Proposed List of Best Management Practices for Certain Operational Issues at Aggregate Production Operations

Comment From: William MCCABE

1/15/25 @ 11:14 AM

In the 2021 87th Legislative Session, Senate Bill (SB) 1 charged the TCEQ "to adopt and make accessible on the commission's internet website best management practices for aggregate production operations regarding nuisance issues relating to dust, noi...↓se, and light, and to conduct aerial observations at least twice per fiscal year to ensure enforcement of existing statutes and rules relating to aggregate operations." The 2023 88th Legislative Session reiterated that charge with SB 1397 and House Bill (HB) 1505. These companion bills charged the TCEQ to develop and make accessible on the commission's internet website recommended BMPs for APOs that operate under the jurisdiction of the commission. The BMPs must include operational issues related to dust, water use, and water storage. The TCEQ spent over three years (from September 2021 to December 2024) to produce a set of BMPs that is so sparse, vague, and self-evident, as to be completely irrelevant and useless.
The proposed BMP list fails to address many of the real issues associated with APOs, including issues they were directly charged with addressing. Their charge in 2023 was to "include operational issues related to dust, water use, and water storage." While they addressed dust and water storage (albeit inadequately) the TCEQ completely overlooked the "water use" portion of their 2023 charge. Their 2021 charge also directed them to address noise and light pollution, both of which the proposed BMPs completely ignore. TCEQ has simply failed to comply with their legislative mandates
The BMPs listed are not only too few, but many of them are also too vague to be useful. For instance, "Ensure vehicles are driven at reasonable speeds to reduce dust disturbance." Why not include that speed limits of 10 or 15 mph should be posted and abided by on unpaved haul roads within an APO? The value of a BMP list is in detailing out what a "reasonable speed" ought to be. Another example: "Use fuel-efficient and appropriately-sized equipment to reduce emissions, operation time, and the overall amount of dust you produce." Why not indicate what is meant by "appropriately sized"? How is anyone to assess when a BMP is being implemented, if they are described in completely subjective terms like "reasonable" and "appropriate"?
Other BMPs listed are simply reminders to follow permit requirements or are otherwise self-evident. For instance, "Be sure your stockpiles are only as high as your permit allows," or "the further dustproducing operations are from the site boundaries, the less likely they will create a nuisance for any neighbors." Who benefits from these self-evident recommendations and simple reminders to follow the permit requirements? This completely inadequate draft BMP list, three years in the making, only weakens TCEQ's effort to protect public health and natural resources by pretending to establish new guidelines while actually saying nothing. It is a disservice to taxpayers and to the environment. It is also important to recognize that whatever list of BMPs the TCEQ ultimately settles on will be neither required nor incentivized for industry implementation.
Some specific inclusions that need to be included in the next attempt at fulfilling the legislative mandate are:
1)Water use: Maximize the use of process wastewater, which cannot be discharged without treatment but can be reused in site operations. Managing fine tailings to reduce amount of fine tailings settling ponds with tailings thickener system and/or flocculant and thickener are key BMPs understood, accepted and utilized by many APOs, These facilities can provide additional recycled water to reduce overall APO water use, water loss and reduce land use.
2) Riparian health and safety: The following is a list of suggested BMPs for riparian areas.
a. Maintain undisturbed setback from at least 50 feet from the water's edge and preferably 200 feet.
b. Create a buffer between mining activities and the waterway.
c. Leave large woody debris in the floodplain.
d. Mine above the water table only.
e. Minimize use of heavy equipment in riparian areas to protect vegetation and reduce soil compaction

No attachments

Comment From: Susan Pollard

1/14/25 @ 11:43 PM

I am writing as a concerned resident to urge you to take steps to protect our waterways and possible flooding of our homes from sand mines. Please protect us from discharge of sediment-laden water, pit capture (when a river starts flowing through a ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Randy Braud

1/14/25 @ 7:32 PM

I am extremely disappointed that after 3 years of work that the TCEQ have issued such a disappointing proposal for APO Best Management Practices. It seems like you asked the aggregate operators to prepare this document. I started to develop a list of...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Todd McElroy

1/14/25 @ 1:42 PM

Regarding the APO BMP List Proposal, there does not appear to be strong, enforceable best practices or guidelines for controlling excess sediment flowing into water, particularly when flooding does occur. The flooding causes additional sediment to e...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Kathy McCormack

1/14/25 @ 11:19 AM

The attached file includes feedback from the Texas Groundwater Protection Committee (TGPC) regarding the "Protect Groundwater Conditions" heading on the new APO BMPs webpage. The current webpage content is on page 1, and the proposed content is on p...↓

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Andrew Ricks

1/14/25 @ 9:45 AM

We live close to the San Jacinto River and the Kingwood Diversion Ditch that feeds into the river at River Grove Park. This section of the river is very shallow. As a result of Harvey and sediment upstream, particularly from breached dams at sand min...↓

No attachments

Comment From: James Crawford

1/14/25 @ 8:22 AM

I live near the San Jacinto River in Kingwood. Our area has flooded repeatedly in the 40+ years I have lived here. TCEQ needs to develop BMPs that address the discharge of sediment-laden water, pit capture (especially considering the mining that oc...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Richard Cadwell

1/13/25 @ 11:26 PM

I live in the Commons on Lake Houston and my property backs up to the East Fork of the San Jacinto. I have witnessed a significant increase in sand coming down the river since early 2024. I understand a dike broke on a sand pit upstream of us. I n...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Barbara Pederson

1/13/25 @ 11:02 PM

The TCEQ's recommended BMPs do not really address the biggest mining issues we have in the upper San Jacinto watershed.

I urge you to urge TCEQ to develop BMPs that address:

Discharge of sediment-laden water
Pit capture (when a river starts flowing...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Roy Streckfuss

1/13/25 @ 10:49 PM

Reduceflooding.com

Fix the problems with flooding in the Lake Houston and Kingwood .. San Jacinto water shed

No attachments

Comment From: Richard Campbell

1/13/25 @ 8:48 PM

The spoils of a sand mine should not be allowed to flow into the reservoir for drinking water.

No attachments

Comment From: Todd McElroy

12/14/24 @ 1:04 PM

When considering new best management practices, please create stricter requirements around when rivers break through dikes of sand mines. The cost to the tax payers for down stream dredging should be a major consideration, along with the safety of ...↓

No attachments

[ Previous Page / Next Page ]