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

INSPECTIONS AND PERMITS  - Data last updated on: 

Region 6 (Lahontan) 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	3	2	2	100%	0	1	0%	0	$279,211	2.3
NPDES Minor Individual	10	6	6	100%	1	1	100%	0
NPDES Minor General Enrollees	15	0	0	NA	1	0	NA	0
Stormwater Construction	328	43	30	143%	155	0	NA	0	$278,163	2.7
Stormwater Industrial	230	19	22	86%	13	0	NA	0
Stormwater Municipal	10	0	1	0%	0	0	NA	0
Waste Discharge to Land, Municipal Waste	82	34	36	94%	1	1	100%	1	$765,993	7.1
Waste Discharge to Land, Industrial Waste	14	2	5	40%	0			0
Waste Discharge to Land, All Other Facilities	177	19	15	127%	0			22
Land Disposal Landfills	44	29	18	161%	0	2	0%	0	$708,990	5.6
Land Disposal All Other	53	22	15	147%	1	4	25%	3	$0	0.0
Timber Harvest	54	0	20	0%	0	0	NA	0	$281,826	2.5
Confined Animal Facilities	5	1	0	NA	0	0	NA	0	$0	0.0
All Other Programs	364	31			0			17	$3,065,468	15.4
TOTAL	1,389	208			172			43	$5,379,651	35.6

OTHER TARGETS

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 This includes the number of permits revised, which should include the number of permits reviewed, revised and/or rescinded.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

• At least thirty percent of the WDR resources were focused on enforcement actions and follow-up activities directed at reducing nitrogen and salt discharges from dairies and wastewater treatment facilities and ensuring replacement water was provided to persons with affected supply wells.

• TMDL resources were focused on implementing adopted TMDLs, including Lake Tahoe and Truckee River. In December 2011, the region adopted a Municipal Storm Water NPDES Permit for the local governments on the California side of the Tahoe Basin. This Permit requires implementation of the Lake Tahoe TMDL including use of an innovative Water Quality Crediting Program to track pollutant reductions. Similar requirements have been incorporated into the draft Caltrans Statewide Storm Water Permit.

• Region focused most of its Site Cleanup resources on enforcement actions requiring Pacific Gas and Electric to continue its investigation and cleanup efforts of hexavalent chromium contamination in Hinkley, California and to provide whole household replacement water to affected individuals.

• The region adopted a Basin Plan amendment replacing its pesticide objective with a waste discharge prohibition and exemption criteria. The exemption criteria allows for aquatic pesticide applications to protect public health and safety and restore ecosystem integrity when waters are threatened or impacted from aquatic invasive species.

• Region did not meet targets for permitting due to regional board quorum problems (delayed some permitting to July 2012) and due to discharger delays in completing permit applications.

• Region adopted individual waste discharge requirements for 10,000 acre timber harvest/fuel reduction project in the Lake Tahoe Basin to ensure sediment does not adversely affect Lake Tahoe. Region renewed grazing waiver for Bridgeport Valley ranchers requiring increased implementation of measures to reduce bacteria in impaired waters of the area.

( Page last updated:  10/12/12 )