Welcome to the State Water Resources Control Board Welcome to the California Environmental Protection Agency
Governor's Website Visit the Water Board Members Page
Agendas
My Water Quality
Performance Report
PERFORMANCE REPORT The Water Boards...

State Water Board Logo

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

TARGETS AND RESOURCES: REGION 5 CENTRAL VALLEY


Targets Achieved
GROUP:  TARGETS AND RESOURCES - REGION 5
MEASURE:  ALL REGIONAL TARGETS
ALL RESOURCES

 

INSPECTIONS AND PERMITS  - Data last updated on: 

Region 5 (Central Valley)
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 55 49 44 111% 4 8 50% 8 $2,212,654 18.6
NPDES Minor Individual 99 28 14 200% 7 16 44% 30
NPDES Minor General Enrollees 200 6 0 NA 8 0 NA 1
Stormwater Construction 1497 402 453 89% 787 0 NA 0 $1,173,436 9.3
Stormwater Industrial 1867 207 113 183% 98 0 NA 0
Stormwater Municipal 97 4 5 80% 0 0 NA 1
Waste Discharge to Land, Municipal Waste 652 95 78 122% 7 13 146% 8 $3,345,381 31.9
Waste Discharge to Land, Industrial Waste 451 90 85 106% 6 1
Waste Discharge to Land, All Other Facilities 181 24 4 600% 6 35
Land Disposal Landfills 135 70 68 103% 4 10 40% 2 $2,852,568 23.4
Land Disposal All Other 121 44 57 77% 4 7 57% 2 $0 0.0
Timber Harvest 404 118 101 117% 0 0 NA 0 $763,176 5.4
Confined Animal Facilities 1404 256 257 100% 0 0 NA 0 $1,375,910 13.3
All Other Programs 2274 56 0 6 $4,718,215 36.5
TOTAL 9,437 1,449 931 94 $16,441,340 138.4

 

OTHER TARGETS

Region 5 (Central Valley) Actual
FY 11-12
Target
FY 11-12
%
Target
Plan and Assess

 

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

Major NPDES Permits Renewed: The Central Valley Water Board targeted 3 major permits to be renewed in FY 11/12. The chart reflects a target of 8 which was determined by State Board. The Region exceeded its target by renewing 4 major permits. In addition to the 4 major permits the Region also rescinded 1 major permit and revised 3 major permits to reflect site-specific updated requirements.

Minor NPDES Permits Renewed: The Central Valley Water Board exceeded its target of 16 by renewing 18 minor permits. The chart does not reflect 6 minor permits that were issued through General Order coverage. An additional 5 minor permits are not reflected due to data entry error.

Land Disposal Landfills: The target was not achieved primarily because staff, were redirect to work on the highly controversial Kettleman Hills Landfill permit.

Land Disposal All Other: Staff were redirected to work on several waivers for the Department of Transportation dealing with lead contaminated soils. In addition many dischargers failed to complete CEQA as planned, which delayed their projects.

Pollution/Water Body Combinations Addressed, TMDLís and Water Quality Objectives Adopted: Completion of the Central Valley Pesticide TMDL, which was scheduled for adoption in 2011-2012, was delayed due to staff shortages for most of the year and the need for an expanded effort on TMDL implementation in NPDES permits due to ongoing detections of these pesticides in stormwater and wastewater. Delay of the TMDL prevented the completion of Pollution/Water Body Combinations Addressed and Water Quality Objectives Adopted.

New DoD Sites into Active Remediation: The majority of sites that were targeted to go into remediation were located at the former McClellan Air Force Base and due to federal government budget reductions in FY 2011-2012 these projects were moved into FY 2012-2013.

New SCP Sites into Active Remediation: A minimum of 18 sites had unaccounted for remediationís and are not reflected in the chart.

( Page last updated:  10/12/12 )

 
 

.