The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5–4 on March 4 that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) wastewater discharge permitting system violates federal law.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion in City and County of San Francisco v. EPA. The opinion was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote a dissenting opinion that was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
The nation’s highest court ruled that the EPA must provide specific effluent limitations to wastewater facilities and the governmental bodies that operate them. Effluent is liquid waste or sewage released into a sea or river.
San Francisco argued in the appeal that the EPA imposed overly vague limitations on how much pollution may be present in wastewater discharged by water utilities. The city said the regulations made it difficult to know if its wastewater systems were in compliance.
The EPA grants permits to local governments and water management authorities under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), to limit the amount of pollution flowing into bodies of water.
In court documents, San Francisco said that the EPA directs cities not to pollute water bodies “too much” but does not provide a specific limitation, and this opens the door to uncertainty and makes it hard to comply.
Instead of telling the city “how much it needs to control its discharges to comply with the Act,” the EPA’s “generic prohibitions leave the City vulnerable to enforcement based on whether the Pacific Ocean meets state-adopted water quality standards,” according to the city.
San Francisco argued it was unfair to hold it responsible for polluted Pacific Ocean beaches near the city because the pollution may have come from outside sources.
The EPA said that the city’s wastewater system cannot cope with runoff during storms, leading to pollution being released into the ocean. The city said it was facing potentially billions of dollars in fines for violating its permit.
After San Francisco challenged the permit, the EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board rejected the challenge in December 2020.
In July 2023, a divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected San Francisco’s appeal and affirmed the EPA’s power to specify “general narrative prohibitions” on discharges under the Clean Water Act (CWA).
Share your thoughts by scrolling down to leave a comment.
