“Over the last decade there have been a couple of U.S. Supreme Court decisions that have really undermined these organizations’ authority and caused a lot of confusion over their abilities to regulate waterways,” Kim Ferraro, the senior staff attorney for the Hoosier Environmental Council, said. “Because of this confusion, the Clean Water Act was sort of muddied and a lot of waters were, in effect, left ?unprotected.”
Before the rule, the law was that a body of water could be regulated by the federal government if it served as a substantial nexus to a larger tributary, but it did not clarify what a substantial nexus was.
Martha Clark Mettler, the deputy assistant commissioner of Indiana’s Office of Water Quality, said the new rule does not seem to significantly alter what kind of water pollution is and is not legal.
“It just came out, so we’re still really analyzing the complete impact of the rule,” she said. “A lot of the practices that the Corps uses to identify waters of the U.S. will stay the same from our cursory ?assessment.”
Ferraro agreed that many of the rules from the Clean Water Act would not be changed.
“What this rule did was provide clarity, which is why I’m confused at why the opposition is being so vocal,” Ferraro said. “It didn’t really ?change anything.”
Indiana Sen. Dan Coats, R-Ind., is among the vocal opposition, according to a statement released by his office Wednesday.
“Indiana businesses, property owners and farmers already face a mountain of Washington red tape, and this announcement only adds more when Hoosiers make decisions about their own land,” Coats said in the release.
Ferraro pointed out that it is not only private property that is at risk when bodies of water are polluted. When the IDS contacted Sen. Coats for a further explanation of his opposition, his representatives said he had no further comments.
“It’s common sense that if you pollute a tributary to a waterway, the pollution is going to end up in the waterway,” Ferraro said. “The new rule is very good news for people who like to fish and swim in lakes and streams and people who like to drink water, which is everyone.”
Though many government officials have voiced concerns about the rule, it is likely to go into effect regardless, Ferraro said. She noted that when the rule goes into effect, it will be especially beneficial for a state like Indiana.
Ferraro mentioned the rapid loss of the state’s wetlands and the high amounts of pollutants, coal ash, E. coli and agricultural chemicals found in the ?waterways.
“We’re losing wetlands at an alarming rate, and part of that is because the Army Corps of Engineers hasn’t had enough jurisdiction to protect them,” she said. “Indiana has too much development and irresponsible farming practices. We’ve got a long way to go, but this should be a good first step.”
