SRF State Multi-Year Report

State Review Framework - CAA Data for New Hampshire, State Multi-Year Report

Metric		Metric Type	Agency	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	Graph
1. Data completeness. degree to which the minimum data requirements are complete.
A	Title V Universe: AFS Operating Majors (Current)	Data Quality	State	39	39	39	39	39	39	39	n/a
	Title V Universe: AFS Operating Majors (Current)	Data Quality	Combined	39	39	39	39	39	39	39	n/a
	Title V Universe: AFS Operating Majors with Air Program Code = V (Current)	Data Quality	State	38	38	38	38	38	38	38	n/a
		Data Quality	Combined	38	38	38	38	38	38	38	n/a
B	Source Count: Synthetic Minors (Current)	Data Quality	State	91	91	91	91	91	91	91	n/a
	Source Count: Synthetic Minors (Current)	Data Quality	Combined	91	91	91	91	91	91	91	n/a
	Source Count: NESHAP Minors (Current)	Data Quality	State	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	n/a
	Source Count: NESHAP Minors (Current)	Data Quality	Combined	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	n/a
	Source Count: Active Minor facilities or otherwise FedRep, not including NESHAP Part 61 (Current)	Informational Only	State	209	262	314	329	287	250	198	n/a
		Informational Only	Combined	209	262	314	329	287	250	198	n/a
C	CAA Subprogram Designations: NSPS (Current)	Data Quality	State	61	61	61	61	61	61	61	n/a
	CAA Subprogram Designations: NSPS (Current)	Data Quality	Combined	61	61	61	61	61	61	61	n/a
	CAA Subprogram Designations: NESHAP (Current)	Data Quality	State	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	n/a
	CAA Subprogram Designations: NESHAP (Current)	Data Quality	Combined	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	n/a
	CAA Subprogram Designations: MACT (Current)	Data Quality	State	10	10	10	10	10	10	10	n/a
	CAA Subprogram Designations: MACT (Current)	Data Quality	Combined	10	10	10	10	10	10	10	n/a
	CAA Subpart Designations: Percent NSPS facilities with FCEs conducted after 10/1/2005	Data Quality	State	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
	CAA Subpart Designations: Percent NESHAP facilities with FCEs conducted after 10/1/2005	Data Quality	State	0 / 0	0 / 0	0 / 0	0 / 0	0 / 0	0 / 0	0 / 0
	CAA Subpart Designations: Percent MACT facilities with FCEs conducted after 10/1/2005	Data Quality	State	92.9%	92.9%	92.9%	92.9%	92.9%	92.9%	92.9%
		Data Quality	Combined	76.5%	76.5%	76.5%	76.5%	76.5%	76.5%	76.5%
D	Compliance Monitoring: Sources with FCEs (1 FY)	Data Quality	State	36	23	39	29	36	33	34
	Compliance Monitoring: Number of FCEs (1 FY)	Data Quality	State	40	27	45	31	36	33	34
	Compliance Monitoring: Number of PCEs (1 FY)	Informational Only	State	43	57	31	38	58	40	41
E	Historical Non-Compliance Counts (1 FY)	Data Quality	State	0	7	7	8	12	11	11
E	Historical Non-Compliance Counts (1 FY)	Data Quality	Combined	8	8	8	9	13	13	14
F	Informal Enforcement Actions: Number Issued (1 FY)	Data Quality	State	14	12	49	44	49	85	73
F	Informal Enforcement Actions: Number of Sources (1 FY)	Data Quality	State	14	12	48	42	48	82	63
G	HPV: Number of New Pathways (1 FY)	Data Quality	State	7	1	2	6	12	8	3
G	HPV: Number of New Sources (1 FY)	Data Quality	State	7	1	2	6	12	8	3
H	HPV Day Zero Pathway Discovery date: Percent DZs with discovery	Data Quality	State	0 / 0	0 / 0	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
	HPV Day Zero Pathway Violating Pollutants: Percent DZs	Data Quality	State	0 / 0	0 / 0	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
	HPV Day Zero Pathway Violation Type Code(s): Percent DZs with HPV Violation Type Code(s)	Data Quality	State	0 / 0	0 / 0	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
I	Formal Action: Number Issued (1 FY)	Data Quality	State	6	6	9	7	7	5	9
I	Formal Action: Number of Sources (1 FY)	Data Quality	State	6	6	9	7	7	5	9
J	Assessed Penalties: Total Dollar Amount (1 FY)	Data Quality	State	$114,750	$24,675	$390,914	$76,000	$165,567	$27,675	$41,858
K	Major Sources Missing CMS Policy Applicability (Current)	Review Indicator	State	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	n/a
2. Data accuracy. degree to which the minimum data requirements are accurate.
A	Number of HPVs/Number of NC Sources (1 FY)	Data Quality	State	0 / 0	66.7%	66.7%	100.0%	166.7%	133.3%	66.7%
A	Number of HPVs/Number of NC Sources (1 FY)	Data Quality	Combined	166.7%	66.7%	66.7%	100.0%	166.7%	100.0%	50.0%
B	Stack Test Results at Federally-Reportable Sources - % Without Pass/Fail Results (1 FY)	Goal	State	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
B	Stack Test Results at Federally-Reportable Sources - Number of Failures (1 FY)	Data Quality	State	4	1	2	4	1	0	1
3. Timeliness of data entry. degree to which the minimum data requirements are complete.
A	Percent HPVs Entered ≤ 60 Days After Designation, Timely Entry (1 FY)	Goal	State	100.0%	100.0%	50.0%	66.7%	33.3%	12.5%	0.0%
B	Percent Compliance Monitoring related MDR actions reported ≤ 60 Days After Designation, Timely Entry (1 FY)	Goal	State	0 / 0	0 / 0	10.2%	37.9%	30.1%	21.9%	40.9%
B	Percent Enforcement related MDR actions reported ≤ 60 Days After Designation, Timely Entry (1 FY)	Goal	State	0 / 0	0 / 0	27.3%	37.5%	60.9%	29.6%	28.6%
5. Inspection coverage. degree to which state completed the universe of planned inspections/compliance evaluations.
A	CMS Major Full Compliance Evaluation (FCE) Coverage (2 FY CMS Cycle)	Goal	State	73.3%	79.4%	79.4%	97.1%	97.1%	85.3%	85.3%
		Goal	Combined	83.3%	91.2%	91.2%	100.0%	100.0%	97.1%	97.1%
	CAA Major Full Compliance Evaluation (FCE) Coverage(most recent 2 FY)	Review Indicator	State	80.4%	76.2%	90.7%	90.7%	72.5%	79.5%	87.2%
		Review Indicator	Combined	91.7%	86.0%	93.0%	93.0%	80.0%	89.7%	89.7%
B	CAA Synthetic Minor 80% Sources (SM-80) FCE Coverage (5 FY CMS Cycle) ¹	Review Indicator	State	81.4%	95.5%	97.8%	20.0%	51.0%	67.3%	78.4%
		Review Indicator	Combined	83.7%	97.7%	100.0%	24.4%	57.1%	73.5%	86.5%
	CAA Synthetic Minor 80% Sources (SM-80) FCE Coverage (last full 5 FY)	Informational Only	State	64.8%	77.8%	83.3%	92.6%	87.0%	92.6%	92.6%
		Informational Only	Combined	66.7%	79.6%	85.2%	94.4%	92.6%	96.3%	100.0%
C	CAA Synthetic Minor FCE and reported PCE Coverage (last 5 FY)	Informational Only	State	66.4%	74.5%	79.1%	88.3%	82.8%	91.8%	93.7%
C		Informational Only	Combined	67.6%	75.7%	80.2%	89.4%	86.9%	94.9%	96.8%
D	CAA Minor FCE and Reported PCE Coverage (last 5 FY)	Informational Only	State	28.1%	31.6%	36.9%	37.7%	31.8%	26.3%	19.4%
E	Number of Sources with Unknown Compliance Status	Review Indicator	State	13	20	8	17	0	6	1
E	Number of Sources with Unknown Compliance Status	Review Indicator	Combined	13	20	8	17	0	6	1
F	CAA Stationary Source Investigations (last 5 FY)	Informational Only	State	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
G	Review of Self-Certifications Completed (1 FY)	Goal	State	93.2%	95.5%	97.6%	97.5%	100.0%	97.7%	100.0%
7. Identification of alleged violations. degree to which compliance determinations are accurately made and promptly reported in the national database based upon compliance monitoring report observations and other compliance monitoring information.
C	Percent facilities in noncompliance that have had an FCE, stack test, or enforcement (1 FY)	Review Indicator	State	0.0%	8.7%	7.0%	9.6%	11.9%	13.2%	12.1%
	Percent facilities that have had a failed stack test and have noncompliance status (1 FY)	Review Indicator	State	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
		Review Indicator	EPA	0 / 0	0 / 0	0 / 0	0 / 0	0 / 0	0.0%	0 / 0
8. Identification of SNC and HPV. degree to which the state accurately identifies significant noncompliance & high priority violations and enters information into the national system in a timely manner.
A	High Priority Violation Discovery Rate - Per Major Source (1 FY)	Review Indicator	State	7.7%	2.6%	0.0%	5.1%	5.1%	5.1%	0.0%
A		Review Indicator	EPA	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
B	High Priority Violation Discovery Rate - Per Synthetic Minor Source (1 FY)	Review Indicator	State	1.1%	0.0%	1.1%	2.2%	5.5%	2.2%	1.1%
B		Review Indicator	EPA	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	1.1%	0.0%
C	Percent Formal Actions With Prior HPV - Majors (1 FY)	Review Indicator	State	100.0%	50.0%	33.3%	0.0%	100.0%	100.0%	33.3%
D	Percent Informal Enforcement Actions Without Prior HPV - Majors (1 FY)	Review Indicator	State	33.3%	100.0%	100.0%	80.0%	50.0%	85.7%	100.0%
E	Percentage of Sources with Failed Stack Test Actions that received HPV listing - Majors and Synthetic Minors (2 FY)	Review Indicator	State	16.7%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	20.0%	100.0%	0.0%
10. Timely and Appropriate Action. Degree to which a state takes timely and appropriate enforcement actions in accordance with policy relating to specific media.
A	Percent HPVs not meeting timeliness goals (2 FY)	Review Indicator	State	71.4%	66.7%	80.0%	66.7%	55.0%	58.8%	76.9%
12. Final penalty assessment and collection. Degree to which differences between initial and final penalty are documented in the file along with a demonstration in the file that the final penalty was collected.
A	No Activity Indicator - Actions with Penalties (1 FY)	Review Indicator	State	5	5	8	6	6	5	7
B	Percent Actions at HPVs With Penalty (1 FY)	Review Indicator	State	50.0%	100.0%	100.0%	50.0%	50.0%	100.0%	100.0%

Report Generated on 6/30/2011
Data Refresh Dates

Note: SRF data metrics results may change as data are updated in AFS, ICIS-NPDES, PCS, and RCRAInfo. The above data set may be saved in Excel or comma delimited text format by clicking on the appropriate Save Results link above.

General Notes:
^* Blue-shaded rows denote that the metric was pulled manually.
^* Metrics that are listed as "current" pull live data from the most recent IDEA refresh. Results for these metrics do not change across fiscal years.

Caveats:
⁰EPA administers the CWA program in the following states/territories: AK, DC, ID, MA, NH, NM, AS, GU, PR, and VI.
EPA administers the RCRA program in the following states/territories: AK, IA, and VI
¹ The current CMS Cycle for SM80s started with FY07; therefore, metric 5B1 includes number of FYs since FY07 through selected FY. Goal percentages expected to increase with selected FY until CMS Cycle completion in FY11, e.g., 20%- FY07,40% -FY08, etc.