[an error occurred while processing this directive]

The California Water Boards' Annual Performance Report - Fiscal Year 2009-10

TARGETS AND RESOURCES: REGION 3 CENTRAL COAST

Display a PDF version of this page for easy printing

 

GROUP: TARGETS AND RESOURCES - REGION 3
MEASURE: ALL REGIONAL TARGETS
ALL RESOURCES

MEASUREMENTS
INSPECTIONS AND PERMITS

Region 3 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(not including revised and rescinded)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 23 15 10 150% 5 7 71% 21 $336,314 3.7
NPDES MINOR
(including general enrollees)
84 8 4 200% 7 9 78%
STORMWATER CONSTRUCTION 241 14 12 117% 81 NA NA 1 $419,390 5.0
STORMWATER INDUSTRIAL 394 23 8 288% 4 NA NA 47
STORMWATER MUNICIPAL 33 1 15 7% 7 NA NA 15
WASTE DISCHARGE
REQUIREMENTS
391 93 40 233% 7 4 175% 20 $483,782 5.4
LAND DISPOSAL 58 41 30 137% 3 2 150% 2 $240,345 1.6
ALL OTHER PROGRAMS 488 5 27 18 $627,867 7.8
TOTAL 1,712 200 141 124 $2,107,698 23.5

 

OTHER TARGETS

Region 3 FY 09-10
Actual
Target
FY 09-10
% TARGET
1 Plan & Assess
# of combinations added/removed from 303(d) list (impaired waters) 559 545 103%
# of Implementation Provisions Adopted 0 12 0%
# of pollutant/waterbody combinations addressed 0 24 0%
# of SWAMP analyses conducted 1,186 1,030 115%
# of SWAMP Site Visits 629 538 117%
# of Total Maximum Daily Loads Adopted 0 2 0%
# of Use Attainability Analysis Adopted 0 1 0%
# of Water Quality Objectives Adopted 0 0 NA
2 Regulate  
# of groundwater cleanup moved to remediation or interim remediation 48 26 185%
# of Site Cleanup Program sites projected closed 9 9 100%
# of Underground Storage Tank sites projected closed 15 17 88%
3 Enforcement  
Mandatory Minimum Penalty Violations Not Addressed Within 18 Months of Discovery (as of June 30, 2010) 81 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. 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

REGIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

( Updated 12/6/10 ) This page is being tracked by Google Analytics

 
 

.