Results of Alleged TCEQ Investigation into Massive Sand-Mine Breach

1/2/25 – According a Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) investigation, a massive breach of an abandoned sand mine on the West Fork San Jacinto in August 2025 was “an unforeseen incident.” The report also says that the new owner of the property wants to use the pit as a “recreational pond for livestock management.”

However, the breach was far from a laughing matter. On 8/24/25, I documented a massive breach that clogged the San Jacinto West Fork with sediment.

So what’s going on here?

Ultimately, TCEQ issued no citations or fines.

That much is certain.

TCEQ Report Sketchy on Details

I and three readers reported the breach to TCEQ, which has responsibility for supervising sand mines. Four months later, at noon on New Year’s Eve, we each received the official report of TCEQ’s alleged investigation. As with similar breaches downstream, TCEQ noted the incident, but took no action.

Here’s a brief summary:

• TCEQ sent four investigators to the site on 8/25/25. They noted no active sand mining and they issued no violations, fines, or citations.
• TCEQ consulted the Montgomery County Appraisal District database. They found that a company called AGS Unlimited Montgomery, LLC had purchased the property on August 1, 2025, only weeks before the breach.
• TCEQ phoned a “managing member” of AGS, Mr. Andrew Shebay IV, on September 2, 2025. Mr. Shebay reportedly described the incident as “unforeseen” and said he had conversations with the Montgomery County Floodplain Administrator and Army Corps about “managing the situation.”
• According to TCEQ, Shebay says he intends to use the pond “as a recreational pond for livestock management.” (That conjured up the comical image above, which I clearly intend as parody.)

To see TCEQ’s full report, click: https://reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/2091112-Compl-Letter-4_Redacted.pdf.

This alleged investigation is consistent with other alleged TCEQ investigations into breaches of sand-mine dikes. Alleged TCEQ investigators observe problems, but rarely recommend fines or citations.

Owner Claims Breach was Accidental

The comical TCEQ claim – that a pond likely 60-90 feet deep – would be used as a livestock spa, made me want to investigate further. So I called the owner myself. He was cordial and open, and we talked for more than twenty minutes.

Here’s a picture of the breach as it was happening.

Mr. Shebay said a third-party contractor was trying to install a drain pipe and spillway to help prevent flooding of adjacent properties in the future. And in fact, I photographed both drain pipes and earthmoving equipment at the site on the day of the breach.

However, Shebay claims a third-party contractor failed to follow engineering plans, causing the breach. The breach was accidental, he says. Things just got out of control.

New Owner’s Plans for Abandoned Mine Not Yet Clear

Shebay’s plans for the abandoned mine are not yet finalized. At various points in our conversation, he mentioned a boat launch, a kid’s camp, a recreational amenity for an adjacent residential community, and selling wetland-mitigation credits.

His ultimate use for the property depends on several things. Foremost among them is the routing of new high-tension electrical wires. He says Entergy will not finalize a route until the end of 2026. He also says that that has kept him from finalizing plans.

If Entergy chooses a route too near his pit, he says, that could rule out plans that involve children. He sees a safety issue.

Re: the wetland mitigation credits, an environmental expert I consulted said that the owner would need to create wetlands first before he could sell credits. That’s not likely to happen here. Why?

Wetlands are typically very shallow, i.e., swamps, bogs and marshes. However, previous owners took sand out of this pit for 20 years, sometimes with two dredges operating simultaneously. And other West Fork mine owners have told me they often dredge pits to 60-90 feet.

Yet this mine’s new owner claims he has no plans to fill the pond. So selling wetland-mitigation credits is unlikely.

Re: fixing the breach, Mr. Shebay says he’s looking for crushed concrete to help fill it and stabilize the pond wall. He also says that he’s made arrangements with a nearby residential development that’s digging a detention basin to take their clay for the same purpose.

Use of Word “Alleged”

You likely noticed my use of the world “alleged” in regard to the TCEQ investigation above. That’s out of frustration.

TCEQ used the adjective “alleged” five times in its report before the nouns “concern,” “incident,” “complaints” and “violation.” Using “alleged” before “violation” is valid; “Violation” assumes a conclusion not yet verified by investigators or a court.

However, the “complaints” are not alleged; they are real. So was the “incident”; I have photos and video to prove it, and TCEQ verified it. And to imply that someone’s “concerns” are alleged is just downright insulting.

The language in alleged TCEQ investigations insults anyone who seeks their help. No wonder the TCEQ has lost so much credibility.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/2/25

3048 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.