HomeMy WebLinkAbout12k
J
5
12
Juii-16-04 16:21 From-KNIFE.RIVER CORPORATION
TO1-530-1451 T-496 P.12/20 F -8T6
DEPARTMENT OF CON 'iERVATION
MINES AND GEOLOGY
DMG OPEN -FILE REPORT ? 000-04
. .. x.1...1
MINERAL LA. -"14D CLASSIFICATION OF THE KRC
HOLDINGS,, INC: M&T CHICO RAN01 SITE,
BUTTE ,COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FO.R
CONSTRUE::"PION AGGREGATE RESOUI ICES
2000
r_
CA Ll i OR NI A
CONSERVATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
GRAY IDAYIS
THE RESOURCES AGENCY GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT 01- CONSERVATION
MARY NICMOLS, DARRYL YOUNG
SECRETARY FOR RESWRCES 01Rf WOR
189
' Jun-16-04 16:21 .From-KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION TO1-530-1451 T7496 P.13/20 F-6T6.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - THE RESOL RCES AGENCY GRAY DAVIS Gov�enn
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERV,eMON
DMSION OF ADhIMM MON "
OMMON OF MINES AND GEOLOGY •
't DMSION OF OIL, GAS AND GEOTHO RMAL RESOURCES
DMSION OF RECYCLDYG
w. K Soni
SACRAREM0. CA 6414-6 M
ice.. (�KI12:-t0i0
• .. 7DO (P16j 724•rd66
I OPEN-FILE REPORT REIT ,EASE
OFR 2000-N "Mineral Laud C'iassification of the KRC Hold'mgs, Inc- M&T Chico Ranch Site, Ho tte County,
Califorata, for Qmtruction Aggregate Resources" by John P. Clinkeib=A Associate Engineering
Geologist, 18 page I VW,
SUMMARY: This report 1 vas prepared in response to a petition received by the State Mining amd Go Aogy Board
(SMGB) from KRC Holdings, Inc.:in February2, 2000. The petition requested that a property in western Butt: County be
classified for construction aggregate: resources under the provisions of the Surface Diming and Reclamation Act of 197S
(SMARA). The petition was transa, tted to the State Geologist for preliminary evaluation to dcu mine: 1) the dual of the
economic geologic data provided b;. the petitioner, 2) the likelihood of the property revciving the classification requested
by the petitioner, and 3) if preset or near-form land use in *0 i o mediate area indicates that Mineral Land 0 wifieat lon
is advisable. After a review of the atc Geologist's preliminary evaluation, the SMGB accepted the petition or March 9,
2000. A field examination of the M. , tT Chico Ranch site was conducted on April S, 2000.
The State Geologist has in•, estigated and subsequently classified as MR7,2a a portion of the Ord Fert.i
Quadrangle, Butte County, for cons: ruction aggregate. The property, referred to as the M&T Chico Ranch sue, is currently
leased by KRC Holdings, Inc. and i ; subsidiary, Baldwin Contracting Company.
This study is an evaluatioru of the aggregate potential of the approximately 627- acre M&T Chian Ran % site based
upon field and laboratory data provi. led by the petitioner, KRC Holdings, Inc. A field examination ofthe site Mas
conducted on April S, 2000.
This report explains the cb sification of the property and presents the conclusions reached in this stud y. It is
intended for the use of the SMGB, i e petitioner. and the lead agencies that have decision-making authority oy4a this
property under SMARA.
For a mineral deposit to be dere i significant and therefore eligible for MRZ-2 classification, it must meet
criteria established by the SMGB R. - material quality, marketability, and economic value- The significance of time resotxs
was determined by evaluating the q,ality of the deposit and its suitability as a marketable commodity, and by cilculating
the available volume, tonnage, and -slue of aggregate resources contained within the property. Data necessary .o ever luate
the property were compiled from gi:. aogic literature, proprietary company files, and limited field stilly by the I )ivision of
Mines and Geology (DMG) stat
AVAILABILI[TY: The Open-F L Report is available for reference at the Division of Mines and Geolgy ofticts in
Sacraraeuto, San Fnmcisco and Los Angeles.
OFFICES OF THE DIVISION OI ' MINES AND GEOLOGY
GEOLOGIC INFORMATION AMD PUBLICATIONS
801 K STREET MS 14-33
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
(Refersrree copies, over the -counter mics, DMG OFR mail orders)
SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION• AL OFFICE
18S BERRY STREET, SUITE 21(
SAN FRANCISCO. CA 94107
(Reference copies, over-tho-minter ..ales)
SOUTUERN CAL"RMA REG ZONAL OMICE
6SS SOUTH HOPE STREET, #9d i
LOS ANGELES, CA 90017
(Reftreneo oapies,over-the-counter • des)
190
Jun-16-04 16:21 From—KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION
101-530-1451
OPEN—FILE REPORT 2000-04
T-496 P.14/20 F-816
MINERAL LAND CLP SSIFICATION OF THE KRC HOLDINGS, INC. M&T Cl lICO
RANCH SITE, BUTTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FOR CONSTRUCTION AGGRI-GATE
RESOURCES
By.
John P. Clinkenbeard
2000
u..
CALI1 'ORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
801 K Street. MS 12-30
Sacramento, Califomia 95814-3531
191
Jun -16-04 16:22
From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION -
701-530-1451 T-496 P-15/20 F-676
I
I
TABLE
Table. Average annijal per capita aggregate consumption rates
for Central Valley counties and production -consumption
(P -C) regiom ................................................................................................... 9
FIGURES
Figure 1. Location of th 3 KRC Holdings, Inc. M&T Chico Ranch site .............................2
Figure 2. Relationship ..of MRZ categories to the resourcetreserve
classificaffor, system ............. I ... " .................................................. .......... o ....... 6
Figure 3. Generalized t,- eologic map of the KRC Holdings, Inc. M&T
ChicoRancl- site ............................................................................................ 13
Figure 4. Mineral Land GlasOcation of the KRC Holdings, Inc. M&T
Chico Ranch site for construction aggregate ................................................15
192
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVESUMMARY ................................................... ............................................. fli
INTRODUCTION......... .................................. .............. I .............................................
BACKGROUND............
...................................................................................................
THE SURFACE MINING ,tND RECLAMATION ACT OF 1975 (SMARA) ..................:................1
MINERAL LAND CLAS. 311FICATION .................................. I ............................. .................
4
MINERAL RESOURCE 2*,)NE (MRZ) CATEGORIES ..............................................................
4
MINERAL RESOURCE-F-,EsERvE CLAsswicxnoN NOMENCLATURE .....................................
5
CLASSSCATIONCRITFIUA ...............................................................................................
8
OVERVIEW OF CONS',RUCTION AGGREGATE ..........................................................
9
AGGREGATE QuALrrY . .................................................................................................
10
ALLUVIAL SAND AND 0 AVEL VERSUS CRUSHED STONE AGGREGATE ..............................11
FAc ToRs AFFECTING i,GGREGATE DEposfr QuAm .....................................................11
CLASSIFICATION OF **I'HE M&T CHICO RANCH SITE ...............................................12.
GEOLOGIC SUMMARY . .................................................................................................
12
MATERIAL QUALITY ..... ..................................................... I .... I .... I ............. I ...................
12
THRESHOLDVALUE ...................I......... ............I........'... I .......................:.............12
PROPERTYEVALuAlio -j ................................................................................................
14
CONCLUSIONS.......... ...................................................................................................
16
REFERENCESCITED ................................... .............................................................
17
I
I
TABLE
Table. Average annijal per capita aggregate consumption rates
for Central Valley counties and production -consumption
(P -C) regiom ................................................................................................... 9
FIGURES
Figure 1. Location of th 3 KRC Holdings, Inc. M&T Chico Ranch site .............................2
Figure 2. Relationship ..of MRZ categories to the resourcetreserve
classificaffor, system ............. I ... " .................................................. .......... o ....... 6
Figure 3. Generalized t,- eologic map of the KRC Holdings, Inc. M&T
ChicoRancl- site ............................................................................................ 13
Figure 4. Mineral Land GlasOcation of the KRC Holdings, Inc. M&T
Chico Ranch site for construction aggregate ................................................15
192
IJun -16-04 16:22
1
t
From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION
701-530-1451
T-496 P.16/20 F-876
EXECUTIVE SUMMAI;, Y
In response to s petition submitted under the provisions of the Surface Mining
and Reclamation Act ei 1975 (SMARA), the State Geologist has- investigated and
subsequently classifies as MRZ-2a a portion of the OM Ferry Quadrangle, i6utwi.
County, for constructio a aggregate. The property, referred to as the M&T Chico Ranch
site, Is currently leasecl by KRC Holdings, Inc. and its subsidiary, Baldwin Contracting
Company.
This study is an :valuation of the aggregate potential of the approximatery 627 -
acre M&T Chico Rand site based upon field and laboratory data provided by the
petitioner, KRC Holdirn. s, Inc. A field examination of the site was conducted on April 6,
2000.
This report expl,: ins the classification of the property and presents the
conclusions reached in this study. It is intended for the use of the State Mining ;md
Geology Board (SMG6 i, the petitioner, and the lead agencies that have decision-
making authority over this property under SMARA.
For a mineral dE: posit to be considered significant and therefore eligible for MRZ-
2 classification, it must meet criteria established by the SMGB for material (juality;
marketability, and ecor 3mic value. The significance of the resources was determined by
evaluating the quality o: the deposit and its suitability as a marketable cornrnodity, and
by calculating the avail. Able volume, tonnage, and value of aggregate resources
contained within the prnperty. Data necessary to evaluate the property were compiled
from geologic literature. proprietary company files, and limited field study by the Division
of Mines and Geology i DMG) staff' of the Department of Conservation.
It Is concluded that:
• Aggregate test results provided by the petitioner and analyzed by DMG staft indicate
that, with approprial 3 processing, the material present on the M&T Chico Ranch site
could meet the spe; ifications for use in a variety of construction aggregate products
-including base, asps Baltic concrete, and portland cement concrete.
• Aggregate resource!,, present at the M&T Chico Ranch site far exceed the minimum
threshold value of 12.5 million 1998 -dollars (approximately 13.1 million 200(: -dollars)
established by the ; : MGB.
• The M&T Chico Rai Bch site has been classified MRZ-2a for construction agcxegate
as.shown on Figure: 4 of this report.
H
193
�. Jun -16-04 16:22 From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION 701-530-1451 T-496 P-IT/20 F-876
1
11,
The site consists of approximately 627 acres on the M&T Chico Ranch in
western Butte County a:)out 7 miles southwest of Chico (Figure 1). The area is :;hown
on the U.S. Geological Survey Ord Ferry 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle. Tiae site is
within sections 13, 24,25, and 36 (projected), T. 21 N., R.1 W., MDBM. KRC Holdings,
Inc. and its subsidiary, l.,aldwin Contracting Company, have a lease agreement with the
property owner, Pacific Realty Associates L.P., and have submitted an application to the
Buttd County Departme•iit of Development Services to mine the site.
In the past, the property owner has mined a small amount of aggregate:fiom the
site to surface roads on the ranch property. There Is no existing SMARA mineral land
classification study eov:. ring the area.
The Surface Mining arid Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA)
' SMARA require:: the State Geologist to dassrfy land based on the pmseocce,
absence, or likely oem 'enoe of significant mineral deposits In certain areas of the state
subject to urban expan::; ion or land uses Incompatible with mining. The areas to be
classified are set forth I:iy the SMGB as shown on a priority list established. in Rtmolution
No. 82-14 (SMGB, 198::), and by the SMGB's acceptance of petitions for classlication
of specific properties. 11* SMGB, upon receipt and acceptance of the dassification
information, transmits h to the appropriate lead agencies for Incorporation into their
general plans and for u ;e in their land -use planning process.
194
'
INTRODUCTION
Background
This report was 1: repared in response to a petition received by the State Mining
and Geology Board (SK-IGB) from KRC Holdings, Inc, on February 2, 2000. The petition
requested that a proper y in western Butte County be classified for construction
aggregate resources under the provisions of the Surface Mining and Redamaticn Act of
1975 (SMARA). The pe- ition was transmitted to the State Geologist for preliminExy
evaluation to determine 1) the quality of the economio-geologic data provided by the
petitioner, 2) the likelihc: )d of the property receiving the classification requested by the
petitioner, and 3) if pre umt, or near -future land use in the immediate area indiew.es that
Mineral Land Classifica• ion is advisable. After a review of the State Geologist's
preliminary evaluation, i,e SMGB accepted the petition on March 9, 2000. A fieid
examination of the M&1 Chico Ranch site was conducted on April 5, 2000.
11,
The site consists of approximately 627 acres on the M&T Chico Ranch in
western Butte County a:)out 7 miles southwest of Chico (Figure 1). The area is :;hown
on the U.S. Geological Survey Ord Ferry 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle. Tiae site is
within sections 13, 24,25, and 36 (projected), T. 21 N., R.1 W., MDBM. KRC Holdings,
Inc. and its subsidiary, l.,aldwin Contracting Company, have a lease agreement with the
property owner, Pacific Realty Associates L.P., and have submitted an application to the
Buttd County Departme•iit of Development Services to mine the site.
In the past, the property owner has mined a small amount of aggregate:fiom the
site to surface roads on the ranch property. There Is no existing SMARA mineral land
classification study eov:. ring the area.
The Surface Mining arid Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA)
' SMARA require:: the State Geologist to dassrfy land based on the pmseocce,
absence, or likely oem 'enoe of significant mineral deposits In certain areas of the state
subject to urban expan::; ion or land uses Incompatible with mining. The areas to be
classified are set forth I:iy the SMGB as shown on a priority list established. in Rtmolution
No. 82-14 (SMGB, 198::), and by the SMGB's acceptance of petitions for classlication
of specific properties. 11* SMGB, upon receipt and acceptance of the dassification
information, transmits h to the appropriate lead agencies for Incorporation into their
general plans and for u ;e in their land -use planning process.
194
jwn-16-04 16:22 From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION TO . 1-530-1451 T-406 P-18/20 F -8T6
Krrj
A
GLMN Amwww Stfn S\
COUNTY bybcodaftmoo COUNTY
Figure 1. Location :)f the KRC holdings, Inc., M&T Chico Ranch site in Butte Cow
Californi 3k
Jun -16-04 16:23 FroerKNIFE RIVER CORPORATION
TO1-530-1451 T-496 P.19/20 F-876
The primary gaga! of mineral land classification is to ensure that the mineral
resource potential of lay ds is recognized and considered before land -use. decisions that
could preclude mining arra made. The availability of mineral resources is vital to our
society. Yet, for most mi neral commodities, economic deposits a're rare, isolate+i
occurrences. In addition, access to land for purposes of mineral exploration an(', mine
development has become increasingly difficult because Callibmia is faced with growing
land -use competition. A:;; a consequence, local planning agencies are confronted with
increasingly difficult tarn i -use decisions. if the -minerals industry is to continue supplying
raw materials for Califon.1ia, it Is essential that areas containing significant mineal
resources be identified :.;o that this information can be incorporated into land-us,i
planning decisions.
Jun -16-04 16:23 From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION . 701-530-1451. T-486 P.20/20 F! -8T6
MRZ-3a:, An -,as containing known mineral occurrences of undetermin9d
mineral resource significance. Further exploration within these -
are: 3s could result in the reclassification of specific localities into
MF Z -2a or MRZ-2b categories. As shown on the California Mineral
Land Classification System Diagram, MRZ-3 is divided into '.VIRZ-3a
ant: MRZ-3b on the basis of knowledge of economic characteristics
of the resources.
MRZ-3b: Arras containing inferred mineral occurrences of undeterrnioed
mineral resource significance. Land classified MRZ-3b reprc--.ents
areis In geologic settings that appear.to be favorable envirc nments .
4
11
197
MINERAL LAND CLA;:;SIFICATION
As set forth in S =action 2761 (b) of SMARA, the State Geologist shall classify land
solely on the basis of Qicologic factors and without regard4o existing land use. Area-,
subject to mineral land Jassification studies are divided by the State Geologist into
various Mineral Resouu :e Zone (MRZ) categories that reflect varying degree o mineral
resource potential. They MRZ criteria and nomenclature adopted by the SMGB (I)MG,
2000) are described be, ow.
Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) Categories
MRZ-1: Areas where available geologic information indicates that little
like::lihood exists for the presence of significant mineral resonirces.
MRZ-2a: Ani. as underlain by mineral deposits where geologic data indicate
tht t significant measured or indicated resources are present. As
shi.,wn on the California Mineral Land Classification S ..tem
Dkigram (Figure 2), MRZ-2 is divided into MRZ-2a and MR;; -2b on
the.basis of degree of knowledge and economic factors. An)as
clz,:;sified MRZ-2a contain discovered mineral deposits that are
eiti- er measured or indicated reserves as determined by such
evi�iienee as drilling records, sample analysis, surface. expo:wre,
ani I mine information. land included in MRZ-2a is of prime
IM.: ortance because it contains known economic mineral deposits.
MRZ--2b_ An.:as underlain by mineral deposits where geologic infomrition
indicates that significant inferred resources are present Areas
classified MRZ-2b contain discovered mineral deposits that are
sig,iificant inferred resources as determined by their lateral
md.;nsion from proven deposits or their similarity to proven
der assns. Further exploration could result in upgrading area:;
cla :sifted MRZ-2b to MRZ-2a.
MRZ-3a:, An -,as containing known mineral occurrences of undetermin9d
mineral resource significance. Further exploration within these -
are: 3s could result in the reclassification of specific localities into
MF Z -2a or MRZ-2b categories. As shown on the California Mineral
Land Classification System Diagram, MRZ-3 is divided into '.VIRZ-3a
ant: MRZ-3b on the basis of knowledge of economic characteristics
of the resources.
MRZ-3b: Arras containing inferred mineral occurrences of undeterrnioed
mineral resource significance. Land classified MRZ-3b reprc--.ents
areis In geologic settings that appear.to be favorable envirc nments .
4
11
197
Jun -16-04 16:31 From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION 701-530=1451 T-497 P-01/18 F-877
MINERAL RESOURCE: 4 concentration of naturally occurring solid, liquid, cc gaseous
material in or on ta: a earth's crust in such form and amount that economic
extraction of a coi itmodity from the concentration is currently or potentially
feasible. The tern!; resource and mineral resource are synonymous in this
report.
4i
1
198
for the occurrence of specific mineral deposits. Further exploration
-co
old result in the reclassification of all or part of these are is into
tht:. MRZ-2a or MRZ-2b categories.
MRZ-4: An: as of no known mineral occurrences wb6re geologic infmm><itton
da -s not rule out either the presence or absence of signficmt
mit i eral resources.
The distinction bAween the MRZ-1 and the MRZ-4 categories g es is importaott for
land -use consideration:., it must be emphasized that MRZ-4 classification does not
imply that there is littl!: likelihood for the presence of mineral resources, but
rather that there is a 1;1ck of knowledge regarding mineral occurrence.
Further
exploration could result n the reclassification of land in MRZ-4 areas to MRZ-3 cK
MRZ-2.
Mineral Resource-Res;rve Classification Nomenclature
The following definitions are important when studying the different rescour`;e
categories used in the ( alifomia Mineral Land Classiticatlon System Diagram (Figure
2). Particular attention s 1iould be given to the distinction between a mineral deposit and
a resource to how -I
and mineral deposit may relate to resources.
MINERAL. DEPOSIT: A •iaturally occurring concentration of minerals in amounts or
arrangements thri t under certain conditions may constitute a mineral resoan ce.
The conoenttatioi i may be of value for its, chemical or physical characterisge or
for both of these I- roperties.
tMINERAL
OCCURREN+.:E: Any ore or economic mineral in any concentration found in
bedrock or as flog, t, especially a valuable mineral in sufficient eonce*4- oa to
''.
suggest further e;- ploration.
ECONOMIC: This tern h nplies that profitable extraction orroductio
p n under Befit ted
Investment assumptions has been established, analytically demonstrated. or
assumed with rea ::unable certainty. .
MINERAL RESOURCE: 4 concentration of naturally occurring solid, liquid, cc gaseous
material in or on ta: a earth's crust in such form and amount that economic
extraction of a coi itmodity from the concentration is currently or potentially
feasible. The tern!; resource and mineral resource are synonymous in this
report.
4i
1
198
Jun -16-04 16:31 From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION
Tol-530-1451 T -487 P.02/18 F-87
CALIFORNIA MINERAL LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM DIAGRAM
AREAS OF
AREAS OF UNDETERMINED UNKNOWN
MINERAL RESOURCE MINERAL
SIGNIFICANCE RESOURCE
A
SIGNIFICANCE
AREAS OF
AREAS OF I[::ENTIFIED
NO MINERAL
O.
MINERAL RI: SOURCE
p4
SIGNIFICANCE
SIGNIFICANCE
MINERAL.
MINERAL
MRZ-1
Demonstrated
OCCURRENCE
OCCURRENCE
0CC1 JRRENCE
Inferred
Measureo�nd+cated
MRZ-2a
MRZ-2b
0
z
U
Inferred
"'
Reserves
Resources
!
-------------------
- -----------------
zo
MRZ-2a
MRZ 2b
>
0
Marginal
Inferred
Reserves
Marginal
$..
$--------------------Resources-------......----
w
o
MRZ-2b
MIRZ-2b
�z
°o
Demonstrated
Inferred
'"
Subeconomic
::ubeconomic
Resources
Resources
AREAS OF
AREAS OF UNDETERMINED UNKNOWN
MINERAL RESOURCE MINERAL
SIGNIFICANCE RESOURCE
A
SIGNIFICANCE
AREAS OF
v
NO MINERAL
O.
RESOURCE
p4
SIGNIFICANCE
U
0
MINERAL.
MINERAL
MRZ-1
z.
OCCURRENCE
AREAS OF
AREAS OF UNDETERMINED UNKNOWN
MINERAL RESOURCE MINERAL
SIGNIFICANCE RESOURCE
A
SIGNIFICANCE
MRZ-3a
MRZ-3b 1ARZ-4
NO
KNOWN
INFERRED
_
KNOWN
MINERAL.
MINERAL
W NERAL.
OCCURRENCE
OCCURRENCE
0CC1 JRRENCE
f---- Increasing Knowledge of Resources
Figure 2. Relationship of h' RZ categories to the resourcetreserve dassiRcation system.
Adapted from thi . U.S. Bureau of W eW S Geological Survey (1980)
g
199
Jun -16-04 16:31 FrwKNIFE RIVER CORPORATION 701-530-1451 T-407 P.03/18 F -OTT
MARGINAL RESOURCriS: The part of the inferred resource base that, at thea tin re of
determination, wo,ild be economically producible, given postulated changes in
economic or techs i ologic factors.
SUBECONOMIC RESOiI.IRCES: The part of identified resources that does not m:et the
�. economic criteria of marginal reserves and marginal resources.
7
200
RESERVES: The part df the resource base that could be economically e*act(.:d or
produced at the time of determination. In this report, the term reserves has been
further restricted-) to include only those depositsfor which a valid mining 1►er it
has been granted by the appropriate lead agency.
IDENTIFIED MINERAII.. RESOURCES: Resources whose location, grade, quality, and
quantity are knc:-,vn or estimated from specific geologic evidence. Identis3d
mineral resource s include economic, marginally economic, and subecon )rTdc
components. To reflect varying degrees of geologic certainty, these ecor omic
divisions can be: subdivided into demonstrated and inferred.
DEMONSTRATH.-D: A term for the sum of measured plus indicated.
MEASUR ED: Quantity is computed from dimensions revealed in c;utcrops,
tre: ach workings, or drill holes; grade,andlorualuare
fro n the results of detailed sampling. The sites for inspftic n,
sampling, and measurement are spaced so closely and the
gee: Logic character is so well defined that size, shape, depth, and
mineral content of the resource are well established.
INDICATf:: D: Quantity and grade and/or quality are computed from;
infurma 'o similar b n s mrlar to that used for measured resources, but the
site; V for inspection, sampling, and measurement are farther apart
'
or otherwise less adequately spaced. The degree of assuratice,
although lower than that for measured resources, is high ern)ugh to
tINFERRED:
assa.tme continuity between points of observation.
Esth-iates are based on an assumed oontlnuity beyond mearured
and/or In:licated resources for which there is geologic evidence. lutferred
resourcirs may or may not be supported by samples or measurements.
MARGINAL RESERVE :1: The part of the demonstrated reserve base that, at the time of
determination, borders on being economically producible. The essential
I'
characteristic of ti pis term is economic uncertainty. included are resources that
would be producil -le, given postulated changes in economic or technologic:
factors.
MARGINAL RESOURCriS: The part of the inferred resource base that, at thea tin re of
determination, wo,ild be economically producible, given postulated changes in
economic or techs i ologic factors.
SUBECONOMIC RESOiI.IRCES: The part of identified resources that does not m:et the
�. economic criteria of marginal reserves and marginal resources.
7
200
Jun -16-04 16:31 From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION
TO1-530-1451 T -49T P.04/18 F-87
Classification Criteri 3
To be consider :d significant for the purpose of mineral land classificalion, a
mineral deposit, or a 1 -roup of mineral deposits that can be mined as a unit, mirst meet
marketability and thre-: hold value criteria adopted by the SMGB (DMG, 2000). The
criteria vary for differel of minerals depending on (1) whether they are strategic or non-
strategic minerals, (2) heir uniqueness or rarity, and (3) their commodity -type . atego y
(metallic minerals or it Justrial minerals). For example, to be considered signifi.�ant, the
threshold value of the Iirst marketable product for a metallic ore deposit (such as a gold
deposit) is $1,250,000 1998 -dollars, $2,500,0001998 -dollars for an industrial mineral
deposit (such as a d1a3 )mite or day deposit), and $12,500,0001998 -dollars for a
construction aggregatt,- deposit (such as a sand and gravel or crushed stone d, -posit).
To adjust for inflation & nce 1998, each of these values is multiplied by 1.052, a factor
based on the annual U S. consumer price index (Department of Finance website, April
2000) to calculate the V treshold values in 2000 dollars. The results are:
Wallic Deposits $ 1,315,000
Inc ustrial Minerals $ 2,630,000
Ca,istruction Aggregate $13,152,000
8
201
1
J
Jun -16-04 16:32 FrwKNIFE RIVER CORPORATION 701-530-1451 T-497 P.05/18 HTT
OVERVIEW OF. CONS.- TRUCTION AGGREGATE
Sand, gravel, a id crushed stone are 'construction:materials.- These
commodities, collectively referred to as aggregate, provide the bulk and str(rng>lh to
Portland cement concr ,,te (PCC), asphaltic concrete (AC, commonly called "black t(>p^),
plaster, and stucco. Ac gregate is also used as road base, subbase, railroad ba last, and
fill. Aggregate nomralll, provides from 80 to 100% of the material volume in the above.
uses.
The building anc paving industries consume large quantities of aggregate and
future demand for this, ximmodity is expected to increase throughout California
Aggregate materials ani essential to modem society, both to maintain the existing
infrastructure and to privide for new construction. Therefore, aggregate materiels are a
resource of great impo, tance to the economy of any developing area. Previous DMG
studies in the Central % alley area indicate that the annual per -capita consumption of
construction aggregate varies between about 5 and 10 tons and averages
approximately 7.5 tons Table). Because aggregate is a low unit value, high bul( weight
commodity, it must be btained from nearby sources to minimize the dollar cost
Table. Average annual per -capita aggregate consumption rates for Central Valley
counties and d ,roduction-consumption (P -C) regions.
9
202
AVERAGE ANNUAL.
AREA
PER -CAPITA
AGGREGATE
TIME PERIOD
REFFERUNCE
{:CONSUMPTION (tons)
1960 to 1998
1980 to 1995
1960 to 1994
Clinkenbeard, 1999
Dupras, 1997
--
Taylor, 1997
Merced County
8.1
Shasta County
8.0
Tulare County
P-C Region
5.3
Stansiaus Courtly
7.3
1960 to 1991
M99ins & Dupas, 1993
Stockton -Lodi
P -C Region
8.5
1960 to 1985
1961 to 1982
Jensen & Silva, 1988
Cole & Fuller, -;988
Fresno P -C Region
7.0 ,
Sacramento -Fairfield
P -C Region
10.2
1960 do 1980
1984 to 1984
Duprds, 1988
Habel & Campion. 19B8
MaryaWP-CRegionl uba Gly
5 4
Bakersfield P -C Region
7.4
1960 to 1984
Cole, 1988
AVERAGE
7.6
9
202
IJun -16-04 16:32
From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION
701-530-1451 T -49T P-06/18 F—STT
to the aggregate consurr, ;r and other environmental and economic costs associated
with transportation. If nes rby sources do not exist, then transportation costs can garickly
exceed the value of the Eiggregate. In addition to increasing the cost of aggregate to the
consumer, transporting a Igregate from distant sources also results in increased fuel
consumption, air pollutior, , traffic congestion, and road maintenance. In fact,
transportation cost is the principal constraint defining the market area for an aggregate
' mining operation. These -I.ictors set construction aggregate apart from many other
mineral commodities, suo i as gold or copper, that may reach markets far removed from
the areas in which they ai : mined.
Aggregate Quality
ty
Rarely, even from 1 ie highest -grade deposits, is in-place aggregate raw malerial
physically or chemically si rited for every type of aggregate use. Every potential deposit
must be tested to determit te how much .of the material can meet specifications for a
particular use, and what F, ocessing is required. Specifications for various uses of
aggregate have been esti: blished by several agencies. such as the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation, the U.S. Arn .y Corps of Engineers, and the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans), to ensure that aggregate is satisfactory for specific uses.
These agencies and other major consumers test aggregate using standard testing
procedures by the America in Society for Testing Materials (ASTM), the American
Association of State Highvay Officials (AASHO), and other organizations.
Most aggregate specifications have been established to ensure the manufacture
of strong, durable structun s capable of withstanding the physical and chemical effects
of weathering and use. Fo example, specifications for PCC and concrete products
prohibit or limit the. use of r 2ck materials containing mineral substances such as
gypsum, pyrite, zeolite, op e1, chalcedony, chert, siliceous shale, volcanic glass, and
some high -silica volcanic r icks. Gypsum retards the setting firm of Portland cernen:
pyrite dissociates to yield - ulfuric acid and an iron oxide stain; and other substance,;
contain silica in a form that reacts with alkali substances In the cement, resulting in
cracks and "pop -outs." Alk all reactions in PCC can be minimized by the addition of
pozzolanic admixtures suc i as fly ash.
Specifications also ;:all for precise particle -size distribution for the various usc;s of
aggregate. Aggregate is a mmonly classified into two general sizes: coarse and find.
Coarse aggregate is rock r, stained on a 3/8" or a #4 U.S. sieve. Fine aggregate pas -;es
a 3/8 inch sieve and is reta ined on a #200 U.S. sieve (a sieve with 200 weaves per
inch). For some uses, such as asphalt paving, particle shape is specified. Caltrans
Standard Specifications (11::92) require that at least 25% by weight of coarse aggregate
(1/4 to 3/4 inch diameter) u .ed as Class 2 aggregate base material shall be crushed
particles. Furthermore, agg -egate material used with bituminous binder to form t;ealing
coats on road surfaces shall consist of at least 90% by weight of crushed particles.
Crushed stone is preferable to natural gravel in AC because asphalt adheres better 'o
10
r
203
1
I
1
Jun -16-04 16:32 From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION TO1-530-1451 T-497 P.07/18 F-877
broken surfaces than t:) rounded surfaces, and the interlocking of angular partirJes
strengthens the AC and road base.
Alluvial Sand and Gavel Versus Crushed Stone Aggregate
The preferred u:..e of one aggregate material over another in construction
practices depends not ;mly on specification standards, but also on economic
considerations. Alluvial gravel is preferred to pushed stone for PCC aggregate because
the rounded particles ai' alluvial sand and gravel result in a wet mix that Is easkir to work
than a mix made of ani;i ular fragments. The workability of a mix consisting of poruand
eementwith crushed s::)ne aggregate can be improved by adding more sand and water,
but more cement must :hen be added to the mix to meet concrete durability standards.
This results in a more e: g3ensive concrete mix. In addition, aggregate from a cnished
stone deposit is typic *i more expensive than that from an alluvial deposit due to the
additional costs assodated with mining and processing crushed stone. Although more
care is required in pouri ig and placing a wet mix containing crushed stone, PCR; made
with this aggregate is a:. satisfactory as that made with alluvial sand and gravel of
comparable rock quality. .
Factors Affecting Aggregate Deposit Quality
The major factory. that affect the quality of an aggregate deposit are the rack type
and the degree of weati:ering of the deposit. Rode type determines the hardnes
durability,. and potential !%heroical reactivity of the rock when mixed with cement :o make
concrete. In alluvial Ban.I and gravel deposits, rock type is variable and reflects ifie
rocks present in the drai,zage basin of the stream or river. in crushed stone deposits,
rock type is typically les!. variable, although in some types of deposits such as
sandstones or volcanic: there may be significant variability of rock type witftin a deposit
Rock type may also inflc anee aggregate shape. For example, some metamorphic rocks
such as slates tend to bi 3ak into thin platy. fragments that are unsuitable for many
aggregate uses while m:- ny volcanic and granitic rocks break into blocky fragments
more suited to a wide Wa"of aggregate uses. Deposit type also affects aggre±late
shape. For example, in pluvial sand and gravel deposits the natural abrasive aolon of
the stream rounds the &: ges of rock particles in contrast to the sharp edges of p articles
from crushed stone depi::sits.
Weathering is the in-place physical or chemical decay of rock materials at or near
the earth's surface. Wea'hering commonly decreases the physical strength of then dasts
and may make the mate; al suitable only for uses in which high strength and durability
are not specified. Weathi. ring may also alter the chemical composition of the aggregate
making it less suitable fo some aggregate uses. if weathering is seven:. enough, the
material may not be suit:::ble for use as construction aggregate. Typically, the older a
deposit is, the more likely. it is to have been weathered, and the severity of W-athering
commonly increases with increasing age of the deposit.
11
204
Jun -16-04 16:33 From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION TO1-530-1451. T -46T P.08/18 F-877
CLASSIFICATION (:IF THE M&T CHICO RANCH SITE
Geologic Summary
The KRC Holcl ngs, Inc. M&T Chico Ranch site is about? miles southw?
st city of Chico. The sit-; lies in the floodplain of the Sacramento River and is ab )ut 1' =he
' miles east of the pre:,.W river channel. The site is characterized by subdued
topography, with elevidions ranging from less than 105 to.120 feet. Much of tha site and
the surrounding area I Lave been leveled and are under cultivation. The am_as :hat have
not been leveled for a;dcultural use are characterized by slight rises and swalI)e typical .
of areas within the mc -ander belt of a large river:
The petitioned ;trea is in the Great Valley geomorphic province and is underlain
by Quaternary alluvim-i deposited by the Sacramento River. The most reoent sleologie
map of the area is thal of Helley and Harwood (1985), who mapped the M&T CWoo
Ranch site as predominantly Holocene stream channel deposits with a small aoea of
Holocene marsh depc,:;its in the southern part of the site (Figure 3). The sirearn
channel deposits whic:ih make up the majority of the site consist of gravels, sands, and.
slits derived from sour ;e regions in the Sierra Nevada, the IQamath Mountains, and the
Coast Ranges. It is likAy that the stream channel deposits at the M&T Chico Ranch site
are an abandoned me: -ender of the Sacramento River.
Material Quality
Proprietary mat!:iiais testing results provided by the petitioner. were Compared to
published Caltrans spe: zifications (Caltrans, 1992) by DMG staff. The results stow that,
with appropriate prose; sing, the material present on the M&T Chico Ranch site Could
meet the specification„ for use in a variety of construction aggregate products including.
base, AC, and PCC.
Threshold Value
DMG staff made volumetric
calculations of aggregate resources contained in the
M&T Chico Ranch site eased on the drill-hole and laboratory data provided by the
petitioner. These caICU :htions indicate that the site contains resources of constrcidion
aggregate that greatly u=eed the threshold value of 12.5million 1998 dollars
(approximately 13.1 mil ion 2000 dollars) established by the SMGB. The results :)f these
calculations are proprie ,ary and cannot be released in this report It is
' however, to demonstraf:; that the M&T Chico Ranch site contains aggrega a resourcesthat exceed the minimus n threshold value without revealing Confidential data.
rl
12
205
Im
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
r
Jun -16-04 16:33 From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION
TO1-530-1451 T -49T P.09/18 F-877"
Base map from U.S. Geoiopleai Survey 3rd Ferry 7_54"k to Quadrangle (JM)
EXPI. ANATION
Qsc Holocene Witam Channel Deposits
QM Holocene Mar:;h Deposits
... Contact
N
0 2000 4010
beet
Scale.• 1:48,000
Figure 3. Generalized (,I 301091C map of the KRC Holdings, Inc., M&T Chico Ranch
site. ModNec, from Holley and Harwood, 1985.
13
` 206
Jun -16-04 16:33 From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION
Y
TO1-530-1451 T -49T P.1O/18 1-87
Given an aver-ige selling price of $5.30 per tan for construction aggregate
(provided by the petiti :)ner), approximately 2.5 million to of resources neded to
meet the minimum�hr�mhold value. Using an avenge density of 1.5 tons Per cubic yard
and a 15% waste fad. -or, the depth of mining necessary to meet the threshold value over
the 627 acre site is afgwoximately 2 feet. The average thickness of sand and gravel
deposits under the sit:. greatly exceeds 2 feet.
Property Evaluation
A one -day field investigation of the property by DMG staff, along with an
evaluation of the subsa. rface information and materials test'data provided by tha
Petitioner, indicates thy:: following:
• The M&T Chico Ranch site contains resources of sand and gravel suitable for use in
a variety of c onstru, tion aggregate products including base, AC, and PCC.
• The resources pres!:nt greatly exceed the threshold requirements established by the
SMGB for inclusion into the MRZ 2a category for construction aggregate.
Results of the classifimidon of the M&T Chico Ranch property are shown in 1=igcire 4.
14
207
s
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Jun -16-04 16:34 From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION
TO1-530-1451
T -40T P:11/18 F -STT
N
E: (PLAHATIOH
MAZ 2a Areas underlain by v ineral deposits where geologic data 0 2000 4000
Indicate that signifies,nt rneasured or indicated resources U a
are present Feet
Scales 1:48,000
Figure 4. Mineral Land C: lassification of the KRC Holdings, Inc., M&T Chico Ranch
site for constra-.4ion aggregate.
.45
208
-Jun -16-04 16:34 From -KNIFE RIVER0 - -
C RPORATION TOt-530 1451 T -48T P 12/18 F 8TT
CONCLUSIONS
In accordance with the ' mandates of the SMARA, the staff of DMG, Under the direction of the State C: eologist, has evaluated the M&rChlco Ranch site controlled by
KRC Moldings, Inc. It i. concluded that significant high quality construction aggregate
resources are present, Pn this property. These resources meet the suitability arid
' threshold criteria established by the SMGB for inclusion into the MRZ-2a category for
construction aggregate
1 "
a
-16 !
• j _ 209
Jun -16-04 16:34 From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION
TO1-530-1451 T -49T P.13/18 F-87
Jensen, L.S. and Silva, NI.A., 1988, Mineral land classification: portland cement
' concrete -grade aggregatr:. in the Stockton -Lodi Production -Consumption Region:
Califomia Division of Mints and Geology, Special Report 160.
17
'
210
REFERENCES CITED
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 1992, Standard specificado>>s.
--
Clinkenbeard, J.P,, 19ii9, Mineral land classification of Merced County, Califom:a:
Division of Mines and ( ieology, Open -File Report 99-08.
Cole, J.W., 1988, Mines al land classification: Aggregate materials in the Bakersfield
Production-Consumptka Region: California Division
of Mines and Geology, Special
Report 147.
'
Cole,
J.W. and Fuller, G.R., 1988, Mineral land dassificatio matelogy, �e
Fresno Production-Con.aumption Region: California Mines
'
Division of and
Special Report 158.21 i).
Department of Finance website, 2000, Implicit Price Deflator, State and Local
Government Purchases of Goods and Services: httP:/Mm.dof.ca.gov/htmlns—d;jta/
LatestEconData/Data/P. ioes/Bbdsl96.XLS
'
Division of Mines and G::ology, 2000, California surface mining and reclamation 3olicies
and procedures: Specie Publication 51, third revision.
'
Dupras, D,L„ 1988, Min, :ral land daWfication: Portland cement concrete grade
aggregate in the Sacran Sento-Fairfield Production -Consumption Region: California
Division of Mines and er-ology, Special Report 156.
Dupras, D.L,1997, Mirn: rail land classification of alluvial sand andravel,
stone, volcanic cinders, h mestone, and diatomite within Shasta County, Californe
Division
of Mines and Gc-ology, Open-Fde Report 97-03,18e p.
'
.,
Hable, R.S. and Campion, LF., 1988, Mineral land classification: portland cemen t
concrete -grade aggregat;; in the Yuba City-Marysville Production-ConsumptionREgion:
California
-
Division of Minas and Geology, Special Report 132.
Helley,
E.J. and Harwood, D.S., 1985, Geologic ma of the elate Cenozoic deposit; of
the Sacramento Valley a d northern Sierran foothills,
California: U.S. Geological :iurvey
Miscellaneous Field Stwes Map MF -1790, Sheet 3 of 5, 1:62,500.
Higgins, C.T. and Dupras; D.L. 1993, Mineral land classification of Stanislaus County,
California: Division of Miry -n and Geology, Special
plates. Report 173,174 p., 4 appendices, 1.1
Jensen, L.S. and Silva, NI.A., 1988, Mineral land classification: portland cement
' concrete -grade aggregatr:. in the Stockton -Lodi Production -Consumption Region:
Califomia Division of Mints and Geology, Special Report 160.
17
'
210
Jun -1.6-04 16:34 From -KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION TO1 530 1451 T -49T P.14/18 F -87T
SMGB, 1982, Priodde:* for the Classification of mineral lands in urban and nonurban
areas: State Mining or 1 Geology Board, Resolution No. 82-14,2 p.
Taylor, G.C.; 1997, Mii neral land classification of concrete aggregate resources in the
' Tulare County Produci,on-Consumption Region, California: Califomia Division a)f Mines
and Geology, Open-Fil-3 Report 97-01.
U.S. Bureau of Mines nd U.S. Geological Survey, 1980, Principles of a
resourcelreserve classification for minerals: V.S. Geological Survey Circular 831, 5 p.
Youngs, L.G. and Miller, R.V., 1999, Update of mineral land classification: aggr--gate
' materials in the Fresno Production -Consumption Region, California: Division of Mines
and Geology, Open-Fil• 3 Report 99-02, 39 p.
1
1
18
W
' 211