California Water Boards' Annual Performance Report - Fiscal Year  2017-18

State Board | Region 1 | Region 2 | Region 3 | Region 4 | Region 5 | Region 6 | Region 7 | Region 8 | Region 9


TARGETS AND RESOURCES: REGION 8 - SANTA ANA

GROUP: 
TARGETS AND RESOURCES - REGION 8
MEASURE: 
ALL REGIONAL TARGETS
ALL RESOURCES

Targets Achieved:
• = Less than 60% of target met
• = Target met between 60% and 80%
• = Target met at 80% or above

Santa Ana Regional Water Board Performance Summary1
Percentage of Targets Met
Area: 2798 square miles Budget: $14,524,257 Staff: 64.8
Permitting 60% • Inspections 70% • Others 67% •
1Regional Board performance summary statistics show the percentage of targets met.
 
Total Maximum Daily Load and Basin Planning
Program Budget: $1,870,621 Program Staff: 9.00
  Target Actual Achieved % of Targets Met
Pollutant/Water Body Combinations Addressed 2 1 50% •
Total Maximum Daily Loads Adopted 1 1 100% •
Basin Plan Amendments Adopted 3 2 67% •
Regional Considerations: No Regional Board Considerations Provided
NPDES Wastewater
Program Budget: $1,504,167 Program Staff: 7.70
  Target Actual Achieved % of Targets Met
Major Individual Permits Issued or Renewed 4 1 25% •
Major Individual Facilities Inspected 22 11 50% •
Minor Individual Permits Issued or Renewed 2 1 50% •
Minor Individual Facilities Inspected 4 5 125% •
Minor General Facilities Inspected 20 2 10% •
Regional Considerations: Permit renewal of Poseidon Resources Huntington Beach Desalination Facility and Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) Plants 1 and 2 were not completed in FY 16-17 for the following reasons 1)Poseidon desalination project is the first to be evaluated for compliance with the requirements of the desalination amendment to the Ocean Plan. This permit renewal is highly controversial, resource intensive, requires coordination with other state agencies and very complex requiring state and regional boards to seek expert assistance to address scientific and technical issues that emerged in order to move forward, 2) USEPA Region 9 permit lead for permit renewal of OCSD Plants 1 and 2 was re-directed to litigation support. Inspections conducted fell short of targets as staff were re-directed to Poseidon permitting activities and other Waste Discharge to Land – Wastewater priorities.
NPDES Stormwater
Program Budget: $2,385,495 Program Staff: 10.90
  Target Actual Achieved % of Targets Met
Municipal (Phase I/II Inspections) 7 7 100% •
Construction Inspections 305 919 301% •
Industrial Inspections 273 350 128% •
Regional Considerations: No Regional Board Considerations Provided
Waste Discharge to Land - Wastewater
Program Budget: $676,118 Program Staff: 2.90
  Target Actual Achieved % of Targets Met
Waste Discharge to Land Inspections 26 19 73% •
Individual Waste Discharge Requirements Updated 2 0 0% •
Regional Considerations: Region 8 Wastewater Unit has 5 staff to perform permitting, inspection and enforcement activities at NPDES and WDR permitted facilities projected to be done by 10.6 PYs. Permitting completion fell short of targets as staff focused on other regional board priorities such the Local Area Management Programs for Rancho Cucamonga and Yucaipa pursuant to the statewide OWTS policy, issuance of authorizations under regional general permits, and Quail Valley prohibition appeal and inquiries.
Land Disposal
Program Budget: $1,003,128 Program Staff: 4.00
  Target Actual Achieved % of Targets Met
Landfill Individual Permits Updated 2 4 200% •
Landfill Inspections 60 56 93% •
All Other Individual Permits Updated 1 2 200% •
All Other Inspections 44 11 25% •
Regional Considerations: No Regional Board Considerations Provided
Confined Animal Facilities (WDR, NPDES, etc.)
Program Budget: $0 Program Staff: 0.00
  Target Actual Achieved % of Targets Met
Confined Animal Facilities (WDR, NPDES, etc.) 70 83 119% •
Regional Considerations: No Regional Board Considerations Provided
Timber Harvest (Forestry)  
Program Budget: $0 Program Staff: 0.00
  Target Actual Achieved % of Targets Met
Timber Harvest Inspections 0 0  
Regional Considerations: No Regional Board Considerations Provided
Enforcement
Program Budget: $388,692 Program Staff: 1.40
  Target Actual Achieved % of Targets Met
Class 1 Priority Violations will Result in Formal Enforcement or an Investigative Order Pursuant to Water Code Section 13267 within 18 Months of Discovery 100% 0% 0% •
Regional Considerations: No Regional Board Considerations Provided
Cleanup
Program Budget: $1,647,260 Program Staff: 8.40
  Target Actual Achieved % of Targets Met
New Department of Defense Sites Into Active Remediation 1 0 0% •
New Cleanup Moved Sites Into Active Remediation 3 4 133% •
Cleanup Sites Closed 5 6 120% •
New Underground Storage Tank Sites Into Active Remediation 5 2 40% •
Underground Storage Tank Sites Projected Closed 20 25 125% •
Regional Considerations: No Regional Board Considerations Provided

WHAT THE CARD IS SHOWING

Each target card provides a direct comparison of actual outputs for the fiscal year (July 1st to June 30th) 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 before November 4, 2014 and may not reflect data input after that period.

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 circles: • = Less than 60% of target met
    • = Target met between 60% and 80%
    • = Target met at 80% or above.
  • Other Programs (budget): miscellaneous programs not included in the above.
  • Permits issued: Does not include rescissions, amendments or permit revisions that may have been included in the targets.

REGIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

Regional Considerations provided in tables above under each program section.