EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has set a stated goal of producing a "perfect" definition of Waters of the United States, telling Brownfield the current framework has failed farmers and regulators alike because it leaves essential terms undefined.

"You could use a term like 'drought' or 'low tide' and not define it, and then we can finalize a decision and not define it," Zeldin said in an interview with Brownfield. "And it ends up being an imperfect WOTUS definition."

His words mark the most direct signal yet from the agency's current leadership that another rewrite of the rule is in motion.

Why the wording matters

WOTUS determines which wetlands, ditches and waterways fall under federal Clean Water Act jurisdiction. For growers, that jurisdiction translates directly into permitting costs, mitigation requirements and delays on ground that may hold water only part of the year.

Zeldin's complaint is about vocabulary. A rule that invokes conditions such as drought or low tide without defining them, he argued, produces an "imperfect" standard that cannot be applied consistently across regions or enforcement actions.

What does this change for growers?

In the short term, nothing. Zeldin described an aim, not a finalized rule. No date for a proposal, comment period or final action appears in his remarks.

What changes is the direction of travel. The administrator has placed definitional precision, rather than jurisdictional scope, at the center of the agency's stated approach. That suggests the next iteration will be judged on whether terms like drought and low tide carry enforceable meanings.

Farmers and their trade groups have pressed for exactly that clarity through multiple administrations, as courts and agencies alternately widened and narrowed the rule's reach.

The road ahead

Any new definition will move through formal rulemaking. That process carries public comment, likely litigation and the possibility of divergent standards across states, all of which have shadowed previous WOTUS revisions.

Until a proposal is published, growers making drainage, tile or land-clearing decisions face the same ambiguity Zeldin criticized. His stated ambition, in his own framing, is a definition precise enough that the word "perfect" fits.

Whether the agency can deliver that precision, and on what timeline, will become clear only when draft text reaches the Federal Register.