# EUR-Lex - 52014DC0363 - EN

*|*

# 52014DC0363

**REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION Synthesis Report on the Quality of Drinking Water in the EU examining the Member States' reports for the period 2008-2010 under Directive 98/83/EC /* COM/2014/0363 final */**

			*

			*

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION

Synthesis Report on the Quality of
Drinking Water in the EU examining the Member States' reports for the period
2008-2010 under Directive 98/83/EC

1. 
Introduction

Safe drinking water is essential to our
lives. It is vital for public health and an important driver of a healthy
economy. The WHO[1]
concludes that by ‘improving access to safe drinking water and adequate
sanitation, in addition to the health benefits through prevention of waterborne
diseases, significant economic benefits may be gained’. These include
healthcare savings, productive days gained per year, increased school
attendance and value of life
lost averted. The water industry sector also makes a significant contribution
to GDP. The total estimated gross value added (GVA) of the industry covering
sanitation and water supply services reached €43.84 billion in 2010 and
represented that year about 500,000 full-time equivalent jobs[2].

The
Drinking Water Directive[3],
introduced in 1980 and revised in 1998, has led to the availability of high-quality
drinking water across the EU. Joint efforts from EU institutions, Member States
and service providers have resulted in high compliance rates with the drinking
water standards and the Directive is therefore one of the  success stories,
albeit not a very well known one, of EU legislation in the field of environment
and public health.

The
quality of drinking water and the required level of treatment is very much
related to the quality of drinking water sources. The level of protection of
water resources, in particular groundwater and surface water, is thus crucial
for the Drinking Water Directive as it impacts on the treatment costs.

Drinking
water is also an important issue for EU citizens. This is reflected in a
EUROBAROMETER[4]
survey and in the recently launched European Citizens’ Initiative Right2Water[5]. In
its reply to the initiative, the Commission announced an EU-wide public
consultation on the Drinking Water Directive[6],
notably with a view to improving access to quality water in the EU.

2. 
Drinking
Water Situation

This
document gives a summary of the status of implementation of the Drinking Water
Directive, based on the latest data reported by Member States[7].
Technical reports which contain detailed fact sheets per Member State will be soon available on DG Environment's website[8].

2.1.  
Water Supply

Drinking
water supply in the EU is organised by supply zones, i.e. geographically
defined areas within which water intended for human consumption comes from one
or more sources and within which water quality may be considered as being
approximately uniform. There are nearly 100,000 water supplies zones (WSZ) in
the EU. The Directive makes a distinction between large and small supplies[9].
Minimum water quality requirements are equal for both large and small supplies.
However, monitoring requirements differ and Member States do not need to report
on the small supplies. About 65 million people are served by small water
suppliers.

'Supply'
in the sense of the Directive does not mean 'access' to the public water supply
network[10].
Eurostat has collected data about the "population connected to public
water supply[11], see
table 1 at the end of the report. Due to the voluntary nature of the reporting,
this collection shows data gaps and does not allow calculating EU
totals/averages.

Sources
of Raw Water

In
the EU, water supply is mainly fed by groundwater and by surface water,
including artificial reservoirs. Water sources vary considerably between Member
States. Overviews have been provided in earlier reports[12], and
are collected by Eurostat[13].
There are significant differences in the percentage between large and small
supplies with much higher rates of groundwater sources for small supplies
(84%).

Groundwater
contamination, in particular by substances difficult to detect like pesticides,
and surface water contamination, increasingly influenced by climate change
(floods, extreme rainfalls, rain overflow) can pose problems that are passed on
to drinking water. A coordinated monitoring of groundwater and drinking water,
along with putting in place climate change adaptation and mitigation measures
would be beneficial for safe drinking water.

2.2.  
Drinking Water Quality

In order to
ensure that drinking water is safe for human consumption, the Drinking Water
Directive sets out minimum water quality requirements. It identifies
microbiological and chemical parameters that could pose a risk to human health
when concentrations exceed certain thresholds. For each of the parameters, the
Directive sets maximum concentration values that must be complied with. In
addition to the microbiological and chemical parameters, the Directive
identifies indicator parameters for the purpose of indicating a possible risk
for human health and which requires remedial action only if further
investigation confirms the human health risk.

Reported data on
these parameters show that drinking water quality in the EU is in general very
good. The overall trend is also positive. For the large supplies, the vast
majority of Member States show compliance rates for microbiological and
chemical parameters of between 99% and 100%. For the few Member States showing
compliance rates lower than 99%, reinforced action will be required to ensure
that all citizens served by the large supplies concerned can safely use
drinking water.

Figure
1: Summary overview - compliance rates microbiological and chemical parameters
in Member States

Detailed figures
can be found in table 1 at the end of the report.

As
regards the small water supplies, the picture is more divergent. Lower
compliance levels are noted for the microbiological parameters, with only three
Member States achieving compliance rates between 99% and 100%. A breakdown of
compliance rates for microbiological parameters shows that the compliance for
small supplies is significantly lower than for large supplies.

Figure
2: Compliance Rate Microbiology, Number of Member States

For
the chemical parameters for small supplies, similar high compliance levels are
noted as for the big supplies. In some supply zones, problems were reported in
relation to nitrate, nitrite, arsenic, and to a lesser extent, boron and
fluoride. For example, in 2010 more than 1000 small supplies with nitrate
concentrations exceeding the prescribed levels were identified (see table 1 at
the end of the report). The compliance rates for indicator parameters show that
in general the performance of small supplies was lower than that of large
supplies.

The
assessment of reported data on the small supplies showed that some Member
States are struggling to manage small supplies in a safe way. This could
potentially affect between 11.5 and 15.5 million people. However, more
information and a detailed assessment on the way these small supplies are
managed would be required to estimate any concrete risk for human health for
the citizens concerned.

Concerns
in relation to small water supplies have also been recognised by the 7th
Environmental Action Programme (7th EAP)[14], which
calls for increased efforts in the implementation of the Directive in
particular for small drinking water supplies.

As a
first step, the Commission, in close cooperation with Member States, has
elaborated a "Framework for Action" document setting out best
practices for conducting risk-assessments for small water supplies that will
soon be available on DG Environment’s website[15]. As
millions of EU citizens are concerned, further efforts should be pursued to
improve the supply with high-quality water in particular in remote and rural
areas.

Data
from Member States show that in cases of incidents and failures to meet the
quality standards, in general remedial action is taken by Member States within
an appropriate response time. In relation to the microbiological parameters,
measures entailed improving the treatment and cleaning of the contaminated
components of the public distribution system. For chemical parameters, failures
were addressed through better agricultural practice, conditioning or treatment
of the water, change of the source water, and providing information to the
public.

2.3.  
Monitoring and Information

The
Directive requires Member States to ensure that regular monitoring of the
quality of water intended for human consumption is carried out. However,
monitoring approaches differ between Member States and even between different
water supply zones within individual Member States, resulting in different
levels and availability of monitoring data. This does not necessarily amount to
a failure in meeting the legal requirements as the Directive allows for adapted
monitoring programmes depending on the specific characteristics of the water
supply zone. The analysis suggests, however, the need to review and better
streamline the current monitoring approaches, considering in particular the
WHO's risk assessment and risk management water safety plan approach[16].

To
address Member States’ monitoring and performance, the Commission is working on
a so called "Structured Implementation and Information Framework"
(SIIF), establishing systems at national level which actively disseminate
information about how EU environment legislation is being implemented. This
information is then brought together to provide an EU-wide overview. The
Directive's requirement that up-to-date information on drinking water quality is
made available to consumers could also be linked to such an information
framework and be improved in this context. Drinking water data could also be
more clearly linked to the Water Information System for Europe (WISE) which
comprises a wide range of data and information collected by the EU
institutions.

2.4.  
Derogations

The Directive
allows derogations from the drinking water quality standards under very strict
conditions and limited in time. Such derogations may not constitute a potential
danger for human health and may only be established if the supply of drinking
water in the area concerned cannot otherwise be maintained by any other
reasonable means. A derogation may not exceed a period of three years. However,
where a Member State considers that a longer derogation period is required, it
may grant a second derogation for a maximum period of three years and it must communicate
the grounds for this decision to the Commission. In exceptional cases, a Member State may request a third derogation from the Commission. The Commission will in
this case carefully assess the request and may either refuse the request or
grant the derogation for a maximum period of three years.

The Commission has
so far granted a number of third three-year derogations to the Czech Republic, Italy, Hungary and Germany, referring mainly to the parameters of nitrate and
nitrite, fluoride, boron, arsenic and nickel. It has refused one request for a derogation,
from Estonia. Further information is available on DG Environment’s webpage[17]. The
Commission is looking into appropriate ways of ensuring the correct
implementation of related decisions.

Derogations and
other possible exemptions in exceptional circumstances could jeopardize a
consistent EU-wide implementation of the Directive if not applied prudently. The
Commission considers that the current derogation regime provided Member States
with sufficient time to ensure that drinking water quality standards are met.
The Commission considers that no new derogations to the drinking water quality
standards should be granted for existing water supplies with the exception of
situations of new unforeseen pollution sources or following the introduction of
standards for new parameters or reinforced drinking water quality standards of
existing parameters. For new supplies, derogations could be considered under
strict conditions if the pollution sources can be remediated within an
acceptable timeframe and in case no alternative to the new supply is possible.

2.5.  
Challenges

EU policy on
drinking water has led to the development of high drinking water quality across
the EU over the past decades. However, in order to keep these high quality
standards and address specific remaining challenges, there may be a need to further
adapt the EU legal framework.

The nature of
small water supplies differs significantly from large water supplies. They are
small in scale and often located in rural and remote areas, requiring
management approaches taking into account the specific situations in these
areas. The current Drinking Water Directive focuses mainly on the large supplies.
Adding specific provisions for small supplies, including a reporting
obligation, would help to ensure efficient, risk-based management of small
supplies and allow better mapping of drinking water quality in small supply
zones. This would contribute to increasing access to safe drinking water,
particularly in remote areas, and increased availability of information for the
public and stakeholders on drinking water quality.

The current
parameter list and corresponding parametric values as well as monitoring and
analysis requirements may need to be adapted in light of the risks related to
emerging pollutants and scientific and technological progress. There may be a
need to extend this list to new emerging pollutants such as certain products
used in agriculture or industry, including pharmaceuticals. Monitoring
methodologies and specifications for the analysis of parameters should consider
the latest methods and techniques, including risk-based approaches, to allow
quality control in the most efficient and cost effective way, both as regards
treatment processes in the treatment facility and the distribution network up
to and including the tap. The EU framework should be assessed against updated
WHO guidelines on this matter. Specific action may be required as well to
reduce leakages in the distribution networks. In about half of the Member
States, more than 20% of clean drinking water is lost in the distribution
network before it reaches consumers’ taps, while for some Member States the
proportion is as high as 60%.

It is important
for the public to have access to information on drinking water quality. While
often provided on national websites, it is frequently not up to date and is difficult
to understand. The majority of Member States do not use comprehensive maps or
other public supports. The current set-up for reporting does not provide the
Commission with adequate and timely information to perform a thorough synthesis
of drinking water quality developments in the European Union. This makes it difficult
to provide the Council, European Parliament and the public with updated EU-wide
information on drinking water policy and quality on a regular basis. In
addition, the way data are collected, processed and reported differs across the
EU, which makes it difficult to compare situations in different Member States
with regard to their performance and compliance with the Directive. A revised
or new reporting concept could facilitate transparent data dissemination and
management at both national and EU level.  Also, benchmarking drinking water
quality could allow easier interpretation and visualisation of water quality
data across the EU and better comparison of water quality and trends between
Member States.

3. 
Conclusions

The analysis confirms that the Drinking Water
Directive contributed to high quality drinking water across the EU, as
demonstrated by the high compliance levels with the drinking water quality
standards.

Although enforcement is satisfactory and progress has
been made in many areas, the following issues and challenges have been
identified:

The
  supply of high-quality water,
  in particular in remote and rural areas,
  should be improved. Small water supplies
  in these areas require specific risk-based management approaches and the
  role of the Drinking Water Directive in this context should be explored.
 Risk-based approaches
  to the management of big water supplies would allow for more cost
  effective monitoring and parameter analysis in relation to identified
  risks and provide better guarantees for the protection of human health.
  Methodologies for monitoring and analysis should reflect the latest scientific and technological developments. 
  New
  scientific information about chemical and other parameters in relation to
  the drinking water parameter list should be considered in line with the ongoing revision of the WHO drinking-water
  guidelines, including emerging pollutants.
 Modern
  information technology and easier access to environmental information
  should be used to provide more up-to-date information for consumers, and
  to explore how to link different monitoring data with reporting and
  consumer information. 
 Implementation
  timescales and derogation mechanisms are out- of-date and would benefit
  from a general update and overhaul.

An EU-wide public consultation will be a first step towards
a further in-depth assessment of the above mentioned challenges and how they
could be best addressed. It may also identify additional issues to be tackled
in order to ensure and further improve high drinking water quality standards
across the EU.

Fact
Sheet – Implementation of the Drinking Water Directive (98/83/EC) in 2010

Number of Water Supply Zones · 96,388 water supplies zones in the EU, covering a population of approximately 474 million people · 11,233 large water supplies serving 317 million people · 85,559 small water supplies serving 65 million people (based on voluntary survey)               Drinking Water Quality – Large Supplies For this report, full compliance with the parametric values was considered if more than 99%[18] of the analyses were in compliance. Microbiological parameters All Member States' large supplies have compliance rates of over 95%, and 23 Member States reached full compliance (99-100%). Only BG, CY, HU and LV did not meet these high levels. Chemical parameters Compliance rates were high, but slightly lower than those for the microbiological parameters. All Member States reported compliance rates above 90% except for 3 Member States – HU (parameter arsenic), IE (parameter trihalomethane[19]) and LT (parameter fluoride). Indicator parameters Seven Member States achieved maximum performance rates (99-100%), while in ten Member States they were above 95%. The remaining 10 Member States achieved performance rates of between 90% and 95%. DK (Coliform bacteria), HU (ammonium), LV (sulphate) and MT (chloride and sodium) had for these parameters rates below 90%.               Drinking Water Quality – Small supplies Microbiological parameters Levels of compliance were lower than for large water supplies, with compliance rates over 99% reported only for 3 Member States (EE, MT, SE).  Sample compliance of 95-99% was found for 14 Member States, of 90-95% for 4 Member States (BG, CY, IT, UK), and below 90% for 6 Member States (DK, EL, LT, PL, RO, SI). Chemical parameters The compliance of small supplies was similar to large supplies. Indicator parameters Possible underperformance was due to coliform bacteria, clostridium perfringens, iron, manganese, ammonia and pH. Many Member States were able to achieve performance rate of above 95%; however, there were significant problems in some Member States.

Table 1: Overview data per Member State (WSZ = Water Supply Zone)

MS || Nr. of Large WSZ || Nr. of Small WSZ || Population connected to public water supply (year) Source Eurostat || Microbiology Sample compliance % || Chemicals

Large (figure 1) || Small || Large: Sample Compliance % (figure 1, (x) In figure 1 set to = 90% ||  Small: Example: Nitrate, Nr of non-compliant WSZ

AT || 260 || 4570 || 95,05 (2008) || 99-100% || 95-99% || 99-100% || 20

BE || 225 || 522 || 99,9 (2009) || 99-100% || 95-99% || 99-100% || 3

BG || 196 || 2226 || 99,2 (2011) || 95-99% || 90-95% || 95-99% || 349

CY || 20 || 268 || 100 (2011) || 95-99% || 90-95% || 95-99% || 1

CZ || 283 || 3870 || 93,5 (2010) || 99-100% || 95-99% || 99-100% || ?

DE || 2283 || 5873 || 99,3 (2010) || 99-100% || 95-99% || 95-99% || 12

DK || 252 || 2071 || 97 (2002) || 99-100% || < 90% || 90-95% || 4

EE || 25 || 1115 || 80 (2009) || 99-100% || 99-100% || 90-95% || -

EL || 177 || 713 || 94 (2007) || 99-100% || < 90% || 95-99% || 20

ES || 928 || 7907 || 100 (2010) || 99-100% || 95-99% || 95-99% || -

FI || 158 || 697 || 91 (2011) || 99-100% || 95-99% || 99-100% ||

FR || 2487 || 18363 || 99,4 (2001) || 99-100% || 95-99% || 95-99% || 381

HU || 275 || 2731 || 100 (2011) || 95-99% || 95-99% || < 90% (x) || 10

IE || 241 || 1920 || 85 (2007) || 99-100% || 95-99% || < 90% (x) || 9

IT || 1046 || 3977 || - || 99-100% || 90-95% || 95-99% || 6

LT || 65 || 1734 || 75 (2011) || 99-100% || < 90% || < 90% (x) || 1

LU || 43 || 154 || 99,9 (2011) || 99-100% || 95-99% || 99-100% || 1

LV || 29 || 1145 || - || 95-99% || 95-99% || 99-100% ||

MT || 12 || 7 || 100 (2011) || 99-100% || 99-100% || 99-100% ||

NL || 209 || 250 || 100 (2010) || 99-100% || 95-99% || 99-100% || -

PL || 970 || 8839 || 87,6 (2011) || 99-100% || < 90% || 95-99% || -

PT || 362 || 3176 || 96,9 (2009) || 99-100% || 95-99% || 95-99% || 28

RO || 310 || 5398 || 56,5 (2011) || 99-100% || < 90% || 95-99% || 133

SE || 182 || 1486 || 87 (2010) || 99-100% || 99-100% || 99-100% || -

SI || 78 || 899 || - || 99-100% || < 90% || 95-99% || 4

SK || 95 || 957 || 86,9 (2011) || 99-100% || 95-99% || 99-100% || 11

UK || 22 || 4691 || - || 99-100% || 90-95% || 99-100% || 109

[1]       http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/wsh0404summary/en/

[2]       EUROSTAT
(2013)

[3]       Directive
98/83/EC, OJ L 330, 5.12.1998

[4]       http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_344_en.pdf

[5]       Communication
in response to the European citizens' initiative (ECI) "Water and
Sanitation are a human right! Water is a public good not a commodity!"
COM (2014)177 of 19.03.2014: http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/initiatives/finalised/answered

[6]       Council
Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the quality of water intended for
human consumption, OJ L 330, 5.12.1998, p. 32

[7]       Reported
data in accordance with Article 13 of the Drinking Water Directive for the
reference period 2008-2010 and voluntary reported data on small water supply
for which no reporting is required by the Directive.

[8]       http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-drink/reporting_en.html;

https://circabc.europa.eu/faces/jsp/extension/wai/navigation/container.jsp

[9]       Large
WSZ are individual supplies of water exceeding 1 000 m3 a day as an average or
serving more than 5000 persons; small WSZ are those below 1 000 m3 or less than
5000 persons

[10]     The
Treaty, Article 345 TFEU, obliges the EU to remain neutral in relation to the
ownership regime for water. Therefore the aspect of the physical right to
'access' water is not addressed here.

[11]     http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=env_wat_pop&lang=en

[12]     https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/b580866d-8eb7-4937-9a97-d3d3485d046e/2005-2007%20SynthesisReport.pdf

[13]     http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Water_statistics

[14]     Decision
1386/2013 of the European Parliament and Council

[15]     http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-drink/small_supplies_en.html

[16] http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/environment-and-health/water-and-sanitation/country-work/ensuring-drinking-water-safety-through-water-safety-plans

[17]     http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-drink/derogations_en.html, and on CIRCABC

[18]     A
margin of error of 1% is acceptable due to the level of uncertainties and
incidents (e.g. sampling or analytical errors) that occur; compliance rates are
furthermore given in ranges because they are mostly time-limited exceedances.
The results are not entirely comparable because of differences in sampling and
monitoring methods and the lack of standardised approaches, but the data give a
good overview of the situation across the EU.

[19]     In relation to chemical parameter trihalomethane total, the
Directive provided up to December 2008 a derogation from the threshold listed
in Annex I, Part B (up to 150 microgrammes/l from 100 microgrammes/l).