![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Clean Water Act Annual Noncompliance Report (ANCR) - 2008 Data for Non-Major Permittees (html version) |
 |
Table of Contents
Introduction
View Flash based interactive Clean Water Act Annual Noncompliance Report.
EPA and States regulate hundreds of thousands of facilities under the Clean Water Act, from small dispersed sites that have runoff during wet weather (such as construction sites or animal feedlots), to pipe discharges at factories or wastewater treatment plants that are required to stay below permitted pollutant levels. The available data for violations increases based on the size of facilities. EPA has extensive data about large municipal and industrial dischargers available on the ECHO (Enforcement and Compliance History Online) Web site.
This Website focuses on annual statistics for the smaller direct discharge permit holders (primarily factories and smaller wastewater treatment plants). Each permittee measures its discharges (typically on a monthly basis), and submits data to the state (or directly to EPA if the state does not have program authorization, such as in MA, NH, AK, NM, ID, PR, DC and trust territories). Many states enter the measurements into EPA's national database, which will automatically calculate violations. Other states do not provide this level of information to EPA, but instead provide EPA with a summary view of what is happening.
EPA compiles this information to:
- show how many facilities were reviewed (pollutant measurements were calculated against limits to find violations)
- how many permittees had violations
- and how many enforcement actions were taken to address violations
Pay particular attention to data availability caveats about whether facility information is entered in EPA's databases, otherwise, you may draw false conclusions. For example, a state that does not enter discharge data EPA's database will have few, if any facilities showing up in violation. To get information about violations within that state, you will need to review state websites, or contact the state CWA program or information on obtaining that level of detail.
Quick Links - Annual Noncompliance Report (ANCR)
Most Current ANCR Report
2010 ANCR (for smaller permittees)(PDF) (36pp, 397KB, About PDF)Archival ANCR Reports
2009 ANCR (for smaller permittees)(PDF) (43pp, 932KB, About PDF)2008 ANCR (for smaller permittees)(PDF) (15pp, 141KB, About PDF)
2007 ANCR (for smaller permitees)(PDF) (15pp, 141KB, About PDF)
2006 ANCR (for smaller permitees)(PDF) (6pp, 73KB, About PDF)
2004-05 ANCR (for smaller permitees)(PDF) (8pp, 96KB, About PDF)
Data Table (2008 Annual Noncompliance Report)
Data in the table can be sorted by selecting columns from the table header, table can be sorted on multiple columns by holding shift key and selecting multiple columns.
| Region | State | NonMajors Facility Universe (individ. permits only) | NonMajors Reviewed (note 1) |
Percent NonMajors Reviewed (note 1) |
Non-complying NonMajors In Category I (SNC) (note 2) |
Percent Serious Noncompliance of Reviewed (note 2) |
Additional Non-complying NonMajors in Category II only | Total NonMajors in RNC or SNC, of Those Reviewed | Percent Noncompliance of Reviewed | Formal Enforcement Actions for Noncompliant NonMajors | Percent Actions per Violators | Percent Actions per Serious Violators | Data Source Manual or Automated (see note H below) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | AK | 50 | 16 | 32% | 14 | 88% | 1 | 15 | 94% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 2 |
| 4 | AL | 1432 | 717 | 50% | NR | NR | NR | 516 | 72% | 34 | 7% | NR | 4 |
| 6 | AR | 672 | 650 | 97% | 499 | 77% | 47 | 546 | 84% | 7 | 1% | 1% | 2 |
| 9 | AZ | 82 | 82 | 100% | NR | NR | NR | 52 | 63% | 10 | 19% | NR | 4 |
| 9 | CA | 353 | 353 | 100% | NR | NR | NR | 138 | 39% | 68 | 49% | NR | 4 |
| 8 | CO | 243 | 241 | 99% | 67 | 28% | 25 | 92 | 38% | 2 | 2% | 3% | 3 |
| 1 | CT | 77 | 71 | 92% | 13 | 18% | 7 | 20 | 28% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 1 |
| 3 | DC | 10 | 10 | 100% | 6 | 60% | 0 | 6 | 60% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 2 |
| 3 | DE | 33 | 33 | 100% | 4 | 12% | 0 | 4 | 12% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 3 |
| 4 | FL | 240 | 191 | 80% | 23 | 12% | 69 | 92 | 48% | 13 | 14% | 57% | 3 |
| 4 | GA | 850 | 14 | 2% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0 | 0% | 15 | NA | NA | 3 |
| 9 | HI | 27 | 27 | 100% | NR | NR | NR | 8 | 30% | 0 | 0% | NR | 4 |
| 7 | IA | 1321 | 1321 | 100% | 244 | 18% | 242 | 486 | 37% | 10 | 2% | 4% | 3 |
| 10 | ID | 133 | 121 | 91% | 89 | 74% | 17 | 106 | 88% | 1 | 1% | 1% | 1 |
| 5 | IL | 1395 | 1395 | 100% | 304 | 22% | 688 | 992 | 71% | 27 | 3% | 9% | 3 |
| 5 | IN | 1438 | 1398 | 97% | 520 | 37% | 137 | 657 | 47% | 40 | 6% | 8% | 3 |
| 7 | KS | 1047 | 913 | 87% | 23 | 3% | 176 | 199 | 22% | 11 | 6% | 48% | 3 |
| 4 | KY | 1655 | 232 | 14% | 209 | 90% | 21 | 230 | 99% | 1 | 9% | 10% | 3 |
| 6 | LA | 1209 | 661 | 55% | NR | NR | NR | 393 | 59% | 34 | 9% | NR | 4 |
| 1 | MA | 155 | 153 | 99% | 0 | 0% | 39 | 39 | 25% | 4 | 10% | NA | 3 |
| 3 | MD | 945 | 945 | 100% | NR | NR | NR | 33 | 3% | 7 | 21% | NR | 4 |
| 1 | ME | 286 | 182 | 64% | 118 | 65% | 54 | 172 | 95% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 2 |
| 5 | MI | 449 | 449 | 100% | 5 | 1% | 222 | 227 | 51% | 2 | 1% | 40% | 3 |
| 5 | MN | 651 | 651 | 100% | 100 | 15% | 155 | 255 | 39% | 28 | 11% | 28% | 3 |
| 7 | MO | 2923 | 2923 | 100% | 407 | 14% | 232 | 639 | 22% | 10 | 2% | 2% | 3 |
| 4 | MS | 1427 | 746 | 52% | 177 | 24% | 346 | 523 | 70% | 15 | 3% | 8% | 3 |
| 8 | MT | 169 | 153 | 91% | 110 | 72% | 7 | 117 | 76% | 2 | 2% | 2% | 1 |
| 4 | NC | 1085 | 894 | 82% | 54 | 6% | 135 | 189 | 21% | 6 | 3% | 11% | 3 |
| 8 | ND | 95 | 45 | 47% | 8 | 18% | 7 | 15 | 33% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 3 |
| 7 | NE | 606 | 599 | 99% | 314 | 52% | 47 | 361 | 60% | 10 | 3% | 3% | 3 |
| 1 | NH | 45 | 45 | 100% | 7 | 16% | 0 | 7 | 16% | 1 | 14% | 14% | 3 |
| 2 | NJ | 693 | 693 | 100% | 12 | 2% | 84 | 96 | 14% | 12 | 13% | 100% | 3 |
| 6 | NM | 99 | 89 | 90% | 66 | 74% | 5 | 71 | 80% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 1 |
| 9 | NV | 74 | 74 | 100% | 1 | 1% | 3 | 4 | 5% | 1 | 25% | 100% | 3 |
| 2 | NY | 1197 | 1013 | 85% | 163 | 16% | 293 | 456 | 45% | 27 | 6% | 17% | 2 |
| 5 | OH | 3031 | 3025 | 100% | 669 | 22% | 932 | 1601 | 53% | 31 | 2% | 5% | 3 |
| 6 | OK | 357 | 357 | 100% | 208 | 58% | 30 | 238 | 67% | 139 | 58% | 67% | 2 |
| 10 | OR | 304 | 67 | 22% | NR | NR | NR | 15 | 22% | 15 | 100% | NR | 4 |
| 3 | PA | 3968 | 1550 | 39% | NR | NR | NR | 550 | 35% | 16 | 3% | NR | 4 |
| 2 | PR | 172 | 165 | 96% | 96 | 58% | 64 | 160 | 97% | 2 | 1% | 2% | 2 |
| 1 | RI | 68 | 66 | 97% | 21 | 32% | 5 | 26 | 39% | 6 | 23% | 29% | 3 |
| 4 | SC | 351 | 208 | 59% | 119 | 57% | 74 | 193 | 93% | 19 | 10% | 16% | 3 |
| 8 | SD | 215 | 213 | 99% | 84 | 39% | 16 | 100 | 47% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 3 |
| 4 | TN | 1246 | 45 | 4% | 15 | 33% | 23 | 38 | 84% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 3 |
| 6 | TX | 2217 | 1865 | 84% | 1341 | 72% | 131 | 1472 | 79% | 190 | 13% | 14% | 2 |
| 8 | UT | 86 | 83 | 97% | 31 | 37% | 4 | 35 | 42% | 4 | 11% | 13% | 3 |
| 3 | VA | 960 | 960 | 100% | 88 | 9% | 65 | 153 | 16% | 22 | 14% | 25% | 3 |
| 2 | VI | 59 | 49 | 83% | 48 | 98% | 0 | 48 | 98% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 2 |
| 1 | VT | 137 | 137 | 100% | 0 | 0% | 74 | 74 | 54% | 0 | 0% | NA | 3 |
| 10 | WA | 359 | 359 | 100% | 38 | 11% | 155 | 193 | 54% | 22 | 11% | 58% | 3 |
| 5 | WI | 684 | 684 | 100% | NR | NR | NR | 365 | 53% | 47 | 13% | NR | 4 |
| 3 | WV | 807 | 202 | 25% | 170 | 84% | 27 | 197 | 98% | 94 | 48% | 55% | 2 |
| 8 | WY | 1695 | 1695 | 100% | 16 | 1% | 132 | 148 | 9% | 6 | 4% | 38% | 3 |
Notes:
- "Reviewed" is defined as facilities whose limits have been reviewed and compared against DMRs at least once during the reporting year, or have received some other type of compliance review by authorized regulatory authority.
- States with an NR in this column indicated that they can produce a noncompliance rate, but cannot breakout the more serious Category I violations.
- Some states are not authorized to administer the NPDES program, thus EPA is the regulatory authority. EPA is the regulatory authority in all territories, and DC, ID, MA, NM, and NH -- meaning that statistics here represent EPA activity.
- For states that are authorized, the numbers in this table do not reflect additional EPA enforcement activity, except where identified separately (e.g., LA Reg).
- The state groupings on this page focused largely on significant changes to the noncompliance rate or the number of facilities in noncompliance. Three states (OK, TX and WV) listed in the blue group did have significant changes in the number of formal enforcement actions taken, compared to the data which they provided in EPA's national database.
- EPA does not currently require states to report discharge monitoring reports or other enforcement actions to the national database for non-major permittees. However, facility-specific noncompliance and enforcement data is widely available in ECHO for states in the green (automated) and blue (automated with adjustments) shading. These states are reporting the data voluntarily. Data from other states is not well populated in ECHO. Users interested in this additional information should contact the state.
- Under the NPDES program, EPA does not define a penalty action that carries no administrative order as a formal enforcement action. Users searching ECHO may find more enforcement cases than indicated in this table because ECHO will show when a state takes a penalty-only action.
- This report does not include smaller facilities that are considered "wet weather" sources, such as Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations and Stormwater permits.
- Category I violations are more serious violations -- using equivalent methods to EPA's calculation of significant noncompliance for major facilities (as examples, more than 20% over a toxics limit, more than 40% over a conventional limit, failure to submit reports, or failure to adhere to a compliance schedule). Category II violations are all other violations.
- Reporting flag:
- Data Source: Automated (National Database with No Changes by state/Region)
- Data Source: Automated with Adjustments (National System Data with Minor Adjustments by state/Region)
- Data Source: Full Manual Reporting - State Chose to Report Manually or National System Data Was Adjusted Significantly by State/Region
- Data Source: Partial Manual Reporting - State Chose to Report Manually and Was Unable to Distinguish Category I and Category II violations for This Report
Data Availability Table (2008)
* - Denotes EPA managed state environmental program.
| States | Estimated Violation Data Availability for Majors (DMR Entry Rate) |
Estimated Violation Data Availability for Non-Majors (DMR Entry Rate) |
Estimated Enforcement Data Availability for Non-Majors |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 98% | 44% | 15% |
| Alaska* | 78% | 34% | N/A |
| Arizona | 96% | 5% | 0% |
| Arkansas | 98% | 94% | 57% |
| California | 81% | 0% | 0% |
| Colorado | 100% | 42% | 100% |
| Connecticut | 100% | 92% | N/A |
| Delaware | 91% | 74% | N/A |
| District Of Columbia* | 80% | 75% | N/A |
| Florida | 95% | 84% | 69% |
| Georgia | 68% | 19% | 100% |
| Hawaii | 90% | 8% | N/A |
| Idaho* | 94% | 81% | 100% |
| Illinois | 89% | 81% | 100% |
| Indiana | 100% | 91% | 3% |
| Iowa | 72% | 37% | 100% |
| Kansas | 22% | 2% | 0% |
| Kentucky | 94% | 21% | 100% |
| Louisiana | 90% | 11% | 27% |
| Maine | 93% | 55% | 100% |
| Maryland | 87% | 35% | 57% |
| Massachusetts* | 95% | 58% | 0% |
| Michigan | 86% | 61% | 100% |
| Minnesota | 92% | 3% | 0% |
| Mississippi | 95% | 23% | 100% |
| Missouri | 93% | 61% | 100% |
| Montana | 100% | 80% | 100% |
| Nebraska | 92% | 47% | 30% |
| Nevada | 83% | 0% | 0% |
| New Hampshire* | 100% | 5% | 0% |
| New Jersey | 99% | 85% | 42% |
| New Mexico* | 97% | 55% | N/A |
| New York | 99% | 85% | 100% |
| North Carolina | 99% | 85% | 100% |
| North Dakota | 89% | 0% | N/A |
| Ohio | 97% | 92% | 100% |
| Oklahoma | 98% | 96% | 1% |
| Oregon | 100% | 1% | 0% |
| Pennsylvania | 99% | 1% | 13% |
| Puerto Rico | 99% | 93% | 100% |
| Rhode Island | 100% | 67% | 100% |
| South Carolina | 94% | 84% | 100% |
| South Dakota | 93% | 64% | N/A |
| Tennessee | 95% | 23% | N/A |
| Texas | 89% | 72% | 7% |
| Utah | 100% | 63% | 75% |
| Vermont | 91% | 1% | N/A |
| Virgin Islands | 100% | 50% | N/A |
| Virginia | 83% | 0% | 0% |
| Washington | 8% | 4% | 5% |
| West Virginia | 96% | 23% | 0% |
| Wisconsin | 100% | 1% | 0% |
| Wyoming | 83% | 0% | 0% |
Notes:
-Non-Majors columns apply to data within the ANCR. For more information about data availabilitity please visit the EPA's Facilities and Enforcement Activities related to the Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program page.
-N/A represents states that neither reported or entered (to national databases) any CWA enforcement actions during the 2008 reporting period.
Related Resources
Find out more about map data, or view maps of data availability (violations | enforcement).
See information about EPA Performance Evaluations of State Programs: reports, and comparative state data.