The California Water Boards' Annual Performance Report - Fiscal Year 2011-12

TARGETS AND RESOURCES: REGION 3 CENTRAL COAST

Targets Achieved

INSPECTIONS AND PERMITS  - Data last updated on:  09-18-2012 (2:32 pm)

Region 3 (Central Coast) Regional Considerations	Facilities Regulated	Facilities Inspected			Permits Issued, Revised and Renewed			Enforcement (Compliance & Penalty Actions)	Budget	Staff (PY)
Program		Actual	Target	% Target	Actual	Target	% Target
NPDES Major Individual	22	10	7	143%	1	4	25%	2	$414,736	3.7
NPDES Minor Individual	17	4	5	80%	2	5	40%	0
NPDES Minor General Enrollees	70	1	0	NA	4	0	NA	1
Stormwater Construction	402	20	10	200%	191	0	NA	0	$545,559	5.0
Stormwater Industrial	395	16	5	320%	13	0	NA	0
Stormwater Municipal	45	6	10	60%	0	0	NA	0
Waste Discharge to Land, Municipal Waste	175	17	30	57%	3	4	200%	2	$601,052	5.4
Waste Discharge to Land, Industrial Waste	121	13	10	130%	2			0
Waste Discharge to Land, All Other Facilities	213	1	25	4%	3			0
Land Disposal Landfills	42	22	22	100%	0	1	0%	0	$409,596	2.7
Land Disposal All Other	8	1	0	NA	1	0	NA	0	$0	0.0
Timber Harvest	93	0	0	NA	0	0	NA	0	$0	0.0
Confined Animal Facilities	3	0	0	NA	0	0	NA	0	$0	0.0
All Other Programs	245	11			0			2	$1,352,440	10.9
TOTAL	1,851	122			220			7	$3,323,383	27.7

OTHER TARGETS

Region 3 (Central Coast)	Actual FY 11-12	Target FY 11-12	% Target
Plan and Assess
Implementation Provisions Adopted	0	0	NA
Pollutant/Water Body Combinations Addressed	23	36	64%
Total Maximum Daily Loads Adopted	3	4	75%
Use Attainability Analyses Adopted	0	0	NA
Water Quality Objectives Adopted	0	0	NA
SWAMP Analyses Conducted	2,344	1,987	118%
SWAMP Site Visits	1,004	686	146%
Regulate
NPDES Wastewater Major Facilities All Electronic Reports (eSMR)	22	23	96%
Enforcement
Mandatory Minimum Penalty Violations Not Addressed Within 18 Months of Discovery	138	0
Clean Up
New DoD Sites Into Active Remediation	1	2	50%
New SCP Sites Into Active Remediation	6	6	100%
Cleanup Program Sites Projected Closed	6	10	60%
New UST Sites Into Active Remediation	5	7	71%
Underground Storage Tank Sites Projected Closed	16	17	94%

RESOURCES (INPUTS)

WHAT THE CARD IS SHOWING

Each target card provides a direct comparison of actual outputs for FY 2011-12 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 27, 2011 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. 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 arrows: = Less than 80% of target met
  = Target met between 80% and 90%
  = Target met at 90% 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.
• Target Definitions FY 2011-2012

REGIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

Land Disposal Program

Region 3�s Land Disposal staff did not meet the anticipated target for the number of Permits Issued, Revised and Renewed for Land Disposal Landfills. The target was not met because there was an unexpected requirement for a new Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) for a Class II Surface Impoundments which fits under the Permit Issued, Revised and Renewed for Land Disposal All Other category. Region 3 did not have the staff resources to complete the planned renewal of the Land Disposal Landfill WDR and the unexpected new Land Disposal All Other WDR. Therefore, R3 needed to exchange our staff time to complete the new WDR versus the planned update to an existing WDR.

Site Cleanup and Underground Storage Program

 

R3�s site cleanup program staff did not meet four out of ten anticipated Cleanup Program Sites projected closures. However, these four sites no longer pose a threat to the environment and we are in the process of finalizing these closures after we receive either well abandonment activity completion reports or finalized deed restrictions.

Region 3 experienced a reduction in staff in January of 2012 which resulted in fewer UST cases moved into remediation than originally anticipated. Moving forward targets will be adjusted to reflect available resources.

( Page last updated:  10/12/12 )