FACTS: Because a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license was required and because the project might result in discharges into the Dosewallips River, petitioners were required to obtain state certification of the project pursuant to § 401 (33 U.S.C.S. § 1341) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly known as the Clean Water Act (Act), 33 U.S.C.S. § 1251 et seq. The principal dispute was whether the minimum stream flow requirement that the state imposed on the hydroelectric project was a permissible condition of a § 401 certification under the Act. The Court concluded that it was, upholding the state supreme court's judgment. The Court held that a state may include minimum stream flow requirements in a § 401 certification insofar as necessary to enforce a designated use contained in a state water quality standard. In so doing, the Court rejected petitioners' assertion that the Act was only concerned with water quality and did not allow the regulation of water quantity. Indeed, there was recognition in the Act itself that reduced stream flow, or diminishment of water quantity, could constitute water pollution.
CONCLUSION: The Court affirmed the judgment of the state supreme court.
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?