TCEQ Alleges Fourth Unauthorized Discharge in 10 Months at Triple PG Mine

In March, ReduceFlooding.com published pictures of the Triple PG sand mine pumping water onto adjoining properties near White Oak Creek. The TCEQ investigated within days. Today, they reported their findings and issued a Notice of Enforcement for the unauthorized discharge of process water. The discharge also appears to violate terms of the Attorney General’s injunction against the mine and could result in the AG seeking additional fines up to $25,000 per day for discharges at apparently lasted three months.

Mine process wastewater flooding neighboring properties in upper right. Picture taken Jan 20, 2020.
Mine process wastewater flooding neighboring properties in foreground. Picture taken Feb. 13, 2020.
Triple PG wastewater on neighboring properties on March 6, 2020. See water in strip of trees in front of stockpile.

TCEQ Report on Compliance Investigation

TCEQ observed process water outside Triple PG’s property boundary and concluded, “The allegation of a discharge of process water was confirmed. As a result of the investigation conducted on March 11, 2020, one alleged violation was noted for failure to prevent the discharge of process water.” That was the fourth such finding in five years for the mine.

TCEQ says in part, “Because process water was located outside of the facility’s property boundary with a high likelihood to enter waters of the state, an unauthorized discharge had occurred.”

676% Higher Levels of Suspended Sediment than Creek Water

Wastewater was overflowing from Ponds Five and Six. Analysis of water samples showed that the overflow had levels of suspended solids in it that were 137% to 676% higher than the background level found upstream in White Oak Creek. That’s more than 2X to almost 8X above the creek water.

Discharge Not Authorized

Both TCEQ rules and the terms of the injunction prohibit any discharges of process water not authorized by the TCEQ.

The Notice of Enforcement issued by the TCEQ on 4/3/2020 cites, “Unauthorized discharge of process water: Specifically, during the investigation conducted on March 11, 2020, process water was noted outside the property boundary of Triple PG Sand Development Facility with the likelihood to enter waters of the state.”

Recommended corrective action? TCEQ simply says, “There shall be NO unauthorized discharge of pollutants.”

Additional Fines Possible

The Texas Water Code Section 7.102 allows fines up to $25,000 per day for each day of a continuing violation. See flooded neighboring properties above in January, February and March flyover photos.

That water was building up and flooding adjoining properties for at least three months. This could get expensive for Triple PG!

The Attorney General’s office did not respond yet to a request for comment about the type of penalties that it would seek, if any.

Fourth Unauthorized Discharge in Last Year

TCEQ has conducted eight other investigations at Triple PG in the previous 5 years. They included investigations into:

  • Failure to renew their registration
  • Alleged failure to maintain pollution prevention measures and controls
  • Failure to maintain a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWP3)
  • Unauthorized discharge of process water (three times since May 2019)

This makes the fourth citation for unauthorized discharges in a year.

Editorial Comment: This mine just doesn’t seem to take the TCEQ, Attorney General, State of Texas or the health of their neighbors seriously. I hope the Attorney General shuts them down.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/6/2020

951 Days after Hurricane Harvey and 200 after Imelda

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.

Last Chance to Ask County Leaders to Help Prevent Elm Grove Flooding

In tomorrow’s Harris County Commissioners’ Court meeting, county leaders will discuss, in executive session, the possibility of purchasing Woodridge Village land from Perry Homes. The idea: to build a large detention basin with sufficient capacity to keep Elm Grove from flooding again.

If you have not yet called or written commissioners and the county judge, please do so. The outcome of this meeting will likely impact home values in the affected and surrounding areas for years to come. Here are points you could mention:

Key Points to Emphasize

  • Elm Grove never flooded before Perry Homes clearcut the area immediately upstream called Woodridge Village.
  • Then Elm Grove flooded twice in five months, on May 7th and September 19th, 2019. Approximately two hundred homes flooded in May. Two or three times that number flooded in September.
  • The flooding was not due to normal street flooding or overflow from Taylor Gully. Overland sheet flow from Woodridge Village caused it.
  • Clearcutting increased the amount and rate of runoff in both storms so that it accumulated at the county line culvert quickly and overflowed into Elm Grove streets.
  • Perry funneled the water toward the areas that flooded.
  • Perry bought the land in January of 2018. After two years and three months, they still have only constructed 23% of the promised detention pond capacity.
  • Even that capacity is undersized by approximately 40% because Perry contractors used pre-Atlas 14 rainfall statistics in their computer modeling.
  • The water table is much higher than Perry anticipated. Their 15-foot deep detention basin is constantly about one-third filled with water, reducing detention capacity even more.
  • About a quarter to a third of the site was previously wetlands. Standing water there has not evaporated for months.
  • This land will probably never be safe for homebuilding.
  • If Harris County doesn’t buy it and convert it into a detention basin, Elm Grove is likely to flood again.
  • The recurrent flooding and uncertainty have caused many families to flee the affected area already. Homes are selling for 50 cents on the dollar. Many homes remain vacant and rotting. Many who are left can’t afford to move.
  • It’s becoming a public-health and mental-health issue at this point. People are reluctant to repair their homes until they are certain of mitigation that has a chance to succeed.

Hints

  • Be positive. Harris County didn’t cause this problem.
  • Don’t flame. Honey attracts more bees than vinegar.
  • Don’t demand. They have many problems to solve.
  • Specify that this relates to Item IV on the agenda for 4/07/20. It relates to a request by Commissioner Cagle to discuss the purchase of real property in the Elm Grove area needed for flood control purposes.

Of the four other votes on the Court, Cagle needs commitments from two to make this happen. Steve Radack, Precinct 3 Commissioner; Lina Hidalgo, County Judge; and Adrian Garcia, Precinct 2 Commissioner are the most likely supporters.

Who/How to Contact

Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo 
  • Phone: 713-274-7000 or (713) 755-8379  
  • Email: judge.hidalgo@cjo.hctx.net 
Commissioner Adrian Garcia, Precinct 2 
  • Phone: 713-755-6220 or 713-274-2222
  • Email via web form.
Commissioner Steve Radack, Precinct 3
  • Phone: (713) 755-6306
  • Email: pct3@pct3.com

Please call or write NOW. The meeting is tomorrow morning at 10 a.m.!

Due to Covid-19 restrictions, you can sign up to speak without actually going downtown.

To see the meeting online, go to https://www.harriscountytx.gov/Government/Court-Agenda/Court-Videos.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/6/2020

951 Days after Hurricane Harvey and 200 since Imelda

Bruce Sprague’s Hurricane Harvey Story, Part VI

I have known Bruce Sprague for 30 years. He has always been a contributor. He flew cargo planes in Vietnam back in the 1970s and was honorably discharged from the Air Force as a Major. Then he captained commercial planes for Continental Airlines. Most recently, he taught military pilots how to transition to commercial aircraft. Like most pilots who live to the age of 73, Bruce follows procedures religiously and always has backup plans to his backup plans. But lately, life has dealt him a series of blows that have left him flying on fumes with only one engine.

While in the US Air Force and USAF Reserves from 1970 thru 1984, Sprague flew C5s all over the world.
Bruce Sprague flew for Continental Airlines from 1978 thru 2006.  Here is his most famous passenger in 2001, right after the terrorist attacks. Bruce is the pilot standing next to George Bush.

In 2006, at age 60, FAA regulations forced him to retire from flying. Then in 2008, the financial crisis wiped out a large part of his retirement savings. Next, in 2017, he flooded from Hurricane Harvey. Then the Texas General Land Office (GLO) denied him a grant under the Homeowner Assistance Program (HoAP) because he had already taken out an SBA loan. And most recently, he lost his teaching gig when the airline industry went into a tailspin due to the corona virus; no new pilots needed!

So now, Bruce is trying to regain altitude by appealing the grant rejection, but the GLO is still stalling him.

This is the story of a man who has been 1) forced out, 2) wiped out, 3) flooded out, 4) ruled out and 5) “virused” out.

Despite all that, Bruce has maintained a positive attitude. I’m writing this because he symbolizes, according to a GLO estimate, a thousand other Texans caught in a similar bind.


Waking Up on August 29, 2017, to a Changed Life

Rehak: What happened to you and your home during Harvey?

Sprague: Like most people, we went to bed on the night of August 28th thinking we were safe. But on the morning of the 29th we woke up to find an army of insects marching in front of a what felt like a tidal wave headed toward our house. Soon, the water started creeping in. It eventually reached 25 inches in the house and 30 inches in the garage.

The Sprague Kitchen on the morning of August 29, 2017 during Harvey

Rehak: Did you have flood insurance?

Sprague: No. We are in the 500-year flood plain.

Rehak: What happened next?

Reconstruction, Loans and Grant: Start of Even Bigger Problem

Sprague: Luckily, our son in law is in a business that regularly uses lots of contractors. He got people repairing our home right away. And they only charged us cost. No markup. That was the good news. But because of financial losses in 2008, we still had a mortgage and less in our retirement fund than I planned. So we applied for an SBA loan. And they loaned us about $90,000. We also got about $30,000 of individual assistance from FEMA. But the repairs cost $130,000 and that didn’t include contents and replacement of two cars. At any rate, we were able to get back in our house by Christmas, which was close to a record.

Tearing out wallboard, insulation, cabinets and flooring.

Rehak: Some time later, HUD Homeowner Assistance grants became available and you applied for one. Did you see anything in the fine print to cause you concern?

Sprague: Yes, there was a clause called “Duplication of Benefits.” It said that if we had taken an SBA loan, we would not be eligible for the grant.

Rehak: Did you ask about that?

Sprague: Yes, the person at the City who processed our application for the General Land Office said that would not be a problem. “Not to worry about it,” she said.

Rehak: So you applied?

Sprague: Yes. We went thru a year long process to fill out forms. We made multiple visits to the HoAP offices, and many, many phone calls and emails.

Loan With Interest Classified Like Grant

Rehak: What happened?

Sprague: They denied us.

Rehak: Why?

Sprague: Duplication of benefits.

Rehak: How is a loan that you have to pay back with interest a “benefit”?

Sprague: Those are their rules. But that wasn’t our only problem. Even though we had receipts totaling $130,000 for repairs, and even though most other people in the neighborhood paid more than $200,000 to repair their homes, the City inspector estimated we only had about $105,000 worth of damage. That reduced the amount of any potential grant.

Not Following Katrina Model

Rehak: When people hear the words “duplication of benefits,” it conjures up images of double dipping and fraud.

Sprague: Right. Had we applied for GRANTS that totaled more than we paid, I would agree with that. But a loan is not a grant. You have to pay it back…with interest. So you’re not defrauding the government unless you default on the loan. Look at it this way.

We had way more in repair costs than the total of our loans and grant. And they’re not even considering a homeowner assistance grant.

That’s just not fair. A lot of people think that, not just me. After Katrina, they allowed people in New Orleans to pay down their SBA loans with homeowner assistance grants. It was NOT considered a duplication of benefits then!

Rehak: So, what did you do next? You’ve worked in and around government for decades.

Crenshaw Rallies Support in Congress and With Trump

Sprague: I went to Congressman Dan Crenshaw. He and his staff have been terrific. He got ten other members of Congress to send a letter to President Trump explaining that SBA loans should not be considered a duplication of benefits. That was not Congress’ intent. Trump agreed and had HUD-leader Ben Carson publish new guidance for duplication of benefits for Harvey. [See Section VB2 on page 28841 of Federal Register.]

But the Texas General Land Office, which was overseeing the distribution of these funds in Texas, still has not changed their rules. They said the new guidance came “too late.” They also said they didn’t have enough money to make grants to people who also had loans. So, Crenshaw pushed an additional $45 million appropriation through Congress.

Rehak: Where does that stand now?

The belongings of a lifetime on the curb for looters and garbage men to take. Sprague lives in a one-story house.

Appropriations Bill Stalled In Senate Due to Virus

Sprague: It stalled in the Senate because everyone is focusing on corona virus now. The GLO has not changed its position. They say that even though Congress and the President have clarified their position, “the rules came too late.”

Rehak: That leaves you in limbo. And you’re dealing with two disasters now: Harvey and the virus.

Sprague: I understand that people are just doing their jobs, that they have rules to deal with, and they’re trying to prevent fraud. But it sure is frustrating when the President tells someone in his chain of command, “This is how I and Congress want this to work,” and then people down the line don’t follow instructions.

Rehak: Are you holding out much hope for a grant at this point?

Sprague: No time soon. It’s been more than two and a half years since Harvey. When natural disasters destroy people’s lives and homes, they need help right away, not three or four years later.

Hoping Appeals Last Long Enough

Rehak: Have you appealed?

Sprague: Yes. We’re on our second appeal. Three appeals are possible. We’re hoping we can keep this going long enough for Crenshaw’s appropriations bill to get some traction in the Senate and for the GLO to revise its rules.

Rehak: Is there any hope in the Senate? Have you approached Cruz or Cornyn?

Sprague: I’ve gotten some nice form letters back from them saying they are “working for all Texans.”

Rehak: What do you hope for at this point?

Sprague: I just hope we survive corona so our heirs don’t inherit a mountain of debt with our house. Until now, I’ve never asked anything from my government. I hope just this once they come through.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/4/2020

949 days after Hurricane Harvey

Note: This report for the Congressional Research Service describes issues with the Duplication of Benefits provision.