to the literature reviewed, these consist of hornblende gabbro, pyroxene-hornblende gabbro,

clinopyroxene anorthosite, and other mafic plutonic rocks including some diorite. The general geology

of the Site is presented on the Site Geologic Map, Figure 3.

Micro-chem Laboratories performed petrographic analyses on five samples of rock collected from

borings performed in 2005 on the Site. Based on the petrographic analyses, the rock on the Site is

diorite and diabase. Copies of the petrographic analytical results are included in the 2005 Geotechnical

Engineering Investigationreport prepared by BSK in Appendix B.

The geologic conditions we observed on the Site during our reconnaissance are consistent with those

represented in the reviewed literature. The Site is comprised of an east-west-trending ridge (Jesse

Morrow Mountain) formed by Mesozoic basic intrusive rocks that are bounded by valleys filled will

alluvial deposits. Pillow structures, lava features that were formed due to cooling in a submarineenvironment, were observed in scattered outcrop locations. Post-emplacement joints are present in

exposed outcrops throughout the Site. However the jointing has a discontinuous and chaotic nature

where observed in outcrops. Typical outcrops where jointing was observed on the Site are shown in

Photographs 1 through 4. We did observe a single prominent joint set crossing the Site with a dip of

approximately 85 degrees and a dip direction of 330 degrees. The joint set is shown in Photograph 5.

The approximate location and orientation of the joint set is shown on Figure 3, the Site Geologic Map.

The exposed natural rock slope inclinations range from less than 2:1 horizontal to vertical to near

vertical with outcrop face heights of 20 feet or greater observed. The average inclination of exposed

natural rock slopes was estimated to be approximately 1.5:1 horizontal to vertical.

Based on the 2005 boring logs, the Mesozoic basic intrusive rocks are present beneath the Site at

depths ranging from 0 to greater than 200 feet. Rocks recovered from the deeper portions of borings

drilled on the Site have also been described as granite. The rock is described as highly fractured inthe weathered zone ranging from approximately 12 to 40 feet below ground surface, with fracturing

decreasing with depth. The referenced 2005 geotechnical investigation reported that the bedrock is

generally competent and minimally fractured below the weathered zone.


7/85

5.2 Offsite Investigation

We visited the Piedra Quarry approximately six miles north north-east of the Site to observe slope

conditions in the highwalls. Mesozoic basic intrusive rocks similar to those present at the Site were

mined in the Piedra Quarry in the early 1950s for the construction of Pine Flat Dam. Therefore, Piedra

Quarry serves as an analog for how slopes at the Site are likely to perform during and after onsite

mining. Slopes in the Piedra Quarry appear to be globally stable at slopes ranging from near-vertical to

1:1 horizontal to vertical at slope heights approaching 100 feet. As at the Site, well-defined persistent

jointing was not observed in the Piedra Quarry. The observed failure mechanism at the Piedra Quarry

is localized raveling and rockfall of loose material out of the quarry face. The general slope conditions

in the Piedra Quarry are shown in Photographs 6 through 8.

5.3 Groundwater

Jesse Morrow Mountain is bounded by alluvial valleys. The Kings River flows through the valley to

the north of Jesse Morrow Mountain. Wahtoke Creek and the concrete-lined Main and Friant KernCanals run through the valley to the south of Jesse Morrow Mountain. One seasonal spring was

observed on the south-facing portion of the Site. Two additional seasonal springs are shown on the

north side of the Site on the Hume 7-1/2 degree topographic map, a portion of which was used as the

base for the Site Plan, Figure 2.

Groundwater was not reported in exploratory borings and test pits excavated on the Site in 2005 and

mining is not expected to occur below the top of the saturated groundwater zone.

6.0 SEISMICITY

Based on our observations on the Site and a review of geologic maps and reports, the Site is not located

on any known active fault trace. In addition, the Site is not contained within a Special Studies

Earthquake Fault Zone (formerly referred to as an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone).

In order to determine the distance of known active faults within 50 miles of the Site, we used the

computer program EQFAULT, (Version 3, Blake, 2000). EQFAULT is a program for performing a

fault search, and a 50-mile radius is used because seismic attenuation is generally sufficient to

minimize damage to most structures at distances greater than 50 miles Principal references used within


8/85

The results of the EQFAULTquery indicate that the Foothills Fault System is the closest source of

potential ground motion at the Site. The CGS maintains a web-based computer model that estimates

probabilistic seismic ground motions for any location within California. The computer model estimates

the Design Basis Earthquake ground motion, which is defined as the Peak Ground Acceleration

(PGA) with a 10% chance of exceedance in 50 years (475-year return period). For a location founded

on firm rock such as the Site, the estimated PGA is approximately 0.10g. The listed PGAs are

considered to be low to moderate. While listing PGA is useful for comparison of potential effects of

fault activity in a region, other considerations are important in seismic design, including frequency and

duration of motion and soil conditions underlying the Site. The Site could be subjected to ground

shaking in the event of a major earthquake along the faults mentioned above or other area faults.

However, the seismic risk at the Site is not considered to be significantly greater than that of the greater

Fresno region.

The site seismic acceleration data from EQFAULT and the CGS Interactive Probabilistic Seismic

Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page results are presented in Appendix C.

7.0 PRELIMINARY SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES

Due to the chaotic nature of the jointing observed in the surficial materials, conventional slope stability

analysis based on fracture orientation analysis was not deemed to be practical for use on rocks exposed

in outcrops on the Site. Therefore our preliminary stability evaluation was based on data presented in

the 2005 geotechnical report, observations of the bedrock outcrops and natural slopes on the Site, and

on observations of the mined slopes in the Piedra Quarry. Analysis of the slope stability of theproposed waste storage pile was performed using the Hoek and Bray method for circular failure

analysis.

7.1 Mining Slopes

Based on our site visit and review of documents on the geologic and geotechnical properties of the Site,

we have reached the following preliminary conclusions regarding the site geology as it affects slopestability:

The rock types identified are generally hard to very hard. Unconfined compressive strengthsfor these types of rock typically range from 15,000 pounds per square inch (psi) to greater than

30,000 psi. These values were confirmed using Schmidt Hammer data collected from outcrop


9/85

We would expect that the rock mass beneath the weathering zone (at depths greater thanapproximately 12 to 40 feet) is likely to be more massive and dense with few open fractures.

This is consistent with information presented in the 2005 boring logs we reviewed and on theverbal reports from Cemex staff that fractures in the rock mass below the weathered zone are

spaced at intervals up to 15 feet or greater.

Based on these observations and the limited amount of previous exploration, our opinions regarding

slope stability and pit design are as follows:

Mine slopes up to approximately 50 feet high separated by minimum 20-foot-wide benches arelikely to be stable (Factor of safety at or above 1.3) at slopes of 0.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) inunweathered and minimally weathered bedrock. However, additional rock fracture and rock

strength data will be necessary as mining progresses to confirm this. Initial slopes of 1.5:1 are

recommended within the surface weathering zone (depths ranging from approximately 12 to 40

feet) unless additional rock fracture and rock strength data is collected to demonstrate that

steeper slopes will be stable.

Raveling of slope materials and minor rock fall can be anticipated for the recommended designslopes but these hazards can be mitigated by a number of methods and construction practicesincluding staging and temporary safety measures. Some examples include placing berms or

fencing to create pedestrian avoidance areas. Temporary waste material buttress fills or

backfills can be used to contain rollout. Temporary loop wire mesh can also be used to limit

rollout as well.

On the basis of the preliminary data and our professional judgment, we conclude that the factor of

safety for mining slopes as set forth above will equal or exceed 1.3 in the static condition.

7.2 Waste Pile Slopes

The currently proposed waste pile slopes for the Jesse Morrow Mountain Mine will be 2:1 horizontal to

vertical, the material that will be placed in the waste pile is expected to be a mixture of rocks up to

boulder size, sand, silt, and clay with a low expansion coefficient and low to plasticity. We assume that

minimal compactive effort will be used in placing the waste pile. Based on the nature of the material,

we expect that waste pile slopes will be globally stable at the proposed 2:1 horizontal to vertical slopes.

Our analysis indicates an estimated minimum stability of 1.6 in the static condition provided that the

surficial cohesive layer is removed. The overexcavation depth for the surficial cohesive soil layer is

estimated to range from 3 to 4 feet based on the boring data reviewed.


10/85

7.3 Reclamation Slopes

The currently proposed reclamation slopes for the Jesse Morrow Mountain Mine will range from 0.5:1to 1:1 horizontal to vertical. SMARA requires an engineering evaluation for proposed reclamation

slopes to determine whether they are suitable for the proposed site end use. Reclamation slopes similar

to those proposed on the Site have been present at the Piedra Quarry for almost 60 years without

apparent maintenance. We did not observe indications of global failures of the slopes observed at the

Piedra Quarry. Those failures observed were localized raveling of loose slope material and small-scale

block falls.


11/85

8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on our observations of the Site, the proposed pit walls should be globally stable in a static

condition at slope angles of up 1.5:1 horizontal to vertical or steeper while excavating material in the

weathered zone (upper 12 to 40 feet of material). Based on the preliminary data, unweathered rock

bench slopes 50 feet high and separated by 20 foot horizontal benches are expected to be stable (factor

of safety at or above 1.3) at the proposed mining slopes, but we recommended that additional rock

fracture and rock strength data be collected during mining to confirm this interpretation. Additionally,

based on the Design Basis Earthquake ground motion where the estimated PGA is approximately0.10g, and based on the observed performance of the slopes in the Piedra Quarry, it is our opinion that

the rock slopes will be globally stable with respect to the expected seismic accelerations. Waste pile

slopes are expected to be globally stable at the proposed 2:1 horizontal to vertical slopes, but inactive

waste pile slopes should be protected from erosion. Based on the proposed site end use being

agriculture and grazing, it is our opinion that the proposed reclamation slopes will be globally stable

and suitable for the currently proposed post-mining use of the Site.

8.1 Testing and Observation Services

The recommendations provided in this report are based on the assumption that we will be retained as

Geotechnical Engineer of Record for the quarry. It is important to maintain continuity of geotechnical

interpretation and confirm that field conditions encountered are similar to those anticipated during design.

In accordance with the 2006 CBC, testing and observation services by the Geotechnical Engineer of

Record are required to verify that construction has been performed in accordance with this report,

approved plans and specifications. If we are not retained for these services, we cannot assume any

responsibility for others interpretation of our recommendations or the future performance of the project.

8.2 Recommendations for Addit ional Work during Quarry Development

The recommendations contained in this report are considered adequate for preliminary pit design and

planning purposes. However, additional geotechnical evaluation should be conducted while mining isoccurring to refine the slope model. The following are our recommendations for future work in refining

the mine model and developing the pit:

1. Collect additional rock mechanics data including unconfined compressive strengths, fracturei t ti d t d d th f th i B d th t d f t d it i th


12/85

Perform oriented coring of the rock mass at a minimum of five locations to develop athree-dimensional model of the rock mass. Determine rock strength with laboratory

testing of the cores. Alternatively, large trench cuts could also provide some or all ofthe desired rock strength information if permitted by regulatory agencies. Costs for

coring and/or trenching can be reduced by using planned mine roads to access

exploratory locations and the resultant road cuts to expose bedrock materials for

analyses.

As excavation is initiated and progresses within the quarry, collect rock mechanicsdata for the exposed faces and recover samples for laboratory strength testing.

2. During pit construction, have a competent person map fractures in the face to look for obviousadverse failure conditions (planar and wedge failures).

3. Scale rock slope faces to limit rock fall volumes.4. Refine the mine plan with emphasis on the quantity balance needed for reclamation.

8.3 Slope Maintenance

Slopes designed as described above while stable from a slope angle perspective will present a moderate

risk of rock fall. Raveling of slope materials and minor rock fall can be anticipated for the

recommended design slopes, but these hazards can be mitigated by a number of methods and

construction practices including staging and temporary safety measures. Some examples include

placing temporary waste material buttress fills or backfills at the base of slopes and benches to contain

rollout. Temporary lope wire mesh can also be used to limit rollout. Additionally, loose material will

likely be present on the slope faces and at the tops of slopes, both as loose blocks due to opening ofjoints and as material likely loosened during quarry operations. Personnel access should be prohibited

on benches below areas where potentially unstable blocks are observed until those blocks can be scaled

from the slope. Loose blocks should be removed starting on the pit edges and bench tops and then

working from the top of the slope down on slope faces. The area at the base of the slope should include

a catchment ditch/swale at least 8 feet wide and 2 to 3 feet deep. The ditch should slope towards the

face of the cut at least 4:1 horizontal to vertical. Berms or fencing should be placed along the base of

active quarry slopes to create pedestrian avoidance areas. We also recommend that a small berm or

temporary fence be constructed once access is not required on a regular basis. The need for protection

can be obviated by restricting access to the area to mechanized large mining equipment no closer than

6 feet from the slope.


13/85


14/85

10.0 REFERENCES

Benchmark Resources,Jesse Morrow Mountain Mine Conceptual Mining Plan, 2011.

BSK Associates, 2005, Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, Processing Plant, RMC Pacific Materials,

Jesse Morrow Mountain, Fresno County, California.

California Geological Survey, California Geomorphic Provinces, CGS Note 36, 2002.

California Geological Survey, Geologic Map of California, Fresno Sheet, 1965.

California Geological Survey, Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page

(http://www.conserv.ca.gov/cgs/rghm/pshamap.pshamap.asp), 2006.

County of Fresno, Jesse Morrow Mountain Mine and Reclamation, Draft Environmental Impact Report,

2005-2009.

Hoek, E, Bray, J.W.,Rock Slope Engineering, 1984, (4thedition).

Turner, A. Keith and Robert L. Schuster, editors, Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation; Transportation

Research Board Special Report 247, 1996.

Unpublished reports, aerial photographs and maps on file with Geocon.


15/85

PROJECT

LOCATION

0 21

Scale in Miles

Annadale Ave.

Ave.Annadale

California Ave.

Ave.

Rd.

Rd.

Elwood

Rd

.

Valle

y

Watts

Rd.

Piedra

Sprin

gs

Trim

mer

Ave.

Ave.

Ave.Shaw

Ashlan

Shields

Belmont

Ave.

Ave

.

Ave

.

Ave

.

Ave

.

Riverbend

Ave

.

Ave

.

Ave

.

Ave

.

Co

ve

Ave

.

Cr

aw

ford

Frankw

ood

Reed

Ave

.

Vista

Rio

Riverbend

MacDonough

Academy

Bethel

Ave.

Ave.

Ave.American

Ave.

Ave.

Ave.Jensen

Ave.American

Central

Goodfellow

Central

North

Jensen

180

Ave

.

Academy

Kin

gs

River

Kings

Riv

er

Alt

a

Main

Canal

Canal

Fria

nt

Jesse Morrow Mountain Mine

Fresno County,California

VICINITY MAP

September 2011 Figure 1S9631-06-01

N

P H O N E 9 1 6 . 8 5 2 . 9 1 1 8 FA X 9 1 6 . 8 5 2 . 9 1 3 2

3160 G O LD VALL EY DR SUIT E 80 0 RANCHO CO RD O VA, CA 9574 2

180

180

180

63

SANGERSANGER

ReedleyAirportReedleyAirport

SherwoodForestGolfClub

SherwoodForestGolfClub

Alta

Main

Canal

PiedraQuarry

Kern


16/85

0 1000

Scale in Feet

Parcel Boundary

Original Proposed Project (400 ac)

Process Facility (40 ac)

Mining Area

Approximate Site PhotographLocation & Orientation

N



SITE PLAN


P H O N E 916 . 852 . 9118 FA X 916 . 852 . 9 132

3160 G O LD V A LLE Y D R S U I TE 800 R A N C H O C O R D O V A , C A 957 42

LEGEND:

HIGHWAY180

HIGHWAY180

1

3

4

5

1,2


17/85

0 1000

Scale in Feet

Parcel Boundary

Original Proposed Project (400 ac)

Process Facility (40 ac)

Mining Area

Shear Zone (Dashed where approximate)(Arrow indicates dip direction)

Formation Contact

(Dashed where approximate)

Approximate Soil Sample Location

Approximate Boring Location

Mesozoic basic intrusive rocks

Pleistocene nonmarine (Pleistocene)

N



SITE GEOLOGIC MAP


P H O N E 916 . 852 . 9118 FA X 916 . 852 . 9 132

3160 G O LD V A LLE Y D R S U I TE 800 R A N C H O C O R D O V A , C A 957 42

LEGEND:

JMM-2

JMM-12

JMM-11JMM-10

JMM-8

JMM-9

JMM-7JMM-6

JMM-5

JM-2

JM-1

JM-3

JM-4

JMM-3

JMM-4

JMM-12

JMM-11JMM-10

JMM-8

JMM-9

JMM-7JMM-6

JMM-5

JM-2

JM-1

JM-3

JM-4

JMM-3

8585

JMM-4

JM-1

HIGHWAY180

HIGHWAY180

Qc

Qc

Qc

bi

bi bi

Qc

Qc

Qc

Qc

bi

bi

bi biJMM-2JMM-2

85Pluge Angle


18/85

Aerial Image of

Piedra Quarry



S9631-06-01 September 2011 Figure 4

N

0 150

Scale in Feet

PHO NE 916 . 852 .9 118 F AX 916 .852 .91323160 G O LD VALLE Y DR SUIT E 800 RANCHO CO RDO VA, CA 95 742

Approximate Site PhotographLocation & Orientation

LEGEND:

1

6

7

8


19/85

Photo No. 1 View looking west of a pillow structure exposed in outcrop on the Site


20/85

Photo No. 3 View looking northwest of typical outcrop exposures on the Site showing the generally chaotic nature of the jointing


21/85

Photo No. 5 View looking southwest along the trace of the high-angle shear zone that crosses the Site


22/85


23/85


24/85

Caretaker

Residence

Residence

1000'

1500'

2000'

15

00'

1000'

500'

1000'

1000

'

1200'

1300'


25/85

500'

600'

700'

800'

900'

400'

300'

1000'

1100'

500'

600'

700'

800'

900'

400'

300'

A'

A

B'B

CROSS-SECTION A-A'

CROSS-SECTION B-B'

Berm

Overall 1:1 Slope

.5:1 Slope

Exi sti ngGroundSurface

Exi sti ngGround Surf ace

Fil lStorage

V:\DATA2\Blocks \Benchmark CADLibrary \Logos &Images \BR_Secondary_Logo_cmyk .jpg

SCALE: 1" = 300'-0"

300' 0 300' 600' SCALE: 1" = 300'4990 Hillsdale Circle, Suite 400

ElDorado Hills, California 95762

Phone: (916) 983-9193Fax: (916) 983-9194

DATE: 06-20-2011

FILE: 188

V: 1.0

JESSE MORROW MOUNTAIN QUARRY

Phase 1

Sheet 2

Berm

.5:1 Slope

25' Saf ety Bench

1200'

1300' Exi sti ngGroundSurface


26/85

500'

600'

700'

800'

900'

400'

300'

1000'

1100'

500'

600'

700'

800'

900'

400'

300'

A'

A

B'B

CROSS-SECTION A-A'

CROSS-SECTION B-B'

2:1Slope2:1

Slope Berm

Overall 1:1 Slope

.5:1 Slope


Fil lStorage


SCALE: 1" = 300'-0"



Phone: (916) 983-9193Fax: (916) 983-9194

DATE: 06-20-2011

FILE: 188

V: 1.0


Phase 2

Sheet 3

.5:1 Slope

25' Saf ety Bench


27/85

1100'

1200'

1300'

E i ti G dS f


28/85

500'

600'

700'

800'

900'

400'

300'

1000'

500'

600'

700'

800'

900'

400'

300'

A'

A

B'B

CROSS-SECTION A-A'

CROSS-SECTION B-B'

2:1Slope

2:1Slo

pe Berm

Overall 1:1 Slope

.5:1 Slope

60' Haul Road

Exi sti ngGroundSurface


Fil lStorage

.5:1 Slope


SCALE: 1" = 300'-0"



Phone: (916) 983-9193Fax: (916) 983-9194

DATE: 06-20-2011

FILE: 188

V: 1.0


Phase 4

Sheet 5

.5:1 Slope

25' Saf ety Bench


29/85


30/85

APPENDIX B


31/85

Geotechnical Engineering InvestigationProcessing PlantRM C Pacific MaterialsJesse Morrow MountainFresno County California

BSK G0518010F

Prepared forMr Peter Cotter

RM Pacific MaterialsP 0 Box 5252Pleasanton CA 94566

August 5 2005

1415 Tuolumne St


32/85

Fresno,C 93706(559) 497-2868FAX (559) 485-61 40

August 5,2 005 BSK JOB G0518010FMr. Peter CotterRM C Pacific MaterialsP. 0 Box 5252Pleasanton CA 94566

SUB JEC T: Geotechnical InvestigationRM C Pacific Materials Processing P lantJesse Morrow MountainFresno County CaliforniaDear Sir:BSK Associates has conducted a geotechnical investigation at the subject site for RMC PacificMaterials (Own er, Client). Th e geotechnical investigation was conducted in accordance withBSK s Proposal GF 05 106 d ted May 1 0 , 2 0 0 5 .Th e enclosed report c ontain s the results of BS K s geotechnical investigation that includes fieldexploration, laboratory testing, and engineering analysis, and provides recommendations for use inpreparation o f plans and specifications for the subject project.Please call if you have questions or comments concerning the report. We appreciate theopportunity to be of service to the RM C Pacific Materials.

Encl: Report

Respectfully submitted,


33/85


34/85

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORTPROCESSING PLANT SITE

RMC PACIFIC MATERIALSJESSE MORROW MOUNTAIN SITEFRESNO COUNTY CALIFORNIA

1.0 INTRODUCTIONThis report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation conducted by BSKAssociates for the proposed RMC Pacific Materials (Ow ner. RMC) processing plant site atHighw ay 180 at the Friant-Kern Canal Crossing in Fresno County, California. BSK w asretained as the geotechnical engineering consultant by RMC.Th e general location of the site is given on the Site Location M ap, Figure 1 The Site Planis given in Figure 2. Based on information provided by the client, building foundationloads will no t exceed 100 kips and 7 h p s per lineal foot for columns and w alls,respectively. For pavement design purposes, a traffic index of 4.5 has been assum ed forareas limited to car traffic only. A traffic index o f 11.0 has been assumed for areas withtruck traffic. In addition, client provided deep boring inform ation on the general site.Specific depths of cuts and fills we re not available at the time of our exploration, w e haveassumed typical v alues o f five feet.In the event that ch anges occur in the design of the project, this report s conclusions an drecommendations will not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed with BSKand the conclu sions and recornmendations are modified or verified in writing. Examp lesof such chang es wou ld include location, size of building, found ation loads, etc.

2.0 OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE O F INVESTIGATIONThe ob jective and scope of the geotechnical investigation w ere set forth in BS K s ProposalGF05106 dated May 10, 2005. The objective of the geotechnical investigation was tocharacterize the subsurface soil conditions in the area of the planned construction and toprovide geotechnical engineering recommend ations. Th e scope of the investigationincluded field exp loration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis, and preparation of thisreport.


35/85

4 0 LABORATORY TESTINGLaboratory tests were performed on selected samples to evaluate relevant engineering soilproperties. Labo ratory tests included moisture content, dry density, direct shear strength,plasticity index and expansion index. The laboratory testing methods and test results aresumm arized in Appendix B.

5 0 SITE COND ITIONSThe following sections address site description, surface and subsurface conditions, andgroundwater conditions. These are presented based on BSK's field exploration,information provided above, and published maps and reports.

5 1 Site Description and Surface ConditionsThe overall site is located approximately eight miles east of the town of Sanger, California,in Fresno County (see the Vicinity Map, Figure 1). The site lies within sections 1 1, 12, 13,and 14, Tow nship 14 South, Range 23 E ast, and the west 114 of section 7 of Township 14South, Ran ge 24 East M ount Diablo baseline and m eridian (see the Site Plan, Figure 2).The site topography is rugged, requiring four-wheel drive vehicles, for access and m uch ofthe surface is covered by thick brush, making travel and visual assessments difficult.The plant site is gently sloped north to south and used as a cow pasture. The plant site isabout 100 feet higher in elevation than Highway 180. Abo ve the plant site is -the steepergrade of Jesse Morrow Mountain, from which the quarry material will come forprocessing. Below the plant site is a modest grade down to Highway 180. There are norock outcrops on the plant site.5 2 Subsurface Conditions5 2 1 Previous InvestigationIn November 1998, RM C Pacific Materials, Inc. (RMC ) advanced four borings at the Site.Boring locations are shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the four borings was to determineif the rock at the Site was suitable for use in the production of Portland cem ent concrete(PCC) and asphalt concrete. The borings JM l, JM 2, JM 3, and JM 4 were advanced todepths of 125, 15 4,2 03 , and 198 feet below th e ground surface (bgs), respectively.


36/85

5 2 2 Current InvestigationTh e uppermost soil is a layer of silty clay to clay which is highly plastic and highlyexpansive. The clay soil takes on a block y structure at a depth of several feet. At the timeof o ur investigation, the clay soils were dam p and stiff to hard.After several feet, weathered remains of boulders or bedrock w ere often encountered,sometimes containing a decomposed granite appearance. W here this profile wasencountered, the soils typically becam e cemented and refusal to back hoe diggingequipment occurred at depths of less than ten feet. Sometimes the soils became a whitishdolomite soil which was hard and dry. Where the whitish dolomite was encountered, thetest pits were able to advanc e to the m aximum depth with no difficulty.N o groundwater was encountered in our test pits, nor was a ny massive rock encountered.5 3 GroundwaterGroundwater was not encountered at the depths explored during BSK s investigation.However, the possibility of the groundwater rising to shallower depths below groundsurface may occur due to seasonal effects or other factors not evident at the time of theinvestigation.6 0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONSFro m a geotechnical engineering stand point, it is BSK s opinion that the site is suitable forthe proposed construction. Significant costs will be incurred managing the shallow claysoils. This opinion is based u pon the data collected during this investigation, BSK sunderstanding of the planned improvem ents as described above, and the recoinmendationspresented herein being properly incorporated into the project design and construction.

6 1 Seismic ConsiderationsIn B SK s opinion there are no un ique geologic factors at the site which would necessitatespecial seismic consideration for the design of the planned building improvements. Basedon BSK s investigation, no know n a ctive or potentially active fault zones are within 15miles o f the project site and the site lies within Seismic Zone 3. Use of the 2001 CaliforniaBuilding C ode (CBC ) seismic design criteria is considered appropriate, unless the projectdesign consultant requires more specific data such as an elastic response spectra orcharacteristic site period. Th e following parameters are considered appropriate for the


37/85

6 2 Site Preparation and G radingThe following procedures should be implemented during site preparation and earthworkfor the proposed imp rovem ents. It should be noted that all references to moisture conten tand percent relative com paction are based on optimum m oisture content and maximum drydensity as determined by the ASTM D 1557 laboratory test procedure.1) Vegetation, trash, debris, fill ma terial, and the near-surface soils containingobjectionable organic matter should be stripped and hauled off site or used inlandscape areas. W ithin five (5) feet of the outer edge of structures, the native soil

subgrade should then be overexcavated to a minimum depth of four (4) feet belowfinish grade or two (2) feet below original grade, whichever is deeper. BSK shouldbe contacted to observe such excavations to verify whether soft or loose soils, orother buried features are present that would require additional excavation.2) All existing buried utility lines and subterranean structures, if located beneath thearea of planned construction, should be removed and relocated to a distance of atleast 5 feet outside the area of the planned improvem ents. All resultant cavitiesshould be widened to provide sidewalls with slopes as discussed below inExcavation Stability and then backfilled w ith com pacted engineered fill.3) Prior to the placement of any fill, the bottom of the excavation in the nativesubgrade should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, moisture conditioned to aboveoptimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent. Excavated soilsshould not be replaced within four feet of finish grade of structures. W ithin four

feet of finish grade of structures, select, import fill or treated native soil should beused as compacted engineered fill up to the desired finish subgrade elevation. Allengineered fill should be placed in uniform layers not exceeding 8 inches in loosethickness, moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content,and compacted to at least 90 percent.4) All select, import fill or treated native soil materials should be free from organic

materials or deleterious substances. Soils used within the top four feet of finishgrade should conform to the following criteria:Maximum Particle Size: 3Percent Passing 200 Sieve: 10 40


38/85

BSK should be contacted for review of proposed engineered fill materials for conformancewith these recomm endations three days prior to h auling to from the borrow areas.6 3 ExcavationsSoils encountered within the depth of the proposed im provements are generally soil Ty peA in accordance to OSH A Occupational Safety and Health Administration). Slope height,slope inclination, and excavation depths including utility trench excavations) must in nocase exceed those spec ified in local, state, or federal safety regulations, e.g., OSH AHealth and Safety Standards for Excavations, 29 CF R Part 1926, or successor regulations)unless stated otherwise herein. Type B soils are typically cut to a maximum slope of0.75H:lV and extend to a typical depth of 12 feet at this site. These excavationrecommendations are based on soil characteristics derived from the test pits. Variations insoil conditions will likely be encountered during excavation. BSK must be afforded theopportunity to provide field review to evaluate actual conditions and account for fieldcondition variations not otherwise anticipated in the preparation of theserecommendations.Temporary excavations for the project construction should be left open for as short a timeas possible and should be protected from runo ff.6 4 Surface Drainage ControlThe control of surface drainage within the area of the planned improvements is animportant design consideration. BSK recomm ends that the final grading around ,the newconstruction sho uld provide for positive and enduring drainage away from the structures,and ponding o f water should not be allowed near the structures.6 5 FoundationsProvided that the site is prepared as recommended above, the building may be supportedon a conventional footing foundation bearing on suitable native soil protected againstfreezing. The foun dation should have a minimum depth of 12 inches below finished gradeand a minimum width of 12 inches. This found ation, constructed as recommended herein,may be designed using an allowable bearing pressure as given in the following table basedupon the thickness o f the engineered fill material below the foundation. This value appliesto the dead load plus live load DL plus LL) condition and may be increased by 113 forshort duration wind or seismic loads.


39/85


40/85

The top eight inches of subgrade in paved areas should be compacted to a minimum of95 as determined by ASTM D 1557.Because of the excessive thicknesses of Class 2 b ase required, it may be feasible to replacea substantial portion of the Class 2 base with treated native soils. Shou ld you wish toevaluate that further, we recom mend that you contact BSK.6 8 Slope StabilityStability of the quarry walls for short term excavation or long term reclamation above theplant site is not part of this scope of work.W ithin the g eneral area of the plant site, the topographic map indicates that the existingslope is about 8 and the existing elevation difference is about 80 feet. Based upon thedrawings provided, the maximum size of any single building or stockpile in the do wnslopedirection is 120 feet. A nominal cu t of 5 feet and a fill of 5 feet would leve l out that largean area. Using the minimum shear strength values from the testing program (i.e. 0.53 ksfcohesion and 8 degree friction angle), the indicated factor of safety of a slope which was 5feet high and 2H :lV would be 7.42, which is well in excess of the minimum 1.5 required.From the topographic m ap, the maxim um elevation difference between the road and theplant site is about 100 feet. The lateral distance is about 800 feet. Using the minimumshear strength values from the testing program (i.e. 0.53 ksf cohesion and 8 degree frictionang1e)and a maxim um soil thickness of 25 feet, the indicated factor of safety o f a slopewhich w as 100 feet high and 8H: 1V would be 2.9 , which is well in excess of the minimum1.5 required.6 9 Aggregate StockpilesFrom the drawings provided, the maximum aggregate stockpile width is 120 feet.Assuming a 32 degree angle, the maxim um pile height is estimated to be 38 feet. Th emaxim um pressure at the center of the pile would be about 4500 pounds per square foot.Th e shallow clay soils have a lesser bearing value. It is our understanding that theaggregate piles are not sensitive to underlying soil movement (horizontal or vertical);therefore no soil improvement is necessary.7 0 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS REVIEWBSK recommends that it be retained to review the draft plans and specifications for the


41/85

formulating the design parameters and recomm endations. BSK observations should besupplemented with periodic compaction tests to establish substantial conformance withthese recommendations. BSK should also be called to the site to observe foundationexcavations, prior to placement of reinforcing steel or concrete, in order to assess whetherthe actual bearing conditions are compatible with the conditions anticipated during thepreparation of this report. BSK should also be called to the site to o bserve placement offoundation and slab concrete.If a firm other than BSK is retained for these services during construction, that o.ther firmshould notify the owner, project designers, governmental building officials, and BSK thatthe firm has assumed the responsib ility for all phases (i.e., both design and construction) ofthe project within the purview of the project geotechnical engineer. Notification shouldindicate that the firm has reviewed this report and any subsequent addenda, and that iteither agrees with BSK s conclusions and recommendation, or that it will provideindependent recommend ations.9 0 CH NGED CONDITIONSThe analyses and recommendations submitted in t h s report are based upon the dataobtained from the test pits performed at the locations shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2.The report does not reflect variations which m ay occur between th e borings. The natureand ex tent of such variations may not becom e evident until construction is initiated. Ifvariations then appear, a re-evaluation of the recommendations of this report will benecessary after performing on-site observations during the excavation period and notingthe characteristics of the variations.The validity of the recommendations contained in this report is also dependent upon anadequ ate testing and observation program during the construction phase. BSK assumesno responsibility for construction compliance with the design concepts orrecommendations unless it has been retained to perform the testing and observationservices during construction as described above.Th e findings of this report are valid a s of the present. How ever, changes in the conditionsof the site can occur with the passage of time, whether caused by natural processes or thewo rk of man, on this property or adjacent property. In addition, changes in applicable orappropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation, gov ernmental policy


42/85

- - - BSK JOB G0518010FFIGURE 2


43/85


44/85


45/85


46/85


47/85


48/85


49/85


50/85


51/85


52/85


53/85


54/85


55/85


56/85


57/85


58/85


59/85


60/85


61/85


62/85


63/85


64/85


65/85


66/85


67/85


68/85


69/85


70/85


71/85


72/85


73/85


74/85


75/85


76/85


77/85


78/85


79/85

APPENDIX C


80/85


81/85


82/85


83/85


84/85


85/85

Documents

JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report