jmm feir slope stability report
TRANSCRIPT
-
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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.
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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.
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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.
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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.
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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.
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
13/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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.
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
Jesse Morrow Mountain Mine
Fresno County,California
SITE PLAN
September 2011 Figure 2S9631-06-01
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
Jesse Morrow Mountain Mine
Fresno County,California
SITE GEOLOGIC MAP
September 2011 Figure 3S9631-06-01
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
18/85
Aerial Image of
Piedra Quarry
Jesse Morrow Mountain Mine
Fresno County,California
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
19/85
Photo No. 1 View looking west of a pillow structure exposed in outcrop on the Site
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
20/85
Photo No. 3 View looking northwest of typical outcrop exposures on the Site showing the generally chaotic nature of the jointing
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
21/85
Photo No. 5 View looking southwest along the trace of the high-angle shear zone that crosses the Site
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
22/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
23/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
24/85
Caretaker
Residence
Residence
1000'
1500'
2000'
15
00'
1000'
500'
1000'
1000
'
1200'
1300'
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
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 2
Sheet 3
.5:1 Slope
25' Saf ety Bench
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
27/85
1100'
1200'
1300'
E i ti G dS f
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
Exi sti ngGround Surf ace
Fil lStorage
.5:1 Slope
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 4
Sheet 5
.5:1 Slope
25' Saf ety Bench
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
29/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
30/85
APPENDIX B
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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,
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
33/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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.
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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.
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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.
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
39/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
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
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
42/85
- - - BSK JOB G0518010FFIGURE 2
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
43/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
44/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
45/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
46/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
47/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
48/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
49/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
50/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
51/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
52/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
53/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
54/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
55/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
56/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
57/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
58/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
59/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
60/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
61/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
62/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
63/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
64/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
65/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
66/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
67/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
68/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
69/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
70/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
71/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
72/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
73/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
74/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
75/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
76/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
77/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
78/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
79/85
APPENDIX C
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
80/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
81/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
82/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
83/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
84/85
-
8/13/2019 JMM FEIR Slope Stability Report
85/85