San Francisco has found unexpected support from fossil fuel groups in its Supreme Court challenge to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency water regulations, arguing that the rules are too vague to comply with.

Pamela King and Miranda Willson report for E&E News.

In short:

• San Francisco claims EPA’s water discharge limits are too generic, leading to compliance difficulties.
• Fossil fuel industry groups back San Francisco, fearing increased liability under the current EPA requirements.
• EPA defends its approach, stating the permits are clear and necessary to prevent water pollution.

Key quote:

“The issue here is whether San Francisco and other permit holders across the nation can be found in violation of generic prohibitions against impacting water quality that don’t identify any specific requirements that we’re supposed to follow.”

— Jen Kwart, spokesperson for San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu

Why this matters:

City officials contend that the one-size-fits-all approach of the EPA does not account for the unique environmental and infrastructural circumstances faced by different municipalities. This has led to significant difficulties in meeting the prescribed standards without incurring excessive costs or resorting to temporary fixes that may not be sustainable in the long run. For San Francisco, and potentially other cities across the nation, this battle with the EPA could set a significant precedent for the future of water management policy.

Related EHN coverage: