California Coastal Commission v. Department of the Navy

The Department of the Navy (Navy) (defendant) planned to dredge a portion of San Diego Bay to create an aircraft-carrier port. As required by the federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), the Navy submitted a Consistency Determination (CD) to the California Coastal Commission (CCC) (plaintiff) to ensure the Navy’s project complied with California’s Coastal Act. The Coastal Act was California’s CZMA-compliant coastal management plan. The CD stated that suitable dredged materials would be used for beach replenishment and the rest would be dumped in the deep ocean, a process called ocean-dumping. CCC approved the project, and the Navy commenced dredging. However, after the Navy discovered that the dredged materials contained live ordnance, the Navy submitted a revised CD to the CCC stating that the Navy planned to ocean-dump all dredged materials. Shortly after, the Navy solicited an expert report, the Harris Report, detailing possible alternatives to ocean-dumping that could make the dredged materials safe for beach replenishment use. However, instead of submitting the Harris Report to the CCC, the Navy withdrew its revised CD from consideration and instead obtained a permit modification through the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). Under the Clean Water Act, the Corps was authorized to regulate the Navy’s dredging projects. The Navy notified CCC that it planned to recommence work under the Corps permit. CCC sued the Navy in district court, seeking a preliminary injunction. CCC argued that (1) the Navy violated CZMA by failing to conform its dredging project to Coastal Act requirements; (2) the Navy failed to prove that there were no feasible, environmentally friendly alternatives to ocean-dumping the dredged materials; and (3) injunctive relief was appropriate because the public would be irreparably harmed if all dredged materials were ocean-dumped. The Navy countered, arguing that the Navy’s decision regarding the suitable usage of the dredged materials was entitled to deferential review.