{ "id": "R43455", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R43455", "active": true, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 458005, "date": "2017-01-05", "retrieved": "2017-01-06T19:12:03.209173", "title": "EPA and the Army Corps\u2019 Rule to Define \u201cWaters of the United States\u201d", "summary": "On May 27, 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jointly announced a final rule defining the scope of waters protected under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The rule revises regulations that have been in place for more than 25 years. Revisions are being made in light of 2001 and 2006 Supreme Court rulings that interpreted the regulatory scope of the CWA more narrowly than the agencies and lower courts were then doing, and created uncertainty about the appropriate scope of waters protected under the CWA.\nAccording to the agencies, the new rule revises the existing administrative definition of \u201cwaters of the United States\u201d consistent with the CWA, legal rulings, the agencies\u2019 expertise and experience, and science concerning the interconnectedness of tributaries, wetlands, and other waters and effects of these connections on the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of downstream waters. Waters that are \u201cjurisdictional\u201d are subject to the multiple regulatory requirements of the CWA. Non-jurisdictional waters are not subject to those requirements.\nThis report describes the final revised rule\u2014which the agencies refer to as the Clean Water Rule. It includes a table comparing the existing regulatory language that defines \u201cwaters of the United States\u201d with the revisions. The rule is particularly focused on clarifying the regulatory status of surface waters located in isolated places in a landscape. It does not modify some categories of waters that are jurisdictional under existing rules (traditional navigable waters, interstate waters and wetlands, the territorial seas, and impoundments). The rule also lists waters that would not be jurisdictional, such as prior converted cropland and certain ditches. It makes no change to existing statutory exclusions, such as CWA permit exemptions for normal farming and ranching activities. The rule will replace EPA-Corps guidance that was issued in 2003 and 2008, which has guided agency interpretation of the Court\u2019s rulings but also has caused considerable confusion. Much of the controversy since the Supreme Court rulings has focused on the degree to which isolated waters and small streams are jurisdictional. Under the EPA-Corps guidance, many of these waters have required case-specific evaluation to determine if jurisdiction applies. Under the final rule, some of these waters would continue to need case-specific review, but fewer than under the existing agency guidance documents. The final rule also explicitly excludes specified waters from the definition of \u201cwaters of the United States\u201d (e.g., prior converted croplands, stormwater management systems, and groundwater).\nChanges in the final rule would increase the categorical assertion of CWA jurisdiction, in part as a result of expressly declaring some types of waters jurisdictional by rule (such as all waters adjacent to a jurisdictional water), making these waters subject to the act\u2019s permit and other requirements if pollutant discharges occur. Nevertheless, the agencies believe that the rule does not exceed the CWA\u2019s lawful coverage or protect new types of waters that have not been protected historically (i.e., under existing rules that the new rule will replace). While it would enlarge jurisdiction beyond that under the existing EPA-Corps guidance, they believe that it would not enlarge jurisdiction beyond what is consistent with the Supreme Court\u2019s current reading of jurisdiction and would reduce jurisdiction over some waters, as a result of exclusions and exemptions. The agencies estimate that the new rule will result in approximately 3-5% more positive assertions of jurisdiction over U.S. waters, compared with current field practice. \nCongressional interest in the rule has been strong since it was proposed in 2014 and has continued in the 114th Congress. The agencies contend that the final rule responds to criticisms of the proposed rule. Their stated intention has been to clarify the rules and make jurisdictional determinations more predictable, less ambiguous, and more timely. Some stakeholders believe that the agencies largely succeeded in that objective, while others do not. Challenges to the rule were filed in multiple federal district and appellate courts by industry groups, more than half of the states, and several environmental groups. The rule became effective on August 28, 2015, but on October 9, 2015, a federal court blocked the rule\u2019s implementation nationwide. The legal question of which federal court should review the challenges to the rule remains in limbo.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R43455", "sha1": "2bb39830b8960015035e8ec22a99eb79edac8cd1", "filename": "files/20170105_R43455_2bb39830b8960015035e8ec22a99eb79edac8cd1.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R43455", "sha1": "9f6f213f9d3b08f48a427caada8d6b542db5c052", "filename": "files/20170105_R43455_9f6f213f9d3b08f48a427caada8d6b542db5c052.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4909, "name": "Water Resource Management" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4929, "name": "Water Quality" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 453833, "date": "2016-06-24", "retrieved": "2016-09-09T19:18:59.402515", "title": "EPA and the Army Corps\u2019 Rule to Define \u201cWaters of the United States\u201d", "summary": "On May 27, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jointly announced a final rule defining the scope of waters protected under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The rule revises regulations that have been in place for more than 25 years. Revisions are being made in light of 2001 and 2006 Supreme Court rulings that interpreted the regulatory scope of the CWA more narrowly than the agencies and lower courts were then doing, and created uncertainty about the appropriate scope of waters protected under the CWA.\nAccording to the agencies, the new rule revises the existing administrative definition of \u201cwaters of the United States\u201d consistent with the CWA, legal rulings, the agencies\u2019 expertise and experience, and science concerning the interconnectedness of tributaries, wetlands, and other waters and effects of these connections on the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of downstream waters. Waters that are \u201cjurisdictional\u201d are subject to the multiple regulatory requirements of the CWA. Non-jurisdictional waters are not subject to those requirements.\nThis report describes the final revised rule\u2014which the agencies refer to as the Clean Water Rule\u2014and includes a table comparing the existing regulatory language that defines \u201cwaters of the United States\u201d with the revisions. The rule is particularly focused on clarifying the regulatory status of surface waters located in isolated places in a landscape. It does not modify some categories of waters that are jurisdictional under existing rules (traditional navigable waters, interstate waters and wetlands, the territorial seas, and impoundments). The rule also lists waters that would not be jurisdictional, such as prior converted cropland and certain ditches. It makes no change to existing statutory exclusions, such as CWA permit exemptions for normal farming and ranching activities. The rule will replace EPA-Corps guidance that was issued in 2003 and 2008, which has guided agency interpretation of the Court\u2019s rulings but also has caused considerable confusion. Much of the controversy since the Supreme Court rulings has focused on the degree to which isolated waters and small streams are jurisdictional. Under the EPA-Corps guidance, many of these waters have required case-specific evaluation to determine if jurisdiction applies. Under the final rule, some of these waters would continue to need case-specific review, but fewer than under the existing agency guidance documents. The final rule also explicitly excludes specified waters from the definition of \u201cwaters of the United States\u201d (e.g., prior converted croplands, stormwater management systems, and groundwater).\nChanges in the final rule would increase the categorical assertion of CWA jurisdiction, in part as a result of expressly declaring some types of waters jurisdictional by rule (such as all waters adjacent to a jurisdictional water), making these waters subject to the act\u2019s permit and other requirements if pollutant discharges occur. Nevertheless, the agencies believe that the rule does not exceed the CWA\u2019s lawful coverage or protect new types of waters that have not been protected historically (i.e., under existing rules that the new rule will replace). While it would enlarge jurisdiction beyond that under the existing EPA-Corps guidance, they believe that it would not enlarge jurisdiction beyond what is consistent with the Supreme Court\u2019s current reading of jurisdiction and would reduce jurisdiction over some waters, as a result of exclusions and exemptions. The agencies estimate that the new rule will result in approximately 3-5% more positive assertions of jurisdiction over U.S. waters, compared with current field practice. \nCongressional interest in the rule has been strong since it was proposed in 2014 and is continuing in the 114th Congress. The agencies contend that the final rule responds to those criticisms of the proposed rule. Their stated intention has been to clarify the rules and make jurisdictional determinations more predictable, less ambiguous, and more timely. Some stakeholders believe that the agencies largely succeeded in that objective, while others do not. Challenges to the rule were filed in multiple federal district and appellate courts by industry groups, more than half of the states, and several environmental groups. The rule became effective on August 28, 2015, but on October 9, a federal court blocked the rule\u2019s implementation nationwide. The legal question of which federal court should review the challenges to the rule remains in limbo.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R43455", "sha1": "696d4aabc43157e9f8d028cf546ad5075f3b0a8f", "filename": "files/20160624_R43455_696d4aabc43157e9f8d028cf546ad5075f3b0a8f.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R43455", "sha1": "dd8b5efa101efc963e8ab8f28644e2d95745aadf", "filename": "files/20160624_R43455_dd8b5efa101efc963e8ab8f28644e2d95745aadf.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 2647, "name": "Water Quality Protection" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 450251, "date": "2016-02-25", "retrieved": "2016-04-06T17:00:45.949456", "title": "EPA and the Army Corps\u2019 Rule to Define \u201cWaters of the United States\u201d", "summary": "On May 27, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jointly announced a final rule defining the scope of waters protected under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The rule revises regulations that have been in place for more than 25 years. Revisions are being made in light of 2001 and 2006 Supreme Court rulings that interpreted the regulatory scope of the CWA more narrowly than the agencies and lower courts were then doing, and created uncertainty about the appropriate scope of waters protected under the CWA.\nAccording to the agencies, the new rule revises the existing administrative definition of \u201cwaters of the United States\u201d consistent with the CWA, legal rulings, the agencies\u2019 expertise and experience, and science concerning the interconnectedness of tributaries, wetlands, and other waters and effects of these connections on the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of downstream waters. Waters that are \u201cjurisdictional\u201d are subject to the multiple regulatory requirements of the CWA. Non-jurisdictional waters are not subject to those requirements.\nThis report describes the final revised rule\u2014which the agencies refer to as the Clean Water Rule\u2014and includes a table comparing the existing regulatory language that defines \u201cwaters of the United States\u201d with the revisions. The rule is particularly focused on clarifying the regulatory status of surface waters located in isolated places in a landscape. It does not modify some categories of waters that are jurisdictional under existing rules (traditional navigable waters, interstate waters and wetlands, the territorial seas, and impoundments). The rule also lists waters that would not be jurisdictional, such as prior converted cropland and certain ditches. It makes no change to existing statutory exclusions, such as CWA permit exemptions for normal farming and ranching activities. The rule will replace EPA-Corps guidance that was issued in 2003 and 2008, which has guided agency interpretation of the Court\u2019s rulings but also has caused considerable confusion. Much of the controversy since the Supreme Court rulings has focused on the degree to which isolated waters and small streams are jurisdictional. Under the EPA-Corps guidance, many of these waters have required case-specific evaluation to determine if jurisdiction applies. Under the final rule, some of these waters would continue to need case-specific review, but fewer than under the existing agency guidance documents. The final rule also explicitly excludes specified waters from the definition of \u201cwaters of the United States\u201d (e.g., prior converted croplands, stormwater management systems, and groundwater).\nChanges in the final rule would increase the categorical assertion of CWA jurisdiction, in part as a result of expressly declaring some types of waters jurisdictional by rule (such as all waters adjacent to a jurisdictional water), making these waters subject to the act\u2019s permit and other requirements if pollutant discharges occur. Nevertheless, the agencies believe that the rule does not exceed the CWA\u2019s lawful coverage or protect new types of waters that have not been protected historically (i.e., under existing rules that the new rule will replace). While it would enlarge jurisdiction beyond that under the existing EPA-Corps guidance, they believe that it would not enlarge jurisdiction beyond what is consistent with the Supreme Court\u2019s current reading of jurisdiction and would reduce jurisdiction over some waters, as a result of exclusions and exemptions. The agencies estimate that the new rule will result in approximately 3-5% more positive assertions of jurisdiction over U.S. waters, compared with current field practice. \nCongressional interest in the rule has been strong since it was proposed in 2014 and is continuing in the 114th Congress. The agencies contend that the final rule responds to those criticisms of the proposed rule. Their stated intention has been to clarify the rules and make jurisdictional determinations more predictable, less ambiguous, and more timely. Some stakeholders believe that the agencies largely succeeded in that objective, while others do not. Challenges to the rule were filed in multiple federal district and appellate courts by industry groups, more than half of the states, and several environmental groups. The rule became effective on August 28, 2015, but on October 9, a federal court blocked the rule\u2019s implementation nationwide.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R43455", "sha1": "aafe08a0b307c5e9766ef2550a22fe4ea3b73a23", "filename": "files/20160225_R43455_aafe08a0b307c5e9766ef2550a22fe4ea3b73a23.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R43455", "sha1": "943a37793881ab1d4c31d935edeb979c32d3cc7a", "filename": "files/20160225_R43455_943a37793881ab1d4c31d935edeb979c32d3cc7a.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 2647, "name": "Water Quality Protection" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc824769/", "id": "R43455_2016Jan04", "date": "2016-01-04", "retrieved": "2016-04-04T14:48:17", "title": "EPA and the Army Corps' Rule to Define \"Waters of the United States\"", "summary": "This report describes the revised rule of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) which defines the scope of waters protected under the Clean Water Act (CWA). Agencies refer to this final rule as the Clean Water Rule. This report includes a table comparing the existing regulatory language that defines \"waters of the United States\" with the revisions.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20160104_R43455_14ab345428d9e4535248f4c0410becf3b1aed9ba.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20160104_R43455_14ab345428d9e4535248f4c0410becf3b1aed9ba.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water Law and legislation", "name": "Water Law and legislation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water pollution", "name": "Water pollution" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water quality", "name": "Water quality" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water resources", "name": "Water resources" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Environmental protection", "name": "Environmental protection" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc819394/", "id": "R43455_2015Jun29", "date": "2015-06-29", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "EPA and the Army Corps\u2019 Rule to Define \u201cWaters of the United States\u201d", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20150629_R43455_27b454faf32d94ef2661a30304accaae1816702a.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20150629_R43455_27b454faf32d94ef2661a30304accaae1816702a.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc812935/", "id": "R43455_2015Apr07", "date": "2015-04-07", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "EPA and the Army Corps\u2019 Proposed Rule to Define \u201cWaters of the United States\u201d", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20150407_R43455_df520fc50849becd4cafb1b1e96727d5b3677c70.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20150407_R43455_df520fc50849becd4cafb1b1e96727d5b3677c70.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc505464/", "id": "R43455_2015Mar20", "date": "2015-03-20", "retrieved": "2015-05-29T05:37:21", "title": "EPA and the Army Corps' Proposed Rule to Define \"Waters of the United States\"", "summary": "This report describes the March 25, 2014 proposed rule to define \"waters of the United States,\" particularly focused on clarifying the regulatory status of waters located in isolated places in a landscape, the types of waters with ambiguous jurisdictional status following the Supreme Court's ruling. It includes a table comparing the proposal to existing regulatory language.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20150320_R43455_2bee15abed19b928dad4a011b0ed7a95cd7feb89.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20150320_R43455_2bee15abed19b928dad4a011b0ed7a95cd7feb89.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water law and legislation", "name": "Water law and legislation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water pollution", "name": "Water pollution" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water quality", "name": "Water quality" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water resources", "name": "Water resources" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Environmental protection", "name": "Environmental protection" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc813590/", "id": "R43455_2015Feb27", "date": "2015-02-27", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "EPA and the Army Corps\u2019 Proposed Rule to Define \u201cWaters of the United States\u201d", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20150227_R43455_fefa43236df964a23853e7ab7ba50c4345d8da5c.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20150227_R43455_fefa43236df964a23853e7ab7ba50c4345d8da5c.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc811799/", "id": "R43455_2015Feb09", "date": "2015-02-09", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "EPA and the Army Corps\u2019 Proposed Rule to Define \u201cWaters of the United States\u201d", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20150209_R43455_887044a4b5c6778de0eac203d0f865c0bb072f01.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20150209_R43455_887044a4b5c6778de0eac203d0f865c0bb072f01.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc491404/", "id": "R43455_2014Nov21", "date": "2014-11-21", "retrieved": "2015-01-27T19:40:46", "title": "EPA and the Army Corps' Proposed Rule to Define \"Waters of the United States\"", "summary": "This report describes the March 25, 2014 proposed rule to define \"waters of the United States,\" particularly focused on clarifying the regulatory status of waters located in isolated places in a landscape, the types of waters with ambiguous jurisdictional status following the Supreme Court's ruling. It includes a table comparing the proposal to existing regulatory language.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20141121_R43455_0273388a86f033a655d5e7f20c225632bff1160c.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20141121_R43455_0273388a86f033a655d5e7f20c225632bff1160c.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water law and legislation", "name": "Water law and legislation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water pollution", "name": "Water pollution" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water quality", "name": "Water quality" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water resources", "name": "Water resources" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Environmental protection", "name": "Environmental protection" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc462853/", "id": "R43455_2014Sep10", "date": "2014-09-10", "retrieved": "2014-12-05T09:57:41", "title": "EPA and the Army Corps' Proposed Rule to Define \"Waters of the United States\"", "summary": "This report describes the March 25 proposed rule to define \"waters of the United States,\" particularly focused on clarifying the regulatory status of waters located in isolated places in a landscape, the types of waters with ambiguous jurisdictional status following the Supreme Court's ruling. It includes a table comparing the proposal to existing regulatory language.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20140910_R43455_8c0a128aceca721bdd4316c5c225a2b74d74592b.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20140910_R43455_8c0a128aceca721bdd4316c5c225a2b74d74592b.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water law and legislation", "name": "Water law and legislation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water pollution", "name": "Water pollution" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water quality", "name": "Water quality" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water resources", "name": "Water resources" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Environmental protection", "name": "Environmental protection" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc306425/", "id": "R43455_2014Apr21", "date": "2014-04-21", "retrieved": "2014-07-08T21:53:44", "title": "EPA and the Army Corps' Proposed Rule to Define \"Waters of the United States\"", "summary": "This report describes the March 25 proposed rule to define \"waters of the United States,\" particularly focused on clarifying the regulatory status of waters located in isolated places in a landscape, the types of waters with ambiguous jurisdictional status following the Supreme Court's ruling. It includes a table comparing the proposal to existing regulatory language.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20140421_R43455_6938d559cbc2519548c3683b0ef2b9520593330f.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20140421_R43455_6938d559cbc2519548c3683b0ef2b9520593330f.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water law and legislation", "name": "Water law and legislation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water pollution", "name": "Water pollution" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water quality", "name": "Water quality" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water resources", "name": "Water resources" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Environmental protection", "name": "Environmental protection" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc284463/", "id": "R43455_2014Mar27", "date": "2014-03-27", "retrieved": "2014-05-06T21:21:54", "title": "EPA and the Army Corps' Proposed Rule to Define \"Waters of the United States\"", "summary": "This report describes the March 25 proposed rule to define \"waters of the United States,\" particularly focused on clarifying the regulatory status of waters located in isolated places in a landscape, the types of waters with ambiguous jurisdictional status following the Supreme Court's ruling. It includes a table comparing the proposal to existing regulatory language.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20140327_R43455_8304d6b8f48ce55a64ae70f519c1060f52170aee.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20140327_R43455_8304d6b8f48ce55a64ae70f519c1060f52170aee.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water law and legislation", "name": "Water law and legislation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water pollution", "name": "Water pollution" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water quality", "name": "Water quality" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Water resources", "name": "Water resources" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Environmental protection", "name": "Environmental protection" } ] } ], "topics": [ "Agricultural Policy", "Environmental Policy" ] }