Table of contents
- Executive summary
- Acronyms and abbreviations
- 1. Overview of EU water-related legislation to protect human health and the aquatic environment
- 2. Protecting surface waters from nutrient and organic pollution
- 3 Protecting drinking water and bathing water from microbial pollution
- 4 Information to the public
- 5 Conclusions
- References
- Annex: Results reported under the three water industry directives
- A1 Bathing Water Directive
- A2 Drinking Water Directive
- A3 Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive
Executive summary
Society depends on the satisfactory and sustainable management of water. Historically, the primary purpose for water treatment was to reduce the likelihood of disease being transmitted to humans through water. Subsequent measures to address environmental concerns have broadened our expectations of what water and wastewater treatment should deliver.
This report considers three pieces of EU water legislation targeted at particular sectors: the Bathing Water Directive (BWD, 1976, 2006), the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (UWWTD, 1991) and the Drinking Water Directive (DWD, 1998), together termed the “water industry directives”. Their objectives towards specific issues are considered in the context of the Water Framework Directive (WFD, 2000).
Consideration of the older legislation in the context of WFD is worthwhile as the European Commission considers a review of water legislation. Meanwhile, the European citizen’s initiative ‘Right2Water’ (http://www.right2water.eu/) highlighted the level of interest in water issues. This report looks at areas in common between the water industry directives and notes where integration under the WFD can identify synergies and allow for improved decision-making.
The report builds upon reports required under the sectoral legislation, summaries of which are provided in the annex. Common features towards public health, environmental quality and informing the public are identified and considered in the context of the WFD, which, as a framework directive conceived after much of the sectoral legislation was adopted, bridges over many objectives of the water industry directives.
As a general overview of the water industry directives, compliance of UWWTD tends to be high among the countries that were Member States before 2004 (EU-15). The picture is more mixed among the newer Member States (EU-13), where compliance is high or increasing. Compliance rates of BWD and DWD are high in all countries. Reporting under the WFD in the second cycle of river basin management planning is under way and results should become available over 2017-18. Results of the first river basin management plans of the WFD in 2009 showed nutrient inputs from wastewater treatment plants and agriculture as one of the most significant reasons for waterbodies failing to be in good status.
An integrated approach of water related directives may help us deal better with current and future challenges, for example using the WFD river basin management planning process to identify those stakeholders with relevant interests, and to implement effective decision-making that takes into account the differing issues, costs and benefits. Integration may need more detailed understanding of inter-related issues than that needed to meet more linear obligations under sectoral legislation, such as infrastructure improvement. Authorities and water managers need to identify related pressures and impacts to help identify root causes and thereby facilitate more effective implementation.
Continuing challenges remain in dealing with diffuse pollution, through for example: surface run-off from urban and agricultural land and overflow from combined sewers. Such diffuse sources are likely to become more significant over time as point sources are tackled. Moreover, emerging risks include micropollutants, microplastics and antimicrobial resistance, where potential risks for both the environment and human health have been identified but the significance is as yet unclear.
-
-
Acknowledged.
-
-
General remark to the report: Austria very much appreciates the cross-sectoral evaluation of effects on health and environment of the three thematic EU Directives taking into account the overall objectives of the WFD.
In our opinion a main message of the report – ideally prominently reflected in the executive summary and the conclusions - should be, that the existing EU water legislation highly contributed and still contributes to ensure public health and environmental protection all over Europe.
This clear message is even more needed in times of BREXIT and EU scepticism as well as decreasing financial resources.
-
Addressed.
-
-
CEEP: General remarks
CEEP welcomes the report aiming at linking public health and environmental protection in European Water Policies. CEEP would like to refer to two CEEP Opinions issued this year: a) Opinion 01 on the review of the Drinking Water Directive, and b) Opinion 07 on a strategic approach to pollution in the context of the upcoming evaluation of EU water legislation. Key points addressed in these opinions, which are relevant for issues dealt with in the report, are
- Precaution is the fundamental principle of drinking water legislation.
- Polluters need to be held responsible for the damage they cause.
- EU water legislation should provide comprehensive protection from source onwards. CEEP stresses the need for better integration of the protection of drinking water resources in the River Basin Management Plans and for a legal cross-reference between DWD and WFD (including the Groundwater Directive and the Priority Substances Directive)
- Poor implementation and enforcement hinders good policy outcome.
The draft report seems to suggest that drinking water utilities should take on responsibilities as to the protection of source water, normally attributed to competent authorities (for instance the co-ordination of stakeholders). This should be repaired in the final text. Similar, CEEP does not agree with a general approach where drinking water utilities are expected to compensate polluters (e.g. agriculture). More generally, CEEP suggests to check the text on consistency where it comes to addressing actors such as Member States, national and local governments, authorities, water managers, water service providers and water suppliers.
CEEP suggests to clarify the evaluation and presentation of drinking water quality data in the report in relation to the ex post evaluation as part of DWD review (REFIT).
CEEP also would like to see a further explanation of the term water industry directives as the three directives at hand (BWD, UWWTD and DWD) address Member States and do not regulate water services.
Note: foot text in the report (environmental quality) is different from of title of report (environmental protection).
Executive Summary:
Second para: Add DWD 1980 and amendment 2015. WFD, including daughter directives on groundwater and priority substances.
Last para,
Also point sources continue to creating challenges.
Last sentence: we would argue that it is clear enough to take actions.
-
Addressed.
Swiss data is included only in the Chapters 2.2 and A1. Switzerland has no comments on the report.