Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Supreme Court's Decision in Rapanos v. United States & Carabell v. United States

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) | December 2nd, 2008

Congress enacted the Clean Water Act ("CWA" or "the Act") "to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters." One

Congress enacted the Clean Water Act ("CWA" or "the Act") "to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters." One of the mechanisms adopted by Congress to achieve that purpose is a prohibition on the discharge of any pollutants, including dredged or fill material, into "navigable waters" except in compliance with other specified sections of the Act. In most cases, this means compliance with a permit issued pursuant to CWA §402 or §404. The Act defines the term "discharge of a pollutant" as "any addition of any pollutant to navigable waters from any point source" and provides that "[t]he term `navigable waters' means the waters of the United States, including the territorial seas[,]." In Rapanos, the Supreme Court addressed where the Federal government can apply the Clean Water Act, specifically by determining whether a wetland or tributary is a "water of the United States." The justices issued five separate opinions in Rapanos (one plurality opinion, two concurring opinions, and two dissenting opinions), with no single opinion commanding a majority of the Court. The Rapanos Decision Four justices, in a plurality opinion authored by Justice Scalia, rejected the argument that the term "waters of the United States" is limited to only those waters that are navigable in the traditional sense and their abutting wetlands. However, the plurality concluded that the agencies' regulatory authority should extend only to "relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water" connected to traditional navigable waters, and to "wetlands with a continuous surface connection to" such relatively permanent waters . Justice Kennedy did not join the plurality's opinion but instead authored an opinion concurring in the judgment vacating and remanding the cases to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.  Justice Kennedy agreed with the plurality that the statutory term "waters of the United States" extends beyond water bodies that are traditionally considered navigable." Justice Kennedy, however, found the plurality's interpretation of the scope of the CWA to be "inconsistent with the Act's text,structure,andpurpose[,]" and he instead presented a different standard for evaluating CWA jurisdiction over wetlands and other waterbodies.' Justice Kennedy concluded that wetlands are"waters of the United States" "if the wetlands, either alone or in combination with similarly situated lands in the region, significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of other covered waters more readily understood as `navigable.' When, in contrast, wetlands' effects on water quality are speculative or insubstantial, they fall outside the zone fairly encompassed by the statutory term 'navigable waters.' Four justices, in a dissenting opinion authored by Justice Stevens, concluded that EPA's and the Corps' interpretation of "waters of the United States" was a reasonable interpretation of the Clean Water Act. When there is no majority opinion in a Supreme Court case, controlling legal principles may be derived from those principles espoused by five or more justices. Thus, regulatory jurisdiction under the CWA exists over a water body if either the plurality's or Justice Kennedy's standard is satisfied. Since Rapanos, the United States has filed pleadings in a number of cases interpreting the decision in this manner. The agencies are issuing this memorandum in recognition of the fact that EPA regions and Corps districts need guidance to ensure that jurisdictional determinations, permitting actions, and other relevant actions are consistent with the decision and supported by the administrative record. Therefore, the agencies have evaluated the Rapanos opinions to identify those waters that are subject to CWA jurisdiction under the reasoning of a majority of the justices. This approach is appropriate for a guidance document. The agencies will continue to monitor implementation of the Rapanos decision in the field and recognize that further consideration of jurisdictional issues, including clarification and definition of key terminology, may be appropriate in the future, either through issuance of additional guidance or through rulemaking.

Clean Water, Clean Beaches Water Quality Funding Measure*

Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) | September 21st, 2012

The Problem: Stormwater and runoff rushes down the street, picking up trash and toxic pollutants. On a rainy day, over 10 billion gallons of contaminated stormw

The Problem: Stormwater and runoff rushes down the street, picking up trash and toxic pollutants. On a rainy day, over 10 billion gallons of contaminated stormwater flows directly — untreated — into rivers, creeks, lakes and our bay and coastal waters. Polluted stormwater and urban runoff include toxins and pathogens that can affect our health, drinking water supplies, and the health of marine life. Contaminants include: Industrial solvents, paints and chemicals; heavy metals like lead, mercury, chromium and arsenic; infection-causing bacteria; pesticides and fertilizers; and trash like plastics, cigarette butts, candy wrappers and syringes. *The proposed solution, a parcel tax to fund stormwater remediation and capture projects, failed before the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors in 2013.

Clean Watersheds Needs Survey 2012

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) | December 13th, 2012

Clear Lake Watershed and Lake Remediation

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | December 9th, 2024

The main goal of this joint effort between the University of California Davis, Tahoe Environmental Research Center (UCD-TERC), and the United States Geological Survey (US

The main goal of this joint effort between the University of California Davis, Tahoe Environmental Research Center (UCD-TERC), and the United States Geological Survey (USGS), is to develop the watershed and in-lake monitoring and modeling needed to:  Better understanding of the processes contributing to poor water quality;  Predict watershed and lake responses to changing environmental conditions; and,  Evaluate the impacts and unintended consequences of potential management and restoration activities. 

Clearer Structure, Cleaner Water: Improving Performance and Outcomes at the State Water Boards

Little Hoover Commission | January 1st, 2009

The Little Hoover Commission on Thursday urged the governor and the Legislature to reform the State Water Resources Control Board and nine Regional Water Quality Control

The Little Hoover Commission on Thursday urged the governor and the Legislature to reform the State Water Resources Control Board and nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards by expanding the state board to nine members, with five members representing statewide interests and four drawn on a rotating basis from the nine regional board chairpersons, whose positions would become full-time. In addition, the Commission called for a revamped appeals process; to improve the use of data and science in water quality regulatory processes; and urged the water boards to focus on new ways to solve modern water quality problems and set priorities. In its report, Clearer Structure, Cleaner Water: Improving Performance and Outcomes at the State Water Boards, the Commission also recommends refocusing both the state board and regional boards on policy-making and updating basin plans. During its study, the Commission found that the water boards face increasingly complex water quality problems, caused in part by hard-to-regulate sources such as urban and agricultural runoff. The Commission also found that a decentralized governance structure, with nine regional water quality boards operating with distinct policies and processes, hinders accountability and transparency. The result is a system that has lost the confidence of most stakeholders. To restore accountability and increase focus on clean-water outcomes, the Commission recommends strengthening the relationship between the state and regional boards. “The governance structure for water quality regulation in California is 40 years old and is ill-prepared to handle modern problems,” Little Hoover Commission Chairman Daniel Hancock said. “Major reform is needed to help protect and improve water quality, which is a key to the state’s future.”

Clearing the Waters: A Focus on Water Quality Solutions

Pacific Institute | March 22nd, 2010

Every day, 2 million tons of sewage and industrial and agricultural waste are poured into the world’s waters. The result is that more people die from unsafe water annua

Every day, 2 million tons of sewage and industrial and agricultural waste are poured into the world’s waters. The result is that more people die from unsafe water annually than from all forms of violence, including war. A new Pacific Institute report released by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) for World Water Day, March 22, 2010, lays out steps and solutions to address our urgent water-quality challenges––and they start with awareness and will to action. “A wide range of human activities affect water quality. The health of our ecosystems––and our communities––depends on how we act now,” said Achim Steiner, executive director of UNEP. “Improving and protecting water quality means healthier ecosystems, improved human well-being, and more secure livelihoods, both for ourselves and for future generations.” The new United Nations report, Clearing the Waters: A Focus on Water Quality Solutions, details how water quality is as important as water quantity for satisfying human and environmental needs, yet has received far less investment, scientific support, and public attention. Prepared by the Pacific Institute, one of the world’s leading nonprofit research organizations on freshwater issues, the UNEP report is part of the World Water Day 2010 effort to bring global attention to the need for clean, safe water––and action and policy to address water pollution. “Improving water quality, whether by preventing pollution, treating wastewater before disposal, or restoring the quality of waterways, requires increased awareness and political will,” said Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute. “The consequences of inaction are stark: water-quality problems affect our health, reduce agricultural productivity, impose additional costs on industrial production, and degrade ecosystem services––with costs to local populations and governments.”

Climate Action Plan

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) | May 31st, 2022

The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California’s (Metropolitan) core mission is to provide a clean, reliable water supply to Southern California. Changing clim

The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California’s (Metropolitan) core mission is to provide a clean, reliable water supply to Southern California. Changing climatic conditions, variable precipitation patterns, availability of water supplies, changes in consumer demands, and sea level rise will change the way Metropolitan provides its services and how it operates its regional water system. Metropolitan recognizes the potential impact of climate change to water availability and is committed to environmental stewardship to protect this valuable resource. Reducing greenhouse gas (G H G) emissions is an important step in protecting California and the region from the effects of climate change. Reducing G H G emissions from Metropolitan’s operations supports California’s overall G H G reduction goals. This Climate Action Plan (CAP) sets targets for reducing G H G emissions from Metropolitan’s operations, including conveyance, storage, treatment, and delivery of water to its 26 member water agencies. Additionally, this CAP complements Metropolitan’s existing long-range planning efforts, including the Integrated Water Resources Plan, Energy Sustainability Plan, and Capital Investment Plan. Through the implementation of this CAP, Metropolitan will strengthen its commitment to environmental sustainability, increase the resiliency of its operations, and strategically achieve G H G reduction goals. For additional details on the purpose of this CAP and Metropolitan’s history and existing operations, refer to Section 1.0, Purpose, Overview, and Environmental History and Leadership.

Climate Action Plan Phase 1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan Update 2023

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | March 22nd, 2024

DWR developed the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan Update 2023 (Update 2023) to review its GHG reductions since Update 2020 and to update strategies for further re

DWR developed the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan Update 2023 (Update 2023) to review its GHG reductions since Update 2020 and to update strategies for further reduction consistent with legislative changes, including the GHG emissions reduction targets established in SB 1020 (2022) and SB 1203 (2022). It also includes DWR’s new role in emergency energy generation. Since the 2012 Plan was adopted, California’s wholesale electricity market has also seen a significant increase in renewable resources. To reflect this change and to align with industry practice in emission reporting, Update 2023 incorporates updated emission factors to determine emissions from unspecified market resources.

Climate Action Plan Phase 1: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | May 18th, 2012

The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) in an effort to reduce its impact on the environment and lead by example, has developed this Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emiss

The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) in an effort to reduce its impact on the environment and lead by example, has developed this Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Reduction Plan to guide its project development and decision making with respect to energy use and GHG emissions. It is now clearly understood that these gases enhance the Earth’s ability to absorb and retain the heat radiated from the sun. Increased concentrations of GHGs in the atmosphere are the principal cause of anthropogenic climate change. As the connection between GHG emissions and climate change has strengthened and California has established GHG policies and reduction goals, DWR has focused on its own GHG emissions and developed strategies to reduce its contribution to the global problem of climate change consistent with those policies and goals. This GHG Emissions Reduction Plan (Plan) is the first Phase in DWR’s Climate Action Plan and considers GHG emissions from all DWR activities. In this Plan, DWR details its progress and future plans for reducing GHG emissions consistent with the GHG emissions reduction targets established in Assembly Bill (AB) 32, Executive Order S-3-05, and DWR’s own policies, the aggressive steps it will take to reduce its emissions by over 80% below 1990 levels, and the steps that it will take to monitor its progress toward achieving these reductions. DWR estimates that its total GHG emissions in 1990 were nearly 3.5 million metric tons, roughly the equivalent of a coal fired power plant or 680,000 passenger cars. Most of these emissions were released as a result of generation of electricity used to move water through the State Water Project (SWP), which DWR owns and operates. Since 1990, DWR’s GHG emissions have fluctuated due to hydrologic conditions, water demands, and energy resources. DWR GHG emissions peaked in 2003 at over 4.1 million metric tons per year. This Plan shows how DWR will make substantial reductions in its GHG emissions in the near-term (present to 2020) and how it will continue to reduce emissions beyond 2020 to achieve its long-term (2050) GHG emissions reduction goals.

Climate Action Plan, Phase 3: Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | February 14th, 2019

Climate change impacts have been widely documented globally, across the nation, and within the state. Loss of snowpack; longer, more frequent heat waves; and longer, more

Climate change impacts have been widely documented globally, across the nation, and within the state. Loss of snowpack; longer, more frequent heat waves; and longer, more intense wildfire seasons are already being experienced in California. While uncertainties remain about the exact timing and extent of projected impacts, numerous climate-driven hazards represent a clear threat to Department of Water Resources (DWR) facilities, managed lands, operations, and staff activities. By conducting this department-wide vulnerability assessment, DWR seeks to better prepare its decision-making for an uncertain future.  This climate change vulnerability assessment (VA) provides the first evaluation of its kind for facilities owned and operated by DWR and the activities that DWR performs. This analysis draws from the extensive body of knowledge about climate change and attempts to evaluate, describe, and quantify — where possible — DWR’s vulnerabilities to expected increases in wildfire, extreme heat, and sea-level rise, as well as to changes in hydrology and ecosystems that will impact DWR’s facilities, operations, and other activities. Table ES-1 presents examples of vulnerabilities identified in this assessment and summarizes quantitative indicators of climate change risk.  Using a mid-century time horizon, climate-change-driven hazards assessed in this VA are presented under six categories: wildfire, extreme heat, sea-level rise, long-term persistent hydrologic changes, short-term extreme hydrologic events, and habitat and ecosystem services degradation. This assessment applies a common framework to examine vulnerability through three components of how DWR’s assets and operations could be exposed to future climate hazards, how these assets and operations are sensitive (or susceptible) to impacts of this exposure, and the capacity of these assets and operations to cope with or adapt to changing conditions or events.