The California Water Boards' Annual Performance Report - Fiscal Year 2013-14

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

TARGETS AND RESOURCES: REGION 1 NORTH COAST

GROUP: TARGETS AND RESOURCES - REGION 1

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

REGIONAL BOARD TARGET RESULTS - Data last updated on:

North Coast Regional Water Board Performance Summary	Your Page Does not Support iFrames Percentage of Targets Met
Area: 22222 square miles	Budget: $9,428,790	Staff: 69.8
Permitting 50% •	Inspections 90% •	Others 75% •

Total Maximum Daily Load and Basin Planning
Program Budget: $1,940,693	Program Staff: 13.80
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Basin Plan Amendments Adopted	1	2	200% •
Pollutant/Water Body Combinations Addressed	0	0	N/A
Total Maximum Daily Loads Adopted	1	1	100% •
The adopted TMDL project addresses 8 pollutant/water body combinations covering 4,303 square miles of the Eel River, Mattole River, and Navarro River watersheds (approx. 22% of the North Coast Region). This project completed the last of the implementation plans for the region’s Consent Decree TMDLs.

NPDES Wastewater
Program Budget: $333,155	Program Staff: 1.80
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Major Individual Permits Issued or Renewed	2	2	100% •
Major Individual Facilities Inspected	8	12	150% •
Minor Individual Permits Issued or Renewed	3	3	100% •
Minor Individual Facilities Inspected	6	11	183% •
Minor General Facilities Inspected	0	0	N/A
No Regional Board Considerations Provided

NPDES Stormwater
Program Budget: $556,211	Program Staff: 4.00
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Municipal (Phase I/II Inspections)	9	9	100% •
Construction Inspections	65	76	117% •
Industrial Inspections	70	72	103% •
No Regional Board Considerations Provided

Waste Discharge to Land - Wastewater
Program Budget: $200,446	Program Staff: 1.50
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Waste Discharge to Land Inspections	52	63	121% •
Individual Waste Discharge Requirements Updated	5	2	40% •
No Regional Board Considerations Provided

Land Disposal
Program Budget: $311,446	Program Staff: 2.20
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Landfill Individual Permits Updated	2	0	0% •
Landfill Inspections	12	27	225% •
All Other Individual Permits Updated	0	0	N/A
All Other Inspections	9	3	33% •
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 Inspections	2	30	1,500% •
The target was set based on the understanding that only CAFOs regulated under waste discharge requirements would be counted, however, the actual achieved counts show all CAFO inspections, including those regulated under waivers.

Timber Harvest (Forestry)
Program Budget: $2,393,917	Program Staff: 19.40
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
Timber Harvest Inspections	150	193	129% •
No Regional Board Considerations Provided

Enforcement
Program Budget: $148,561	Program Staff: 1.00
	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%	80%	80% •
Facilities with Over $12,000 in MMPs (4 or More Violations) Not Assessed within 18 Months of Accrual	0	8	0% •
The target for “Facilities with 4 or more MMP violations Not Assessed within 18 Months of Accrual” is 0, actual achieved column shows number not addressed within 18 months. Number of facilities with 4 or more MMP violations that were addressed within 18 is not shown.

Cleanup
Program Budget: $1,117,248	Program Staff: 9.30
	Target	Actual Achieved	% of Targets Met
New Department of Defense Sites Into Active Remediation	0	0	N/A
New Cleanup Sites Into Active Remediation	4	6	150% •
Cleanup Sites Closed	15	24	160% •
New Underground Storage Tank Sites Into Active Remediation	4	16	400% •
Underground Storage Tank Sites Projected Closed	25	83	332% •
No Regional Board Considerations Provided

RESOURCES (INPUTS)

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.
Target Definitions

REGIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

Regional Considerations provided in tables above under each program section.

( Page last updated: 10/27/14 )

Region 1 (North Coast)	FY 13-14 Budget ($)	Staff (PY)	%Fees/Taxes Penalties	%Federal	%General Fund/Other	%Bonds