2. LEA EVALUATIONS Evaluation staff assess LEA performance to ensure LEA: 1)Provides consistent enforcement of statute and regulations. 2)Implements its CIWMB-approved EPP. 3)Remains in compliance with its certification requirements.

3. LEA EVALUATIONS Evaluation staff find an LEA is not fulfilling its duties if: (PRC 43214) 1)The LEA has failed to exercise due diligence in inspections of SWF and disposal sites. 2)The LEA has intentionally misrepresented inspection results. 3)The LEA has failed to prepare, or cause to be prepared, permits, permit revisions, or closure and postclosure maintenance plans.

4. LEA EVALUATIONS 4) The LEA has approved permits, permit revisions, or closure and postclosure maintenance plans not consistent with Part 4 and Part 5 of PRC. 5)The LEA has failed to take appropriate enforcement actions. 6) The LEA has failed to comply with, or has taken actions that are inconsistent with, or unauthorized by statute and regulations.

5. LEA EVALUATIONS When Evaluation staff finds the LEA to be not fulfilling its responsibilities A “stepped approach” process is initiated which potentially escalates as needed to involve full Board action.

6. STEPPED APPROACH 1st step:Evaluation workplan 2nd step: Administrative conference 3rd step:Board Action

7. BOARD ACTIONS 1)Establish a schedule and probationary period for improved LEA performance (43216.5). 2)Assume partial/full responsibility for LEA duties (43214, 43215, 43216, 43216.5). 3)Conduct more frequent inspections and evaluations (43216.5). 4)May implement any other measure which it determines necessary to improve LEA compliance (43216.5). 5)May take any actions it determines necessary to ensure LEAs fulfill their obligations (43216.5).

8. URGENCY STEP If the CIWMB finds that conditions at solid waste facilities threaten public heath and safety or the environment, the CIWMB shall, within 10 days of notifying the LEA, become the enforcement agency.

9. LEA EVALUATION RESULTS 3 rd Cycle 10 complete

10. LEA PROGRAM FINDINGS  Failed to exercise due diligence in the inspection of solid waste facility (ies) and/or disposal site (s) {3} (City of Pittsburg, San Francisco County, Siskiyou County)  Failed to prepare or caused to be prepared permits, permit revisions, or closure and postclosure maintenance plans {1} (Sikiyou County)  Failed to take appropriate enforcement action {0}  Failed to maintain certification requirements {0}  Failed to comply with, or has taken actions actions inconsistent with, or unauthorized by statute or regulations {0}

11. STATUS OF LEA EVALUATION WORKPLANS 14 LEAs on Workplans in 2 nd Cycle CompletedIn Progress AlamedaFresno AmadorMono/Alpine ImperialCity of San Jose Kern (complete 2-04) Lassen Monterey San Benito San Luis Obispo Shasta/Trinity Tehama Tulare

12. STATUS OF LEA EVALUATION WORKPLANS One Additional Workplan in Current (3 rd ) Cycle In Progress Fresno Mono/Alpine City of San Jose Siskiyou

13. STATUS OF LEA EVALUATION WORKPLANS One Additional Workplan Outside Cycle In Progress Fresno Mono/Alpine City of San Jose Siskiyou Merced

14. 3 EWs require permit revisions Status: 2 workplans are being amended (Fresno, Mono/Alpine) 1 workplan is being developed (Siskiyou) 1 EW requires hiring new staff Status: New staff hired – workplan complete 2-04 (City of San Jose) 1 EW requires LEA program reform Status: CIWMB evaluating LEA proposals (Merced) LEA EVALUATION WORKPLANS (EW) IN PROGRESS

15. BRANCH RESPONSIBILITIES FOR LEA PERFORMANCE ASSISTANCE INDEPENDENT OF EVALUATION CYCLE

17. INSPECTION PROGRAM TRIGGERS 1. Inspections conducted? 2. Inspection reports sent to the CIWMB within 30 days? 3. Inspections represented correctly? 4. Inspection forms filled out correctly? 5. LEA follow up to written complaints?

18. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM TRIGGERS 1.For the Inventory, a compliance schedule issued timely and with follow up? 2.Appropriate enforcement action taken? 3.Correct enforcement orders per CCR, Title 14, Section 18304? 4.Is the LEA enforcing orders?

19. PERMIT PROGRAM TRIGGERS 1.Complete and/or correct packages per CCR, and for tiered permit process? 2. Adequate permit review reports and reissuances prepared and submitted? 3. Prepare and issue permits/RFI amendments timely? 4. Identify and pursue permits for active unpermitted facilities? 5. Processing owner/operator changes and/or RFI amendments? 6. Pursuing permit revisions? 7. Providing evidence of the required findings for permit/CEQA/RFI amendments correctly?

20. CLOSURE PROGRAM TRIGGERS 1. Sites met applicable closure/postclosure requirements? 2. Closed sites inspected quarterly or an approved frequency? 3. Are closed sites not maintaining compliance with closure/postclosure requirements? 4.Enforcement actions taken for sites not complying with regulations? 5. Sites listed for non-compliance with closure requirements? 6. Assessing closed, illegal, and abandoned sites?

21. CERTIFICATION PROGRAM TRIGGERS 1.Conflict of interest? 2. Staff technical expertise and staff levels OK? 3. Does the current budget indicate adequate resources? 4. Annual EPP updated? 5. Training requirements met? 6. EPP facility/site enumeration consistent with SWIS? NOTE: All P&E Division branches will coordinate issues. When assistance is given to the LEA by CIWMB staff other branch contacts are notified so that other issues can be coordinated (as needed) at the same time.