Jump to main content.


State Review Framework - CAA Data for Louisiana, State Multi-Year Report

Help Page
Metric Metric Type Agency 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Graph
1. Data completeness. degree to which the minimum data requirements are complete.
ATitle V Universe: AFS Operating Majors (Current)Data QualityState540540540540540540540n/a
Combined540540540540540540540n/a
Title V Universe: AFS Operating Majors with Air Program Code = V (Current)Data QualityState515515515515515515515n/a
Combined515515515515515515515n/a
BSource Count: Synthetic Minors (Current)Data QualityState102102102102102102102n/a
Combined102102102102102102102n/a
Source Count: NESHAP Minors (Current)Data QualityState105105105105105105105n/a
Combined105105105105105105105n/a
Source Count: Active Minor facilities or otherwise FedRep, not including NESHAP Part 61 (Current)Informational OnlyState1,0911,2741,3531,2771,164883691n/a
Combined1,0911,2741,3531,2771,164883691n/a
CCAA Subprogram Designations: NSPS (Current)Data QualityState474474474474474474474n/a
Combined474474474474474474474n/a
CAA Subprogram Designations: NESHAP (Current)Data QualityState298298298298298298298n/a
Combined298298298298298298298n/a
CAA Subprogram Designations: MACT (Current)Data QualityState548548548548548548548n/a
Combined548548548548548548548n/a
CAA Subpart Designations: Percent NSPS facilities with FCEs conducted after 10/1/2005Data QualityState85.2%85.2%85.2%85.2%85.2%85.2%85.2%
CAA Subpart Designations: Percent NESHAP facilities with FCEs conducted after 10/1/2005Data QualityState81.7%81.7%81.7%81.7%81.7%81.7%81.7%
CAA Subpart Designations: Percent MACT facilities with FCEs conducted after 10/1/2005Data QualityState92.9%92.9%92.9%92.9%92.9%92.9%92.9%
Combined90.6%90.6%90.6%90.6%90.6%90.6%90.6%
DCompliance Monitoring: Sources with FCEs (1 FY)Data QualityState290254196178134190253
Compliance Monitoring: Number of FCEs (1 FY)Data QualityState420474306198144196262
Compliance Monitoring: Number of PCEs (1 FY)Informational OnlyState325347307274214203169
EHistorical Non-Compliance Counts (1 FY)Data QualityState01010101030111
Combined262221212445120
FInformal Enforcement Actions: Number Issued (1 FY)Data QualityState21416515314067116133
Informal Enforcement Actions: Number of Sources (1 FY)Data QualityState18615914713364114129
GHPV: Number of New Pathways (1 FY)Data QualityState98772416393030
HPV: Number of New Sources (1 FY)Data QualityState92732316383027
HHPV Day Zero Pathway Discovery date: Percent DZs with discoveryData QualityState0.0%0 / 04.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
HPV Day Zero Pathway Violating Pollutants: Percent DZsData QualityState0.0%0 / 050.0%56.2%82.1%90.0%93.3%
HPV Day Zero Pathway Violation Type Code(s): Percent DZs with HPV Violation Type Code(s)Data QualityState0.0%0 / 050.0%62.5%84.6%96.7%100.0%
IFormal Action: Number Issued (1 FY)Data QualityState286251262144184194162
Formal Action: Number of Sources (1 FY)Data QualityState219218184106146159137
JAssessed Penalties: Total Dollar Amount (1 FY)Data QualityState$553,322$1,332,287$2,868,761$322,954$502,097$199,683$206,128
KMajor Sources Missing CMS Policy Applicability (Current)Review IndicatorState29292929292929n/a
2. Data accuracy. degree to which the minimum data requirements are accurate.
ANumber of HPVs/Number of NC Sources (1 FY)Data QualityState0 / 06100.0%5000.0%2500.0%4500.0%330.0%28.2%
Combined557.1%484.6%425.0%216.7%342.9%147.8%27.1%
BStack Test Results at Federally-Reportable Sources - % Without Pass/Fail Results (1 FY)GoalState0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Stack Test Results at Federally-Reportable Sources - Number of Failures (1 FY)Data QualityState810139171711
3. Timeliness of data entry. degree to which the minimum data requirements are complete.
APercent HPVs Entered ≤ 60 Days After Designation, Timely Entry (1 FY)GoalState98.0%100.0%83.3%18.8%30.8%40.0%16.7%
BPercent Compliance Monitoring related MDR actions reported ≤ 60 Days After Designation, Timely Entry (1 FY)GoalState0.0%0.0%9.1%6.2%2.8%2.8%2.9%
Percent Enforcement related MDR actions reported ≤ 60 Days After Designation, Timely Entry (1 FY)GoalState0.0%0.0%41.5%55.7%20.9%20.9%13.7%
5. Inspection coverage. degree to which state completed the universe of planned inspections/compliance evaluations.
ACMS Major Full Compliance Evaluation (FCE) Coverage (2 FY CMS Cycle)GoalState96.6%87.7%87.7%70.2%70.2%64.4%64.4%
Combined96.6%88.2%88.2%70.7%70.7%64.6%64.6%
CAA Major Full Compliance Evaluation (FCE) Coverage(most recent 2 FY)Review IndicatorState77.2%73.0%65.4%57.8%47.7%54.0%74.7%
Combined77.6%73.3%65.8%58.1%48.1%54.2%75.0%
BCAA Synthetic Minor 80% Sources (SM-80) FCE Coverage (5 FY CMS Cycle) 1Review IndicatorState100.0%94.0%98.0%44.4%60.6%68.4%84.8%
Combined100.0%94.0%98.0%44.4%60.6%68.4%84.8%
CAA Synthetic Minor 80% Sources (SM-80) FCE Coverage (last full 5 FY)Informational OnlyState43.2%49.5%52.6%55.8%50.5%47.4%48.4%
Combined43.2%49.5%52.6%55.8%50.5%47.4%48.4%
CCAA Synthetic Minor FCE and reported PCE Coverage (last 5 FY) Informational OnlyState62.3%68.9%66.0%69.8%71.0%68.3%65.0%
Combined62.3%68.9%66.0%69.8%71.0%68.3%65.0%
DCAA Minor FCE and Reported PCE Coverage (last 5 FY)Informational OnlyState16.1%16.1%15.7%14.5%12.9%9.2%6.5%
ENumber of Sources with Unknown Compliance StatusReview IndicatorState1059155871285544
Combined1059155871285544
FCAA Stationary Source Investigations (last 5 FY)Informational OnlyState0000000
GReview of Self-Certifications Completed (1 FY)GoalState99.8%97.7%92.2%99.8%100.0%94.2%98.9%
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.
CPercent facilities in noncompliance that have had an FCE, stack test, or enforcement (1 FY) Review IndicatorState0.0%0.3%0.3%0.4%0.4%3.9%23.3%
Percent facilities that have had a failed stack test and have noncompliance status (1 FY)Review IndicatorState0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.9%14.3%
EPA0 / 00 / 00 / 00 / 00 / 00 / 00 / 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.
AHigh Priority Violation Discovery Rate - Per Major Source (1 FY)Review IndicatorState11.7%7.0%3.7%2.0%6.3%5.2%4.6%
EPA0.4%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.2%0.7%0.2%
BHigh Priority Violation Discovery Rate - Per Synthetic Minor Source (1 FY)Review IndicatorState3.9%2.0%0.0%1.0%2.0%0.0%0.0%
EPA0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
CPercent Formal Actions With Prior HPV - Majors (1 FY)Review IndicatorState47.6%38.7%34.5%29.6%40.2%42.6%24.6%
DPercent Informal Enforcement Actions Without Prior HPV - Majors (1 FY)Review IndicatorState48.3%50.8%79.5%77.8%63.3%77.8%78.3%
EPercentage of Sources with Failed Stack Test Actions that received HPV listing - Majors and Synthetic Minors (2 FY)Review IndicatorState40.0%18.8%33.3%35.3%35.3%36.4%13.6%
10. Timely and Appropriate Action. Degree to which a state takes timely and appropriate enforcement actions in accordance with policy relating to specific media.
APercent HPVs not meeting timeliness goals (2 FY)Review IndicatorState24.2%34.9%47.4%63.3%34.3%20.3%28.6%
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.
ANo Activity Indicator - Actions with Penalties (1 FY)Review IndicatorState282245235128169167155
BPercent Actions at HPVs With Penalty (1 FY)Review IndicatorState36.6%26.2%41.3%51.3%27.3%34.2%26.8%
Download a comma delimited text file Download an excel file 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.

Jump to main content.