You are here
State Comments on Frozen Data - 2013
State comments on frozen data are available through the links below, organized by the submission year. Additional data quality information which is not specific to the frozen data is available through the known data problems and State Review Framework Recommendations Tracker.
|Alabama||CAA||Metric 2a is flawed because it is comparing the historic CMS to the current value. This facility was not major in FY2013.
Metric 7b2 is inaccurately characterizing whether failed stack test received enforcement because the metric only looks within the fiscal year.
Metric 7b1 is flawed because it is not taking into account that actions late in the fiscal year will be reported in the next fiscal year. These three facilities were deemed in violation in late September (FY13) and the status reported in October (FY14).
Metric 7c1 is inaccurate. There are no permit schedule violations in ICIS for Alabama in FY13.
Metric 7f1 is inaccurate. A pull of Category I noncompliance for FY13 directly from ICIS only lists 352 permittees.
Metric 7g1 is inaccurate. A pull of Category II noncompliance for FY13 directly from ICIS only lists 57 permittees.
|Alaska||CWA||Nonmajor Cat2 Noncompliance - 6 of the 20 permits in this metric were terminated and should not be included in the total metric count.
Compliance Schedule Violations - The 5 that are listed in this metric are a result of EPA actions, schedules and data entry that was input in 2008 , then updated in 2013. I think if any of the State metrics showing EPA actions or events that were entered, then those activities should be moved to the EPA metric and removed from the State counts.
Permit Schedule Violations - 60 of the 725 counts were terminated and should not be included in the total metric count.
|Arkansas||CAA||All necessary corrections have been made.|
|CWA||State Review Framework Clean Water Act (CWA) Data Verification Caveats/Comments for the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) 02/14/2014:
Number of Active NPDES Non-Majors with Individual Permits (SRF CWA Metric 1a3): 9 of the facilities counted in metric 1a3 have expired without submitting a renewal application or a notice of termination (NOT); therefore, the permit coverage has been deemed invalid. Since ADEQ has not received NOTs from these facilities, they have not been terminated in ICIS. ICIS does not provide a permit activity status for permits that have expired without renewal. ADEQ does not believe these permits should be counted as "Active Non-Majors with Individual Permits". There were actually 683 active NPDES non-major facilities with individual permits in FY2013.
Number of Active NPDES Non-Majors with General Permits (SRF CWA Metric 1a4): 260 of the facilities counted in metric 1a4 have expired without submitting a renewal application or a notice of termination (NOT); therefore, the permit coverage has been deemed invalid. Since ADEQ has not received NOTs from these facilities, they have not been terminated in ICIS. ICIS does not provide a permit activity status for permits that have expired without renewal. ADEQ does not believe these permits should be counted as "Active Non-Majors with General Permits". There were actually 2589 active NPDES non-major facilities with general permits in FY2013.
Number of Major Facilities with a Manual Override of RNC/SNC to a Compliant Status (SRF CWA Metric 1b3): The manual overrides of the RNC Status for the three (3) facilities counted in metric 1b3 were performed to correct a known system error in US EPA's ICIS-NPDES database. Therefore, no negative implications should be drawn from these manual settings.
* The RNC Status for Q4 FY2013 for the City of Marion was manually changed to Resolved Pending since the permittee is under Consent Administrative Order LIS# 12-035 and is on schedule. The QNCR regulations (40 CFR 123.45) state that a permittee that is under an enforcement order, in compliance with the enforcement order, but has not achieved full compliance with permit conditions, the compliance status shall be reported as "Resolved Pending" on the QNCR.
* The RNC Status for Q4 FY2013 for Maumelle Improvement District 500 was manually changed to Resolved since the DMR that was flagged as overdue was actually received on time, but was entered into the ICIS database after the Final RNC run for the quarter.
* The RNC Status for Q1 FY2013 for Union Power Partners, LP - UNION POWER Station was manually changed to Resolved since the DMRs that were flagged as overdue were actually received on time, but were entered into the ICIS database after the Final RNC run for the quarter.
Total Number of Informal Actions at CWA NPDES Facilities (SRF CWA Metric 1e2): Normally, ADEQ normally enters Informal Enforcement Actions for Major permits only. Informal enforcement actions such as Notices of Violations that precede a Default Administrative Order may be entered for non-major facilities. 4 informal enforcement actions were duplicated in metric 1e2 since single informal enforcement actions that address violations for multiple facilities were counted as multiple informal enforcement actions. There were actually 97 informal enforcement actions at CWA NPDES facilities in FY2013.
Compliance schedule violations (SRF CWA Metric 7b1): Compliance Schedule Violations for eight (8) of the Arkansas NPDES facilities counted in metric 7b1 are from Enforcement Actions issued by U.S. EPA (AR0000752, ARR10A987, ARR10C780, ARR150775, ARR150985, ARR151050, ARR151661, ARR152383). Arkansas does not track schedule events established in orders issued by US EPA. Should these violations be listed with the "State" metrics? There were actually 10 compliance schedule violations for state-issued permits and formal enforcement actions in FY2013.
|Arizona||CAA||CalPortland Rillito Cement Plant with AFS ID Number 04019Z0310 should not be listed under Metric 1D1 State - Number of Tier I Facilities with Noncompliance Identified (Facility Count) for FY 2013 Production DAA Data for AZ LCON 00 since the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) did not identify any issues with performance tests, compliance cert reviews, or facility inspections that would result in noncompliance for FY 2013 and did not identify any informal or informal enforcement actions against the facility during FY 2013. This facility was in compliance during FY 2013 as far as ADEQ is concerned.
Nucor Steel Kingman with AFS ID Number 04015Z2455 should not be listed under Metric 1D1 State - Number of Tier I Facilities with Noncompliance Identified (Facility Count) for FY 2013 Production DAA Data for AZ LCON 00 since the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) did not identify any issues with performance tests, compliance cert reviews, or facility inspections that would result in noncompliance for FY 2013 and did not identify any informal or informal enforcement actions against the facility during FY 2013. This facility was in compliance during FY 2013 as far as ADEQ is concerned.
|Colorado||CWA||1a3 - Bondad Landfill, CO0034983, and Transit Waste LLC, COR050005, not showing up in ECHO, but are flagged properly in ICIS.
1a4 - Five GMG permits showing up on Region 8 list (see detailed permit list for flagged permits). However, they are Gulf of Mexico Region 6 permits, and should not be counted for Region 8.
1a4 - We have approximately 6,000 general permit certifications for storm water that are not currently entered in the ICIS database. State issued Non-NPDES ground water permits are not included in SRF numbers.
1e1 &1e2 - The Division does not currently enter informal actions into ICIS; however, the Division routinely issues compliance advisories to facilities when self-reported or field-identified violations occur.
1g1 - The Division issued 10 formal actions in FY13 that resolved civil penalties. 7 included straight payments of civil penalties, while 3 were entirely resolved through the performance of Supplemental Environmental Projects. EPA data includes one WVU action.
1g2 - Total civil penalties including Supplemental Environmental Projects = $834,679 ($437,772 in civil penalties, $1,500 in stipulated penalties from FY12 action, and $395,407 in SEPs). EPA data includes one WVU penalty.
|Connecticut||CWA||Metric 1a3 - CTP002306, Igor Sikorsky Memorial Airport in Stratford, CT is erroneously listed in this metric as an NPDES Non-Major. This is a pretreatment permit.
Metric 1a4 - The number of Active Non-Majors with General Permits is erroneous. This reflects a fraction of the facilities with NPDES GPs, as CT does not enter all GP registrants into ICIS. Those listed were entered because CT DEEP inspected them at some point in the past.
Metric 1e1 and 1e2 - CT began entering Informal Actions (NOVs) into ICIS in 2013. Not all NOVs are entered into ICIS. Only those issued to permit classes that are currently tracked in ICIS, e.g., NPDES Major individual permits, NPDES Non-Major individual permits, Pretreatment SIUs and CIUs already in ICIS.
Metric 7a1 and 7a2 - CT began entering SEVs into ICIS in 2013. CT enters SEVs identified during inspections of NPDES Major facilities and for those addressed by formal enforcement actions issued to NPDES Major facilities.
|RCRA||There are 3 FRR Inspections not listed in the original EPA data pull.
1b1 # of of sites inspected, EPA says 129, CT verifies 132
1b2 # of inspections, EPA says 129, CT verifies 132
The facilities are: Olin Corp, Waterbury Rolling Mills, Sporting Goods Properties
|Florida||CAA||FCE Coverage Major (5a): The metric percentage of 100% is correct on the SRF, but the actual counts of facilities receiving an FCE is greater than that listed. EPA explained to the state on 1/24/2014 that the reason these facilities are not included is because they calculate their CMS Cycle to begin in FY2014 based on the completion of the FCE in 2013. So because the cycle starts after the review period they are not captured in the CMS coverage universe. They will be included in the FY2014 coverage universe if they have an FCE.
FCE Coverage SM-80 (5b): The metric percentage of 100% is correct on the SRF, but the actual counts of facilities receiving an FCE is greater than that listed. EPA explained to the state on 1/24/2014 that the reason these facilities are not included is because they calculate their CMS Cycle to begin in FY2014 based on the completion of the FCE in 2013. So because the cycle starts after the review period they are not captured in the CMS coverage universe. They will be included in the FY2014 coverage universe if they have an FCE.
Review of Title V Annual Compliance Certifications Completed (5e): The actual percentage reviewed by the state during the fiscal year was 99%. Of the 10 "Not Counted" facilities, 7 facilities were not required to submit a certification in FY2013. The remaining 3 facilities were required to submit a certification but either the reports were not submitted, or the report was resubmitted and reviewed in FY2014.
Alleged Violations Reported Per Informal Enforcement Actions (Tier I only) (7b1): The actual percentage for this metric for the state is 100% as the "Not Counted" facilities should be zero. EPA Region 4 notified the state on 1/23/2014 the 'Not Counted' facility had been updated in AFS and the state verified the changes were done on that date. The changes should be reflected on the SRF report when it is refreshed in February.
Alleged Violations Reported Per Failed Stack Tests (7b2): The percentage for this metric for the state is actually 100% as the "Not Counted" facilities should be zero. There are two facilities listed on the report for which the state sent data correction requests to EPA Region 4 in January. The changes in AFS have been completed by EPA, and should be reflected on the SRF report when it is refreshed in February.
Alleged Violations Reported Per HPV Identified (7b3): The percentage for this metric for the state is actually 100% as the "Not Counted" facility should be zero. The state sent a data correction request to EPA Region 4 in January 2014. The changes in AFS have been completed by EPA, and should be reflected on the SRF report when it is refreshed in February.
HPV Reporting Indicator at Majors with Failed Stack Tests (8b): The percentage for this metric for the state is actually 100% as the 'Not Counted' facility should be zero. The failed stack test is properly linked to the HPV in AFS, but it appears that other PCE discovering actions also linked to the HPV are overriding the stack test activity. (See Day '0' = 4/30/2013, Key Action 00134 and PX: 4/23/2013, 5/09/2013; PS: 4/25/2014, and B7 (5/15/2013).
|CWA||1a2 - Number of Active NPDES Majors with General Permits State
Florida has no general permits for major facilities.
1a4 - Number of Active NPDES Non-Majors with General Permits
This number appears accurate, except for the North Carolina permit (NCG080425) that is included. This item was brought to Region 4s attention for correction on 01/30/14.
Since this metric's drilldown results are too large to view in a browser window, the results have to be downloaded to a CSV file. As a result, individual facilities could not be verified.
*On 01/31/14, EPA's Office of Compliance acknowledged in an email that the logic used to determine the universes of active facilities for CWA (metrics 1a1, 1a2, 1a3, 1a4) is incorrect. The FY 2013 just counts facilities that are currently active. Several states have pointed out that the logic includes permits that have been initiated since the end of FY13 and excludes permits that were terminated after the end of FY13, neither of which is correct. Beginning in FY 2014, the CWA SRF will define active facilities as facilities that were active at any time during the fiscal year.
1e1 - Facilities with Informal Actions
This number appears accurate, except for two AL issued permits (ALU001202 and ALU001240). These permits were brought to Region 4s attention on 01/30/14.
1e2 - Total Number of Informal Actions at CWA NPDES Facilities
This number appears accurate, except for two AL issued permits (ALU001202 and ALU001240). These permits were brought to Region 4s attention on 01/30/14.
7c1 Permit schedule violation
This number does not appear accurate. A manual override was requested of Region 4 on 01/24/14. The override was not granted as Region 4 was unable to locate the violation. Additional information was provided to Region 4 for consideration on 01/30/14.
7f1 Non-Major Facilities in Category 1 Noncompliance
This number appears accurate, except for the one permit noted. A manual override was requested of Region 4 for FL0040291 on 01/24/14, but it was not granted. Additional information was provided to Region 4 for consideration on 01/30/2014.
7g1 Non-Major Facilities in Category 2 Noncompliance
This number appears accurate, except for one permit. A manual override was requested of Region 4 for FL0101192 on 01/24/2014, but it was not granted due to an open consent order from 2000. The consent order was then closed in ICIS. Additional information was provided to Region 4 for consideration on 01/30/2014.
|RCRA||Metric 8B Timeliness of SNC determinations:
1. Only one facility truly belongs on this list. Loomis Executive Jet Refinishing should have been SNC'd before day 150.
2. Four of the six facilities reported in the SRF as not receiving a timely SNC determination is not accurate. These facilities were secondary violators that were appropriately reclassified as SNC before day 240 as specified in the 2003 EPA Enforcement Response Policy. This seems to be a data issue in how the SQG select statement calculates SNC determinations, not accounting for secondary violators reclassified as SNCs. The reclassified SNCs are:
a. Pan Tropic Power
b. Nu Look Mobile/Collision Paint Center
c. Central Florida Freezer
d. OU Metal
3. One facility (Diamond Cleaners) was mischaracterized as a SNC in our SWIFT Data Management System and should not be on this list.
Metric 5C Five-year inspection coverage for LQGs:
1. Twenty seven facilities are reported as not being inspected within a five year period.
2. Twenty of the Twenty seven facilities are foreign flagged cruise ships and should not be on this list since FDEP relies on the US Coast Guard to perform routine cruise ship inspections. FDEP recommends that a data flag be created to remove cruise ships from Metric 5C.
3. Six facilities below should not be on the list. Chevron Chemical, CVS, and Space Exploration Technologies are recent LQGs (became LQGs within the 5 year coverage period and will get inspected within a 5 year coverage). Transportation Security Administration was never inspected but was closed in FFY 2012; Simmons Trucking Accident Site and SWS Environmental Services are for one time cleanup emergencies.
|Illinois||CAA||1d1 - Number of Tier I Facilities with Noncompliance
1d2 - Number of Tier II Facilities with Noncompliance
All known current and past compliance status errors discovered by Illinois EPA during data verification of metrics 1d1 and 1d2 were corrected in US EPA's AFS system. Illinois EPA was unable to verify the corrections in AFS effectively changed the data in the data verification tables and the Illinois Dashboard information, because a refresh of the data was not available. Therefore, further compliance status errors could exist.
1i1 - Number of Stack Tests with Passing Results
Illinois EPA data indicated that in addition to the 124 passed stack tests counted in FFY2013 metrics 1i1, there were 21 passed stack tests not credited due to how the data for the metrics was generated. In accordance with meeting minimum data requirements (MDRs) per the Clean Air Act, Illinois EPA reported to AFS a total of 145 passed stack tests.
1i5 - Number of Stack Tests Observed & Reviewed
Illinois EPA data indicated that in addition to the 12 stack tests counted as observed and reviewed in FFY2013 metrics 1i5, there were 5 observed and reviewed stack tests not credited due to how the data for the metrics was generated. In accordance with meeting minimum data requirements (MDRs) per the Clean Air Act, Illinois EPA reported to AFS a total of 17 observed & reviewed stack tests.
1i6 - Number of Stack Tests Reviewed Only
Illinois EPA data indicated that in addition to the 118 reviewed stack tests counted in FFY2013 metrics 1i6, there were 14 reviewed stack tests not credited due to how the data was generated for this metrics. In accordance with meeting minimum data requirements (MDRs) per the Clean Air Act, Illinois EPA reported to AFS a total of 132 reviewed only stack tests.
1j - Number of Title V Annual Compliance Certifications Reviewed
Illinois EPA data indicated that in addition to the 533 reviewed Annual Compliance Certifications reviewed in FFY2013 metrics 1j, there were 46 reviews not credited due to how the data for the metrics was generated. In accordance with meeting minimum data requirements (MDRs) per the Clean Air Act, Illinois EPA reported to AFS a total of 579 reviewed Annual Compliance Certifications.
|CWA||Metric ID - 1a3: All Individual Minor Permits with/at an effective status were verified. Individual minor permits at a AdmCont status or expired status are undergoing further review to verify the current permit status and facility operational status. There are 26 ILD permits in this count that are not valid NPDES Permits because they are duplicate permit ID#s for mine facilities. There is one permit, WI0030481, on the drilldown list, which is not an Illinois permit. This would make the number of active NPDES Non-Majors with Individual Permit 1248. Once the verification process is complete, Illinois anticipates this number will be further reduced.
Metric ID - 1a4: All NPDES General Permits in Illinois are being thoroughly reviewed to confirm the current permit and operational status. Due to number of permits the review process is not complete. However, Illinois anticipates a significant reduction in the number of Active NPDES Non-Majors with General Permits when it concludes the review. One reason is that a large number of Storm Water Construction permits do not terminate their permit when construction is complete. A file review and/or site visits are thus necessary to determine their operational status.
Metric ID – 7c1: Permit schedule violations shown for Metric 7C1 are not correct. The count includes permits that terminated prior to FY2013. According to EPA, this is due to auto RNC status being accessed after the termination date. Therefore, RNC status for the terminated permits had to be manually resolved. According to ICIS support this is an application design flaw and a patch to delete all Auto RNCs after the termination date would be considered. Thus the number of permit schedule violations should decrease.
Metric ID – 7f1: In order to assist Illinois with its data cleanup efforts, ICIS support refreshed the auto RNC for Illinois two times. There were several hundred permits with inaccurate Auto RNC statuses (DMR Non-Receipt) which caused them to be in this count. This inaccuracy was due to the DMR data, which was timely submitted, being entered into ICIS after the auto RNC had run. This number should be significantly decreased in the final SRF refresh.
Metric ID – 7g1: In order to assist Illinois with its data cleanup efforts, ICIS support refreshed the auto RNC for Illinois two times. This number should be further decrease.
Metric ID – 8a1: In order to assist Illinois with its data cleanup efforts, ICIS support refreshed the auto RNC for Illinois two times. There were several Major permits with inaccurate Auto RNC statuses (DMR Non-Receipt) which caused them to be in this count. This inaccuracy was due to the DMR data, which were submitted on time, but entered into ICIS after the auto RNC had run. This number should be significantly decreased to approximately 38.
|Indiana||CAA||Regarding Metrics 1b1, 1b2, and 1b3, Indiana estimates that these numbers are probably at least 95% accurate, and both Indiana and the EPA will continue to work to further improve their accuracy in AFS.
Regarding Metrics 1a5, 1a6, 1d1, and 1d2, based on historical database inaccuracies made by EPA and/or the state, the sources listed may not have had compliance status issues within the federal Fiscal Year 2013 period in question. IDEM continues to work with EPA to improve current data quality and accuracy regarding compliance status on these facilities.
|CWA||Indiana does not have any Master General Permits at this time.|
|Iowa||CWA||Iowa currently has a significant number of CWA related ICIS violations. However, the vast majority of these are not actual violations, but are the result of implementation of a new computer system for transmitting data to EPA's ICIS database. Errors in this system have caused inaccurate synchronization of data between Iowa's NPDS permitting system and ICIS. Our experience has shown that over 90% of the ICIS CWA violations are not true violations. Iowa has and will continue to make significant progress in eliminating the causes of the false violations.|
|Kansas||CWA||Metric ID 1e1: Facilities with informal actions. KDHE does not track informal actions in a centrally located searchable format and therefore, does not load the data to ICIS-NPDES.
Metric ID 1e2: Total number of informal actions at CWA NPDES facilities. KDHE does not track informal actions in a centrally located searchable format and therefore, does not load the data to ICIS-NPDES.
Metric 1f1: Facilities with formal actions. KDHE has added 3 additional facilities which do not show on this list.
Metric 1f2: Total number of formal actions at CWA NPDES facilities. KDHE has added 3 additional facilities which do not show on this list.
Metric 1g2: Total penalties assessed. KDHE has corrected two amounts and added the amount on one facility that was already listed. The correct total amount of penalties assessed is $291,695 plus the cost of a significant SEP.
Metric 2a1: Number of formal enforcement actions, taken against major facilities, with enforcement violation type codes entered. KDHE does not tie enforcement violation type codes to the formal enforcement actions. All previous violations which still exist or may recur at the time the order is written are covered under the order.
Metric 7a1: Number of Major facilities with single event violations. KDHE does not track single event violations in a centrally located searchable format and therefore, does not load the data to ICIS-NPDES.
Metric 7a2: Number of non-major facilities with single event violations. KDHE does not track single event violations in a centrally located searchable format and therefore, does not load the data to ICIS-NPDES.
Metric 7b1: Compliance schedule violations. KDHE does not track compliance schedule violations in a searchable format and therefore, does not load the data to ICIS-NPDES. Of the eight facilities listed, five are shown as having schedule violations of EPA issued orders. It is unknown whether the facilities are in violation of the EPA issued orders or EPA has not updated ICIS-NPDES. One is a wastewater treatment plant listed by EPA for Safe Drinking Water Act violations. EPA needs to correct this entry. Moundridge has schedule violations listed for both EPA and KDHE orders but has been slowed by delays in the EPA-ordered industry's pretreatment upgrades. The O'Brien Ready Mix order is a KDHE-issued order which has now been terminated.
Metric 7c1: Permit schedule violations. KDHE does not track permit schedule violations in a searchable format and therefore, does not load the data to ICIS-NPDES.
Metric 7f1: Non-major facilities in Category 1 non-compliance. KDHE loads non-major basic data including limit sets to ICIS-NPDES. However, states are not required to load non-major DMR data and, KDHE did not load, during this time period, the discharge monitoring report (DMR) data to support the limit set requirements. Therefore, the vast majority of the Category 1 non-compliance is because of KDHE not loading the non-major DMR data to ICIS-NPDES.
Metric 7g1: Non-major facilities in Category 2 non-compliance. KDHE loads non-major basic data including limit sets to ICIS-NPDES. However, the states are not required to load non-major facility DMR data, and KDHE did not load, during this time period, the discharge monitoring report (DMR) data to support the limit set requirements. Therefore, the vast majority of the Category 2 non-compliance is because of KDHE not loading the non-major DMR data to ICIS-NPDES.
Metric 8a1: Major facilities in SNC. Of the four facilities shown, three are shown as having schedule violations of EPA issued orders. It is unknown whether they are in violation of the EPA issued orders or EPA has not updated ICIS-NPDES. The fourth facility is legitimately in Significant Non-Compliance for permit limit violations and is in the process of making plant upgrades.
|Kentucky||CWA||Kentucky has verified the FY2013 NPDES data with the following caveat: Surface coal mining permits are entered into ICIS-NPDES. Effluent limit data for these permits are not being entered into ICIS-NPDES at this time. Please contact Jory Becker (502-564-3410), Shawn Hokanson (502-564-3410), or Mark Cleland (502-564-2150) for additional information.|
|RCRA||Invalid data was contained in the LQGs not inspected (5c on the Matrix) in the last 5 years. Four facilities with invalid EPA ID #s were included in the count. The facilities had these numbers because they filed their biannual reports electronically with Region 4 with the incorrect numbers. Region 4 has told us these facilities cannot be removed from RCRA Info. These should not be considered in the count. The facilities erroneously listed are:
Steel Technologies KY0000639424
Osram Sylvania KYD006339000
IPSCO Tubular KYD991227112
Continental Crushing KYR055105290
Please contact Mark Cleland (502-564-2150) or Brian Osterman (502-564-6716) for more information.
|Louisiana||CWA||1a1, 1a2, 1a3, 1a4 - Number of permits is based on current active universe rather than those permits effective during FY2013.
1f2 - Number of formal actions does not include 72 formal enforcement actions that LDEQ issued during FY2013. LDEQ did receive credit for all of the facilities associated with these actions in the total number of facilities with formal actions (metric 1f1). LDEQ has contacted EPA HQ about the issue and is awaiting a response.
7b1- Number of compliance schedule violations includes LA0040941 but the violation is a judicial action violation from an EPA order and should not be included in the Louisiana list.
7f1 - Number of non-major facilities in Category 1 non-compliance is erroneously elevated due to the implementation of electronic discharge monitoring report system (NetDMR). Where limits are coded for untracked non-major facilities and NetDMR is not immediately used, non-receipt DMR violations are generated for DMRs that may have been received through standard paper submission and are not entered into ICIS.
7g1- Number of non-major facilities in Category 2 non-compliance includes LAR10E876 which was terminated as of 04/23/2009 and the associated order was closed 06/29/2009 so this permit should not be included.
|Maine||CWA||Maine DEP thoroughly reviewed the verification results for FY2013 Production CWA Data for Maine.
Maine DEP staff identified several instances where Permit Schedule items were logged out in the State of Maine system called EFIS, but not logged out in ICIS. This may be a data flow issue that needs to be further investigated.
During FY2013, Enforcement screens were built in the Maine EFIS system with the intention of flowing Enforcement data to ICIS. To date, some Enforcement data has been added to EFIS.
Maine DEP staff added comments to address 11 Metric ID's that were determined to be incorrect or deficient. Please refer directly to the following Metric ID's for specific comments; 1ae, 1e1, 1e2, 1f1, 1f2, 1g1, 1g2, 2a1, 7c1, 7g1, and 8a1.
|Massachusetts||CAA||There is a lag between the time noncompliance is found and when it is recorded in the system as well as a lag in the time that the condition of noncompliance is corrected and the facility status is changed to "in compliance" in the system. This lag time could be as much as 45 days. Therefore, compliance status within any given time period is suspect data and for actual periods of noncompliance for any given source, the state should be consulted.|
|Michigan||CAA||In general, the data in the US EPA's FY2013 report is consistent with data in the Michigan Air Compliance and Enforcement System (MACES) database. However data on the number of Title V Annual Compliance Certifications reviewed is underreported in AFS. This is a known issue that Michigan is working to resolve.|
|CWA||The MDEQ, Water Resources Division (WRD), has not been able to transfer information regarding our compliance and enforcement activities to the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS). We believed corrections were in place to rectify this situation. Unfortunately, that is not the case. We expect our compliance and enforcement data will be electronically transferred to ICIS within the next couple of months. We do not have staff to manually enter this data.
Below is a summary of informal and formal enforcement actions taken during the period of October 1, 2012, to September 30, 2013. This information is included in our Performance Partnership Grants report that will be submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 5. This data accurately reflects our efforts to take timely and appropriate action for noncompliance issues.
Issue compliance communications (CC), violation notices (VN) and/or second violation notices (SVN), where appropriate, to facilities found to be in noncompliance with permit requirements, state laws, or administrative rules.
Program CC /VN /SVN/Total
CAFO 44/ 29/ 1/ 74
Construction Storm Water 13/ 18/ 7 /38
Industrial Storm Water 90/ 87/ 8/ 185
MS4 6/ 3 /1/10
Traditional NPDES 200/ 78/ 8 /286
Grand Totals 353 /215/ 25/ 593
Issue Director's Final Orders (DFOs) for the abatement of water pollution, where necessary.
- No DFOs were issued during Fiscal Year 2013 (FY 2013). However, 25 Administrative Consent Orders, Amended Administrative Consent Orders and District Initiated Administrative Consent Orders were entered for abatement of water pollution and assessment of penalties. The WRD also resolved 48 additional unpermitted discharge cases involving mostly industrial storm water discharges via the WRD's General Administrative Consent Order and Certificate of Entries for unpermitted dischargers.
- Assure that the assessment of civil penalties, payment for natural resource damages, and the payment of agency costs are efficient to assure an effective deterrent to continuing pollution and consistent with current civil penalty policies.
- The assessment of civil penalties, agency costs, and natural resource damages amounted to $275,116.08 in FY 2013.
|Minnesota||CWA||The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has made all reasonable effort to verify and correct the data presented in the ECHO State Review Framework environment. This has been done by ensuring that the data contained in the respective EPA program systems, ICIS-NPDES, RCRAInfo and AFS are in agreement with the Delta data system maintained by the MPCA as implementer of these programs for the State of Minnesota. Where discrepancies still exist, they are often beyond the control of the MPCA because they are related to the procedures by which the EPA ECHO database aggregates and assesses the data stored in the stand-alone program systems. The MPCA is unable to correct or influence any errors that arise in this process, which is wholly within the control of the EPA. For complete and current information on regulated parties in Minnesota, the MPCA suggests that data be accessed through our "What's in my Neighborhood" website.|
|Mississippi||CAA||Metric 3a2 Untimely entry of HPV determinations - MDEQ's business process for entering enforcement MDRs into AFS is based on making an accurate HPV/non-HPV determination before beginning the data entry. MDEQ enters data into AFS via EPA's Universal Interface and linking of enforcement actions to a Day Zero is least complicated when the Day Zero already exists. Therefore NOVs are entered at the time the Day Zero is entered. Because changing from an HPV to non-HPV action or viceversa is a very complicated process, we often wait to make a HPV determination until after the source has responded to our NOVs. This ensures accurate data entry.
Metric 3b2 Timely reporting of stack test MDRs - The deadline for data entry begins from the date the stack test is conducted. Permits typically allow 45 to 60 days from the date the test was conducted for a report to be submitted. MDEQ enters stack test data following staff review and at times, the 120 days deadline will be exceeded.
Metric 3b3 Timely reporting of enforcement MDRs - MDEQ's business process for entering enforcement MDRs into AFS is based on making an accurate HPV/non-HPV determination before beginning the data entry. MDEQ enters data into AFS via EPA's Universal Interface and linking of enforcement actions to a Day Zero is least complicated when the Day Zero already exists. Therefore NOVs are entered at the time the Day Zero is entered. Because changing from an HPV to non-HPV action or viceversa is a very complicated process, we often wait to make a HPV determination until after the source has responded to our NOVs. This ensures accurate data entry.
|RCRA||Metric 5b - Annual inspection coverage for LQG (1FY)- Universe used in this metric corresponds to the number of LQGs that filed a biennial report for the 2011 cycle. The universe of LQG has changed since then, therefore metric 1A2 is a more accurate representation of the LQG universe in MS during FFY13 and should be used in this metric.
Metric 5c - Five year inspection coverage for LQG- Universe used in this metric corresponds to the number of LQGs that filed a biennial report for the 2011 cycle. The universe of LQG has changed since then, therefore metric 1A2 is a more accurate representation of the LQG universe in MS during FFY13 and should be used in this metric.
|Missouri||RCRA||We have recognized some discrepancies between the data reflected in the national database and our internal tracking systems however we have not determined the cause. We will continue to research and work to resolve these issues to ensure the data in ECHO accurately reflects the actions of our RCRA program.|
|Montana||CAA||Montana DEQ's air program reviewed the air quality data from OTIS. Some of the data presented in the data metrics does not appear to be reflective of Montana's air quality program. Montana focused much of its data review on the metrics that pertain to the CMS agreement between Montana and EPA. Other metrics in OTIS that focus on sources outside of the CMS appear to be in error. A more clear description of Montana's air program can be obtained from data within its CEDARS database and from discussions with DEQ staff members that can put context to the data.|
|CWA||1a3 - Northern Border Pipeline Company, MT0030791, is not showing up in ECHO even though it is flagged correctly in ICIS.
7A1 Metric - MT0021211 CITY OF GLASGOW HAD A SINGLE EVENT VIOLATION ON 12/06/2012 RESOLUTION CODE DATE OF 5/3/2013 THIS FACILITY SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THIS METRIC.
7c1 - Permit MT0020524 flagged for violation on 10/31/2012, but permit was terminated in 2008, so it cannot be flagged for a violation. Fixed in ICIS, but still being flagged in ECHO.
7g1 - Town of St. Ignatius, MT0020524, terminated on 10/22/2008, so should no longer be flagged for noncompliance. Metric 7G1 has incorrect information all facilities with incorrect information have been flagged in the metric.
There are two permits that should be showing in North Dakota, they have been flagged for review and correction.
|RCRA||1a2 - Count: 51
Count should be 53, however due to logic extract error (data being extracted as of date of data pull instead of end of FY), missing Jupiter Sulphur, MT0000882019 (is being shown in the SQG count but they were LQG at end of FY 2013) and Phoenix Industries, MTR000007708 (was a LQG and closed during FY 2013).
1a3 - Count: 71
Count correct, however due to logic extract error (data being extracted as of date of data pull instead of end of FY), Bearclaw Petroleum Inc., MTR000207738, was not in this count as the site was an active SQG at the end of FY 2013, but inactivated 01/08/2014 and Jupiter Sulphur, MT0000882019, is being shown but they were LQG at end of FY 2013, but are currently an SQG.
|New Hampshire||CAA||I have flagged the data problems. Most of the problems are related to the compliance status. In addition, DES conducted 80 FCEs in FFY 2013 and submitted all of the data to AFS, but only 70 are reflected in the reports.|
|RCRA||Metric 1a4 - as of 2/12/14, NHDES has 1900 "active" CESQGs, and 151 total hazardous waste transporters (9 of which are registered for NH).
Metric 1b1 and 2 - should be 34 rather than 33, as one site has not received an EPA ID number as of yet and the inspection not been entered into RCRAInfo.
Metric 1e1 - should be 2, as there have been 2 new sites with SNC.
|New Jersey||CAA||New Jersey does not have the resources to verify every single piece of CWA data contained in ECHO for FFY2013. However, our verification efforts have shown that the manually entered data from New Jersey's NJEMS system to EPA AFS is accurately portraying our universe of facilities and enforcement work conducted. The NJDEP is dedicated to making environmental information readily available to our constituents while maintaining user confidence in the data. The information provided within NJDEP Data Miner reflects NJDEP's FFY2013 CAA data and is available at: http://www.nj.gov/dep/opra/online.html|
|CWA||ICIS-NPDES includes historical data for the state of New Jersey; however, the state no longer enters data into this system. Therefore, the CWA data in ECHO for FFY2013 does not accurately reflect New Jersey's universe of facilities and enforcement work conducted. The NJDEP is dedicated to making environmental information readily available to our constituents while maintaining user confidence in the data. The information provided within NJDEP Data Miner reflects NJDEP's FFY2013 CWA data and is available at: http://www.nj.gov/dep/opra/online.html|
|RCRA||New Jersey does not have the resources to verify every piece of RCRA data contained in ECHO for FFY2013. However, our verification efforts have shown that the batch data uploaded from New Jersey's NJEMS system to RCRAinfo is accurately portraying our facilities and enforcement work conducted. The NJDEP is dedicated to making environmental information readily available to our constituents while maintaining user confidence in the data. The information provided within NJDEP Data Miner reflects NJDEP's FFY2013 RCRA data and is available at: http://www.nj.gov/dep/opra/online.html|
|New York||RCRA||NYSDEC does not use the federal generator status field in RCRAInfo to track the RCRA hazardous waste generation status of a site (ie LQG, SQG) and this field is inaccurate for NY sites. We use an internal database of manifest and Hazardous Waste Report data of HW shipments and generation instead. NY also does not use the active site field in RCRAInfo. This results in the calculation of certain RCRA State Review Framework Metric #s being inaccurate:
1.a.2., 3., and 4., about # of sites in each generator category; and
5.b., c., and d., about inspection coverage.
Any other calculations using these numbers are also inaccurate. The percent of NY LQGs and SQGs inspected, or inspection coverage, is greater than calculated in the metrics.
The metric numbers are based on current universe counts for LQGs and SQGs, but since these universes change on a daily basis, some of the LQG and SQG inspections conducted are not credited in EPA's SRF reports because the site moved out of the universe, and their generator status field in RCRAInfo was not revised.
EPA R2 and NYSDEC have agreed to target inspections at long-term LQGs, since a very large percentage of our LQGs are an LQG for a year or less. Inspecting sites that do not generate hazardous waste on an ongoing basis is difficult.
This also results in the EPA ECHO Search, Dashboard, Comparative Map, and Envirofacts public web pages not displaying the generator status of NY sites correctly.
For metric 5a, Two-year inspection coverage for operating TSDFs, the Combined or All metric results should be used, because EPA R2 has requested that they inspect federal owned NY TSDFs.
For metric 1b2, Number of inspections, three FUI evaluation types, or Follow-Up Inspection, were completed by NYSDEC and entered, but not counted by this metric.
For metric 8a, SNC ID rate, EPA OECA changed it's calculation, did not email states about it, and did not follow the Enforcement Response Policy in their new calculation of it. (There are other inspections besides CEI and FCI that produce SNC violators that are not counted. There is also a timing issue for sites that have inspections and SNC determinations in different fiscal years.) EPA HQ has acknowledged this and de-emphasized the use of this metric.
NY conducts inspections at facilities that do not have EPA ID#s and are not required to notify EPA nor NYSDEC of their hazardous waste activities (i.e. federal CESQGs, and non-regulated facilities) nor get an EPA ID #. As a result, not all inspection and enforcement activities are captured in the database, nor reflected in EPAs metrics. EPAs metrics understate NYs full range of hazardous waste compliance, inspection, and enforcement efforts.
Inspection and enforcement data has not been entered for some SQGs where enforcement is pending, and the sites don't have an EPA ID # yet, because their failure to obtain an ID is part of the enforcement. Without an ID, we can't enter any data.
Almost all data was entered in RCRAInfo before EPAs deadline. Data is accurate as much as possible.
|North Carolina||CAA||Metrics 1b1 - Number of Active Federally Active NSPS Part 60 Facilities 2 NC Facilities are not subject to NSPS Part 60. The Air Program NSPS Part 60 was still listed as operating in AFS for these facilities. Total for this Metric for NC is 623.
1b3- Number of Active Federally Active NESHAP Part 63 Facilities 3 NC Facilities are not subject to NESHAP Part 63. The Air Program NESHAP Part 63 was still listed as operating in AFS for these facilities. Total for this Metric for NC is 618
1h1- Total Amount of Assessed Penalties 1 NC facility with an Assessed Penalty was not counted for FFY2013. Total for this Metric is $121,203.00
1h2- Number of Formal Enforcement Actions with an Assessed Penalty 1 NC Formal Enforcement Actions with an Assessed Penalty was not counted for in FFY2013 Total for this Metric is 12
1i1 -Number of Stack Test with Passing Results There were 20 NC Facilities that had Stack Tests that were not counted with passing results in FFY2013. The source test action types and result code (PP) for these facilities were all listed in AFS. Total for this Metric is 202
1i3 -Number of Stack Test with Pending Results There were 5 NC Facilities that had Stack Tests that were not counted with passing results in FFY2013. The source test action types and result code (99) for these facilities were all listed in AFS. Total for this Metric is 59.
1i5- Number of Stack Tests Observe and Reviewed There were 19 NC Facilities that were Observed and Reviewed that were not counted in FFY2013. The source test action type (23) for these facilities were all listed in AFS. Total for this Metric is 172.
1i6 -Number of Stack Tests Reviewed Only There were 7 NC Facilities that were Reviewed Only were not counted in FFY2013. The source test action type (TR) for these facilities were all listed in AFS. Total for this Metric is 92.
|Forsyth County, NC Comments (XLS)(30 K)|
|CWA||Problems with the translation and timing of the data between EPA and the state exist for the count of active permits, enforcement actions, and facilities in SNC and Category 1 and 2 Noncompliance. In addition, two Alabama permits were included in the counts for Metrics 1e1 and 1e2. The data counts for these metrics should be corrected to exclude the Alabama permits. During FY13, EPA required the state to migrate its data from PCS to ICIS-NPDES. After the migration, the state was not able to upload its DMR data to ICIS, as the state was still working on the interface between the two systems. The state resumed DMR upload to EPA late 2013. The lack of DMR flow to EPA resulted in invalid DMR non-receipt violations for North Carolina NPDES facilities. Because the DMR data was uploaded to ICIS after the quarter that the invalid violations occurred, the state cannot manually correct the violations. The state will need EPA's assistance in either removing the violations or doing manual overrides of the violations.|
|RCRA||North Carolina has verified its data. It should be noted that NC uses two additional Enforcement Codes: 214 for NC legislative Inspection and Investigative costs and 219 for a state agency and facility joint informal meeting.|
1a4 - Capital Lodge WWTP, NDG650025, is not showing up in ECHO even though it is filled out correctly in ICIS.
Also, five North Dakota General permits that are located in Indian Country are counted under South Dakota's numbers, even though they have ND permit numbers.
|RCRA||Metric 1b1 and 1b2 (facilities inspected and number of inspections): The inspection total numbers for FY2013 include 92 US EPA Region VIII "site visits" to oil production lease sites which generate solid waste (subject to RCRA 7003 and USFW's MBTA). The inspection trend numbers should be viewed with this understanding.|
|Ohio||RCRA||The number of LQGs in Ohio should be judged from a count of Biennial Report filers not from RCRAInfo as a whole. Because there is no federal requirement for a site to re-notify, the regulated activity information is generally outdated for a large number of hazardous waste handlers.|
|Oklahoma||RCRA||The biennial report LQG metric is an artificially high number from 2011 with limited relevance to the present day; number of sites inspected and number of inspections is too low; number of sites with new violations, informal enforcement actions and sites with informal enforcement are too low; and sites with formal enforcement is too low.
Lastly, it is worth noting that we are in the middle of our fiscal year and therefore have many cases that are not yet resolved including cases from previous years that are going through legal processes. The data should be seen as a snapshot from a finite time period and therefore will have limited value for detecting trends or patterns.
|Oregon||CWA||The state agency indicated that its CWA data metrics were verified with caveat notes provided on February 14, 2014. EPA does not have access to each state's notes.|
|RCRA||Metric 1a5 - BR 2011 LQG is 190|
|Pennsylvania||CAA||This verification is for Pennsylvania DEP data only and does not include the counties of Allegheny or Philadelphia. Allegheny County is administered by Allegheny County Health Department, and Philadelphia County is administered by Philadelphia Air Management Services.|
1b1 & 1b2 - PADEP eFACTS records show approx. 1,195 sites w/approx. 1,260 inspections and RCRAInfo records show 742 sites w/846 inspections. A partial cause of the data discrepancy includes RCRAInfo not counting all of the inspection types that eFACTS does. For example, eFACTS has 13 GME sites w/13 GMEs conducted. In RCRAInfo, there are only 4 GME facilities/inspections that are listed. The discrepancies in the data are being identified and will ultimately be resolved.
|Puerto Rico||CAA||PREQB is in the process to update the AFS.|
|Rhode Island||CWA||DEM issued one enforcement action with penalty in federal fiscal year 2013, not 0. That action was taken against Belmont Commons, a construction general permit permittee, permit #RIR100812. That action was sent on 11/27/12 with an assessed penalty of $3,000. A penalty of $1,500 was collected on 2/5/13.|
|South Carolina||CAA||SC Sent E mail to EPA on January 16, 2014 to address the following:
Check into why these two facilities with enforcement actions are not in our count as per 7b1 and 7b3 of state frame work counts:
4501900022 Hess (Now Buckeye Terminals)
4508300075 Exopack LLC
I feel like SC should have 100% on these two fields.
To date we have not heard a response back from EPA. SC feels that these two facilities should be counted in 7b1 and 7b3 making our counts 100%.
1a3 - Standing Rock Rural Water System, SD0030996, and Rosebud Casino and Hotel, SD0034584, are not showing up in ECHO, but are completed correctly in ICIS to be credited to Region 8.
Also, please note that five North Dakota Tribal permits are being counted as South Dakota permits because the Tribe is located both in North and South Dakota, and those permits happen to be located in South Dakota while still having North Dakota numbers.
|RCRA||1b1 and 1b2: The actual number of inspections conducted in FY2013 was 78, and are reflected in RCRAInfo. The 31 entities inspected that are not reflected in ECHO are non-generators or CESQGs. These companies are not required to submit HW notification forms. Implementer information for these companies are in RCRAInfo but the data are not extracted to the public and therefore not reflected in ECHO.|
|Tennessee||CAA||Metro Public Health Department indicated that all data has been updated and corrected in AFS.|
|Texas||RCRA||Metrics 1b1 & 1b2 - RCRAInfo reflects record review inspections; however, ECHO does not reflect record review inspections. TCEQ conducted 235 record review inspections that are not reflected in ECHO. TCEQ conducted 260 inspections that are not reflected in either RCRAInfo or ECHO because the facilities do not have (and are not required to have) EPA Identification Numbers (EPA IDs). One of the criteria for an inspection to upload from TCEQ's Consolidated Compliance and Enforcement Data System (CCEDS) to RCRAInfo is an EPA ID associated to the facility that was inspected. This is a requirement of RCRAInfo rather than CCEDS.
Metric 1d2 - Number of informal enforcement actions:
CCEDS 362 This number represents Notice of Violations and includes facilities that are not required to obtain EPA Ids.
Metric 1f2 - Number of formal enforcement actions:
CCEDS 94 Includes facilities not required to obtain EPA IDs.
Metric 1g - Total dollar amount of final penalties:
CCEDS $2,126,371.45 The difference in the penalty amounts are for facilities that are not required to obtain EPA IDs and are not uploaded to RCRAInfo.
Metric 1h - Number of final formal actions with penalty in last 1 FY:
CCEDS 55 Includes Court Orders and facilities not required to obtain EPA IDs. TCEQ is in the process of identifying a process for entering/uploading Court Orders.
|Utah||CWA||1a3 - NN0020133 is located in Texas, and should not count towards Region 8 numbers. NN0025178 is indeed located in UT. However, both permits are Navajo Nation permits, and should not count towards Region 8 numbers.
1g1 - The seven that are listed are correct however, there is one more enforcement action with penalty during FY13 and that is Summit Creek Area Docket# UT-I12-01 the amount was $6,125.00. Once the system updates it should reflect this and make the correct total 8 Enf actions with penalties.
1g2 - With the additional enforcement action in FY13 that is yet to update here, Utah collected $6,125.00 from Summit Creek Settlement docket number UT-I12-01 bringing the total penalty amount collected at $538,644.
7c1 - One of these 6 is a biosolids reporting requirement and is not part of an individual permit schedule.
7f1 – NN0020133 This facility is in Navajo Nation, so it should not count towards Region 8 (Utah).
7g1 - Gouldings Lodge, permit NN0025178, is in Navajo Nation, and should not be counted toward Region 8 (Utah).
8a1 - 7 of the 11 Major facilities listed here have been manually resolved as of 1/29/2013. 4 Major facilities remain.
Also, COG587002, White Mesa Wastewater Lagoon, is counting towards Utah numbers because the permit is located in Indian Country, and the location is in Utah, even though it is a Colorado permit number.
|Vermont||CAA||Data reviewed and corrections have been made.|
|Virginia||CWA||1a3 - MD0064556 is not issued by Virginia.
1a4 - Virginia General Permit info is not uploaded to ICIS. Permits shown are limited to the facilities that had federal inspection done in the past; they are a fraction of the VPDES general permits.
1f1 - The correct count should be 13. WVU007757 is not issued or monitored by Virginia.
1f2 - The correct count should be 13. WVU007757 is not issued or monitored by Virginia.
1g1 - WVU007757 is not issued or monitored by Virginia. The total count should be 9.
1g2 - WVU007757 is not issued or monitored by Virginia; its penalty amount should not be included in the total penalties collected by Virginia. The total amount should be $151,132.
7b1 -The records have been updated in ICIS and should be reflected after the next data refresh.
7c1 - All records have been updated in ICIS and should be reflected after the next data refresh.
7f1 - The count posted is not accurate; it does not include any facilities that have effluent violations since Virginia does not upload any Non-Major permit Discharge Monitoring Report or effluent violation data into ICIS. The Category 2 Noncompliance Count is submitted along with the Annual Noncompliance Report (ANCR) every calendar year.
7g1 - The count posted is not accurate; it does not include any facilities that have effluent violations since Virginia does not upload any Non-Major permit Discharge Monitoring Report or effluent violation data into ICIS. The Category 2 Noncompliance Count is submitted along with the Annual Noncompliance Report (ANCR) every calendar year.
|Washington||RCRA||RCRA Metrics 1G and 1H: One site received a formal enforcement (penalty) in September, 2013. The penalty is under appeal. It remains a Proposed Monetary Penalty (PMP) in RCRAInfo and is not included in metrics 1G and 1H. It will not show in the frozen RCRAInfo data for federal fiscal year 2013.|
|West Virginia||CWA||The following caveats apply:
1e1 and 1e2 - WV does not currently enter informal actions into the ICIS database.
7a1 and 7a2 - WV does not currently enter SEVs into the ICIS database.
|Wyoming||CWA||1a3 - NM0000205 is located in Colorado, but should not count towards Region 8 numbers (especially not for Wyoming). Should be considered part of New Mexico's numbers.
7f1 – WY0000469 Permit expired on 12/31/2012, so should not be flagged for noncompliance past Quarter 1 of FY13.
7f1 – WY0044539 Permit expired on 12/31/2001, so should no longer be flagged for noncompliance.