Do you know where your water comes from? Photo: Matt O’Brien.
The United States Supreme Court gave the City of San Francisco the green light to continue its sewage management practices, dumping raw human waste into the ocean when its system becomes overwhelmed by stormwater. The decision reduced the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority to enforce vague limits on San Francisco’s water quality or penalize them for such violations.
San Francisco had sued the EPA, arguing that new conditions on its wastewater permit were poorly defined and could lead to unfair fines. They requested more clarity from the EPA on the measures it needed to take instead of the agency levying non-specific pollutant limits called “narrative” requirements. The question before the court focused on how the Clean Water Act of 1972 is interpreted – to what extent the EPA can impose limits on the wastewater San Francisco releases into the ocean.
The Supreme Court ruled five to four in favor of San Francisco, a rare alignment between the conservative court and the liberal city. Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote for the majority noting that when a permit contains vague, undefined thresholds, a permittee could follow every requirement and still be punished if pollution levels don’t meet standards.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett dissented, arguing that the EPA should retain the ability to impose broad pollution limits that adapt to changing conditions, highlighting that San Francisco’s discharges led to “serious breaches of the water quality standards.” She added that permittees like San Francisco should be able to challenge specific rules if they believe them to be unfair, but a complete “statutory rewrite” was unnecessary.
As far as what this ruling means in practical terms, San Francisco doesn’t need to make radical changes to its sewage practices. The City’s sewage system, which combines human waste with storm runoff, overflows during heavy rains, releasing untreated sewage into the ocean to prevent flooding. According to an EPA lawsuit, San Francisco has discharged 1.8 million gallons of raw sewage into the Pacific Ocean and San Francisco Bay since 2016. The City downplays the release, saying that it happens at most 10 times per year and that when the system does overflow, only less than 10 percent of the discharge is “partially treated sewage.”
San Francisco’s lawsuit divided city officials, with some fearing it could set a dangerous precedent. The Board of Supervisors voted to urge a settlement before the case reached the Supreme Court, concerned that a favorable ruling could weaken pollution regulations nationwide. Ultimately, the city proceeded, leading to a new legal precedent on the Clean Water Act.
San Francisco’s Surfrider Chapter was discouraged by the decision.
“This ruling is disappointing because the city’s current operation of its combined sewage system causes pollution in local waterways, particularly during, and after, rain events,” a chapter representative said in an email. “We are committed to working with the EPA to support an updated permit containing enforceable limits that protects our water quality. We encourage the City of San Francisco to step up and make the financial investments in the sewage system that are needed to keep our waterways clean.”
