COMPLIANCE REVIEW REPORT 

STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD 

Compliance Review Unit 
State Personnel Board 
July 12, 2016 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 
Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... 1 
Background ...................................................................................................................... 2 
Scope and Methodology ................................................................................................... 3 
Findings and Recommendations ...................................................................................... 4 
Examinations .............................................................................................................. 4 
Appointments .............................................................................................................. 8 
Equal Employment Opportunity ................................................................................ 15 
Personal Services Contracts..................................................................................... 18 
Mandated Training .................................................................................................... 21 
Departmental Response ................................................................................................. 24 
SPB Reply ...................................................................................................................... 24 

INTRRODUCTIOORRODUCTIOON 

Established by the California CConstitutionn, the Statee Personneel Board (the SPB or BBoard) 
is chargged with eenforcing aand adminnistering thhe civil serrvice statuutes, presccribing 
probatioonary periodds and classsifications, adopting rregulations, and reviewwing discipplinary 
actions and merit-rrelated apppeals. The SPB overssees the mmerit-based recruitmennt and 
selectionn process for the hirring of oveer 200,000 state empployees. Thhese emplooyees 
provide critical servvices to thee people of California, including bbut not limitted to, proteecting 
life and property, mmanaging eemergencyy operationss, providingg educationn, promotinng the 
public hhealth, and preserving the eenvironment. The SPPB provides directioon to 
departmments througgh the Boarrd’s decisioons, rules, ppolicies, andd consultattion. 

Pursuannt to Governnment Codee section 1 8661, the SSPB’s Commpliance Reeview Unit ( CRU) 
conducts complian ce reviewss of appointting authoriity’s personnnel practicces in five aareas: 
examinaations, appointments, equal employment oopportunity (EEO), peersonal serrvices 
contractts (PSC’s), and manddated traininng to ensuure compliaance with ccivil servicee laws 
and boaard regulatioons. The p urpose of tthese revieews is to ennsure state agencies aare in 
compliannce with mmerit-relatedd laws, rulees, and poolicies and to identify and sharee best 
practices identified during the reviews. TThe SPB coonducts theese reviewss on a threee-year 
cycle. 

The CRRU may also conduct special invvestigationss in response to a specific requeest or 
when the SPB obtaains informaation suggeesting a pottential meritt-related vioolation. 

EXECUTTIVE SUMMMARY 

The CRRU conductted a routinne compliaance revieww of State Water Reesources C ontrol 
Board (SSWRCB) personnel practices in the areas of examinaations, appoointments, EEO, 
and PSCC’s from MMay 1, 20155, through February 229, 2016, aand mandatted trainingg from 
Februaryy 28, 20144, through February 29, 2016. The followwing table summarizees the 
compliannce review findings. 

AArea Finding Severityy 
Examminations 
Examinations Commplied with Civil Servic In Compliance andd Board Ruules 
Appointments 
Probatioonary Evaluuations Werre Not Prov 
SerioussAll Appoointments RReviewed 
Appointments 
Appointment Docuumentation Was Not K 
Serioussthe Approppriate Amouunt of Time 
Appointments Applic 
A 
cations Wer 
Accepted A 
re Not Date 
After the Fin 
e Stamped a 
nal File Date 
and/or 
e 
Non-Serio 
or Technic 
ous 
cal 

1 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

AArea Area Finding Severityy 
Equal E 
Opp 
mployment 
portunity 
t Complainants Were Not Notif ied of the R 
Very Serioousfor Dellays in Deccisions Withhin the Pres 
TTime Periodd 
Equal Employmentt A Writtten Upwardd Mobility Plan Has No 
Very SerioousOppportunity EEstablishedd 
Personaal Services Persoonal Servicees Contractts Complied In ComplianceConntracts Proceduural Requirrements 
Mandateed Trainingg 
Supervvisory Trainning Was Noot Provided 
Very SerioousSSupervisorss 
Mandateed Trainingg 
Sexual Harassmennt Training Was Not P 
Very Serioousfor AAll Supervissors 

A color-ccoded systeem is used to identify the severityy of the violations as ffollows: 

. 
RRed = Very Serious 
. 
OOrange = SSerious 

. 
YYellow = Noon-serious oor Technicaal 

. 
GGreen = In Compliancee 

BACCKGROUND 

The SWWRCB was created bby the Leggislature in 1967. Thee SWRCB ’s mission is to 
preservee, enhancee, and restoore the quaality of Califfornia’s waater resourcces and driinking 
water foor the proteection of thhe environmment, public health, all beneficial uses, aand to 
ensure pproper wateer resourcee allocationn and efficieent use for the benefiit of presennt and 
future generations. The joint authority oof water alllocation annd water qquality proteection 
enables the SWRCCB to providde comprehhensive pro otection for CCalifornia'ss waters. 

The SWWRCB consiists of five full-time saalaried memmbers, eachh filling a d ifferent speecialty 
position. Each boaard membeer is appoi nted to a four-year tterm by thee Governor and 
confirmeed by the Senate. 

There are nine Reegional Watter Quality Control Booards (Regiional Boardds). The mission 
of the Regional Boards is to develoop and ennforce watter quality objectivess and 
implemeentation plaans that wwill best prootect the bbeneficial uuses of thee state’s wwaters, 
recognizzing local d ifferences in climate, ttopographyy, geology, aand hydroloogy. 

2 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

There iss 2,202 state and reegional boaard staff, sspread throoughout 177 different state 
locationss including the regionnal board ooffices, with the majoority of stafff located iin the 
Sacrameento area. The SW RCB staff consists of engineeers, geologgists, scienntists, 
informattion technollogy professsionals, and administrrative support. 
ss 2,202 state and reegional boaard staff, sspread throoughout 177 different state 
locationss including the regionnal board ooffices, with the majoority of stafff located iin the 
Sacrameento area. The SW RCB staff consists of engineeers, geologgists, scienntists, 
informattion technollogy professsionals, and administrrative support. 

SSCOPE AND METHODDOLOGY 

The scoope of the compliancee review wwas limited to reviewiing SWRCB examinaations, 
appointmments, EEOO program, and PSC’ss from Mayy 1, 2015, tthrough Febbruary 29, 2016, 
and manndated trainning from FFebruary 288, 2014, thrrough Februuary 29, 20016. The prrimary 
objectivee of the revview was to determine if the SWRRCB personnnel practicces, policiess, and 
proceduures complied with sstate civil service laaws and bboard reguulations, annd to 
recommmend correcctive action for those deficiencies identified. 

A cross--section of SWRCB exxaminationss and appoointments wwere selecteed to ensurre that 
various samples off examinatioons and apppointment types, classsifications, and levelss were 
reviewedd. The CRRU examineed the doccumentatio on that the SWRCB provided, wwhich 
includedd examination plans, eexaminationn bulletins, job analyses, 511b’s,, scoring reesults, 
notice oof personnnel action (NOPA) foorms, vacaancy postinngs, appliccation screeening 
criteria, hiring interrview ratingg criteria, ccertification lists, transsfer movemment workshheets, 
employmment historyy records, ccorrespondence, and pprobation reeports. 

The review of the SWRCB EEEO progra d examiningg written EEs

m included EO policies and 
proceduures; the EEEO officeer’s role, dduties, andd reporting relationshhip; the internal 
discriminnation commplaint proocess; thee upward mobility program; the reasoonable 
accommmodation program; thhe discrimiination commplaint proocess; andd the Disability 
Advisoryy Committeee (DAC). 

The SWWRCB’s PS C’s were aalso revieweed.1 It was beyond the scope off the complliance 
review tto make coonclusions aas to whethher SWRC B justificatiions for thee contracts were 

1 If an emmployee organnization requeests the SPBB to review anny personal sservices contrract during thhe SPB 
compliancce review perriod or prior too the complettion of the fin nal compliance review repoort, the SPB wwill not 
audit the contract. Insstead, the SPB will revieew the contraact pursuant t to its statuttory and reg ulatory 
process. IIn this instancce, none of the reviewed PPSC’s were chhallenged. 

3 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

legally ssufficient. TThe revieww was limiteed to whetther SWRCCB practicees, policiess, and 
proceduures relativee to PSC’s ccomplied wwith proceduural requireements. 
ssufficient. TThe revieww was limiteed to whetther SWRCCB practicees, policiess, and 
proceduures relativee to PSC’s ccomplied wwith proceduural requireements. 

In addition, the SWWRCB’s mmandated trraining wass reviewedd to ensuree all emplooyees 
requiredd to file stattements of economic interest werre providedd ethics traiining and thhat all 
supervissors were pprovided baasic supervisory and ssexual haraassment preevention traaining 
within sttatutory timelines. 

On Junee 23, 2016, an exit conference wwas held witth the SWRRCB to expplain and disscuss 
the CRUU’s initial finndings and recommenndations. Onn July 1, 20016, the CRRU receive d and 
carefullyy reviewed the responsse, which iss attached tto this final compliancce report. 

FINDINGS ANDD RECOMMMENDATIONNS 

Examinaations 

Examinaations to esstablish an eligible list must be coompetitive aand of suchh characterr as to 
fairly tesst and deteermine the qualifications, fitness, and abilityy of compeetitors to peerform 
the dutiees of the class of posiition for which he or she seeks aappointmennt. (Gov. Coode, § 
18930.) Examinatioons may bee assembleed or unasssembled, written or oraal, or in thee form 
of a deemonstratioon of skillss, or any ccombination of thosee tests. (Ibbid.) The BBoard 
establishhes minimum qualificcations forr determining the fitnness and qualificatio ns of 
employeees for eac h class of pposition and for appliccants for exxaminationss. (Gov. Coode, § 
18931.) Within a rreasonablee time befoore the schheduled datte of the eexaminationn, the 
designatted appoinnting poweer shall annnounce orr advertisee the exammination foor the 
establishhment of e ligible lists.. (Gov. Codde, § 189333, subd. (a).) The advvertisementt shall 
contain such informmation as thhe date andd place of tthe examinnation and tthe nature of theo 
minimumm qualificattions. (Ibid.)) Every appplicant for eexaminationn shall file aan applicattion in 
the officce of the departmennt or a designated aappointing power as directed in the 
examinaation annouuncement. ((Gov. Codee, § 18934..) Generallyy, the final earned ratting of 
each peerson competing in anyy examination is to bee determineed by the wweighted av erage 
of the eearned ratinngs on all phases of the examiination. (Goov. Code, § 18936.) Each 
competittor shall bbe notified in writing of the reesults of thhe examinnation when the 
employmment list ressulting fromm the examination is esstablished. (Gov. Code, § 18938.5.) 

During tthe period under review, the SWWRCB connducted 11 5 examinaations. The CRU 
reviewedd 25 of thosse examinaations, whicch are listedd below: 

4 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

CClassificatioon Examinatio 
Type 
E 
Comp 
Exam 
ponents 
Final File 
Date 
No. o 
Applicat 
of 
tions 
Assistaant Chief Coounsel DDepartmen 
Promo QQAP 10/21/20155 7 
Associaate Budget Analyst DDepartmen 
Promo 
tal Qual 
App 
Pane 
ification 
praisal 
l (QAP)2 
10/27/20155 4 
Associa 
Engine 
ate Sanitary 
er 
DDepartmen 
Promo 
Educa 
Expe 
ation and 
erience 3 9/30/20155 1 
CEA A, 
Resear 
Perform 
, Director, O 
rch Plannin 
mance 
Open 
State 
Qualif 
(S 
ement Of 
fications 
OQ)4 
12/23/20155 21 
CEA B, 
Directo 
, Chief Dep 
r 
p Open SSOQ 10/30/20155 18 
CEA B, 
Division 
, Deputy Di 
n of Water Q 
rector, 
Quality Open SSOQ 12/23/20155 12 
Engineering Geoloogist Open 
Train 
Expe 
(T 
ning and 
erience 
T&E)5 
7/31/20155 9 

2 The quaalification appraisal panell (QAP) interrview is the ooral compon ent of an exxamination w hereby 
competitoors appear beefore a panel of two or m ore evaluatorrs. Candidatees are rated and ranked aagainst 
one anothher based on an assessmeent of their abbility to performm in a job cla ssification. 

3 In an edducation and eexperience (EE&E) examinaation, one or more raters rreviews the aapplicants’ Staandard 
678 appli cation forms,, and scores and ranks thhem accordinng to a predeetermined ratting scale thaat may 
include yeears of relevaant higher eduucation, profeessional licennses or certificcations, and/ or years of reelevant 
work expeerience. 

4 In a staatement of qqualifications (SOQ’s) exaamination, appplicants subbmit a writtenn summary oof their 
qualificatioons and expeerience relateed to a publisshed list of deesired qualificcations. Rateers, typically ssubject 
matter experts, evaluatte the responnses accordin g to a predet ermined ratinng scale desiggned to assesss their 
ability to pperform in a joob classification, assign sccores and ran nk the compettitors in a list. 

5 The training and expperience (T&EE) examinatioon is administtered either oonline or in wwriting, and assks the 
applicant to answer multiple-choicce questionss about his or her level l of training and/or expeerience 
performin g certain taskks typically p erformed by those in this classificationn. Responsess yield point vvalues, 
which aree totaled by t he online sysstem or a de partment exaam analyst, aand then ass igned a perc entage 
score. 

5 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

CClassificatioon Examinatio 
Type 
E 
Comp 
Exam 
ponents 
Final File 
Date 
No. o 
Applicat 
of 
tions 
Engineering Geoloogist Open TT&E 8/31/20155 16 
Environ 
Manage 
nmental Pro 
er I (Superv 
ogram 
visor) 
DDepartmen 
Promo TT&E 6/30/20155 2 
Environ 
Manage 
nmental Pro 
er I (Superv 
ogram 
visor) 
DDepartmen 
Promo TT&E 8/31/20155 4 
Environ 
Manage 
nmental Pro 
er I (Superv 
ogram 
visor) 
DDepartmen 
Promo TT&E 9/30/20155 3 
Environ 
Manage 
nmental Pro 
er II 
DDepartmen 
Promo TT&E 6/30/20155 2 
Environnmental Sciientist Open TT&E 7/31/20155 18 
Environnmental Sciientist Open TT&E 8/31/20155 13 
Environnmental Sciientist DDepartmen 
Promo TT&E 9/30/20155 14 
Principaal Engineerr, DWP DDepartmen 
Promo TT&E 1/28/20166 10 
Senior 
Geolog 
Engineerin 
gist Open TT&E 6/30/20155 4 
Senior 
Geolog 
Engineerin 
gist Open TT&E 7/31/20155 6 
Senior 
Geolog 
Engineerin 
gist Open TT&E 9/30/20155 4 
Senior 
Scientis 
Environme 
st (Speciali 
ntalist 
st) Open TT&E 7/31/20155 5 
Senior 
Scientis 
Environme 
st (Speciali 
ntalist 
st) Open TT&E 8/31/20155 12 

6 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

CClassificatioon Examinatio 
Type 
E 
Comp 
Exam 
ponents 
Final File 
Date 
No. o 
Applicat 
of 
tions 
Senior 
Scientis 
Environme 
st (Speciali 
ntalist 
st) Open TT&E 9/30/20155 6 
Senior 
Scientis 
Environme 
st (Supervis 
ntalist 
sor) Open TT&E 8/31/20155 12 
Senior 
Scientis 
Environme 
st (Supervis 
ntalist 
sor) Open TT&E 12/31/20155 10 
Senior 
Control 
Water Res 
l Engineer Open TT&E 7/31/20155 2 

FINDINNG NO. 1 – Examinaations Commplied witth Civil Seervice Lawws and Booard 
Rules 

The SWWRCB admministered 119 open examinationns and six departmenntal promootional 
examinaations to crreate eligibble lists froom which too make apppointmentss. For all oof the 
examinaations, the SSWRCB puublished andd distributeed examinattion bulletinns containinng the 
requiredd informatioon. Applicattions receivved by thee SWRCB wwere acceppted prior tto the 
final filinng date andd were therreafter propperly assesssed to dettermine whhether appliicants 
met the minimum qqualificationns (MQ’s) ffor admittance to the examinatioon. The SWWRCB 
notified applicants as to whether they qualified to take the examinaation, and those 
applicannts who me t the MQ’s were also notified aboout the nexxt phase of the examinnation 
process. After all pphases of thhe examinaation processs were coompleted, thhe score off each 
competittor was coomputed, and a list of eligiblee candidattes was eestablished.. The 
examinaation resultss listed thee names off all successsful compeetitors arranged in ordder of 
the scorre received by rank. Coompetitors were then notified of ttheir final scores. 

The CRU found noo deficiencies in the eexaminationns that the SWRCB cconducted dduring 
the commpliance review periodd. Accordinngly, the SSWRCB fullfilled its reesponsibilitiies to 
administter those exxaminationss in compliaance with ccivil service laws and bboard rules. 

7 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

Appointmments ppointmments 

In all caases not exxcepted or exempted by Article VII of the California CConstitutionn, the 
appointing power must fill positions bby appointtment, including casees of trannsfers, 
reinstateements, proomotions, aand demotioons in strictt accordancce with the Civil Servicce Act 
and Boaard rules. (GGov. Code, § 19050.) Appointmeents made ffrom eligiblee lists, by wway of 
transfer,, or by wayy of reinstaatement, mmust be made on the basis of mmerit and fittness, 
which reequires connsideration of each inddividual’s joob-related qqualificationns for a possition, 
includingg his or heer knowleddge, skills, abilities, eexperience, and physsical and mmental 
fitness. ((Cal. Code Regs., tit. 22, § 250, suubd. (a).) 

During tthe compliaance revieww period, thhe SWRCBB made 4448 appointmments. The CRU 
reviewedd 131 of thoose appointments, which are listeed below: 

Claassification Apppointment 
Type Tenuure Timme Base No. of 
Appointmeents 
A 
Adm 
Analys 
S 
Associate 
ministrative 
st (Account 
System) 
t Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 2 
Assoociate Budg 
Analyst Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 2 
AAttorney Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 6 
Atttorney III Certtification Lisst Limit 
Ter 
ted 
rm FFulltime 1 
Atttorney III Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 4 
Atttorney IV Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 5 
En 
G 
ngineering 
Geologist Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 10 
Env 
Progra 
(M 
vironmental 
am Manage 
Managerial) 
Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Env 
Progra 
(Su 
vironmental 
am Manage 
upervisory) 
Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 3 
Env 
S 
vironmental 
Scientist Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 5 

8 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

Claaassification Apppointment 
Type Tenuure Timme Base No. of 
Appointmeents 
Execuutive Assistaant Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 2 
Grad 
A 
duate Lega 
Assistant Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 2 
Legaal Secretaryy Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 2 
Office 
(Typ 
e Technicia 
ping) – LEA 
an 
P Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Senio 
G 
r Engineeri 
Geologist Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 10 
Senior 
Scient 
Environme 
ist (Special 
ental 
list) Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 5 
Senior 
S 
(Su 
Environme 
Scientist 
upervisory) 
Certtification Lisst Limit 
Ter 
ted 
rm FFulltime 2 
Senior 
S 
(Su 
Environme 
Scientist 
upervisory) 
Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 7 
Seniorr Legal Analyst Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Senio 
S 
or Personn 
Specialist Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 2 
Sta 
M 
aff Services 
Manager I 
Certtification Lis Permaanent FFulltime 2 
Sta 
M 
aff Services 
anager III 
Certtification Lis Permaanent FFulltime 2 
Su 
En 
G 
upervising 
ngineering 
Geologist 
Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 3 
Wate 
Cont 
er Resourc 
trol Enginee 
e 
er Certtification Lisst Permaanent FFulltime 10 
Adm 
As 
ministrative 
ssistant II 
M 
Rei 
Mandatory 
nstatementt Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Associaate Accoun 
Analyst 
M 
Rei 
Mandatory 
nstatementt Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Su 
En 
G 
upervising 
ngineering 
Geologist 
M 
Rei 
Mandatory 
nstatementt Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Atttorney III P 
Rei 
ermissive 
nstatementt Permaanent FFulltime 1 

9 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

Claaassification Apppointment 
Type Tenuure Timme Base No. of 
Appointmeents 
En 
G 
ngineering 
Geologist 
P 
Rei 
ermissive 
nstatementt Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Env 
S 
vironmental 
Scientist 
P 
Rei 
ermissive 
nstatementt Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Env 
S 
vironmental 
Scientist 
P 
Rei 
ermissive 
nstatementt 
Limit 
Ter 
ted 
rm FFulltime 1 
Senior 
Scient 
Environme 
ist (Special 
ental 
list) 
P 
Rei 
ermissive 
nstatementt Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Princi 
Drin 
P 
pal Engine 
nking Water 
Program 
er, 
r 
Te 
Au 
U 
emporary 
thorization 
Utilization 
Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Adm 
As 
ministrative 
ssistant II TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Assoc 
E 
ciate Sanita 
Engineer TTransfer Limit 
Ter 
ted 
rm FFulltime 3 
Assoc 
E 
ciate Sanita 
Engineer TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 2 
Data 
M 
a processin 
Manager II TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 1 
En 
G 
ngineering 
Geologist TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 5 
Env 
Progra 
vironmental 
am Manage 
l 
er II TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Env 
S 
vironmental 
Scientist TTransfer Limit 
Ter 
ted 
rm FFulltime 1 
Env 
S 
vironmental 
Scientist TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 5 
Resea 
Sp 
(G 
Informa 
arch Progra 
pecialist II 
Geographic 
ation Syste 
am 
ms) 
TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Sanittary Engineer TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Senio 
G 
r Engineeri 
Geologist TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 3 
Senior 
Scient 
Environme 
ist (Special 
ental 
list) TTransfer Limit 
Ter 
ted 
rm FFulltime 1 

10 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

Claaassification Apppointment 
Type Tenuure Timme Base No. of 
Appointmeents 
Senior 
Scient 
Environme 
ist (Special 
ental 
list) TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 2 
Senio 
Syst 
(S 
or Informatio 
ems Analys 
Specialist) 
TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Sen 
E 
nior Sanitary 
Engineer TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Su 
En 
G 
upervising 
ngineering 
Geologist 
TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Syste 
Sp 
(T 
em Softwar 
pecialist II 
Technical) 
TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 1 
Syste 
Sp 
(T 
em Softwar 
pecialist III 
Technical) 
TTransfer Permaanent FFulltime 1 

FINDINNG NO. 2 – Probatio 
Appointm 
onary Eva 
ments Rev 
aluations 
viewed 
Were NNot Proviided for All 
Summaary: The SWR 
probation 
RCB did no 
nary reports 
ot prepare, 
s of perform 
, complete, 
mance. 
, and/or retain 20 reqquired 

Classificattion Appoin 
Ty 
ntment 
ype 
No. of 
Appointmeents 
No. o 
Pr 
of Uncomple 
rob. Report 
eted 
ts 
Asso 
Analys 
ociate Admi 
t (Accounti 
inistrative 
ng System)) 
L 
Appoin 
ist 
ntment 1 3 
Associate Sanitarry Engineerr L 
Appoin 
ist 
ntment 1 2 
Attorney L 
Appoin 
ist 
ntment 2 3 
Attorney IV L 
Appoin 
ist 
ntment 1 1 
Enggineering GGeologist L 
Appoin 
ist 
ntment 1 1 
Envi 
Man 
ironmental 
nager I (Ma 
Program 
nagerial) 
L 
Appoin 
ist 
ntment 1 1 

11 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

Classificattion ttion Appoin 
Ty 
ntment 
ype 
No. of 
Appointmeents 
No. o 
Pr 
of Uncomple 
rob. Report 
eted 
ts 
Envi 
Ma 
ironmental 
nager I (Sp 
Program 
pecialist) 
L 
Appoin 
ist 
ntment 2 3 
Enviironmental Scientist L 
Appoin 
ist 
ntment 1 2 
Exxecutive Asssistant L 
Appoin 
ist 
ntment 1 1 
Seenior Engin 
Geologi 
neering 
st 
L 
Appoin 
ist 
ntment 1 1 
Sen 
Sc 
nior Environ 
cientist (Spe 
nmental 
ecialist) 
L 
Appoin 
ist 
ntment 1 1 
Wateer Resource 
Enginee 
es Control 
er 
L 
Appoin 
ist 
ntment 1 1 
Total 14 20 

Criteria: 
A new probationaryy period iss not required when an employyee is 
appointedd by reinstaatement witth a right oof return. (CCal. Code RRegs., 
tit. 2, § 3322, subd. (d)(2).) Hoowever, thee service of a probationary 
period is required wwhen an emmployee ennters state civil servicce by 
permanennt appointmment from aan employmment list. (CCal. Code RRegs., 
tit. 2, § 3222, subd. (a).) In addiition, unless waived bby the appoointing 
power, a new probaationary perriod is requuired when an employyee is 
appointedd to a poosition und er the following circcumstancess: (1) 
without a break in sservice in thhe same cl ass in whicch the empployee 
has commpleted thee probationnary periood, but unnder a difffferent 
appointing power; a nd (2) withhout a break in servicee to a classs with 
substantiaally the same or loweer level of duties andd responsibbilities 
and salarry range ass a class inn which thee employeee has comppleted 
the probaationary perriod. (Cal. CCode Regss., tit. 2, § 3322, subd. (c)(1) 
& (2).) 

During thhe probationnary periodd, the appoointing powwer is requirred to 
evaluate the work and efficieency of a probationeer at sufficciently 
frequent intervals to keep thee employeee adequattely inform ed of 
progress on the job.. (Gov. Codde, § 191722; Cal. Codde Regs., titt. 2, § 
599.795.)) The appointing poweer must preepare a written appraiisal of 
performance each oone-third off the probaationary period. (Cal. Code 
Regs., tit.. 2, § 599.7795.) 

12 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

Severityy: yy: Serious. The probaationary peeriod is thee final step in the seleection 
process to ensure that the individual selected ccan successsfully 
perform the full sccope of thheir job duties. Failing to usee the 
probationnary period to assist aan employeee in improoving his oor her 
performance or termminating thee appointmeent upon deeterminatio n that 
the appoointment is not a goood job/persson match is unfair tto the 
employeee and servees to erode the quality of state goovernment. 
Cause: The SWRRCB states that it is thhe responsibility of eaach supervissor to 
complete probationaary reports timely andd to ensuree the reportts are 
sent to the Humaan Resourrces Brancch for plaacement inn the 
employeee’s official personnel file. The SSWRCB dooes not haave a 
centralizeed process for tracking or reportting to ensuure probationary 
evaluationns are commpleted. 
Action: It is recoommended that withinn 60 days of the Exeecutive Offficer’s 
approval of these findings aand recommmendations, the SWWRCB 
submit too the CRU a written ccorrective aaction plann that addreesses 
the corrections the department will impleement to ennsure confoormity 
with the probationaary requiremments of GGovernmennt Code seection 
19172.

FINDINNG NO. 3 – Appointm 
Amount 
ment Docu 
of Time 
umentationn Was Not Kept for thhe Appropriate 
Summaary: 

Criteria: 

The SWRRCB failed to retain personnel records suuch as NOOPA’s, 
VPOS BBulletins, and appliications. SSpecificallyy, of the 131 
appointments revieewed, the SWRCB did not reetain 10 VVPOS 
Bulletins and 20 NOOPAs. Addditionally, twwo of the 1131 appointment 
files revieewed were missing a ll applicatioons for reccruitment, eexcept 
the appointee’s, andd two appoi ntment filess reviewed were missiing all 
applicatioons. 

As speciffied in Cal ifornia Codde of Reguulations, title 2, sectioon 26 
(Rule 26)), appointinng powers aare requireed to retainn records reelated 
to affirmaative actionn, equal emmployment opportunityy, examinaations, 
merit, seelection, annd appointmments for a minimumm period oof five 
years froom the date the reccord is creeated. Theese recordss are 
required to be readdily accesssible and rretained in an orderlyy and 
systematic manner. (Cal. Codee Reg., tit. 22, § 26.) 

13 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

Severityy: yy: Serious. 
appointm 
Without d 
ents were p 
documentat 
properly co 
tion, the C 
onducted. 
CRU could not verify if the 
Cause: The SW 
decentral 
followed. 
RCB state 
ized proce 
es that tha 
esses, and 
at it has 2 
procedure 
28 offices 
es have n 
statewide 
ot always 
, has 
been 
Action: It is reco 
approval 
submit to 
the corre 
with the 
Regulatio 
documen 
ommended 
of these 
o the CRU 
ctions the 
record re 
ons title 
tation shou 
that within 
findings a 
a written c 
departmen 
etention re 
2, sectio 
uld be includ 
n 60 days 
and recom 
corrective a 
t will imple 
equirement 
on 26. C 
ded with th 
of the Exe 
mmendation 
action plan 
ement to en 
ts of Calif 
Copies of 
e plan. 
ecutive Off 
s, the SW 
n that addre 
nsure confo 
fornia Cod 
any rel 
ficer’s 
WRCB 
esses 
ormity 
de of 
levant 

FINDINNG NO. 4 – 
Summaary: 
Applicati 
the Final 
ions Were 
File Date 
e Not Datee Stampedd and/or AAccepted AAfter 
The SWR 
date stam 
filing date 
RCB proces 
mped and 4 
e. 
ssed 176 o 
42 applicati 
out of 1,861 
ons that we 
applicatio 
ere accepte 
ns that wer 
ed after the 
re not 
e final 
Criteria: California 
timely fili 
place, wit 
the exam 
a Code Reg 
ng of app 
thin the tim 
ination ann 
gulations, ti 
lications: A 
me, in the m 
nouncemen 
itle 2, sectio 
All applicat 
manner, an 
nt. 
on 174 (Ru 
tions must 
nd on the f 
ule 174) req 
be filed a 
form specif 
quires 
at the 
fied in 
Filing an 
postal se 
appropria 
the date s 
application 
rvice or dat 
ate office o 
specified. 
n ‘within the 
te stamped 
f the agenc 
e time’ sha 
d at one of t 
cy adminis 
ll mean po 
the departm 
stering the 
stmarked b 
ment’s office 
examinatio 
by the 
es (or 
on) by 
SPB 
State WateB Compliance 
er Resources 
e Review 
s Control Boarrd 

14 

An appliccation thatt is not poostmarked or date sstamped by the 
specified date shall be accepteed, if one off the following conditioons as 
detailed in Rule 1744 apply: (1 ) the appliccation wass delayed ddue to 
verified error; (2) thee applicatioon was submmitted in errror to the wwrong 
state ageency and is either posttmarked or date stampped on or bbefore 
the speciified date; (3) the emmploying aggency veriffies examinnation 
announceement disstribution problems that preevented ttimely 
notificatioon to an emmployee of a promotioonal examinnation; or (44) the 
employingg agency vverifies thatt the appliccant failed tto receive ttimely 
notice of promotional examinaation. (Cal. Code Regg., tit. 2, §§ 174, 
suds. (a), (b), (c), && (d).) The same final filing datee procedurees are 
applied too the selecttion processs used to fill a job vacancy. 
ccation thatt is not poostmarked or date sstamped by the 
specified date shall be accepteed, if one off the following conditioons as 
detailed in Rule 1744 apply: (1 ) the appliccation wass delayed ddue to 
verified error; (2) thee applicatioon was submmitted in errror to the wwrong 
state ageency and is either posttmarked or date stampped on or bbefore 
the speciified date; (3) the emmploying aggency veriffies examinnation 
announceement disstribution problems that preevented ttimely 
notificatioon to an emmployee of a promotioonal examinnation; or (44) the 
employingg agency vverifies thatt the appliccant failed tto receive ttimely 
notice of promotional examinaation. (Cal. Code Regg., tit. 2, §§ 174, 
suds. (a), (b), (c), && (d).) The same final filing datee procedurees are 
applied too the selecttion processs used to fill a job vacancy. 

Severityy: 
Non-Serioous or Technical. FFinal filing dates aree established to 
ensure alll applicantss are givenn the same amount of time in whhich to 
apply for a job vacaancy and tto set a deeadline for the recruittment. 
Thereforee, althoughh the accepptance of application s after thee final 
filing datee may givee some appplicants mmore time to preparee their 
applicatioon than other applicannts who meeet the finaal filing datee, the 
acceptance of late aapplicationss will not immpact the rresults of thhe job 
vacancy sselection. 

Cause: 
The SWRRCB statess that it didd not havee a centraliized processs for 
ensuring all applicaations weree date stammped and received bby the 
final filingg date. 

Action: 
It is recoommended that withinn 60 days of the Exeecutive Offficer’s 
approval of these findings aand recommmendations, the SWWRCB 
submit too the CRRU a writteen correcttive actionn plan thaat the 
departmeent will impplement too ensure cconformity with Rule 174. 
Copies of any relevvant docummentation shhould be inncluded witth the 
plan. 

Equal Employmentt Opportunity 

Each staate agencyy is responssible for ann effective EEEO prograam. (Gov. Code, § 199790.) 
The apppointing powwer for eacch state agency has tthe major rresponsibilitty for monitoring 
the effecctiveness oof its EEO pprogram. (GGov. Code, § 19794.) To that endd, the appoointing 
power mmust issue aa policy staatement committed to equal empployment opportunity; issue 
proceduures for filing, proceessing, annd resolvinng discrimmination coomplaints; issue 

15 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

proceduures for providing eqqual upward mobility and prommotional oppportunities; and 
cooperaate with thee Californiaa Departmeent of Humman Resources (CalHHR) by provviding 
access tto all requirred files, doocuments aand data. (Ibbid.) In adddition, the aappointing ppower 
must apppoint, at the managerial level, ann EEO officcer, who shaall report diirectly to, and be 
under the supervvision of, tthe directoor of the departmennt to deveelop, implement, 
coordinaate, and moonitor the deepartment’ss EEO proggram. (Govv. Code, § 19795.) 
uures for providing eqqual upward mobility and prommotional oppportunities; and 
cooperaate with thee Californiaa Departmeent of Humman Resources (CalHHR) by provviding 
access tto all requirred files, doocuments aand data. (Ibbid.) In adddition, the aappointing ppower 
must apppoint, at the managerial level, ann EEO officcer, who shaall report diirectly to, and be 
under the supervvision of, tthe directoor of the departmennt to deveelop, implement, 
coordinaate, and moonitor the deepartment’ss EEO proggram. (Govv. Code, § 19795.) 

Becausee the EEO Officer invvestigates and ensures proper handling oof discriminnation, 
sexual hharassmentt and other employee ccomplaints, the positioon requiress separationn fromthe reguular chain of commandd, as well ass regular and unencummbered acccess to the head 
of the orrganization. 

Each sttate agenccy must eestablish a separate committeee of emplooyees whoo are 
individuaals with a disability, oor who havve an intereest in disaability issuees, to advisse the 
head of the agency on issuess of conce rn to emplooyees with disabilitiess. (Gov. Coode, § 
19795, subd. (b)((1).) The ddepartmentt must invvite all emmployees too serve onn the 
committ ee and takee appropriaate steps too ensure that the final committeee is comprissed of 
memberrs who havee disabilities or who haave an inte erest in disaability issues. (Gov. Coode, § 
19795, ssubd. (b)(2)).) 

The CRU reviewedd the SWRCCB’s EEO pprogram thaat was in effect duringg the complliance 
review pperiod. 

FINDINNG NO. 5 – Complai 
Decision 
nants Wer 
ns Within th 
re Not Not 
he Prescri 
ified of the 
bed Time P 
e Reasons 
Period 
s for Delayys in 
Summaary: 

Criteria: 

The SWWRCB provvided no documenttation demmonstrating that 
discriminaation complaints weere trackedd during the complliance 
review peeriod. As ssuch, the SWRCB ccould not pprovide a llist of 
discriminaation compplaints, nor could theyy demonstrate how loong it 
took to isssue complainants a wwritten deciision after aa complainnt was 
filed. 

The app ointing po wer must issue a written deecision to the 
complainaant within 990 days ofthe complaaint being ffiled. (Cal. CCode 
Regs., tit . 2, § 64.4, subd. (a). ) If the apppointing powwer is unabble to 
issue its decision wwithin the prrescribed tiime period , the appoiinting 
power muust inform tthe compla inant in wriiting of the reasons foor the 
delay. (Ibbid.) 

16 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

Severityyyy: 
Very Serrious. Empployees weere not infoormed of tthe reasonns for 
delays inn decisionss for commplaints. Employees may feel their 
concerns are not being taken sseriously, wwhich can leeave the aggency 
open to li ability and low employyee morale . 

Cause: 
The SWRRCB states that it did nnot have a centralizedd tracking t ool or 
notificatioon system to ensuree responsees were ttimely andd that 
complainaants were aaware of deelays. 

Action: 
It is recoommended that withinn 60 days of the Exeecutive Offficer’s 
approval of these findings aand recommmendations, the SWWRCB 
submit too the CRU a written ccorrective aaction plann that addreesses 
the corrections the department will impleement to ennsure confoormity 
with the requireme nts of Cal ifornia Codde of Reg ulations, tiitle 2, 
section 64.4, subdivvision (a). CCopies of aany relevannt documenntation 
should bee included wwith the plaan. 

FINDINNG NO. 6 – A Writtenn Upward MMobility Pllan Has Noot Been Esstablished 

Summaary: 

Criteria:

Although the deparrtment provvided a drraft of an Upward MU obility 
program policy andd plan, theere was nno active UUpward Moobility 
program in place at the time of the compli ance revieww. 

Each ap pointing auuthority shhall develop and maaintain a wwritten 
upward mmobility plan as speecified in the SPB “Guidelinees for 
Administeering Departmental Upwardd Mobilityy Employyment 
Programss,” revised JJuly 25, 20000. 

The plann shall incclude: (a) A policy statementt regardingg the 
appointing authorityy's commitment to providing equal uppward 
mobility oopportunity for its empployees in low-paying occupationns. (b) 
A descripption of thhe componnents of itss program consistentt with 
Government Code ssection 194401, how eemployees may accesss the 
program, and wheere inform ation abouut the proogram maay be 
obtained. (c) The rroles and rresponsibiliities of thee employeee, the 
employeee's supervi sor, the cooordinator, the persoonnel officee, the 
training office, and the equal emplooyment oppportunity office 
regardingg the mobiliity programm. (d) Criterria for selecting emplooyees 
in low-paaying occuupations too participatte in the upward mobility 

17 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

efforts deescribed inn Governmment Codee section 19401. (e)) The 
number oof employeees in clas sifications in low-payying occupaations 
used by the appoinnting authorrity; careerr ladders, bbridging claasses, 
and entrry techniccal, professional, annd adminisstrative claasses 
targeted for upwaard mobility; and pplanned uupward moeescribed inn Governmment Codee section 19401. (e)) The 
number oof employeees in clas sifications in low-payying occupaations 
used by the appoinnting authorrity; careerr ladders, bbridging claasses, 
and entrry techniccal, professional, annd adminisstrative claasses 
targeted for upwaard mobility; and pplanned uupward mo

obility 
examinations. (Cal. Code Regss., tit. 2, § 5599.983.) 

Severityy: 
Serious. The deparrtment did not have aa plan to eensure it haas an 
effective upward mobility pprogram too develop and advvance 
employeees in low-paaying occuppations. 

Cause: 
The SWRRCB has aan outdateed upward mobility pplan, whichh it is 
currently in the proceess of updaating. 

Action: 
It is recoommended that withinn 60 days of the Exeecutive Offficer’s 
approval of these findings aand recommmendations, the SWWRCB 
submit too the CRU a written ccorrective aaction plann that addreesses 
the corrections the department will impleement to ennsure confoormity 
with the rrequiremennts of Goveernment Coode sectionn 19401. CCopies 
of any relevant docuumentation should be included wiith the plan . 

Personaal Services Contracts 

A PSC includes aany contraact, requisittion, or puurchase order under which labbor or 
personaal services is a significant, separately identtifiable elemment, and the busineess or 
person pperforming the servicees is an independent contractorr that does not have sstatus 
as an eemployee of the Staate. (Cal. Code Regg., tit. 2, §§ 547.59.)) The California 
Constituution has ann implied ciivil service mandate li miting the sstate’s authhority to contract 
with private entities to perfform services the sstate has historically or custommarily 
performeed. Goverrnment Coode section 19130, subdivisioon (a), hoowever, coodifies 
exceptioons to the ccivil servicee mandate wwhere PSCC’s achievee cost savinngs for the state. 
PSC’s that are of a type en umerated iin subdivis ion (b) of Governme nt Code seection 
19130 aare also perrmissible. SSubdivision (b) contraccts include private conntracts for aa new 
state function, serrvices that are not available wiithin state service, seervices thaat are 
incidentaal to a contract for tthe purchaase or leasse of real or personaal propertyy, and 
servicess that are off an urgent,, temporaryy, or occasioonal naturee. 

18 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

For cost-savings PPSC’s a sttate agencyy is requireed to notiffy the SPBB of its inteent to 
execute such a coontract. (Goov. Code, §§ 19131.) FFor subdivission (b) conntracts, thee SPB 
reviews the adequuacy of thhe proposeed or execcuted contrract at thee request of an 
employeee organizaation repressenting statee employeees. (Gov. CCode, § 19132.) 
PPSC’s a sttate agencyy is requireed to notiffy the SPBB of its inteent to 
execute such a coontract. (Goov. Code, §§ 19131.) FFor subdivission (b) conntracts, thee SPB 
reviews the adequuacy of thhe proposeed or execcuted contrract at thee request of an 
employeee organizaation repressenting statee employeees. (Gov. CCode, § 19132.) 

During tthe compliaance revieww period, the SWRCB had 19 PSSC’s that weere in effecct and 
subject to Departmment of Geeneral Servvices (DGSS) approvall, and thuss our proceedural 
review. TThe CRU reeviewed alll 19 of those contractss, which aree listed beloow: 

VVendor Servvices CContract Daates C 
A 
ontract 
Amount 
Justificat 
Identifie 
tion 
ed 
Aquat 
C 
tic Science 
Center Mainteenance 12/4/2015 
8/31/2016 
56 
$3000,000.00 Yes 
Aquat 
C 
tic Science 
Center Mainteenance 4/1/2016 
6/30/2017 
-
7 $1335,000.00 Yes 
Basic Laboratory 
Inc. 
, Mainteenance 1/31/2016 
1/31/2018 
68 
$110,000.00 Yes 
Califo 
Unive 
Beach 
Fou 
ornia State 
ersity, Long 
h Research 
undation 
Mainteenance 1/27/2016 
6/30/2018 
68 
$4999,998.00 Yes 
Crown 
Mov 
Stor 
n Worldwide 
ving and 
rage, LLC 
e 
Mainteenance 11/9/2015 
9/30/2017 
57 
$955,000.00 Yes 
Eco Interactive, 
Inc. IT Serrvices 10/10/201 
9/30/2016 
36 
$4998,726.00 Yes 
Moor 
Assoc 
re Twining 
ciates, Inc. Mainteenance 1/31/2016 
1/31/2018 
68 
$1330,000.00 Yes 
Moor 
Assoc 
re Twining 
ciates, Inc. Mainteenance 2/25/2016 
3/1/2018 
68 
$310,000.00 Yes 
O 
Envir 
Heal 
Ass 
Office of 
ronmental 
th Hazard 
sessment 
Mainteenance 7/1/2015 
6/30/2018 
-
8 $4225,000.00 Yes 

19 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

VVendor Vendor Servvices CContract Daates C 
A 
ontract 
Amount 
Justificat 
Identifie 
tion 
ed 
Parccel Quest Mainteenance 12/15/201 
12/14/201 
57 
$522,458.00 Yes 
Pen 
Cor 
nn Credit 
rporation IT Serrvices 1/1/2015 
12/31/201 
-
6 $6550,000.00 Yes 
San J 
Un 
Re 
Fou 
Jose State 
niversity 
esearch 
undation 
Mainteenance 5/27/2015 
6/30-2017 
57 
$2883,000.00 Yes 
So 
Califor 
Water 
P 
outhern 
rnia Coasta 
r Research 
Project 
al Mainteenance 10/1/2015 
12/31/201 
57 
$2550,000.00 Yes 
So 
Califor 
Water 
P 
outhern 
rnia Coasta 
r Research 
Project 
al Mainteenance 2/22/2016 
3/31/2018 
68 
$3000,000.00 Yes 
So 
Califor 
Water 
P 
outhern 
rnia Coasta 
r Research 
Project 
al Mainteenance 1/26/2016 
9/30/2017 
67 
$1550,000.00 Yes 
So 
Califor 
Water 
P 
outhern 
rnia Coasta 
r Research 
Project 
al Mainteenance 4/1/2016 
6/30/2017 
-
7 $1335,000.00 Yes 
The R 
the U 
Califo 
Regents of 
niversity of 
ornia, Davis 
Mainteenance 1/1/2016 
3/31/2018 
-
8 $1220,000.00 Yes 
West 
Cor 
Publishing 
rporation Mainteenance 7/1/2015 
6/30/2016 
-
6 $677,479.12 Yes 
Win 
Moving 
d Dancer 
g Companyy Mainteenance 5/4/2015 
4/1/2017 
-
7 $1330,000.00 Yes 

20 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

FINDINNNG NO. 7 – Personal Servicess Contracts Complied withtProceddural 
Requiremments 

When a state agenncy requestts approval from the DDGS for a ssubdivision (b) contracct, the 
agency must incluude with its contract transmitta l a writtenn justificatioon that inccludes 
specific and detaileed factual iinformationn that demoonstrates hoow the conntract meets one 
or more conditionss specified in Governmment Codee section 199131, subddivision (b). (Cal. 
Code Reeg., tit. 2, § 547.60.) 

The totaal amount oof all the PSSC’s reviewwed was $4 ,641,661.12. It was beeyond the sscope 
of the reeview to make concluusions as too whether SSWRCB juustifications for the contract 
were leggally sufficient. For aall PSC’s s ubject to DDGS approoval, the SWWRCB proovided 
specific and detaileed factual innformation in the writteen justificattions as to how each of the 
19 contrracts met aat least one conditionn set forth in Governmment Codee section 1 9131, 
subdivission (b). Acccordingly, the SWRCBB PSC’s commplied withh proceduraal requiremeents. 

Mandateed Training 

Each state agencyy shall offeer at least ssemiannuaally to eachh of its filerrs an orienntation 
course oon the relevvant ethics statutes annd regulatioons that goovern the official conduct of 
state offficials. (Go v. Code, §§ 1146.1) NNew filers mmust be traained within six montths of 
appointmment. (Gov. Code, § 11146.3) 

Each deepartment must provide its neww supervisoors supervisory traininng within twwelve 
months of appointmment. (Govv. Code, § 19995.4, subds. (b) aand (c.).) T he training must 
be a miinimum of 80 hours, 40 of whicch must bee structuredd and give n by a quaalified 
instructoor. The other 40 hourrs may be done on thhe job by aa higher-levvel supervissor or 
manageer. (Gov. Coode, § 199995.4, subd. (b).) 

Additionnally, each departmeent must pprovide itss supervisoors two hhours of ssexual 
harassmment traininng every twwo years. NNew superrvisors musst be provided supervvisory 
training within six mmonths of aappointmentt. (Gov. Co ode, § 12950.1, subd. ((a).) 

The CRRU reviewedd the SWRRCB’s manddated trainiing programm that wass in effect dduring 
the commpliance reeview periood. The SSWRCB’s eethics trainning was found to be in 
compliannce, while the SWRCB’s supervisory traininng and sexxual harasssment preveention 
training were foundd to be out oof compliannce. 

21 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

FINDINNNG NO. 8 – Supervissory Traini ng Was Noot Providedd for All Supervisorss 

Summaary: The SWRRCB did noot provide bbasic supervisory trainning to 13 of 28 

new supeervisors withhin 12 mon nths of appoointment. 

Criteria: 
Each department mmust provide its neww supervissors supervvisory 
training wwithin 12 mmonths of aappointmennt. (Gov. Code, § 199995.4, 
subd. (b) and (c.).) TThe trainingg must be aa minimumm of 80 hours, 40 
of which must be st ructured annd given byy a qualifiedd instructorr. The 
other 40 hours may be done oon the job bby a higher--level supeervisor 
or managger. (Gov. CCode, § 199995.4, subdd. (b).) 

Severityy: 
Very Serious. The ddepartmentt does not ensure itss new managers 
are propperly traineed. Withouut proper training, nnew supervvisory 
employeees may noot properlyy carry ouut their suupervisory roles, 
including managing employeess. 

Cause: 
The SWRRCB statess that it doees not havee a centralized processs for 
tracking ccompletion of supervissory traininng. Each divvision and office 
is responnsible for eensuring supervisors have commpleted reqquired 
training. Additionallyy, there wwas difficultty enrollingg supervisoors in 
training due to contract issues dduring the review period. 

Action: 
The SWRCB mustt take apppropriate ssteps to ensure thatt new 
supervisoors are provided suppervisory ttraining wiithin the twwelve 
months. 

It is thereefore recommmended that no latter than 600 days afteer the 
SPB’s EExecutive Officer’s approval of thesee findings and 
recommeendations, tthe SWRCCB must establish a plan to ensure 
compliancce with su pervisory ttraining maandates annd submit tto the 
SPB a wrritten reportt of compliaance. 

22 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

FINDINNNG NO. 9 – Sexual Harassmeent Training Was Not Provvided for All 
Supervissors 

Summaary: 

Criteria: 

Severityy: 

Cause: 

Action: 

The SWRRCB did noot provide ssexual haraassment preevention traaining 
to five of 94 new su pervisors wwithin six mmonths of thheir appointtment. 
In additioon, the SSWRCB did not proovide sexuual harasssment 
prevention training to 25 of 360 existing supervisors everyy two 
years. 

Each deppartment mmust providee its superrvisors two hours of ssexual 
harassmeent trainingg every twwo years. NNew superrvisors must be 
provided sexual har assment prrevention trraining withhin six mon ths of 
appointment. (Gov. CCode, § 122950.1, subd. (a).) 

Very Seriious. The ddepartmentt does not ensure its new supervvisors 
are propeerly trained to respondd to sexual harassmennt or unwellcome 
sexual addvances, reequests for sexual faavors, and other verbbal or 
physical hharassment of a sexual nature. TThis limits tthe departmment’s 
ability to retain a quuality workkforce, impaacts emplooyee moralee and 
productivity, and subbjects the ddepartment to litigationn. 

The SWWRCB statees sexual harassmeent prevenntion traininng is 
mandatorry and it nnotifies all supervisorrs of this rrequirement and 
provides training oppportunitiess annually. Despite nootification oof the 
requiremeent, not all supervisorrs were ablle to attendd the traininng for 
various reeasons. 

The SWWRCB must take apppropriate steps to ensure thaat its 
supervisoors are provvided sexuaal harassmment trainingg within thee time 
periods prescribed. 

It is thereefore recommmended that no latter than 600 days afteer the 
SPB’s EExecutive Officer’s approval of thesee findings and 
recommeendations, tthe SWRCCB must establish a plan to ensure 
compliancce with sexxual harassment traininng mandatees and subbmit to 
the SPB aa written reeport of commpliance. 

23 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

DDEPARTMEENTAL RESPONSDEPARTMEENTAL RESPONSE 

The SWWRCB’s respponse is atttached as AAttachmentt 1. 

SPPB REPLY 

Based uupon the SSWRCB’s wwritten res ponse, thee SWRCB will complyy with the CRU 
recommmendations aand findings and provide the CRUU a correcttive action pplan. 

It is ffurther reccommended that thhe SWRCCB complyy with thhe afore-sstated 
recommmendations within 60 ddays of thee Executivee Officer’s aapproval annd submit tto the 
CRU a wwritten repoort of complliance. 

24 
SPBB Compliancee Review 
State Wateer Resourcess Control Boarrd 

State Water Resources Control Board 

July 1, 2016 

Suzanne M. Ambrose , Executive Officer 
State Personnel Board 
801 Capitol Mall 
Sacramento , CA 95818 

Dear Ms. Ambrose, 

We have reviewed the Draft Compl iance Review Report (Review Report) fo r the State Water 
Resources Control Board (Water Board), prepared by the State Personnel Boa rd's Complian ce 
Review Team . The draft report summarizes the Compliance Review Team 's find ings in the 
areas of exam inations, appo intments, Equal Employment Opportunity , and Pe rsonal Services 
Contracts from May 1, 2015 , through February 29 , 2016, and mandated train ing from February 
28 , 2014, through February 29, 2016. 

In general we find the Review Report to be a thorough analysis and accurate chara cterization of 
the processes that existed during the time period reviewed. We are committed to correcting all 
deficiencies noted in the Review Report . The Water Board remains dedicated to complian ce 
with all hiring requirements and best practi ces to ensure compliance with the merit system and 
State Personnel Board rules and regu lations . 

As reque sted by the Comp liance Review Team attached are the Wate r Board 's responses 
necessary to help complete the final report, in cluding the causes of the noted deficiencies and 
actions we have already taken to address them . If you have any questions or would like to 
discuss th is further please contact the Chief of our Human Resources Bran ch, Ch ris Fernandez 
at 91 6-341 -5126. 

Sincerely, 

~ 

Thomas Howard 
Executive Director 

cc: 
John Russell , Deputy Director, Adm inistrative Servi ces 
Bill Damian, Ass istant Deputy Director, Administrative Services 
Chris Fernandez, Chief, Human Resources Branch 
FEL!CiA MAf;(,l•~. C HI\IR I T ltOMAS HOWAflD, EXEGUlWE DlflEGfOH 
1OOt I Street, Sacramen:o, CA 95814 I Maolong Address: P .O . Box 100, Sacra menlo, Ca 958 t 2 · 0100 1 www.wat erbonrd~. co.(lov 

Suzanne Ambrose, Executive Officer -2- 
July 1, 2016 

Water Board Responses to Draft Findings 

Portions of the Draft Review Report were intentionally left blank by the Compliance Review 
Team , with the information "To Be provided by the SWRCB". Information requested to complete 
the final report included the Water Board 's understanding of the cause(s) of the deficiencies , as 
well as any specific responses the Water Board would like noted in the final report , such as 
steps we have already implemented to start correcting the noted deficiencies. 

The following are our responses regarding the findings in the Review Report : 

Finding No. 1 -Examinations Complied with Civil Service Laws and Board Rules 

No response is ne cessary, as we were found to be in compliance in this area. 

Finding No. 2-Probationary Evaluations Were Not Provided for All Appointments 
Reviewed 

Cause : It is the responsibility of each supervisor to complete probationary reports timely 
and to ensure the reports are sent to the Human Resources Branch for placement in the 
employee 's Official Personnel File. The Water Board does not have a centralized process 
for tracking or reporting to ensure probationary evaluations are completed . 

Response : 

• 
As implemented in November 2015 , the Human Resources Branch has been 
conducting Best Hiring Practices Training . Participation in this training is mandatory for 
all supervisors an d managers . This train ing emphasizes the requ irements of the 
Cal ifornia Code of Regulations pertaining to completion of probationary reports . 
• 
Additionally , the Human Resources Branch is identifying and implementing appropriate 
procedural so lutions to ensure probationary reports are completed and filed timely as 
required . 
Finding No. 3-Appointment Documentation Was Not Kept for the Appropriate Amount 
of Time 

Cause : There are several causes for documentation not being kept as required . These 
include: 

• 
VPOS bulletins and applications: Each hiring manager is responsible for creation, 
maintenance, and retention of hiring packages . The Water Board does not have 
a centralized process for retaining hiring packages . 
• 
NOPAs: In some instances it appears Personnel Specialists are failing to follow 
procedures for receiving signatures , retaining , and filing NOPAs. Another 
contributing facto r is that the Water Board has 28 offices statewide and 
individuals responsible for routing forms for signature are decentralized . 
Respo nse: 

• 
As implemented in November 2015 , the Human Resources Branch has been 
conducting Best Hiring Practices Training . Participation in this training is mandatory 
for all supervisors and managers . This tra ining specifically identifies retention 
requirements for hiring packages . 
• 
As implemented in January 2016 , the Human Resources Branch retains all vacancy 
bulletins and applications in the Department of Human Resources' Examination and 
Certification Online System (ECOS). 

Suzanne Ambrose, Executive Officer -3 - 
July 1, 2016 

• 
Effective July 2016, Human Resources Branch will be responsible for reviewing and 
retaining all hiring packages. Additionally, the Human Resources Branch will review 
internal and external processes and procedures to ensure NOPAs are signed , 
returned, and retained as required. 
Finding No. 4-Applications Were Not Date Stamped and/or Accepted After the Final File 
Date 

Cause: The Water Board did not have a centralized process for ensuring all applications 

were date stamped and received by the final filing date. 

Response: 

• 
As implemented in November 2015 , the Human Resources Branch has been 
conducting Best Hiring Practices Training . Participation in this training is mandatory 
for all supervisors and managers. This training specifically identifies the 
requirement that all applications be date stamped and/or postmarked by the final 
filing date. 
• 
As implemented in January 2016, the Water Board utilizes ECOS to receive 
applications ; ECOS will not allow applicants to apply after the final filing date and 
includes a virtual date stamp. 
• 
Additionally, the Human Resources Branch will review internal processes and 
procedures to ensure hard copy applications received are date stamped and/or 
include a scanned postmark when uploaded to ECOS. 
Finding No. 5-Complainants Were Not Notified of the Reasons for Delays in Decisions 
Within the Prescribed Time Period 

Cause: The Water Board did not have a centralized tracking tool or notification system to 

ensure responses were timely and complainants were aware of delays. 

Response : As implemented in February 2016, the Equal Employment Opportunity Office 
utilizes a centralized tracking tool for all complaints. Procedures were also created to notify 
the complainant appropriately within the prescribed time period. 

Finding No. 6-A Written Upward Mobility Plan Has Not Been Established 
Cause: The Water Board has an outdated upward mobility plan , which we are currently in 
the process of updating. While our robust training budget allows employees to participate in 
upward mobility as a normal business practice, the Water Board does not have a 
centralized tracking system to track participation. 

Response : The Water Board is currently updating our upward mobility plan to make it 
compliant with current law . We are exploring long-term procedural solutions to ensure that 
we can track and document participation by our staff in the upward mobility program , 
including participating in available training opportunities. In the interim , the Equal 
Employment Opportunity Office has begun tracking staff participation in the upward mobility 
program, until such time as a permanent solution is implemented. 

Finding No. 7-Personal Services Contracts Complied with Procedural Requirements 

No response is necessary, as we were found to be in compliance in this area. 

Suzanne Ambrose , Execu tive Officer -4 -July 1, 2016 

Finding No. 8-Supervisory Training Was Not Provided for All Supervisors 
Cause : The Water Board does not have a centralized process for tracking completio n of 
supervisory training. Each division and office is responsible for ensuring supervisors have 
completed required tra ining and maintaining records of training completion . Additionally , 
due to training contract issues there was temporary difficulty enrolling supervisors during 
the review period (between June 2015 and January 2016) . 

Response: The Water Board now has a contract in place with several vendors to provide 
supervisory training . We are also exploring procedural solutions to ensure required 
supervisory train ing is completed by staff in a timely manner, and records of that traini ng 
are maintained . 

Finding No·. 9-Sexual Harassment Training Was Not Provided for All Supervisors 
Cause : Sexual Harassment Prevention training is mandatory and the Water Board notifies 
all supervisors of this requirement and provides training opportunities annually. Despite 
notification of the requirement , not all supervisors were able to attend the train ing for a 
variety of reasons. 

Response: The Water Board will exp lore procedural solutions to ensure required Sexual 
Harassment Prevention training is completed and training records are maintained . 
Additionally , we are looking into alternate methods of providing this training on a more 
frequent , or as needed, basis so new supervisory staff can be tra ined sooner. In the 
interim, the Equal Employment Opportunity Office has begun tracking Sexual Harassment 
Prevention training in an effort to ensure accuracy and compliance , until such time as a 
permanent solution is implemented .