DOCSLIB.ORG

2019-20 Adopted Budget Document Does Not Include Financial Information for These Funds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2019-20 Adopted Budget Document Does Not Include Financial Information for These Funds PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL Jerry B. Dittrich, Mayor Renee Franklin, Place 2 Jim Wilson, Place 5 Larry Marshall, Place 3 Laura Mackey, Place 6 Dustin Phillips, Place 4 Ron Sauma, Place 7 PREPARED BY Andy Wayman, City Manager Jim Hinderaker, Assistant City Manager Rick Overgaard, Finance Director CITY OF BENBROOK FISCAL YEAR 2019-20 ANNUAL BUDGET CITY OF BENBROOK 2019-20 ANNUAL BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION ONE – INTRODUCTION “Truth in Taxation” Disclosure Requirements ................................................................................................................................................................. 9 Government Finance Officers Association Award for Distinguished Budget Presentation ............................................................................... 10 Key Administrative Officials ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 12 City of Benbrook Organizational Chart..................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Maps of Benbrook, Texas ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 14 Budget Format ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 16 Fund/Department Relationships ................................................................................................................................................................................... 17 City Manager’s Budget Message ................................................................................................................................................................................ 20 City of Benbrook Goals ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 26 Core Value Statement ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 48 Basic Financial Goals ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 51 Current Financial Condition ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 54 Debt Service .................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 56 Operating Funds Budget Proposal .............................................................................................................................................................................. 58 Budget Synopsis .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 66 Approved Capital Expenditures .................................................................................................................................................................................. 92 Long-Range Financial Forecast .................................................................................................................................................................................... 93 SECTION TWO – STATISTICAL Fund Description– Operating Funds .......................................................................................................................................................................... 106 Combined Summary Statement – Operating Funds ............................................................................................................................................... 107 Operating Funds Ten Year Graphic Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures ........................................................................................... 109 Operating Funds Ten Year Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures ........................................................................................................... 110 Operating Funds Ten Year Comparison of Revenues by Source ........................................................................................................................ 112 Operating Funds Ten Year Comparison of Expenditures by Fund and Division ............................................................................................... 114 Operating Funds - Graphic Presentation - Operating Revenues ........................................................................................................................ 115 Operating Funds - Graphic Presentation - Operating Expenditures ................................................................................................................. 116 Ten Year Summary of Property Tax Levies and Collections ................................................................................................................................ 117 Ten Year Summary of Assessed Valuations ............................................................................................................................................................. 118 Ten Year Summary of Property Tax Rates and Exemptions ................................................................................................................................ 119 Ten Year Summary of Tax Revenues by Source ..................................................................................................................................................... 120 2 | Page CITY OF BENBROOK 2019-20 ANNUAL BUDGET Ten Year Summary of Personnel by Division and Department ............................................................................................................................ 121 Ten Year Summary of Employees Per Capita by Department ............................................................................................................................ 122 2018-19 Classification and Compensation Matrix ................................................................................................................................................ 123 SECTION THREE – GENERAL FUND Fund Balance Summary - General Fund ................................................................................................................................................................. 126 Ten Year Summary of Revenues and Expenditures .............................................................................................................................................. 127 Ten Year Graphic Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures .......................................................................................................................... 129 General Fund Revenues by Source - Detail ........................................................................................................................................................... 130 General Fund Revenues by Source- Graphic Presentation ................................................................................................................................. 134 Seven Year Summary of Revenues by Source ....................................................................................................................................................... 135 Seven Year Summary of Revenues by Source - Percent of Total....................................................................................................................... 136 Summary of Expenditures by Division and Department ...................................................................................................................................... 137 Summary of Expenditures by Division and Department – Graphic Presentation ............................................................................................ 139 Summary of Expenditures by Classification ........................................................................................................................................................... 140 Summary of Expenditures by Classification – Graphic Presentation ................................................................................................................ 141 GENERAL GOVERNMENT General Government Division Organizational Chart ........................................................................................................................................... 144 General Government Division Description .............................................................................................................................................................. 145 General Government Division Summary ................................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Oklahoma, Kansas, and Texas Draft Joint EIS/BLM RMP and BIA Integrated RMP
    Poster 1 Richardson County Lovewell Washington State Surface Ownership and BLM- Wildlife Lovewell Fishing Lake And Falls City Reservoir Wildlife Area St. Francis Keith Area Brown State Wildlife Sebelius Lake Norton Phillips Brown State Fishing Lake And Area Cheyenne (Norton Lake) Wildlife Area Washington Marshall County Smith County Nemaha Fishing Lake Wildlife Area County Lovewell State £77 County Administered Federal Minerals Rawlins State Park ¤ Wildlife Sabetha ¤£36 Decatur Norton Fishing Lake Area County Republic County Norton County Marysville ¤£75 36 36 Brown County ¤£ £36 County ¤£ Washington Phillipsburg ¤ Jewell County Nemaha County Doniphan County St. 283 ¤£ Atchison State County Joseph Kirwin National Glen Elder BLM-administered federal mineral estate Reservoir Jamestown Tuttle Fishing Lake Wildlife Refuge Sherman (Waconda Lake) Wildlife Area Creek Atchison State Fishing Webster Lake 83 State Glen Elder Lake And Wildlife Area County ¤£ Sheridan Nicodemus Tuttle Pottawatomie State Thomas County Park Webster Lake Wildlife Area Concordia State National Creek State Fishing Lake No. Atchison Bureau of Indian Affairs-managed surface Fishing Lake Historic Site Rooks County Parks 1 And Wildlife ¤£159 Fort Colby Cloud County Atchison Leavenworth Goodland 24 Beloit Clay County Holton 70 ¤£ Sheridan Osborne Riley County §¨¦ 24 County Glen Elder ¤£ Jackson 73 County Graham County Rooks State County ¤£ lands State Park Mitchell Clay Center Pottawatomie County Sherman State Fishing Lake And ¤£59 Leavenworth Wildlife Area County County Fishing
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Management Program 2013-2018 Appendix A
    Appendix A 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) As required under Sections 303(d) and 304(a) of the federal Clean Water Act, this list identifies the water bodies in or bordering Texas for which effluent limitations are not stringent enough to implement water quality standards, and for which the associated pollutants are suitable for measurement by maximum daily load. In addition, the TCEQ also develops a schedule identifying Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) that will be initiated in the next two years for priority impaired waters. Issuance of permits to discharge into 303(d)-listed water bodies is described in the TCEQ regulatory guidance document Procedures to Implement the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (January 2003, RG-194). Impairments are limited to the geographic area described by the Assessment Unit and identified with a six or seven-digit AU_ID. A TMDL for each impaired parameter will be developed to allocate pollutant loads from contributing sources that affect the parameter of concern in each Assessment Unit. The TMDL will be identified and counted using a six or seven-digit AU_ID. Water Quality permits that are issued before a TMDL is approved will not increase pollutant loading that would contribute to the impairment identified for the Assessment Unit. Explanation of Column Headings SegID and Name: The unique identifier (SegID), segment name, and location of the water body. The SegID may be one of two types of numbers. The first type is a classified segment number (4 digits, e.g., 0218), as defined in Appendix A of the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (TSWQS).
    [Show full text]
  • USACE Recreation 2016 State Report, Texas
    VALUE TO THE NATION FAST FACTS USACE RECREATION 2016 STATE REPORT TEXAS Natural and recreational resources at USACE lakes provide social, economic and environmental benefits for all Americans. The following information highlights some of the benefits related to USACE's role in managing natural and recreational resources in Texas. SOCIAL BENEFITS Facilities in FY 2016 Visits (person-trips) in FY 2016 Benefits in Perspective • 474 recreation areas • 21,116,345 in total By providing opportunities for active • 4,557 picnic sites • 2,579,059 picnickers recreation, USACE lakes help combat • 10,400 camping sites • 613,645 campers one of the most significant of the • 157 playgrounds • 2,213,810 swimmers nation's health problems: lack of • 98 swimming areas • 936,607 water skiers physical activity. • 217 trails • 4,044,269 boaters Recreational programs and activities • 861 trail miles • 7,736,119 sightseers at USACE lakes also help strengthen • • 49 fishing docks 6,204,027 anglers family ties and friendships; provide • 449 boat ramps • 176,745 hunters opportunities for children to develop • 15,473 marina slips • 3,169,565 others personal skills, social values, and self- esteem; and increase water safety. Public Outreach in FY 2016 • 309,805 public outreach contacts ECONOMIC BENEFITS Economic Data in FY 2016 Benefits in Perspective 21,116,345 visits per year resulted in: With multiplier effects, visitor trip spending The money spent by visitors to USACE • $ 621,411,261 in visitor spending within resulted in: lakes on trip expenses adds to the 30 miles of USACE lakes • $ 646,183,208 in total sales local and national economies by • $ 397,320,740 in sales within 30 miles • 5,600 jobs supporting jobs and generating of USACE lakes • $ 189,257,249 in labor income income.
    [Show full text]
  • Trophic Classification of Texas Reservoirs
    Trophic Classification of Texas Reservoirs 2018 Texas Integrated Report for Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d) The primary productivity of reservoirs, as indicated by the amount of nutrients (phosphorus and nitrogen) and the extent of algae (suspended, floating, and attached) and rooted aquatic plants, can have a significant effect on water quality. Up to a point, nutrients promote ecosystem production and healthy growth of algae, larger plants, and fish and other aquatic organisms. However, excess nutrients and algae in reservoirs can have a deleterious effect on water quality, and algae can reach nuisance levels that potentially (1) create nuisance aesthetic conditions, (2) cause taste and odor in drinking water sources, (3) contribute to reduced dissolved oxygen as algae decay, and (4) and ultimately reduce the ability of a water body to support healthy, diverse aquatic communities. Eutrophication refers to an overall condition characterized by an accumulation of nutrients that support relatively elevated growth of algae and other organisms. Eutrophication is primarily influenced by the physical and hydrological characteristics of the water body and can be affected by natural processes and human activities in the surrounding watershed. Human activities can accelerate the eutrophication process by i ncreasing the rate at which nutrients and organic substances enter impoundments and surrounding watersheds. Discharges of treated sewage, agricultural and urban runoff, leaking septic tanks, and erosion of stream banks can increase the flow of nutrients and organic substances into reservoirs. In comparison to natural lakes in northern states, the eutrophication process in southern reservoirs is often enhanced by (1 ) warm climates with long growing seasons, (2) soils and geologic substrates that create high concentrations of sediment and nutrients in rainfall runoff, and (3) relatively high ri ver inflows on main stem impoundments.
    [Show full text]
  • Water-Quality Assessment of the Trinity River Basin, Texas Analysis of Available Information on Nutrients * and Suspended Sediments, 1974-91
    Water-Quality Assessment of the Trinity River Basin, Texas Analysis of Available Information on Nutrients * and Suspended Sediments, 1974-91 By PETER C. VAN METRE AND DAVID C. REUTTER A Contribution of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS REPORT 94-4086 Austin, Texas 1995 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GORDON P. EATON, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Earth Science Information Center 8011 Cameron Road, Bldg. A Open-File Reports Section Austin, Texas 78754-3898 Box 25286, MS 517 Denver Federal Center Denver, Colorado 80225-0286 Information regarding the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program is available on the Internet via the World Wide Web. You may connect to the NAWQA Hone Page using the Universal Resource Locator (URL) at: <URL:http://wwwrvares.er.usgs.gov/nawqa/nawqa_home.html> FOREWORD The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey Improve understanding of the primary natural (USGS) is to assess the quantity and quality of the and human factors that affect water-quality earth resources of the Nation and to provide informa­ conditions. tion that will assist resource managers and policymak- This information will help support the development ers at Federal, State, and local levels in making sound and evaluation of management, regulatory, and moni­ decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • RIVER AUTHORITIES and SPECIAL LAW DISTRICTS WITHIN the STATE of TEXAS (With Lakes and Bays)
    Dallam Sherman Hansford Ochiltree Lipscomb RIVER AUTHORITIES AND SPECIAL LAW DISTRICTS Hartley Moore Hutchinson Roberts Hemphill WITHIN THE STATE OF TEXAS Lake Meredith (with lakes and bays) Oldham Potter Carson Gray Wheeler NOTE: Map reflects Authority and District statutory boundaries and does not necessarily represent service areas. Greenbelt Reservoir Deaf Smith Randall Armstrong Donley Collingsworth Buffalo Lake Prairie Dog Town Fk Red River Parmer Castro Swisher Briscoe Hall Childress Hardeman Lake Pauline Bailey Lamb Hale Floyd Motley Cottle Wilbarger Wichita Foard Santa Rosa Lake Lake Texoma Pat Mayse Lake Lake Nocona Diversion Reservoir Clay Truscott Lake Hubert H Moss Lake Kemp Lamar Red River Lake Arrowhead Montague Red River Cooke Grayson Cochran Fannin Hockley Lubbock Crosby Dickens King Knox Baylor Archer Bowie White River Lake Lake Amon G. Carter Delta Millers Creek Reservoir Ray Roberts Lake Cooper Lake Wright Patman Lake Elm Fork Trinity River Titus Jack Franklin Wise Denton Collin Hopkins Morris Yoakum Terry Lynn Garza Cass Kent Stonewall Haskell Throckmorton Young Lake Bridgeport Hunt Lewisville Lake Lavon Lake Lake Bob Sandlin Lake Graham Lake Stamford Camp Grapevine Lake Ellison Creek Reservoir Rockwall Eagle Mountain Lake Lake Ray Hubbard Rains Lake Fork Reservoir Marion Possum Kingdom Lake Lake O' the Pines Lake Tawakoni Wood Upshur Caddo Lake Hubbard Creek Reservoir Parker Tarrant Dallas Gaines Palo Pinto Dawson Borden Scurry Fisher Jones Shackelford Stephens Lake Daniel Lake Palo Pinto Benbrook Lake Joe Pool Lake
    [Show full text]
  • Figure: 30 TAC §307.10(3) Appendix C
    Figure: 30 TAC §307.10(3) Appendix C - Segment Descriptions The following descriptions define the geographic extent of the state's classified segments. Boundaries of bay and estuary segments have not been precisely defined. Segment boundaries are illustrated in the document entitled The Atlas of Texas Surface Waters (GI-316) as amended and published by the commission. SEGMENT DESCRIPTION 0101 Canadian River Below Lake Meredith - from the Oklahoma State Line in Hemphill County to Sanford Dam in Hutchinson County 0102 Lake Meredith - from Sanford Dam in Hutchinson County to a point immediately upstream of the confluence of Camp Creek in Potter County, up to the normal pool elevation of 2936.5 feet (impounds Canadian River) 0103 Canadian River Above Lake Meredith - from a point immediately upstream of the confluence of Camp Creek in Potter County to the New Mexico State Line in Oldham County 0104 Wolf Creek - from the Oklahoma State Line in Lipscomb County to a point 2.0 km (1.2 mi) upstream of FM 3045 in Ochiltree County 0105 Rita Blanca Lake - from Rita Blanca Dam in Hartley County up to the normal pool elevation of 3860 feet (impounds Rita Blanca Creek) 0201 Lower Red River - from the Arkansas State Line in Bowie County to the Arkansas- Oklahoma State Line in Bowie County 0202 Red River Below Lake Texoma - from the Arkansas-Oklahoma State Line in Bowie County to Denison Dam in Grayson County 0203 Lake Texoma - from Denison Dam in Grayson County to a point immediately upstream of the confluence of Sycamore Creek in Cooke County, up to
    [Show full text]
  • List of Reservoirs with Sedimentation Rates at Conservation Pool Elevation Calculated Using Elevational Sedimentation Rate Method
    List of reservoirs with sedimentation rates at conservation pool elevation calculated using elevational sedimentation rate method Latest volume at Capacity Survey 2 Sediment rate Reservoir Name Survey 1 conservation loss rate (latest) (acre-feet/year) pool (acre-feet) (%/year) Aquilla Lake 1995 2014 43278.7 206.6 0.44 Arlington, Lake 1957 2007 40216.4 108.2 0.24 Arrowhead, Lake 2001 2013 230358.9 666.5 0.28 Athens, Lake 1962 1998 29426.3 95.4 0.29 Bardwell Lake 1965 1999 46836.5 248.6 0.45 Belton Lake 1994 2015 432630.1 658.1 0.15 Benbrook Lake 1952 1998 86252.8 30.5 0.03 Bob Sandlin, Lake 1998 2008 202312.3 408.2 0.20 Bonham, Lake 1969 2004 11414.1 16.9 0.14 Brownwood, Lake 1997 2013 128820.2 224.0 0.17 Buchanan, Lake 1950 2006 875588.0 2012.4 0.20 Cedar Creek Reservoir 1995 2017 631400.1 494.5 0.08 Choke Canyon Reservoir 1983 2012 662821.0 1098.2 0.16 Coleman, Lake 1966 2006 37976.3 50.2 0.13 Conroe, Lake 1973 2010 412199.5 518.0 0.12 Corpus Christi, Lake 2002 2016 256339.5 442.0 0.17 Crook, Lake 1956 2003 9406.5 11.8 0.12 Cypress Springs, Lake 1970 2007 66786.6 162.5 0.22 Eagle Mountain Lake 1968 2008 179980.2 261.5 0.14 Fork Reservoir, Lake 1980 2009 637527.8 1263.6 0.19 Fort Phantom Hill, Lake 1938 1993 72419.3 56.8 0.08 Georgetown, Lake 2005 2016 38067.9 48.2 0.12 Graham, Lake 1958 1998 46825.0 102.4 0.20 Granbury, Lake 1993 2015 133857.7 325.5 0.23 Granger Lake 1995 2013 51926.4 169.2 0.31 Grapevine Lake 2002 2011 164243.8 271.6 0.16 Houston, Lake 1994 2011 126899.5 561.9 0.41 Houston County Lake 1966 1999 18168.3 41.4 0.21 Hubbard
    [Show full text]
  • Mercury Concentrations in Largemouth Bass (Micropterus
    MERCURY CONCENTRATIONS IN LARGEMOUTH BASS (MICROPTERUS SALMOIDES), WHITE BASS (MORONE CHRYSOPS), AND WHITE CRAPPIE (POMOXIS ANNULARIS) FROM SIX DALLAS-FORT WORTH AREA RESERVOIRS by JACOB MICHAEL WADLINGTON Bachelor of Science, 2009 Lipscomb University Nashville, Tennessee Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the College of Science and Engineering Texas Christian University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science May 2011 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Dr. Matthew Chumchal has been an extremely helpful thesis advisor and friend throughout my research and I thank him earnestly for his involvement in my education and life. I would also like to thank my thesis committee members Dr. Ray Drenner and Dr. Amanda Hale. Dr. Drenner has given me his time, use of his laboratory, and great advice for my research and career. Dr. Hale's help in statistics has allowed me to succeed in and out of the classroom with my research and her help has strengthened my education considerably. I would also like to thank my fellow TCU biology graduate students who assisted me in my studies and were great friends. Michelle Fernando was instrumental in processing fish in the laboratory. I would also like to thank the TPWD fishery biologists Rafe Brock and Tom Hungerford for their help in collecting fish and for their hospitality. The TCU Biology department provided supported through a teaching assistantship during this study. The TCU Biology Department, TCU Adkin and RCAF grants funded this research. Lastly, I would like to thank my family for their support, visits, and encouragement as I attended graduate school. My wife, Sara, has given me tremendous support and has made me happy.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimation of Evaporation from Open Water—A Review of Selected Studies, Summary of U.S
    Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth District Estimation of Evaporation from Open Water—A Review of Selected Studies, Summary of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Data Collection and Methods, and Evaluation of Two Methods for Estimation of Evaporation from Five Reservoirs in Texas Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5202 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Front cover, Benbrook Lake, December 2011. Photograph by Glenn Harwell, U.S. Geological Survey. Background, Canyon Lake, November 2008. Photograph by Sam Price, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Back cover: Top, Hords Creek, September 2012. Photograph by Anna Reinhardt, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Middle, Granger Lake, September 2012. Photograph by Ben Bohac, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Bottom, Sam Rayburn Lake, September 2012. Photograph by David LaRue, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Estimation of Evaporation from Open Water—A Review of Selected Studies, Summary of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Data Collection and Methods, and Evaluation of Two Methods for Estimation of Evaporation from Five Reservoirs in Texas By Glenn R. Harwell Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth District Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5202 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012 This and other USGS information products are available at http://store.usgs.gov/ U.S. Geological Survey Box 25286, Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 To learn about the USGS and its information products visit http://www.usgs.gov/ 1-888-ASK-USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Benbrook
    History of Benbrook The ability of the City of Benbrook to shape its future is intimately tied to its past. Prior transportation and land subdivision actions profoundly affect the ability to make future land use decisions by establishing the framework within which future development can take place. Prior economic activity tends to direct future economic activity along associated lines. Prior planning activities, whether implemented or not, also continue to influence land use decisions directly or indirectly. Native Americans and Early Settlers Prior to the arrival of Anglo settlers, large herds of buffalo and members of the Wichita, Caddo, Comanche and Lipan Apache Indian tribes roamed the Benbrook area. Archeologists estimate that the area has been inhabited at least 11,000 years,1 though there is considerable debate as to whether or not that amount of time is much greater.2 Indian communities looked for the same environmental factors as present communities, with the availability of an adequate water supply being a primary consideration. Undoubtedly, the confluence of the Clear Fork‐Trinity River and Maryʹs Creek provided such a watering place to tribes as they passed through the area on hunting expeditions. As a community, Benbrook is one of the oldest in Tarrant County. But as an incorporated City, it is one of the youngest. Anglos originally settled the Benbrook area as part of the Petersʹ Colony, led by William S. Peters, who based his operations out of Louisville, Kentucky. Formed by a series of contracts beginning on August 30, 1841 with the young Republic of Texas, the colony would eventually encompass some 26 Texas counties.3 In 1842, the Republic granted Peters a contract to attract 250 families per year to the Benbrook (then called Miranda or Marinda) area specifically by offering 320 acres free to family men and 160 acres to single immigrants, plus a free cabin, seed, and musket balls.
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (Updated March 18, 2021)
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. 2018 Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (updated March 18, 2021) EPA has not approved the definition of “surface water in the state” in the TX WQS, which includes an area out 10.36 miles into the Gulf of Mexico by reference to §26.001 of the Texas Water Code. Under the CWA, Texas does not have jurisdiction to establish water quality standards more than three nautical miles from the coast, but does not extend past that point. Beyond three miles, EPA retains authority for CWA purposes. EPA’s approval also does not include the application the TX WQS for the portions of the Red River and Lake Texoma that are located within the state of Oklahoma. Finally, EPA is not approving the TX WQS for those waters or portions of waters located in Indian Country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. The following sections in the 2018 Texas WQS have been approved by EPA and are therefore effective for CWA purposes: • §307.1. General Policy Statement • §307.2. Description of Standards • §307.3. Definitions and Abbreviations (see “No Action” section) • §307.4. General Criteria • §307.5. Antidegradation • §307.7. Site-specific Uses and Criteria (see “No Action” section) • §307.8.
    [Show full text]