California Codes

Cal. Water Code § 13000 (2026)

Policy

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The Legislature finds and declares that the people of the state have a primary interest in the conservation, control, and utilization of the water resources of the state, and that the quality of all the waters of the state shall be protected for use and enjoyment by the people of the state.

The Legislature further finds and declares that activities and factors which may affect the quality of the waters of the state shall be regulated to attain the highest water quality which is reasonable, considering all demands being made and to be made on those waters and the total values involved, beneficial and detrimental, economic and social, tangible and intangible.

The Legislature further finds and declares that the health, safety and welfare of the people of the state requires that there be a statewide program for the control of the quality of all the waters of the state; that the state must be prepared to exercise its full power and jurisdiction to protect the quality of waters in the state from degradation originating inside or outside the boundaries of the state; that the waters of the state are increasingly influenced by interbasin water development projects and other statewide considerations; that factors of precipitation, topography, population, recreation, agriculture, industry and economic development vary from region to region within the state; and that the statewide program for water quality control can be most effectively administered regionally, within a framework of statewide coordination and policy.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 102 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 1977–2025 · leading case: City of Burbank v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 108 P.3d 862 (Cal. 2005).
City of Burbank v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 108 P.3d 862 (Cal. 2005). · cites it 4× “" (§ 13000.) The task of accomplishing this belongs to the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) and the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards; together the State Board and the regional boards comprise "the principal state agencies with primary responsibility…”
Pac. Lumber Co. v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 126 P.3d 1040 (Cal. 2006). · cites it 3× “) The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Wat. Code, § 13000 et seq.) specifically authorizes the water quality monitoring ordered by the Water Boards.”
Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London v. Superior Court of Los Angeles Cnty., 16 P.3d 94 (Cal. 2001). · cites it 2× “d would continue to require it, to expend funds therefor; similarly, the California Regional Water Quality Control Boards for the Los Angeles and San Diego Regions (Regional Water Boards) had each initiated at least one proceeding of its own against Powerine by means of a…”
Robins v. Pruneyard Shopping Ctr., 592 P.2d 341 (Cal. 1979). · cites it 2× “) "We do not minimize the importance of the constitutional guarantees attaching to private ownership of property; but as long as 50 years ago it was already `"thoroughly established in this country that the rights preserved to the individual by these constitutional provisions…”
Dep't of Fin. v. Comm'n on State Mandates, 378 P.3d 356 (Cal. 2016). · cites it 2× “California‘s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne Act or the Act; Wat. Code, § 13000 et seq.) was enacted in 1969.”
Voices of the Wetlands v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 257 P.3d 81 (Cal. 2011). · cites it 2× “) In California, NPDES permits, which must comply with all minimum federal clean water requirements, are issued under an EPA-approved state water quality control program administered, pursuant to the *509 Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne Act; Wat. Code, §…”
People ex rel. Lungren v. Superior Court, 926 P.2d 1042 (Cal. 1996). · cites it 2× “(Wat. Code, § 13000 et seq. (Porter-Cologne Act).”
Karuk Tribe of N. California v. California Reg'l Water Quality Control Bd., North Coast Region, 183 Cal. App. 4th 330 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 3× “The reason for-the denial was that federal law preempted application of California law, specifically the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Wat. Code, § 13000 et seq.; Porter-Cologne), which requires reports of waste discharge (ROWD’s) and waste discharge requirements…”
San Joaquin River Exch. Contractors Water Auth. v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 183 Cal. App. 4th 1110 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 3× “) State law “California implements the Clean Water Act through the Porter-Cologne [Water Quality Control] Act (Wat. Code, § 13000 et seq.) .... Under the Porter-Cologne Act, nine regional boards regulate the quality of waters within their regions under the purview of the State…”
City of Arcadia v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 36 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20025 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “Under the Porter-Cologne Act, nine regional boards regulate the quality of waters within their regions under the purview of the State Board. (Wat. Code, §§ 13000, 13100, 13200, 13241, 13242.”
Powerine Oil Co., Inc. v. Superior Court, 118 P.3d 589 (Cal. 2005). “(Wat. Code, § 13000 et seq.) Two cleanup and abatement orders were issued to Powerine requiring it to remediate pollution resulting from its past oil refinery operations at 10 locations.”
United States v. HVI Cat Canyon, Inc., 213 F. Supp. 3d 1249 (C.D. Cal. 2016). · cites it 2× “” Cal. Water Code § 13000 . The California Legislature further declared “that activities and factors which may affect the quality of the waters of the state shall be regulated to attain the highest water quality which is reasonable, considering all demands being made and to be…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.