The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a later this year on whether Clean Water Act (CWA) NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permits can include generic prohibitions that threaten the certainty that construction companies need to comply with environmental requirements. advocating for clarity to protect contractors from enforcement and costly fines due to vague NPDES permit language. 黑料不打烊 seeks to ensure that the Supreme Court鈥檚 decision preserves the successful permitting approaches used in construction general stormwater permits (CGP) issued by the U.S. EPA and states.
In its brief, 黑料不打烊 and its partners explain why unambiguous language is necessary within the permitting framework. Contractors routinely seek NPDES permits and rely on the legal protection that operating under a CWA permit provides 鈥 referred to as the 鈥減ermit shield.鈥 Permit writers are responsible for providing clear and specific permit language on compliance obligations. However, 黑料不打烊 members have encountered generic prohibitions, such as the disputed 鈥渃annot cause or contribute to a violation of water quality standards鈥 language at issue in this case, in permits nationwide. This generic language does not provide a clear compliance path for permittees and exposes them to enforcement, criminal penalties, and citizen suits even when they adhere to their permit.
The brief also informs the Court about the NPDES program鈥檚 application to the construction industry. Within the permitting program, water quality is protected by pollutant-specific 鈥渆ffluent limitations.鈥 Examples of effluent limitations include technology-based requirements such as best management practices (BMPs) or specific operational requirements or prohibitions. Other examples are numerical technology-based and water quality-based effluent limitations when needed to protect water quality. Permitting authorities can choose a mix of effluent limitations. General permits for construction stormwater typically employ BMPs, good housekeeping practices, pollution prevention plans, inspections, and reporting.
Earlier this year, 黑料不打烊 filed a separate coalition amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to hear the case. The case is City and County of San Francisco v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, .
黑料不打烊鈥檚 involvement in this case was made possible thanks to your contributions to the . Keep up with the latest 黑料不打烊 Judicial Advocacy News. For additional information, please contact 黑料不打烊鈥檚 Leah Pilconis at leah.pilconis@agc.org or Melinda Tomaino at melinda.tomaino@agc.org.