Congress has voted to scrap new Clean Water Act rules drafted by the EPA and the Corps of Engineers. President Obama says he'll veto the measure.

Another administration, another Waters of the U.S. rule. Unfortunately, this one doesn’t appear to be farmer friendly.

Last week the Environmental Protection Agency and the Corps of Engineers released a reworked definition of Waters of the U.S., which will determine which waters will be regulated under the Clean Water Act.

The new rule replaces Trump-era WOTUS rules favored by farm groups, potentially putting hundreds of thousands of additional wetlands, lakes and streams under federal protection.

The EPA and the Corps said the reworked rule provides a “durable definition” of waterways to reduce uncertainty. We’re skeptical. The agencies have fumbled with a series of rewrites over nearly 20 years and four administrations, all in an attempt to square the rules with a couple of Supreme Court rulings.

In 2015 the Obama administration extended regulation to isolated bodies of water having a “significant nexus” with navigable waters of the United States. The rule left it to the bureaucrats to determine that nexus, and that made farmers and ranchers nervous.

President Trump suspended the rule. The Biden administration re-established the pre-Obama definition of WOTUS as it consulted a broad “array of stakeholders” to rewrite the rule.

A committee of those stakeholders had suggested that any definition be limited to traditional navigable waters and territorial seas, and use clear terms that are easy to interpret and apply.

Clarity has not been the hallmark of the government’s work.

The new rule depends on two tests to determine if waters are covered by the act. The “relatively permanent’ test covers waters that are “relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing” and are connected to navigable waters, territorial seas or interstate waters.

The “significant nexus” standard covers “waters that, either alone or in combination with similarly situated waters in the region, significantly affect the chemical, physical or biological integrity of traditional navigable waters, the territorial seas or interstate waters.”

The “relatively permanent” standard seems clear enough, though we would be cautious about betting the farm on it.

The “significant nexus” standard, on the other hand, could conceivably include waters and wetlands that have no visible connection to navigable waters that could be miles away.

It all turns on the EPA’s definition of “significant.

Prudent landowners will need to hire expensive consultants to survey the property to access its potential connections to distant waters. Even then, they should probably be prepared for even more expensive litigation.

To further muddy the waters, the new rule was issued as the Supreme Court prepares to render a decision in the case of Idaho landowners who are challenging the EPA’s determination that a wetland on their private land is protected under the Clean Water Act.

The court’s decision could result in a new standard that could set these new rules on their ear. It seems it would have been prudent to wait for a ruling before issuing new regulations.

Changing WOTUS rules is like changing the drapes in the Oval Office. Every president has to do it.