Nailed: Triple-P Sand Mine Photographed Discharging Wastewater Directly into Lake Houston Tributary

Since Harvey, I’ve been talking about the dangers of sand mining too close to the river. Texas is the only state I can find that has no minimum setback for mines. Tony Buzbee, candidate for Mayor of Houston, asked to see what I was talking about. So a friend, Josh Alberson, took us on out his jet boat this afternoon.

Massive Breach in Mine Dike

As luck would have it, we went up Caney Creek. Just above where it enters the East Fork, we spotted a massive new breach in the dike of the Triple-P mine. Here’s what we saw.

Looking into the Triple-P Mine through a breach in its dike on Caney Creek
Note the exposed shoreline in the background indicating how much water the mine lost to the river.
Looking 180 degrees from the shots above. The tree leaning over at a ten degree angle from the river is on the far bank of Caney Creek.
This shows how wide the breach is in relation to the boat. The boat is 22 feet long.
This shot taken from the boat shows the mine’s cleaning, sorting and transportation equipment in the background. I could not see the dredge operating in the mine’s pit from this angle.
This Google Earth image shows the approximate location of the breach. The blue diagonal line is the Harris/Montgomery County Line. Caney Creek connects up with Lake Houston to the south (bottom part) of this image. Mmmmmmm. That water looks delicious, doesn’t it. If you get your water from Lake Houston, you’re drinking it!
Tony Buzbee, examining the sand bar at the bottom of the shot above (below the mine). The bar has grown in size, according to Alberson, a regular East Fork boater. This illustrates the danger of sand mining so close to the river. Buzbee also visited the mouth bar on the West Fork during his river tour today.

Mine Has History of Problems

I previously posted about breaches in this mine’s dikes and the loss of a major portion of its stockpile during Harvey. The stockpile is located in the confluence of two floodways (Caney Creek and White Oak Creek). Partially as a result of this mine, Kingwood’s East End Park just downstream was inundated with sand and gravel up to 15 feet deep after Harvey. Repairing damage to the trails in the park cost Kingwood residents almost $200,000. The wetlands have been lost forever.

Wetlands no more. Eagle Point in East End Park is drowned in sand from the Triple-P mine. It washed downstream during Harvey. Massive sediment deposits in the San Jacinto have also been linked to flooding by the Army Corps of Engineers.

The Triple-P mine also receives very favorable treatment from the Montgomery County appraisal district. They tax most of it as though it were timberland.

Buzbee as Witness

If you are a sand miner, having Tony Buzbee witness this breach and the massive sedimentation it caused downstream is a nightmare scenario. Not only is Buzbee running for Mayor of Houston, he’s self-funding his campaign. That means he does not depend on TACA contributions. And worse (or better if you are a resident), he’s one of the top litigators in the world. In 2015, he was named Texas lawyer of the year. Kingwood residents can only hope he takes up this cause.

TCEQ Already Investigating

Upon returning home from the boat trip, I immediately notified Ramiro Garcia, head of Compliance and Enforcement for the TCEQ (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality) about the breach in the dike. Garcia says they have people already on the case. I hope they choose to yank this mine’s license and make it an example. At a minimum, I believe they should give the mine the maximum fine. My understanding is that the fine can run up to $25,000 per day. This kind of flagrant violation endangers the health of millions of people and deserves no less.

A water quality expert I talked to about breaches like this told me they spike chloride levels in Lake Houston. Chlorides, you may remember, caused the pipe corrosion in Flint, Michigan, that contributed to pipe corrosion, lead poisoning, a public health crisis and an erosion of trust in local government.

Revive Best Practices Legislation for Sand Mines

As a result of the problems created by sand mining in the San Jacinto River watershed, State Representative Dan Huberty sponsored a bill this year to establish best practices for the mines. HB 909 was referred to the Environmental Regulation Committee on 2/25. The committee heard testimony on 5/1. TACA testified AGAINST establishing and publishing best practices. HB909 has been bottled up in committee ever since.

Please use this breach to try to get the legislation out of committee. This is major. It affects the drinking water supply for 2 million people. I talked about the dangers of mining too close to rivers when I testified for HB909. These miners just don’t care. They think that their ability to make a profit is more important that your health. Please send a message to Austin. Refer the members of the Environmental Regulation Committee to this post and tell them this is what Rehak testified about on 5/1. Have them vote it out of committee. Let’s establish best practices for sand mining in Texas. While we still can.

Here are the members of the Environmental Regulation Committee.

  • J.M. Lozano (Chairman) (512) 463-0463
  • Ed Thompson (Vice Chair) (512) 463-0707
  • Cesar Blanco (512) 463-0622
  • Kyle Kacal (512) 463-0412
  • John Kuempel (512) 463-0602
  • Geanie Morrison (512) 463-0456
  • Ron Reynolds (512) 463-0494
  • John Turner (512) 463-0576
  • Erin Zwiener (512) 463-0647

Please call their office and ask them to vote HB 909 out of committee. Tell them this breach is the great example of why we need this bill. Breaches like this happen far too often. There are only ten days left in this session.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/18/19, with a big thank you to Josh Alberson and Tony Buzbee

627 Days since Hurricane Harvey

All thoughts expressed in this post represent my opinions on matters of public policy and are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the Great State of Texas.

Senator Creighton Responds to Concerns About SB 2126

Note: I have created several posts about SB 2126, a bill proposed by Senator Brandon Creighton. While I support the Senator’s efforts and objectives, I feel the bill’s language could open the door to river mining. Senator Creighton disagrees and offers following.

After Harvey, fresh sand deposits several feet thick lined both shores of the west fork of the San Jacinto. The issue: What’s the best way to keep sand from migrating downriver where it can accumulate and contribute to flooding?

To the Editor

First off, I would like to thank Mr. Rehak and ReduceFlooding.com for being a leader in our communities on all aspects of flooding. Your efforts represent the sort of grassroots organizations that impact government and the community.  Reduceflooding.com also serves as a useful resource for residents to educate themselves on flooding, policy initiatives and upcoming events. 

Background

Since Harvey made landfall, we have worked tirelessly with one another to do what is best for the Lake Houston area. We have been on tours together with statewide officials and we have been in dozens of roundtables in Austin and in Kingwood. These meetings included state agencies such as the GLO and TCEQ, local representatives like Council Member Dave Martin, myself and Representative Dan Huberty, Commissioner Cagle, Congressional members such as Ted Poe and Dan Crenshaw, and most importantly, members of the community. Our meetings resulted in helpful policy recommendations on what needed to be done back then, and a vision for the long-term. And now, the long-term is here and we must act this session. 

The Bigger Picture

One of the biggest actions taken thus far was the Senate’s passage of hurricane preparedness and response packages, S.B. 6, S.B. 7, and S.B. 8. My bill, Senate Bill 7, creates the Texas Infrastructure Resiliency Fund, a new fund that will provide unprecedented state funding to cover the nonfederal, local match resulting from Hurricane Harvey as well as provide funding for future mitigation projects that will include upgrading the water gates on the Lake Houston Dam. The state playing the nonfederal role will bring billions of your tax dollars back to Texas from D.C. and will finally result in the feds helping Texas as we have stepped up to assist other states time and again.  

Aggregate Related Proposals

We also filed bills to increase the enforcement of sand mining along the San Jacinto River basin. Senate Bills 2123, 2124, and 2125 were discussed in our roundtable meetings and were generally supported. These bills increase penalties, direct funds to enforce penalties for illegal sand mining, increase the frequency of mandatory sand inspections from every three years to every two, and creates a best practices guide for aggregate producers to follow. 

Where SB 2126 Fits In

Senate Bill 2126 was the next step. This bill passed the entire Senate this week and heads to the House of Representatives. This approach was one of the many discussed at these roundtables and I appreciate you acknowledging the good intentions of this bill. I hear your concerns, and I respect your point of view, however I believe this program will yield many benefits for the community.   

How Safeguards Would Be Implemented

I want it to be clear, this bill will not open up unbridled sand mining in the San Jacinto River basin, and there are many precautions in place to ensure the river basin is protected.   Rather than prescribing arbitrary guidelines in the bill, we will depend on the San Jacinto River Authority and Harris County flood control district expertise to formally and publicly adopt rules, controls, best practices and other safeguards. 

Alternative to Repetitive Dredging

This solution is an outside-the-box approach to a problem identified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. While we have worked hard to expedite and fund the current dredging project underway in the River, it is inefficient and impractical to come back every 10 years to dredge in the River. There must be a long-term solution, and I think this legislation can play a role.

Oversight Authority

SB 2126 will allow the San Jacinto River Authority and the Harris County Flood Control District to place traps in the River. These are stationary traps that will capture sand that naturally deposits in undesirable locations. This does not allow for sand mining to continuously occur in the River or on the banks. We are delegating this authority to these public entities because they are accountable to you. They are entrusted with carrying out many other important duties to protect the resources of all Texans and this is one more way for them to play that role. 

Offsetting Costs Through Sale of Sand

Kaaren Cambio, a newly appointed SJRA board member from Kingwood recently said, “A long term maintenance plan for the San Jacinto River is key to protecting the adjacent communities. We must have many options available to make this plan effective and financially feasible. Public-private partnerships are critical to achieving this goal. SB 2126 gives the SJRA the opportunity to have specific areas dredged and the cost of the dredging is offset by the sale of the sand.”

Council Member Martin’s Endorsement 

Houston City Council Member Dave Martin, who has been an invaluable voice as we address flood mitigation expressed the following sentiment, “Senate Bill 2126 is a key legislation item that will allow aggregate production operators to be part of the sand remediation solution by giving them the ability to introduce sand traps into the West Fork of San Jacinto River. The ability to use sand traps on the West Fork will allow for sediment to fall out of an otherwise sediment rich body of water, thus reducing sediment deposits downstream which can clog up the river and lake. As the Houston Council Member who represents Lake Houston, this bill will help our area avoid additional mouth/sand bars and sediment buildup. I hope this piece of legislation serves as a pilot study the rest of the State can learn from.”

Support of Game Wardens

You noted that Texas Parks and Wildlife testified as a resource for the bill. State agencies remain neutral on legislation because they are agents of the State, but the Texas Game Wardens Peace Officers Association did support the bill at the hearing. They recognize the problem we have and how SB 2126 can be a practical solution. 

Plea to Continue Working Together

Recent floods, and especially Hurricane Harvey exposed serious weaknesses, and I hope that this bill and other components of our legislative flood solution package will serve as effective solutions for Kingwood, Lake Houston and surrounding areas.  If we identify any problems down the road, I hope that you will be a partner and advocate for getting projects back on track.  I know we will continue to work together to ensure the best mitigation efforts are followed.  

Again, I am so appreciative of the work you and all the community leaders have done to make the Lake Houston area a better place to work, live, and raise a family. I look forward to our continued collaboration to achieve that goal. Please feel free to reach out to me and my staff if we can ever be of assistance. We have made some incredible progress – see my newsletter here – and hopefully these policy initiatives will pass during the legislative session and improve our readiness for future storms ahead.  

(Signed)
Senator Brandon Creighton 
State Senator
District 4 

Senator Creighton’s letter posted by Bob Rehak on 5/6/19

616 Days since Hurricane Harvey

TCEQ Lists Water-Quality Concerns About Romerica High-Rise Permit

Last week, SWCA, Romerica’s environmental consultant, requested more time to respond to concerns about the proposed high-rise development in Kingwood. On April 30, the Corps withdrew Romerica’s permit application. The Corps suggested that Romerica resubmit a new application once they worked out issues with the first submittal.

Eight Pages of Concerns

All along, Kingwood residents have expressed skepticism about the suitability of this project for the Kingwood location. Turns out the 727 residents and groups that submitted protest letters weren’t the only ones with questions.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s (TCEQ’s) letter to the Corps expresses eight pages of concerns. Keep in mind that it was dated March 1. So the developer had it for TWO MONTHS. Also remember! TCEQ was reviewing ONLY water-quality issues posed by the development.

Full Text of Letter

Reading the TCEQ letter makes one realize how deficient the original application must have been. Here is the complete text for those who want all the detail.

Summary of Key Points

For everyone else, I have summarized the main concerns below.

  1. Title 30, Texas Administrative Code (TAC), Chapter 279.ll(c)(l), states that “No discharge shall be certified if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem, … ” “Please have the applicant clarify the purpose and need for the project, as portions of the proposed project are not aquatic-dependent.”
  2. From the public notice, the applicant states that “they have avoided and minimized environmental impacts by configuring the location of the proposed structures and reducing the size of the lakes within each district.” “This statement does not detail how and where wetland and stream impacts were avoided or minimized. Please have the applicant explain how and where impacts to stream and wetland resources were minimized and avoided.”
  3. “The applicant proposes to develop a mitigation site or purchase credits but says nothing more…The compensatory mitigation plan must include the objectives, site selection, the site protection instrument, baseline information, how the compensatory mitigation will provide required compensation for unavoidable impacts to aquatic resources, a mitigation work plan, maintenance plan, ecological performance standards, monitoring requirements, long-term management plan, adaptive management plan, financial assurances, and other information per the mitigation rule requirements.”
  4. “During the site visit, the resource agencies and the applicant’s representative noticed several streams that were not accounted for in the impacts tables. Please have the applicant incorporate the additional streams and revise the total amount of project impacts accordingly.”
  5. “There are several impacts within the commercial district that appear to be unaccounted for or are unidentified. Please have the applicant revise the impacts table to account for all resources that will be converted.”
  6. “Please have the applicant determine if project specific locations (PSLs) such as borrow, stockpiling, staging, and equipment parking areas associated with the project will impact wetlands. These PSL impacts should be included in the accounting of total project impacts.”
  7. “Several wetlands within the proposed project boundary will be hydrologically disconnected from the current floodplain. Please have the applicant revise the impacts tables to include wetland and stream resources that will be affected secondarily by the proposed project and address the cumulative effect of each district on the interconnectedness of the onsite wetlands.”
  8. “Please have the applicant explain in detail what measures will be taken to avoid groundwater and surface water contamination from construction activities.”
  9. “Please have the applicant provide a hydraulic analysis of the site to account for current site conditions, projected increased impervious surface runoff, as well as drainage patterns for the site, and describe how water quality on and off the project site will be protected from impacts such as erosion.”
  10. “Stormwater drainage from residential and commercial lots should be routed away from the West Fork San Jacinto River, the marina, and stream resources onsite. Stormwater should be redirected and routed to stormwater treatment features before entering the aforementioned resources. Please have the applicant provide details on how the replacement of lost onsite water quality functions will be addressed.”

Other Issues Outlined in Letter

  1. How an expanded Woodland Hills Drive would affect stream crossings
  2. The purpose and design of the so-called “water-quality ponds”
  3. The design of channels and marinas; their connectivity to the San Jacinto; and their impact on water quality
  4. The impact of boat channels on water-oxygen levels
  5. Channels that cross wetland habitat
  6. Box culverts instead of bridges
  7. Channel widths (100-foot wide for a channel 4-feet deep)
  8. Channels crossing property Romerica doesn’t own
  9. Slope of channels
  10. Diversion of stormwater from roads and parking lots away from channels
  11. Dead-end channels
  12. How domestic wastewater will be collected and treated
  13. Dissolved oxygen monitoring and reporting
  14. Applicants characterization of stream types (intermittent vs. perennial); requests “an accurate assessment.”
  15. Conservation easements on the property. (21.90 acres of wetlands are covered by a conservation easement located within the residential and commercial portions of the proposed development. “Please have the applicant verify that the conservation easement will be protected from potential development and ensure the preserved wetlands will not be impacted, directly or indirectly, from the construction of the proposed project.”

Start Over?

There may be no good answers to some of these questions and concerns. SWCA, CivilTech and Romerica must be re-evaluating the impact of these questions on the economics of their project.

This isn’t the type of stuff you need another week to figure out. These questions will make the developers rethink their commitment to the entire project.

Finding answers will likely involve a redesign of the project and that could cost more than the land itself.

Keep in mind that water quality was just one of 20 different areas that the Corps is evaluating.

TCEQ Didn’t Have Enough Info to Make Decision

I asked Peter Schaefer, a team leader within the TCEQ Water Quality Assessment Section, whether the TCEQ had made a recommendation to the Corps on this project. He said “No.”

The reason: “Because TCEQ did not receive a response to our comment letter, and the applicant had not begun the process of working with us and the Corps to address the concerns raised in the letter, TCEQ was not in a position to make a decision on the project,” said Schaeffer. Hence the detailed requests for more information.

Schaefer added, “A typical 404/401 permitting process would normally take several months, if not a year or more, for the applicant to address comments from TCEQ, Corps, resource agencies, and the public. Because of the magnitude and nature of this project, it would likely have required much more time, coordination, discussion, project revision(s), and perhaps additional public notice(s) to get to the point where the Corps was prepared to complete a Decision Document.”

Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/1/2019

610 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Bayou Land Conservancy Supports HB 909, Publishing Best Practices for Sand Mining

The Bayou Land Conservancy sent this letter today to the Committee Clerk of the House Environmental Regulation Committee. The Conservancy has allowed me to publish it:

On behalf of Bayou Land Conservancy, I urge you to vote FOR HB 909 when the Environmental Regulation Committee meets to consider this bill. Bayou Land Conservancy is a non-profit, community-supported land conservation organization that preserves land along streams for flood control, clean water, and wildlife. We preserve 14,000 acres in the Houston region, focused on the Lake Houston watershed. This includes the San Jacinto River, cited in 2006 as one of America’s most endangered rivers due to a number of threats, including the high intensity of local aggregate mining. 

HB 909 would require the Texas Commission for Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to adopt and make accessible best management practices for aggregate producers to comply with applicable environmental laws and rules. 

This adoption of best management practices would be an important, and needed, step to ensure that aggregate production in Texas is done with sensitivity to the environment and to community standards. As the population of Texas continues to grow, with the corresponding increase in construction of buildings, roads, and bridges, there is greater risk to the quality of life and safety for many communities located near mining operations. 

As one of the nation’s leading aggregate producing states, we know Texas can lead in developing higher standards. We recommend best management practices that consider community values, such as: 

  • Employ public notice and stakeholder process guidelines to ensure mining operations are in step with local priorities and concerns 
  • Maintain setbacks or standards for siting operations away from sensitive areas or those with the highest likelihood to cause impacts 
  • Develop environmental impact statements for proposed mining operations 
  • Enact mitigation standards to reclaim the project area after facility closure 
  • Utilize progressive reclamation with a step-be-step restoration of the site over time rather than waiting for final closure 
  • Require the submission of an approved reclamation plan prior to permit approval 
  • Require the certification of financial security to perform reclamation activities before permit approval 
  • Require post-use conservation easements to ensure that the floodplain is left undeveloped and can provide a community amenity opportunity. 

There is urgency for Texas to lead by enacting commonsense solutions that protect the community. 

Without development and implementation of best management practices, such as those outlined above that would keep sediment in place through floodplain preservation and mine reclamation, downstream communities will continue to be at risk of water quality degradation and flooding. 

Please vote YES on HB 909. 

(Signed) Jill Boullion 
Executive Director 

Please Support HB 909; Here’s How

Call. Write. Or testify in person TODAY. The committee meets to consider this bill tomorrow. The following representatives comprise the Environmental Regulation committee.

  • Rep. J. M. Lozano (512) 463-0463 
  • Rep. Ed Thompson (512) 463-0707
  • Rep. César Blanco (512) 463-0622
  • Rep. Kyle J. Kacal (512) 463-0412
  • Rep. John Kuempel (512) 463-0602
  • Rep. Geanie W. Morrison (512) 463-0456
  • Rep. Ron Reynolds (512) 463-0494
  • Rep. John Turner (512) 463-0576
  • Rep. Erin Zwiener (512) 463-0647
  • Committee Clerk: Scott Crownover. (512) 463-0776

If you can come to Austin to testify, please do. The meeting will be held Wednesday, May 1, in room  E1.026 of the Capitol Building. Most likely hearing time is in the evening around 8 p.m., but get I plan to get there early. Hope to see you there.

Posted by Bob Rehak on April 30, 2019

609 Days since Hurricane Harvey

House Environmental Regulation Committee to Hear Testimony on Sand Mining Best Practices

Wednesday, May 1, 2019, the Texas House of Representatives Environmental Affairs Committee will hear testimony on HB 909. It would require the TCEQ to establish and publish best management practices for sand mining.

Why We Need HB 909

After Harvey, I discovered bright white trails of sand leading from sand mines upstream to massive sediment buildups in the Humble/Kingwood area. The Army Corps later acknowledged that some of our flooding was likely attributable to these massive sediment dams. No doubt some of the sand came from channel erosion, too. But we can’t do much to control that. We can, however, help reduce sediment from man-made sources with sensible regulations found in many other states, including those growing faster than Texas.

Improving Sand-Mining Best Management Practices

Texas sand mines do not follow many best management practices (BMPs) common in other parts of the country and the world. If practiced, they could help increase margins of safety, reduce risks associated with future flooding, and reduce the costs associated with cleanup. Below: the biggest opportunities for improvement.

Recommendations

Locate mines outside of floodways

Texas is the only state that does not mandate minimum setbacks from rivers for sand mines. As a result, virtually all mines in this area are built inside floodways of major rivers where floods can wash sediment downstream.

Establish performance bonds to cover the cost of cleanup

Giant sand dunes deposited during Harvey exacerbate flooding by constraining the conveyance of downstream drainage ditches and the San Jacinto river. Mining exposes downstream populations to heightened flood risk and reduces their property values. Performance bonds could ensure cleanup and repairs after floods in a timely way and force those who caused damage to bear the cost of remediation. 

Increase the width of dikes

Texas has no minimum setbacks from rivers and does not recognize erosion hazard zones. Some mines operate so close to the river that floodwaters breach their dikes repeatedly. Wider dikes:

  • Make stronger dikes that are less likely to fail and that improve safety.  
  • If forested, can slow currents as they enter and leave mines.
  • Reduce the amount of sediment picked up and carried downstream. 
  • Reduce the danger of river capture due to river migration.
River is migrating toward pit in background at the rate of 12 feet per year, in part, due to lack of vegetation protecting banks.
Decrease the slope of dikes

Other states and countries recommend gently sloping dikes to help grow vegetation, which reduces erosion. The near-vertical slope of many dikes on the San Jacinto can’t sustain vegetation.

Steep, loose dikes with no vegetation breach easily during floods.
Reduce erosion with vegetation

Planting dikes and unmined surfaces with grass and/or native trees can bind the soil, slow floodwater, reduce erosion, trap sand, and help retain sand within mine boundaries. 

Virtually all states and countries recommend planting native grasses and trees to help bind soil. Revegetating after plants have been removed can take years. Therefore, the best, cheapest and simplest practice is to leave native vegetation in place when constructing mines.

Replant areas not actively being mined 

Loose sand, exposed to floodwaters, exposes downstream communities to unnecessary risk. Replanting with native grasses and trees can bind soil, reduce water velocity during floods and reduce erosion. TCEQ reports that native grasses are 98% effective in reducing erosion. Keeping soil in place is the best way to keep it out of rivers.

Avoid clearing areas that will not soon be mined.

Delay clearing land until the last possible moment to reduce erosion risk from floodwaters. A large part of a sand mine on the East Fork was cleared, then went through three so-called “500-year storms” in the next three years – before any mining took place. 

This land was cleared just before consecutive 500-year floods in 2015, 2016 and 2017. Downstream communities like Kingwood paid the price. It still has not been mined.
30 acres of wetlands downstream from the mine above were covered by sand dunes up to 10 feet tall.

Protect stockpiles from flooding.

Loose sand in stockpiles is especially vulnerable during floods. During Harvey, sand mines adjacent to Kingwood lost four of six stockpiles completely. Another eroded severely. Only one escaped with little loss, the one on the highest ground, protected by a large swath of trees. 

Before Harvey, this stockpile covered 34 acres and was up to 100 feet tall. It is located at the confluence of not one, but two floodways, just upstream from the wetlands shown above.
Establish performance bonds to guarantee remediation of breaches and repurposing of mined areas once mining is complete.

Satellite images show dike breaches that have remained open 3 to 6 years. Even worse, obtaining a permit to mine in Texas requires a remediation plan, but it does not obligate mines to act on that plan when mining is complete. That creates safety hazards, eyesores, and economic development headaches for communities. 

Gaping Holes in Regs Exposed by Harvey

Harvey exposed gaping holes in Texas regulations. It underscored the importance of adopting better practices to help improve public safety, reduce damage to infrastructure, and avoid widespread flood damage to homes and businesses. Consequences of ignoring these recommendations potentially include:

  • Destruction of downstream communities through increased flooding
  • Illegal “taking” of private property
  • More loss of life
  • Unfair imposition of remediation costs on taxpayers
  • Hidden “subsidies” that distort the true cost of cement and its usage
  • Loss of faith in the ethical standards of businesses and the free enterprise system
  • Loss of faith in government institutions to protect people and property
  • Loss of home and business values
  • Reduction of property tax income to city and county governments
  • Making Texas a less desirable place to live.

Destruction like we experienced during Harvey is rarely caused by one thing. Multiple failures on multiple levels compounded each other. To the extent that sand mines contributed to the problem, they can help solve it by modifying business practices as described above.

Please Help

Texas has no simple, easy-to-read recommendations like Louisiana and other states. The few references to best management practices currently on the TCEQ web site have to do with a water-quality district on the Brazos. They do not apply to the San Jacinto.

Please support this legislation. Phone members of the House Environmental Regulation Committee.

  • Rep. J. M. Lozano (512) 463-0463
  • Rep. Ed Thompson (512) 463-0707
  • Rep. César Blanco (512) 463-0622
  • Rep. Kyle J. Kacal (512) 463-0412
  • Rep. John Kuempel (512) 463-0602
  • Rep. Geanie W. Morrison (512) 463-0456
  • Rep. Ron Reynolds (512) 463-0494
  • Rep. John Turner (512) 463-0576
  • Rep. Erin Zwiener (512) 463-0647

If you can come to Austin to testify, please do. The meeting will be in room  E1.026 of the Capitol Building. Most likely hearing time is in the evening around 8 p.m., but I plan to get there early. Hope to see you there.

Posted by Bob Rehak on April 29, 2019

608 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Earth Week Part 3: Sand Mine Setbacks from Rivers

After a year and a half of investigating sand mining best practices around the US and the world, I concluded that Texas falls short of other states and countries on several measures. The single biggest opportunity for improvement: greater setbacks from rivers.

River is migrating toward pit in background at the rate of 12 feet per year. When this picture was taken after Harvey, dike was only 38 feet wide.

Other states recommend from 100- to 1000-foot setbacks. Some prohibit building in floodways and flood plains. All but one sand mine on the San Jacinto lie at least partially in floodways. This leads to frequent dike breaches which, I believe, contribute to downstream sedimentation and flooding. Yet legislation that could increase setbacks and safety remains bottled up in committees.

Benefits of Setbacks

Greater setbacks would remove mines from the fiercest currents during floods. Leaving vegetation in place between the mine and the river would also help bind soil, reduce erosion, protect mines stockpiles, slow currents entering mines, help trap any sand leaving mines, and improve public safety.

Memorial Day Flood in 2015 ruptured the dikes on these sand mines on both sides of the West Fork.

Miners’ Objections to Setbacks

I queried several miners and the Texas Aggregate and Concrete Association (TACA) about why they felt compelled to mine so close to rivers. The answer (I’m paraphrasing now): because there’s less overburden, they have greater efficiencies that are important in a low margin business.

That makes sense until you realize that some of these mines are more than two miles wide. That’s wide enough so that parts didn’t even flood during Harvey. And I have to believe that:

  • …if sand on the perimeter was unprofitable, they wouldn’t mine it.
  • …if mining in the floodway were prohibited, no one would be at a competitive disadvantage.

Dubious Relationship Between Growth and Mining Near River

For generations, the mining industry has positioned itself as “the driver of growth.” And it has sought concessions from state legislators to perpetuate growth. Like all myths, there’s some truth to this one. But when you look closely, any argument for lax regulation rapidly disappears.

While over-regulation can certainly hurt an economy, sensible regulation can help it. If aircraft manufacturers tolerated crashes, people would not fly.

So why is leaving a floodway-wide buffer such a hardship? I’m still scratching my head. According to USA Today, three states have higher growth rates than Texas AND require minimum setbacks (Idaho, Washington and Arizona). So setbacks are not anti-business or a growth killer. Idaho is growing at 2.20%, Washington at 1.71% and Arizona at 1.56% according to USA Today. Texas is growing at 1.43%.

When you look at the opposite end of the spectrum, the two states LOSING the most population are West Virginia and Wyoming – both big mining states with lax regulations.

So clearly, lax regulation is not creating growth and tougher regulation is not stifling it. So why is it so hard to get mining regulation that protects citizens, property and the environment?

Status of Mining Legislation

Here is where Texas stands on proposed sand mining legislation.

No bill opposed by TACA has made it out of committee so far this year.

Two bills supported by TACA have reached the floors of the Senate and the House:

  • SB 2126 which could actually allow mining IN rivers, not just their floodplains.
  • HB 907 which doubles fines against unregistered miners (not TACA’s problem).

All the rest are still bottled up in committee tonight with only 34 more days remaining in the session:

  • HB509 which requires a hydrologic impact study, public notice, and public hearings before permitting
  • HB908 which strengthens fines for water code violations and increases inspection rates
  • HB909 which calls for the TCEQ to adopt and publish best management practices for mining
  • HB1671 which would enforce those best practices on the San Jacinto and require minimum setbacks
  • HB2871 which would require miners to post performance bonds, ensuring reclamation when they finish mining.

Seat Belt and Blowout Analogies

I am not against mining; I am FOR more responsible mining that protects citizens, property, the environment, and the image of Texas as a great place to live. Growth is far more complicated than the sand mining industry would have us believe.

Minimum setbacks will not destroy the state’s formula for growth. They’re a safety measure, like seat belts for Mother Earth against speeding, out-of-control floodwaters.

Arguing against them is reminiscent of the argument against putting seat belts and other safety features in cars 50 years ago. Remember Unsafe at Any Speed? At the time, some in industry claimed the extra cost would drive Detroit out of business. Those of us old enough to remember might say it was the beginning of Detroit’s rebirth.

Another more direct analogy: a hundred years ago, people drilled oils wells that routinely blew out. Erle P. Halliburton changed the industry with new cementing techniques that prevented blowouts and improved well control. In 1957, Oklahoma inducted Halliburton into its Hall of Fame. The world is a much safer place because of him.

Hurricane Harvey exposed the safety flaws in the assumptions underlying sand mining regulations. We have 34 days left in this legislative session. Let’s use them to enact some common sense legislation that improves the safety of mining and preserves the environment for our children.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/25/2019

604 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Outlook Good for Bill That Would Double Fines for Illegal Sand Mining

On April 17th, the Texas House of Representatives Environmental Regulations committee heard testimony on a bill that would double fines for illegal sand mining, HB907. No illegal sand miners spoke against the bill, so this one has a pretty good chance of passing.

Click here to view testimony.

Key Points in Huberty’s Testimony

The bill’s author, State Representative Dan Huberty laid out the case for the bill starting at 9:29 into this recording. His main points: this bill does not penalize miners who have registered with the TCEQ, only those who have not. He reminded committee members how bad the problem of illegal sand mining was when his first sand mining bill was passed in 2011. Huberty said that he believes the problem of unregistered sand mining continues to this day. However, he said, the fines set in 2011, no longer make the same deterrent they did then. He said the increased fines would enable the TCEQ to increase oversight efforts.

Why This is Important

Illegal sand mining contributes disproportionately to the problem of sedimentation in the river. That’s because it often takes place in or on the banks of the river. The illegal miners make no attempt to control erosion or sediment. And the scars can last for decades.

Here is a satellite image from 1989 on the West Fork of a mining operation near a point bar. At this point in time, sand miners were not forced to register with the TCEQ.
The same area almost 30 years later still bears the scars. Both photos courtesy of Google Earth.

Supported by Both TACA and Environmental Groups

At about 18 minutes into the recording, Rob Van Til, owner of River Aggregates, a registered sand mining company, spoke in favor of the bill. Speaking for himself as well as TACA, he said it would help deter “bad actors.”

Grant Dean, representing the Texas Environmental Coalition, from Marble Falls, also rose to speak in favor of the bill.

Not a “Christmas Tree”

Given the lack of opposition, Huberty then wrapped up testimony by moving for passage of he bill. He said that he would not allow the bill to become a “Christmas Tree” when it went to the House floor. A Christmas tree bill is a political term referring to a bill that attracts many, often unrelated, floor amendments that provide special benefits to various groups or interests.

The testimony with questions from the committee members took about 15 minutes. In response to one of the questions, Huberty details all of the other flood mitigation legislation moving through the Legislature at this time. It’s definitely worth watching if you want a preview of how the political landscape could change for sand mining in coming years.

Revenue Neutral

While this is certainly not the most important piece of sand mining legislation, it will help in a limited way by plugging a legislative and enforcement gap. And because the extra revenue generated will pay for the enforcement, it is revenue neutral.

Status: Pending in Committee

To read the text of HB907, click here. Senator Brandon Creighton has introduced a companion bill in the Senate, SB2123. Both are still pending in committee.

Creighton’s SB2123 was referred to the Natural Resources & Economic Development Committee on March 21. The committee has not yet held hearings on it.

Reasoning Behind Companion Bills

A companion bill is a bill filed in one chamber that is identical or very similar to a bill filed in the opposite chamber. Companion bills are used to expedite passage as they provide a means for committee consideration of a measure to occur in both houses simultaneously. A companion bill that has passed one house can then be substituted for the companion bill in the second house.

How You Can Help

Both of these bills deserve the support of Lake Houston Area residents. To urge action, call or email the committee members. Here is contact info for:

Said Huberty at the end of the day, “It was quick, but we feel good about this!”

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/20/2019

599 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Texas Parks and Wildlife Sand and Gravel Permitting Program: History, Scope and Protections

As I’ve been posting a lot about sand mining legislation, a friend sent me this doc today about the reasons for Texas Parks & Wildlife Department’s (TPWD) permitting program. TPWD regulates mining in rivers; TCEQ regulates mining in flood plains.

Photo by Jim & Melissa Balcom of their son playing on the West Fork of the San Jacinto after Harvey.

Difference in Tax Rates Between Rivers and Flood Plains

Flood plain mining has a 2% tax rate; in-river mining 8%. This doc explains what the department does with that 8%. TPWD’s authority to regulate mining in rivers goes back more than 100 years.

TPWD says that:

Dredging of sand, gravel, and shell from rivers and bays can negatively impact fish and wildlife habitats. Habitat alteration is the primary cause of population declines, loss, and extinction of freshwater fishes, mussels, and other aquatic organisms. Habitat alteration is also one of the primary contributors to listing of fish and wildlife as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act. 

Evolution of Mining Influenced

Because of the 4X difference in tax rates, and the fact that sand is a highly competitive undifferentiated commodity, sand from flood plains enjoys a huge cost advantage: 6%. As a result, comparatively little sand is taken from rivers today. In an average year, TPWD department says it brings in only $200,000 to $400,000 statewide. It comes mostly from small scale mining (less than 1000 cubic yards) by people who want to build roads or pipelines across streams.

Goals of Regulations

As the number of applications for permits has increased, TPWD has established project guidelines such as seasonal restrictions that avoid or minimize impacts to recreational users; site-specific provisions to ensure channel stability; and best management practices to control bank erosion, avoid land loss, and reduce downstream impacts. 

Read Over Your Morning Cup

The entire document is 2-pages, well-written, and well-illustrated. It will give you a good understanding of why the state started regulating sand mining in rivers long ago…all during your morning cup of coffee or tea. Highly recommended easy reading!

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/19/2019

598 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Bill that Could Open Door to River Mining Modified and Heading to Full Senate

Senate Bill 2126, which allows sand mining in rivers – without permits or royalties – was voted out of the Senate Water and Rural Affairs committee last night. The committee left the bill pending during the previous day’s testimony after four of the seven members expressed concerns about it.

Changes in Committee Substitute SB 2126

However, when the bill’s author, Senator Brandon Creighton, created a “committee substitute” bill, four senators voted FOR it.

The substitute bill contains two major changes:

  • It limits the bill’s geographic scope to the San Jacinto River and its tributaries.
  • It gives the Harris County Flood Control District the same powers that it gives the San Jacinto River Authority.

Local bills rarely encounter serious opposition. So this may guarantee the bill’s passage.

Issues with Revisions

Unfortunately, the language is still so sweeping, that I fear it could open the door to abuses.

Someone reading this for the first time, without the benefit of all the senate testimony, could draw the conclusion that the San Jacinto and its tributaries are wide open to sand mining – 24/7/365 – as long you justify it by saying you will improve the river’s conveyance.

Vague Language Opens Door to Abuses

For instance, after reading this bill, unless you watched the testimony, how would you know that it’s supposedly:

  • For the purpose of building sand traps that are maintained once or twice a year?
  • Limited to “strategic locations”?
  • Based on scientific studies?

Several years down the road, when the players change, all the verbal promises made during testimony will be long forgotten. It’s easy to see how people could get the wrong impression of the bill’s original intent.

Nightmare Scenario

At that time, I can see developer’s coming to sand miners and the SJRA (or Harris County Flood Control) saying, “I need more fill to elevate my property. Can you take it out of the river for me?”

The only problem is this. While it may reduce the risk of flooding on the developers’ property, without proper safeguards, it will likely increase flooding for surrounding and downstream properties.

It could even increase sedimentation downstream as many academic studies have shown.

Example 1: Loss of riparian vegetation along the banks increases erosion. So even though you take sand out of the river, you put more back in.

Example 2: Imagine a flood moving slowly through a widened area. Now imagine those same floodwaters moving downstream through a narrower area. As the water hits the constriction, it starts churning at and eroding the river banks.

Example 3: Lack of permitting or engineering studies means that developers could put fill anywhere. Even in streams. They could divert flows onto neighboring properties. They could put fill in wetlands and pave it over. This would accelerate flooding downstream.

Proponents of the bill argue that removing deposits like this one near a mine could keep the sand from migrating downriver. Opponents argue that it could destabilize river banks and worsen sedimentation. The vagueness of the language in the bill would also make it easy to widen the river anywhere developers wanted to build in floodplains.

Better Ways to Reduce Sedimentation

Creighton’s original stated intent was to eliminate disincentives for public/private partnerships that could help address excess sedimentation. A noble intention.

But if he really wants to stop sediment from coming downstream, he might be better off partnering with groups like the Bayou Land Conservancy that protect and restore floodplains. Or accelerating bills like his own SB2124, which creates best management practices for sand mining. Texas is the only state that I could find that doesn’t require minimum setbacks from rivers for sand mines. That contributes to repeated flooding of mines. We sure could use some help in that department. Frankly, so could the miners.

This session ends on May 27th. Tick Tock.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/18/2019

597 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 39 days until the end of this legislative session

In Support of HB 907: Doubling Fines for Unregistered Sand Mining

After Hurricane Harvey, I saw mountains of sand everywhere I looked near the San Jacinto River. Since then, I have been studying the origins of the sand and am convinced that part of it comes from bootleg sand mining operations upstream that have destabilized river banks.

Forest Cove Townhomes destroyed by Harvey and swallowed by sand. In places, sand reaches into the treetops.

Bootleg Operators Destabilize River Banks

You don’t have to look long or hard to find examples of bootleg operators; they’re clearly visible in satellite images. As you examine an area in Google Earth and scroll back through time, look for operations that pop up suddenly and disappear just as fast. Concentrate on point bars and areas hidden in woods near rivers.

High Cost of Dredging

It’s costing taxpayers $70 million to restore the conveyance of the San Jacinto River; that’s the cost of the US Army Corps of Engineer’s dredging program. And that’s only for a PORTION of the area that needs dredging.

HB 907 DOUBLES the penalties (both daily and total) for failure to register an APO. It’s simple and straightforward. It targets bootleg operators who take a dump truck and a back hoe to the river and start scooping sand out of point bars. BTW, that’s stealing public property.

In the process, they kill trees and riparian vegetation that stabilize river banks. Results: erosion, excess sedimentation and scars that can last for decades. 

I’m not aware of any responsible parties opposing this legislation. And it doesn’t impose any hardships on honest people.

It does, however, put APOs on the radar of oversight agencies, so the agencies can better enforce environmental laws and regulations.

HB 907 Won’t Solve Sedimentation Problems but Will Help

PLEASE SUPPORT HB 907. It won’t solve all the sedimentation problems on the San Jacinto, but it will definitely help.

The House Environmental Regulation committee is hearing testimony on the bill today. Let’s hope this one makes it out of committee.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/17/2019

596 Days since Hurricane Harvey