The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday morning sided with San Francisco and its unusual alliance of oil companies and business groups in a case it brought against the federal Environmental Protection Agency over the city’s raw sewage.Environmentalists have raised concerns that the court’s conservative majority could use the case to roll back clean water protections on a national scale. The city, meanwhile, argued it was only seeking clarity on permit limitations and believed it was being held responsible for more than its share of water pollution.San Francisco faced the prospect of spending billions to upgrade its infrastructure to get into compliance with the Clean Water Act, a project it said was too expensive.In its 5–4 opinion, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority said that the EPA does not have the authority to require these kinds of sewage system upgrades and that the city is only responsible for what it discharges — not the water quality’s “end result.”Sean Bothwell, executive director of the California Coastkeeper Alliance, said in a statement that regulators must follow up with specific, enforceable permit terms to ensure water quality standards are met. For decades, he said, water dischargers like San Francisco have had the “freedom to decide how to meet water quality standards, and now the Supreme Court has put an end to that practice.”“The regulated community should reap what they sowed,” he said. “You cannot beg regulators for flexibility to avoid enforcement and then ask the Supreme Court to strike down vague permit standards. It is time California hold polluters to specific water quality standards.”Keep Reading
