Triple PG Sand-Mine Lawsuit Slides to Year 7 as Problems Get Worse
8/14/25 – A State of Texas lawsuit against the Triple PG sand mine that began in 2019 will now be tried, at the earliest, in 2026. Meanwhile problems at the mine have gotten worse. Breaches in their dikes that triggered the lawsuit have recurred. And five pipelines carrying highly volatile liquids (HVL) are now exposed and suspended over another breach.
Trial Date Set for Feb. 2026
According to the fourth revised scheduling order issued by a Travis County district court, the lawsuit brought by the State of Texas against the Triple PG sand mine in Porter will now go to a jury no earlier than February 2026.
The State first sued Triple PG in 2019 for mining sand in a pit whose dikes had been breached in at least two places. White Oak Creek was flowing through an area being actively mined and then out through Caney Creek into the headwaters of Lake Houston, which supplies drinking water for more than 2 million people.

Shell Game and Other Early Delays
The judge quickly issued an injunction against the mine’s owner. Mining briefly stopped while miners repaired the dikes. But the dikes failed again. And the mine briefly became an issue in a Houston mayoral election when Tony Buzbee visited the breach for a photo op in May 2019.

The judge then ordered the miners to develop an engineered solution that permanently sealed off the pit. However, the dikes failed yet again last year and have remained open for more than a year.
Between breaches they pumped water over their dikes onto adjoining properties.
Meanwhile, other hazards developed at the mine. The miners have exposed pipelines carrying natural gas and highly volatile liquids by mining near a utility easement.
On the legal front, the mine’s owner, a cardiologist from Nacogdoches, named Prabhakar R. Guniganti, transferred ownership of the mine through a series of shell companies and trust funds that he and his family controlled. This forced the attorney general’s office to sue one entity after another and name the cardiologist individually as a defendant.
Fourth Scheduling Order
Meanwhile, hundreds of miles away, the case lumbers along. See the full FOURTH Amended Scheduling Order here.
If this sticks…
- In August and September this year, the parties will designate their expert witnesses.
- During October and November, they will complete discovery.
- In December, they will challenge each other’s expert witnesses and file remaining unheard motions.
- In January, they will exchange witness and exhibit lists.
- And the Jury Trial will begin on February 9, 2026.
However, the possibility exists that this could slip again as it has at least twice before. The judge originally scheduled this case for trial on October 10, 2023, and October 28, 2024.
General Reasons for Delays
Aside from specific legal maneuverings in this case, lawsuits in general can drag on for years. Many moving parts must align. And each step can take months or even longer. The main causes include:
1. Pre-trial Procedures Can Be Slow
- Discovery – Both sides gather and exchange evidence, which can involve reviewing thousands of documents, deposing witnesses, and fighting over what’s admissible.
- Motions and Hearings – Lawyers may file motions to dismiss, suppress evidence, or get summary judgment. Each motion needs time for responses and court rulings.
- Scheduling Conflicts – Courts juggle many cases, and attorneys may have other trials or deadlines.
2. Complexity of the Case
- Many Issues – Multi-defendant cases or lawsuits involving technical subjects (e.g., environmental law, patents) require more experts, more evidence, and more coordination.
- Specialized Evidence – Expert reports, forensic analysis, or financial audits can take months to produce.
3. Negotiation and Settlement Efforts
- Even if both sides want to settle, negotiations can stall while parties evaluate risk, await rulings on key motions, or try mediation.
4. Appeals and Interlocutory Delays
- If a court rules on an important issue before trial, one side might appeal immediately. This “pause” can last a year or more before the trial even resumes.
5. Strategic Delays
- Parties may deliberately slow the process to pressure the other side—by increasing costs, waiting for evidence to weaken, or banking on a change in law or circumstance.
6. Court Backlogs
- In busy jurisdictions, there can be long waits simply for your turn on the docket—especially after events like the COVID-19 pandemic, which created major case backlogs.
Dikes Open and Pipelines Exposed
In July, mining continued with the dikes wide open again.


Dike Regulations
The Triple PG mine received 15 citations in two years from the Mine Safety and Health Administration before the TCEQ filed its lawsuit through the Texas Attorney General. See the MSHA site for a key to the citations.
The U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration regulation §56.20010 regarding retaining dams specifies that “If failure of a water or silt retaining dam will create a hazard, it shall be of substantial construction and inspected at regular intervals.”
TCEQ also has requirements for constructing dikes and levees. Note the paragraph on page 2 about structural integrity. “Construction must be based upon sound engineering principles. Structural integrity must withstand any waters which the levee or other improvement is intended to restrain or carry, considering all topographic features, including existing levees.”
Pipeline Issues Now Added to Complaint
Breaches aren’t the only issue at the Triple PG mine (now operated under the name Texas Fracsand). The daredevils operating the mine have exposed five pipelines carrying highly volatile liquids.

I alerted the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality after discovering this, but have not yet heard of the outcome of their investigation.

The breeches were still wide open and the pipelines unprotected.
Pray that we don’t see any more delays in the jury trial.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/14/25
2907 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.











