The California Water Boards' Annual Performance Report - Fiscal Year 2009-10
TARGETS AND RESOURCES: REGION 5 CENTRAL VALLEY |
|
|
MEASUREMENTS
INSPECTIONS AND PERMITS
Region 5 | Facilities Regulated |
Inspections | Permits Issued (not including revised and rescinded) |
Enforcement Actions |
Program Budget ($) |
Staff (PY) |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Program | Actual | Target | % Target | Actual | Target | % Target | ||||
NPDES MAJOR | 56 | 67 | 48 | 140% | 8 | 13 | 62% | 239 | $1,899,995 | 18.6 |
NPDES MINOR (including general enrollees) |
275 | 51 | 17 | 300% | 24 | 18 | 133% | |||
STORMWATER CONSTRUCTION | 1,203 | 521 | 550 | 95% | 515 | NA | NA | 115 | $963,181 | 10.3 |
STORMWATER INDUSTRIAL | 1,900 | 47 | 77 | 61% | 94 | NA | NA | 710 | ||
STORMWATER MUNICIPAL | 99 | 2 | 3 | 67% | 1 | NA | NA | 2 | ||
WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS |
1,006 | 404 | 325 | 124% | 23 | 14 | 164% | 463 | $3,014,679 | 31.9 |
LAND DISPOSAL | 265 | 179 | 76 | 236% | 7 | 13 | 54% | 27 | $2,305,433 | 24.4 |
ALL OTHER PROGRAMS | 3,495 | 99 | 106 | 26 | $5,578,221 | 53.2 | ||||
TOTAL | 8,299 | 1,370 | 778 | 1,582 | $13,761,509 | 138.4 |
OTHER TARGETS
Region 5 | FY 09-10 Actual | Target FY 09-10 | % TARGET |
---|---|---|---|
1 Plan & Assess | |||
# of combinations added/removed from 303(d) list (impaired waters) | 434 | 421 | 103% |
# of Implementation Provisions Adopted | 20 | 3 | 667% |
# of pollutant/waterbody combinations addressed | 8 | 30 | 27% |
# of SWAMP analyses conducted | 3,341 | 2,801 | 119% |
# of SWAMP Site Visits | 811 | 717 | 113% |
# of Total Maximum Daily Loads Adopted | 1 | 2 | 50% |
# of Use Attainability Analysis Adopted | 0 | 0 | NA |
# of Water Quality Objectives Adopted | 4 | 6 | 67% |
2 Regulate | |||
# of groundwater cleanup sites new in active remediation | 84 | 57 | 147% |
# of Site Cleanup Program sites projected closed | 31 | 18 | 172% |
# of Underground Storage Tank sites projected closed | 142 | 120 | 118% |
3 Enforcement | |||
MMP Violations Not Addressed Within 18 Months of Discovery (as of June 30, 2010) | 342 | 0 |
RESOURCES (INPUTS)
WHAT THE CARD IS SHOWING
Each target card provides a direct comparison of actual outputs for FY 2009-10 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 through July 15, 2010 and do not reflect data input after that period. 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.
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. As with any first year effort, the ability to accurately estimate targeted levels of activity is a learning process. For this first year, 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 arrows: Red; less than 85% of target met, yellow, target met between 85% and 100%, green; target met at 100% or above.
- All other programs include: Timber Harvest, Non point Source, 401 Certification, Tanks, Pretreatment, Recycling and miscellaneous programs (for budget information).
- Other Programs (budget): miscellaneous programs not included in the above.
- Permits issued: Does not include rescissions or permit revisions that may have been included in the targets
REGIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
-
NPDES Wastewater
- Staff permit actions were completed, however Board adoption is still under consideration based on input received during the public process.
- To improve efficiency, the Board adopted general orders and shifted individual permits to the general orders, thus reducing the overall outputs.
- Data systems are undergoing enhancements to improve tracking of Municipal audits, which cannot currently be distinguished from inspections. This resulted in under-reporting for the Region.
- Staff resources were redirected to support inspection and enforcement needs.
- Adoption of specific pesticide TMDL basin plan amendment was delayed to accommodate changes, ensuring application of the new approach to 35 other TMDL listings.
- The Region emphasized the closure of low-complexity sites as well as sites associated with property transfers resulting in increased outputs.
- Funding may include Cleanup and Abatement Account project funds that do not contribute to staff resources.
)