The California Water Boards' Annual Performance Report - Fiscal Year 2015-16

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 Summary¹	Your Page Does not Support iFrames Percentage of Targets Met
Area: 4451 square miles	Budget: $21,108,636	Staff: 141
Permitting 80% •	Inspections 100% •	Others 67% •
¹Regional Board performance summary statistics show the percentage of targets met.

Total Maximum Daily Load and Basin Planning
Program Budget: $1,610,699	Program Staff: 12.70
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Pollutant/Water Body Combinations Addressed	46	0	0% •
Total Maximum Daily Loads Adopted	2	0	0% •
Basin Plan Amendments Adopted	3	3	100% •
The NPDES Stormwater program also approved 12 Enhanced Watershed Management Programs pursuant to the LA County MS4 Permit, a Watershed Management Program pursuant to the City of Long Beach MS4 Permit, and 16 corresponding monitoring programs under the two MS4 permits. The NPDES Stormwater program also developed and publicly noticed for comment tentative permit provisions to implement 25 TMDLs applicable to industrial stormwater discharges in Region 4 through the Statewide Industrial General Stormwater Permit.

NPDES Wastewater
Program Budget: $2,797,094	Program Staff: 18.90
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Major Individual Permits Issued or Renewed	10	7	70% •
Major Individual Facilities Inspected	26	26	100% •
Minor Individual Permits Issued or Renewed	11	12	109% •
Minor Individual Facilities Inspected	11	12	109% •
Minor General Facilities Inspected	34	88	259% •
Region 4 is awaiting State Board to adopt a statewide general permit for hydrostatic test discharge from natural gas pipeline and State Board’s permitting process has been delayed until February 2017.

NPDES Stormwater
Program Budget: $1,987,376	Program Staff: 14.50
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Municipal (Phase I/II Inspections)	7	6	86% •
Construction Inspections	330	396	120% •
Industrial Inspections	322	344	107% •
No Regional Board Considerations Provided

Waste Discharge to Land - Wastewater
Program Budget: $650,333	Program Staff: 4.50
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Waste Discharge to Land Inspections	24	32	133% •
Individual Waste Discharge Requirements Updated	5	4	80% •
Region 4 Groundwater Permitting Unit has accomplished and exceeded the committed performance goals as follows: - No. of Inspections: Groundwater Permitting Unit has conducted 30 inspections within Fiscal Year of 2015-2016 which is 125% over the goal (24 inspections).

Land Disposal
Program Budget: $526,869	Program Staff: 3.50
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Landfill Individual Permits Updated	3	8	267% •
Landfill Inspections	38	60	158% •
All Other Individual Permits Updated	1	2	200% •
All Other Inspections	22	22	100% •

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

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

Enforcement
Program Budget: $1,009,306	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	•
No Regional Board Considerations Provided

Cleanup
Program Budget: $3,739,058	Program Staff: 21.00
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
New Department of Defense Sites Into Active Remediation	2	1	50% •
New Cleanup Sites Into Active Remediation	15	25	167% •
Cleanup Sites Closed	15	55	367% •
New Underground Storage Tank Sites Into Active Remediation	13	16	123% •
Underground Storage Tank Sites Projected Closed	90	124	138% •
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.

REGIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

Regional Considerations provided in tables above under each program section.

( Page last updated: 5/16/16 )

Region 4 (Los Angeles)	FY 2015-16 Budget ($)	Staff (PY)	%Fees/Taxes Penalties	%Federal	%General Fund/Other	%Bonds