The California Water Boards' Annual Performance Report - Fiscal Year 2013-14

State Board | Region 1 | Region 2 | Region 3 | Region 4 | Region 5 | Region 6 | Region 7 | Region 8 | Region 9

TARGETS AND RESOURCES: REGION 4 LOS ANGELES

GROUP: TARGETS AND RESOURCES - REGION 4

MEASURE: ALL REGIONAL TARGETS
ALL RESOURCES

Targets Achieved:
• = Less than 60% of target met
• = Target met between 60% and 80%
• = Target met at 80% or above

Los Angeles Regional Water Board Performance Summary	Your Page Does not Support iFrames Percentage of Targets Met
Area: 4451 square miles	Budget: $18,596,913	Staff: 137
Permitting 100% •	Inspections 89% •	Others 90% •

Total Maximum Daily Load and Basin Planning
Program Budget: $1,455,691	Program Staff: 13.00
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Pollutant/Water Body Combinations Addressed	10	10	100% •
Total Maximum Daily Loads Adopted	3	3	100% •
Basin Plan Amendments Adopted	4	1	25% •
No Regional Considerations Provided

NPDES Wastewater
Program Budget: $2,544,549	Program Staff: 18.90
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Major Individual Permits Issued or Renewed	6	10	167% •
Major Individual Facilities Inspected	24	24	100% •
Minor Individual Permits Issued or Renewed	8	8	100% •
Minor Individual Facilities Inspected	10	10	100% •
Minor General Facilities Inspected	40	44	110% •
In addition to the adopted ten major and eight minor permits, there were 20 other related items and actions that went to the Board for adoption or as an information item which should be considered as supplemental accomplishments to the proposed FY 2013-2014 targets. Additional adopted Board items included five minor permit terminations, three permit amendments (one NPDES and two POTW WRRs), one POTW WRRs renewal, seven Time Schedule Orders (six major NPDES and one POTW WRRs), one special study and three information items.

NPDES Stormwater
Program Budget: $1,766,608	Program Staff: 14.50
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Municipal (Phase I/II Inspections)	43	18	42% •
Construction Inspections	290	472	163% •
Industrial Inspections	280	454	162% •
With regard to the Municipal Phase I/II Inspection target for Region 4, the target of 43 inspections was incorrectly calculated and included for the region. During the past two fiscal years, a target of 12-13 inspections was established based on staffing. A greater than three-fold increase would not be feasible with current staffing.

Waste Discharge to Land - Wastewater
Program Budget: $703,900	Program Staff: 4.50
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Waste Discharge to Land Inspections	24	43	179% •
Individual Waste Discharge Requirements Updated	5	7	140% •
No Regional Considerations Provided

Land Disposal
Program Budget: $471,197	Program Staff: 3.50
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Landfill Individual Permits Updated	5	5	100% •
Landfill Inspections	36	48	133% •
All Other Individual Permits Updated	0	3	N/A
All Other Inspections	25	30	120% •
No Regional Considerations Provided

Confined Animal Facilities (WDR, NPDES, etc.)	N/A
Program Budget: $0	Program Staff: 0.00
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Confined Animal Facilities Inspections	0	0	N/A
No Regional Considerations Provided

Timber Harvest (Forestry)	N/A
Program Budget: $0	Program Staff: 0.00
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Timber Harvest Inspections	0	0	N/A
No Regional Considerations Provided

Enforcement
Program Budget: $893,869	Program Staff: 7.70
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Class 1 Priority Violations will Result in Formal Enforcement or an Investigative Order Pursuant to Water Code Section 13267 within 18 Months of Discovery	100%	100%	100% •
Facilities with Over $12,000 in MMPs (4 or More Violations) Not Assessed within 18 Months of Accrual	0	0	100% •
The target for “Facilities with 4 or more MMP violations Not Assessed within 18 Months of Accrual” is 0, actual achieved column shows number not addressed within 18 months. Number of facilities with 4 or more MMP violations that were addressed within 18 is not shown.

Cleanup
Program Budget: $6,534,592	Program Staff: 47.30
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
New Department of Defense Sites Into Active Remediation	2	2	100% •
New Cleanup Sites Into Active Remediation	20	21	105% •
Cleanup Sites Closed	10	40	400% •
New Underground Storage Tank Sites Into Active Remediation	17	33	194% •
Underground Storage Tank Sites Projected Closed	140	164	117% •
No Regional Considerations Provided

RESOURCES (INPUTS)

WHAT THE CARD IS SHOWING

Each target card provides a direct comparison of actual outputs for the fiscal year (July 1st to June 30th) to the target estimates established at the outset of the fiscal year. While budgetary and personnel information is not directly aligned with the activities being assessed, it does provide a basis for understanding the relative priority of key programs within each region and across the State. For the actual outputs presented, the Water Boards are continuing to evolve its data bases for improved accuracy. Some of the measurements reported may be different than the measurements tracked by the regions and programs. In addition, there are several targets for which outputs cannot be readily displayed without modification to the databases. This includes the number of permits revised, which should include the number of permits reviewed, revised and/or rescinded.

For the actual outputs presented, the Water Boards are continuing to evolve its data bases for improved accuracy. Some of the measurements reported may be different than the measurements tracked by the regions and programs. Notably, the data portrayed include entries completed before November 4, 2014 and may not reflect data input after that period.

WHY THIS CARD IS IMPORTANT

Beginning with FY 2009-10, performance targets were established for certain output measures. Targets are goals that establish measurable levels of performance to be achieved within a specified time period. This card demonstrates how the resources of the region are being deployed to protect water quality. In establishing the targets, the Regional Water Boards considered the unique differences and needs within their respective watersheds, their work priorities given available resources, external factors such as furloughs, and prior year outputs.

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Target circles: • = Less than 60% of target met
• = Target met between 60% and 80%
• = Target met at 80% or above.
Other Programs (budget): miscellaneous programs not included in the above.
Permits issued: Does not include rescissions, amendments or permit revisions that may have been included in the targets.
Target Definitions

REGIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

Regional Considerations provided in tables above under each program section.

( Page last updated: 10/27/14 )

Region 4 (Los Angeles)	FY 13-14 Budget ($)	Staff (PY)	%Fees/Taxes Penalties	%Federal	%General Fund/Other	%Bonds