Garland v. Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Butz, J.
This appeal concerns the scope of the government’s jurisdiction under the federal Clean Water Act (the Act; 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq.) to regulate water pollutants. Enacted in 1972, the Act prohibits any person from discharging a pollutant into “navigable waters”—i.e., into “the waters of the United States”—from a “point source” (a discrete conveyance of pollutants) without a permit. (See 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251 et seq., 1311(a), 1342(a), 1362(7), (12), (14).)
In Rapanos v. United States (2006) 547 U.S. 715 [ 165 L.Ed.2d 159 , 126 S.Ct. 2208 ] (Rapanos), its most recent decision on the subject, the United States Supreme Court offered three distinct views concerning the Act’s jurisdictional scope afforded by the phrase, “the waters of the United States” (§ 1362(7)). As we shall explain, we need not wade into these roiling waters to resolve the matter before us. This is because while the administrative civil liability (ACL) order at issue here is challenged on these jurisdictional *560 grounds, that order is authorized even under the Rapanos view that most narrowly reads the Act’s jurisdiction. Consequently, we shall affirm the judgment.