On February 12, 2024, the NAM filed an amicus brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to address whether the Clean Water Act allows the EPA to include generic (and vague) prohibitions in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits that subject permitholders to enforcement for exceedances of water quality standards. A NPDES permit is required to discharge a pollutant through a “point source” into “a water of the United States.” In this case, the 9th Circuit affirmed EPA’s use of a generic prohibition in San Francisco’s NPDES permit for a water treatment facility—stating that water discharge “shall not cause or contribute to the violation of any applicable water quality standard.” This ruling directly conflicts with 2nd Circuit precedent deeming generic prohibitions impermissible and could impact manufacturers’ ability to assert the permit shield defense—a defense that provides protection from liability if a manufacturer is operating under a valid permit and its facility discharges waste in accordance with the permit. Permit operators need specific guidance as to allowable discharges in accordance with the permit.
Our brief urges the Supreme Court to review this case to resolve the circuit split and highlights the key role of the permit shield defense in guarding against citizen suits and unforeseen enforcement actions. Happily, on May 20, 2024, the Court granted the petition for certorari.
On July 26, 2024, the NAM filed an amicus brief emphasizing the practical importance of clear and predictable CWA compliance and enforcement and demonstrating that generic prohibitions are inconsistent with the text and design of the CWA.