Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free[Consolidated.][Modified.] J. Bendix modifies a previously published opinion to clarify the extent of a regional water quality board's authority to regulate the unreasonable use of water. The trial court properly held that a regional water quality board lacked the authority to compel publicly-owned treatment facilities to recycle more of the wastewater they discharge into the Los Angeles River. The regional board is tasked with ensuring water quality, not reasonable use. But the trial court erred in directing the state water quality board to evaluate whether the discharges were reasonable and to provide the trial court with facts it could review. The state board has wide discretion over how it evaluates whether water use is reasonable, and the trial court erred in denying its demurrer. Reversed in part.