California Case Summaries

Comite Civico del Valle v. County of Imperial — Lithium project EIR lacked support for long-term water supply

Reported / Citable

Case
Comite Civico del Valle v. County of Imperial 8/11/26 CA4/1
Court
4th District Court of Appeal, Division One
Judge
Erin Kelety (appointment info not available)
Date Decided
2026-09-02
Docket No.
D085747
Status
Reported / Citable
Topics
CEQA, environmental impact reports, Colorado River water, lithium extraction, air quality, tribal consultation

Background

Imperial County approved a geothermal power plant and lithium-extraction complex near the Salton Sea. The project would use about 6,500 acre-feet of Imperial Irrigation District water each year over a planned 50-year life. Community and environmental groups challenged the environmental impact report under the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA.

The challengers argued that the record did not establish a reliable long-term water supply, that mitigation failed to address future Colorado River cutbacks, and that reduced agricultural drainage could worsen Salton Sea air quality. They also challenged cumulative-impact analysis and the County’s consultation with the Quechan Tribe.

The Court’s Holding

The Fourth District found multiple CEQA defects. The administrative record did not contain substantial evidence that the irrigation district could supply the project for 50 years, particularly given uncertainty over Colorado River allocations. The EIR also failed to meaningfully discuss measures aimed at future mandatory water reductions.

The irrigation district’s concern that project water use could reduce agricultural drainage to the Salton Sea and increase exposed playa—and therefore dust and air pollution—was concrete enough to require analysis, not speculation that could be ignored. The court nevertheless upheld the County’s tribal consultation and rejected other cumulative-impact arguments that were not sufficiently developed.

The judgment was reversed in part with directions to grant mandate only to the extent needed to bring the project review into CEQA compliance.

Key Takeaways

  • A long project life requires evidence supporting water availability across that period, not merely present supply assurances.
  • An EIR must confront reasonably foreseeable regulatory cutbacks and discuss mitigation directed to that risk.
  • Agency comments identifying a plausible chain from water use to air impacts can trigger analysis even when the precise magnitude is uncertain.
  • CEQA remedies should be tailored to the specific defects the court identifies.

Why It Matters

California’s lithium strategy links clean-energy development to a water system already under severe pressure. The decision signals that agencies cannot treat long-term Colorado River availability as a static assumption. Project proponents should build a documented supply record, model cutback scenarios, and connect water accounting to Salton Sea and air-quality consequences early in review.

Read the full opinion (PDF) · Court docket

Scroll to Top