Tag Archive for: remediation

Abandoned Texas Concrete Mine in Plum Grove Still Hasn’t Stabilized Soil or Removed Equipment

Portion of Texas Concrete Mine in Plum Grove on 4/21/2020.

Last September 24, less than a week after Imelda, the TCEQ issued a notice of enforcement to the Texas Concrete Sand Mine in Plum Grove on the East Fork of the San Jacinto. The report noted that the mine was abandoned; no activity had been observed there in the two months before Imelda. And no personnel were onsite when investigators visited the operation.

Imelda dumped 30.4 inches of rain on this exact location on 9/17/2019 and days later, investigators found four breaches leaking pit water into the East Fork.

Purpose of Soil Stabilization

Sediment and other pollution can escape through breaches in the mine’s dikes and affect water quality all the way down to Lake Houston. Stabilizing soil helps prevent erosion and water pollution, and thus reduces sediment buildups that can contribute to flooding. I discuss TCEQ standards for final soil stabilization in this post. As you can see in the photo above, this site does not have “perennial vegetative cover with a density of 70 percent (%) of the native background vegetative cover … on all unpaved areas and areas not covered by permanent structures.”

Thus it represents a high risk of pollution.

No Activity Observed for Months, Signs Removed

Josh Alberson, a Kingwood resident, traced excessive turbidity in the East Fork to the mine during the same period and visited it on several occasions. He also observed no activity then or today. Alberson took the three photos below this evening.

This post used to hold the operation’s identifying sign, according to Alberson.
These posts used to hold the safety sign for Texas Concrete. It certainly appears as though someone no longer wants to be identified with the problems remaining on this site.
Past the gate, nothing remained but broken pipe and equipment left to rust. Alberson could see no recent tire tracks in or out. The unguarded, barely fenced operation likely represents a safety hazard to area kids.

Aerial photos taken last week showed no activity at the plant and no processing equipment. However, several dump trucks, a bulldozer and a dredge remained on the property.

Comparing the images below with the Landsat photo in Google Earth dated 12/1/2019 shows that none of the equipment has moved for at least five months and most likely longer.

Pipes, an excavator and fallen light pole have blocked the entry to the plant since 12/1/2019. None of the other equipment has moved since then either.
Mine’s dredge is on dry ground and no longer operational. Comparison with 12/1/2019 Google Earth image shows that the dredge has not moved since then.

Alberson also says that the breaches he reported to the TCEQ last year still remain.

Texas Concrete Says “No Mine in Plum Grove”

The phone number for the plant’s manager (listed in the TCEQ report) has been disconnected and is no longer in service. A receptionist at Texas Concrete’s headquarters was unaware of the man listed as president of the mine in the TCEQ report. She also said “we have no mine in Plum Grove.”

TCEQ Says No Active Permits For Mine

Christian Eubanks, an investigator for the TCEQ says the plant has no active permits. He investigated the plant last year and has opened a new investigation.

Texas Concrete is a member of TACA (Texas Aggregate and Concrete Association) and lists highway materials as a major line of business. (I’ll come back to that later.)

Public Policy Implications

Google Earth shows the mine covers approximately 147 acres and borders the East Fork for more than a mile. In its current state, even more breaches could open up in the next big storm and no one would be there to fix them.

This site represents a preventable disaster in the making. But what to do?

Former Texas Concrete Plant in Plum Grove as seen in Google Earth.

Currently, Texas regulations state that a mine needs a reclamation plan to get a permit. However, there are no regulations stating they must execute the plan before abandoning the property.

The time to think about a major expense, such as reclamation, is NOT what all the profit has left a mine. That, of course, should be done upfront – before mining starts and profits roll in. Duh!

Some states force mines to post performance bonds for reclamation before issuing the initial permit to construct a mine. That makes sense. Texas should adopt that policy. This case shows why.

The Eminent Domain Option

Texas should also exercise eminent domain when miners ignore their reclamation responsibilities. These abandoned pits can represent dangers to neighborhood kids.

Pits can have steep slopes and sharp drop offs. Some, reputedly are 90 feet deep. Roads around them collapse. The sides often cave in. They can even harbor dangerous bacteria.

With money from forfeited performance bonds (if miners fail in their reclamation responsibilities), Texas could turn abandoned mines into parks for people and wildlife to enjoy. And it wouldn’t be at taxpayer expense.

Walking away from reclamation responsibilities is just another way to externalize clean up costs that some mines reportedly build into their business plans.

It’s shameful. State Rep. Dan Huberty has campaigned for more than a decade for sensible sand mine legislation. He had this to say about the Texas Concrete case. “We are working with TCEQ and will be requiring the land owner to remediate.” He added, “We will also be drafting legislation to require bonds that ensure clean up after they are done mining and hold the owners liable for non-performance.” 

When aggregate companies have outstanding issues such as the Plum Grove mine, I personally would like to see their ability to do business with TxDoT suspended. That would get compliance quickly.

Posted by Bob Rehak on April 28, 2020 with thanks to Dan Huberty, Josh Alberson and the TCEQ

753 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 222 since 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.

Drone Video Underscores Dangers of Development without Remediation

Yesterday, the area where a developer proposes a new high-rise development flooded for the fifth time this year. This underscores the need for remediation before any permitting.

It wasn’t an especially heavy rain last week. Kingwood received about 2.5 inches. Areas upstream averaged 3 to 4 inches. Yet the West Fork came out of its banks and flooded River Grove Park for the fifth time this year (February 26, March 28/29, July 4, December 7/8, December 27). The USGS Gage at US59 showed that the flood crested at about midnight. The crest reached almost 50 feet at US59.

The West Fork at US 59 crested at almost 50 feet from the most recent rains. In the days preceding, SJRA released 5-7,000 cfs from Lake Conroe.

Jim Zura of Zura Productions took his drone to River Grove during the last light before the overnight crest. The video shows that although the road was still useable, many of the park’s popular amenities were not. The playground, soccer fields, boat ramp and boardwalk all flooded.

Earlier this year, the US Army Corps of Engineers found that excessive sedimentation in the river contributed to excessive flooding. The frequency of these floods supports that conclusion. The Corps began dredging in late September to remove sediment, but has completed only about 20% of the project so far. Downstream blockages remain. And the biggest – at the mouth of the West Fork – is not even within the scope of the current dredging project.

The end of Zura’s video shows the soccer fields and adjoining property, including a small lake in the floodway. This flood gives us a glimpse of how a minor rain would affect the proposed high-rise development there.

Watch all the way to the end!

The frequency of these floods underscores the need to consider the implications of permitting such a major development – especially when officials know the engineering is based on obsolete data and flood maps that in no way reflect current realities.

Until remediation efforts are complete, officials should postpone consideration of the permit. Remediation efforts include:

  • Dredging the West Fork all the way from US59 to Lake Houston
  • Creating additional upstream detention
  • Adding flood gates to Lake Houston
  • Restoring the conveyance of local drainage ditches and streams.

Rainfalls of the magnitude that caused these five floods should happen about once every 2 years according to Harris County Flood Control. This year they happened five times: 10X greater than expected. A review of peak crest data since 1929 roughly confirms these expectations. In the 80 year since then, the river crested over 50 feet only 40 times.

A review of the same data shows that the river has crested over 57 feet 9 times in the last 80 years and six times since 1994.

I believe excessive sedimentation played a role in this frequency increase. Instead of flooding every other year like this, we’re flooding almost every other month. That’s significant enough to put the brakes on development in the floodway, at least until we understand the extent of the problems and can fix them.

These are my opinions on matters of public policy. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statutes of the Great State of Texas.

Posted by Bob Rehak on December 31, 2018

489 Days since Hurricane Harvey