OCR Text |
Show CALIFORNIA 137 water quality control boards, all within the State resources agency. The advisory committee consists of the chairmen of the regional boards and nine persons, each of a specified discipline, appointed by the Governor.73 The committee advises the State Board, which is the principal policymaking and pollution control agency, working in coordination with the regional boards in pollution controls. (1) State water quality control policy The State board is responsible for formulating the State's policy in accordance with the California water plan, legislatively declared guidelines, and approved regional plans. All State agencies and officers are to abide by the State policy and are encouraged to par- ticipate in its formulation.74 (2) Water Resources Control Board In addition to formulating and adopting State policy, the Board serves as the State's water pollution control agency for all purposes required by Federal water pollution laws.75 It conducts research, coordinates investigations of other agencies, operates a statewide data storage and retrieval program, conducts a public information pro- gram, allocates funds to the regional boards, and regulates and en- forces oil cleanup activities.76 A further major responsibility is the review of actions taken by the regional boards. Such review is the final administrative action of the State, but is subject to judicial review by writ of mandate issued by the State courts.77 (3) Regional hoards Quality control at the regional level plays a crucial role in the State's control system. The regional boards formulate and adopt regional plans which are to establish water quality objectives to protect bene- ficial uses and prevent nuisances (pollution). The legislature has specifically recognized the necessity for tradeoffs between pollution control and economic development.78 The regional boards then ad- minister and enforce the regional plans.79 (4) Application of the law The Porter-Cologne Act has been in effect for just over 2 years, and some procedures are still in the formative stages. The courts have not yet defined the full reach of the act. While it is beyond the scope of this summary to discuss cases decided by the water resources control board, attention is drawn to recent decisions in the "American Eiver and Delta Water Eights" cases where minimum flows have been protected by the board as a means of preserving water quality in the face of proposed large diversions for State projects.80 78W.C, sec. 13120. «W.C, sees. 13140-13146. 76 See 33 USCA 4669-1 et seq. and 1151 et seq. TOW.C, sees. 13161-13169. "W.C, sees. 13320-13330. TOW.C, see .13241. 79 See generally W.C., sees. 13200 et seq. 80 California State Water Resources Control Board, decision 1379, "Delta Water Rights Decision," July 1971, and decision 1400, "Lower American River Water Rights Decision," April 1972. These decisions are on appeal currently. |