In a landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday in City and County of San Francisco v. EPA that the EPA exceeded its authority under the Clean Water Act by imposing “end-result” requirements in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits. The ruling effectively eliminates permit provisions that hold dischargers accountable for the condition of receiving waters and reinforces that the EPA—not permittees—must define clear, enforceable limitations to achieve water quality standards at the point of discharge.
While many initial reactions perceived this as a blow to the Clean Water Act, we see the opinion largely as a win. This ruling requires regulatory agencies to determine specific limitations in stormwater permits to meet water quality objectives. Previously, stormwater permits included vague water quality objectives without specific requirements on how to achieve those goals, making compliance difficult to determine.
Now, stormwater permit compliance will focus on the water coming off the property of dischargers (end-of-pipe metrics) rather than on the quality of the receiving waters. Essentially, dischargers now have fewer places to hide and more explicit liability. We plan to leverage this ruling to create a stronger, more enforceable stormwater permit for Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties.
For over a year and a half, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board has been developing an updated regional MS4 permit that would regulate stormwater pollution in the Santa Ana River Watershed. The current draft permit uses vague water quality objective language, lacks a monitoring plan, and is effectively unenforceable. Tuesday’s Supreme Court opinion even further validates the need to revamp and strengthen our watershed’s MS4 permit with clearer language.
The Orange County Register published an article yesterday that dives deeper into this issue. Read the full story here.
