15.12.  75 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities No C 286/5 
This  has a beneficial  effect  on coordination  and  long-
term  planning  of  infrastructure  measures  in 
transport.  It must  be pointed  out,  however,  that  in 
the implementation  of  integrated  infrastructure 
plans,  a lack  of funds  can  lead  to budgetary 
restrictions,  with  the result  that  some  infrastructure 
measures  will  have  to be axed  and,  for  financial 
policy  reasons,  earmarked  funds  will  have  to be used 
for other  purposes. 
2.3.4.  However,  tax  incentives  should  be used  to 
promote  measures  which  are  in the  public  interest, 
especially  to solve  traffic  and  transport  problems  in 
conurbations. 
2.3.5.  The  allocation  of infrastructure  costs  is 
complicated  by the difficulty  of calculating  external 
costs.  Consequently,  the Committee  doubts  whether 
an objective  system  of infrastructure  charging  can  be 
worked  out. 
2.3.6.  Progress  can  be made,  however,  towards 
aligning  the  vehicle  and  fuel  tax  systems,  and  the 
rules  for VAT  exemption  and  deductibility. 
2.3.7.  As  far as regional  policy  is concerned,  credit 
must  be made  available  at Community  level  in order 
to complement  the  measures  taken  by individual 
Member  States. 
In principle,  decisions  should  be taken  on the basis 
of a cost-benefit  analysis.  In this  connection,  it is 
Done  at Brussels,  on 25 September  1975. essential  that  the requisite  data  should  be established 
on a uniform  Basis  and by uniform  methods. 
2.4. Conclusions 
In the light  of previous  developments,  the Committee 
now proposes  that  the  following  action  be taken 
within  the  framework  of the  common  transport 
policy: 
— amplification  of the  initial  objectives  of the 
common  transport  policy  to take  into  account 
new factors  resulting  from  the  changes  brought 
about  by the new  energy  situation, 
— establishment  of a European  transport  network, 
with  a clear  distribution  of  political  and 
management  responsibilities  at  Community, 
national  and  regional  levels, 
— definition  of criteria  for  choosing  investments, 
the aim  being  to guarantee  better  utilization  of 
resources, 
— tailoring  of financial  policy  to land-use,  regional 
policy  and  energy  policy  objectives,  making  sure 
that action  is integrated  more  dosely  in these 
different  fields,  an  aim  to be  achieved  by 
speeding  up  the  process  of  approximating 
conditions  of competition,  especially  in the field 
of taxes. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Henri  CANONGE 
Opinion  on the proposal  for a Council  Directive  relating  to pollution  of sea water  and 
fresh  water  for  bathing  (quality  objectives) 
The text  referred  to the  Committee  was  published  in the  Official  Journal  of the 
European  Communities  No  C 67 of 22 March  1975,  page  1. 
A. LEGAL  BASIS  FOR  THE  OPINION 
On 17 February  1975,  the  Council  referred  the  abovementioned  proposal  to the 
Economic  and  Social  Committee  under  Article  100  of the  Treaty  establishing  the 
European  Economic  Community. 
No C 286/6 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 15.12.  75 
B. OPINION  OF  THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
The Economic  and  Social  Committee  drew  up its Opinion  at its 133rd  plenary  session, 
held in Brussels  on 24 and  25 September  1975. 
The Opinion  is published  below: 
THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE, 
Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  establishing  the 
European  Economic  Community,  and  in particular 
Article  100  thereof; 
Having  regard  to the request  made  on 18 February 
1975  by the  Council  of the  European  Communities 
for an Opinion  on  the  proposal  for  a Council 
Directive  relating  to pollution  of sea water  and  fresh 
water  for bathing  (quality  objectives); 
Having  regard  to the decision  taken  by its Bureau  on 
25 February  1975,  instructing  the  Section  for 
Protection  of the  Environment,  Public  Health  and 
Consumer  Affairs  to draw  up an Opinion  and  a 
report  on the matter; 
Having  regard  to the Opinion  issued  by the Section 
for Protection  of the  Environment,  Public  Health 
and Consumer  Affairs  on 9 September  1975  and  the 
report  submitted  by the Rapporteur,  Mr De Grave; 
Having  regard  to the discussions  at its 133rd  plenary 
session  held  on 24 and  25 September  1975  (meeting 
of 24 September  1975), 
HAS  ADOPTED  THE  FOLLOWING  OPINION 
by a unanimous  vote: 
Subject  to the  following  comments,  the  Committee 
approves  the  proposal  for  a Directive  and  the 
standards  contained  in the annexes  thereto: 
1. General  comments 
1.1. Field  of application 
The proposal  for  a Directive  is one  of a set of 
provisions  proposed  to cover  the  various  uses  of 
water.  Bathing  is only  one  aspect  of the hazards  and 
pollution  in bathing  areas  and  adjoining  areas  of 
water. 
Other  issues  should  also  be dealt  with,  such  as: 
— measures  stipulating  to what  extent,  if any,  water 
should  be  purified  prior  to  discharge  into 
waterways  or into  the sea, — standards  for  water  in  swimming  pools 
(including  swimming  pools  containing  sea water), 
— rules  for  beaches  — presence  on beaches  of 
animals  (such  as dogs  and  horses)  — which  carry 
micro-biological  organisms,  the  provision  of 
refuse  bins  for public  use,  educating  the  public, 
etc., 
— bathers  gathering  molluscs  and  crustaceans 
which  concentrate  certain  pollutants  in their 
organisms, 
— protection  of  persons  (such  as  bathing 
instructors)  who,  for  professional  reasons,  have 
to remain  in prolonged  contact  with  bathing 
water. 
1.2. Classification  of bathing  waters 
1.2.1.  The  draft  Directive  classifies  bathing  water 
in three  categories: 
— waters  where  bathing  is authorized, 
— waters  where  bathing  is tolerated, 
— waters  where  bathing  is prohibited. 
This  breakdown  stems  from  the fact  that  some  EEC 
States  use  the  'authorization'  system  and  some  the 
'prohibition'  system  (in the latter  case  there  are  no 
officially  'authorized'  bathing  spots  and  bathing  is 
'tolerated'  in waters  where  it is' not  specifically 
prohibited). 
1.2.2.  A  perusal  of the  draft  Directive  raises  the 
following  queries: 
— what  is the status  of rivers,  and  coastlines  along 
which  there  is generally  no explicit  indication  of 
whether  bathing  is authorized  or prohibited? 
— what  is the  difference  between  authorized  and 
tolerated  areas,  from  the point  of view  of legal 
consequences? 
— should  the above  two  categories  be combined? 
— why  is bathing  not formally  prohibited  in waters 
which  do not  comply  with  the requirements  laid 
down? 
15.12.  75 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 286/7 
— how  is the public  to be informed  unambiguously 
as to whether  bathing  is authorized,  tolerated  or 
prohibited:  signboards,  decrees  published  in an 
official  gazette,  the  presence  or absence  of 
facilities  and/or  supervisory  staff,  etc.? 
1.2.3.  The  Committee  notes  that  the 
harmonization  provided  for in the draft  Directive  is 
not complete,  in that  it does  not cover  such  things  as 
authorization  and  prohibition  procedures.  These  are 
left to the discretion  of the Member  States. 
1.2.4.  Without  necessarily  wanting  to  take 
harmonization  further  at this  initial  stage,  the 
Committee  trusts  that  the Directive  will  provide  the 
clarification  needed  to preclude  confusion,  and  that 
work  in this  field  will  be continued. 
1.3. Liability 
1.3.1.  The  Committee  believes  that  the  proposed 
rules  are,  by  and  large,  calculated  to prevent 
accidents.  But,  defective  or negligent  supervision  is 
always  possible,  a fact  which  may  raise  the question 
of liability.  Although  it is usually  very  difficult  to 
link cause  and  effect,  and  prove  a case  for damages, 
it should  be made  clear,  who  — if anyone  — would 
be liable  in the  event  of defective  or negligent 
supervision. 
1.3.2.  At  all events,  the Committee  considers  that 
where  the  Directive  is not  complied  with  by the 
responsible  authorities,  there  can  be no derogation 
from  the ordinary  law  on suits  for damages.  Such  a 
derogation  could  make  protection  completely 
illusory. 
1.4. Relations  with  third  countries 
When  working  with  non-member  countries  and  in 
international  bodies  as the  UN,  the  WHO  and  the 
Council  of Europe,  the Community  should  press  for 
the adoption  of criteria  similar  to those  contained  in 
the proposed  Directive.  Particular  attention  might  be 
paid to states  bordering  the  same  seas  as EEC 
Member  States. 
2. Specific  comments 
2.1. Article  1 
2.1.1.  The  Committee  notes  the  Commission's 
statement  that  the Directive  covers  ponds,  lakes  and 
reservoirs  fed  by rivers.  The  Committee  welcomes 
the Commission's  interpretation.  Article  1 should 
make  it clear  that  the Directive  covers  ponds,  lakes 
and reservoirs  fed by rivers. 2.2. Article  2 (2) 
2.2.1.  To  cover  the  situations  peculiar  to certain 
countries,  the words  'each  Member  State'  should  be 
replaced  by 'The  competent  authorities'. 
2.3. Article  3 (d) 
2.3.1.  The  Committee  urges  that  this  paragraph  be 
set out  in a separate  Article  and  worded  more 
clearly. 
2.3.2.  The  expression  'whenever  possible'  has  no 
precise  legal  meaning  and  should  therefore  be 
deleted.  A possible  wording  for the Article  might  be: 
'In the case  of new  bathing  areas,  the authorities 
shall  observe  the  G values.  Any  derogations 
granted  shall  be justified  to the Commission'. 
2.4. Article  4 
2.4.1.  Article  4 states  that  the  limit  values  laid 
down  under  Article  3 do not have  to be enforced  for 
eight  years.  Given  the  needs  of public  health,  the 
Committee  considers  that  eight  years  is too  long  in 
the case  of the  numerous  regions  where  there  is a 
serious  pollution  hazard. 
In addition,  the  words  'entry  into  force'  should  be 
replaced  by 'notification'. 
2.5. Article  6 (3) 
2.5.1.  As  a result  of this  paragraph,  samples  of sea 
water  will  probably  have  to be taken  in bathing 
areas  at the  height  of the  bathing  season.  In many 
parts  of the  Community  it may  be difficult  to 
determine  this  period,  due  to the changeability  of the 
weather.  What  is more,  no specific  recommendation 
is made  as regards  the measures  to be taken  should 
pollution  by human  beings  as a result  of crowded 
beaches  cause  the stipulated  minimum  standard  to be 
exceeded. 
2.5.2.  The  Committee  approves  the principle  of a 
standardized  sampling  method.  All  the  same,  a 
certain  amount  of flexibility  should  be allowed  when 
applying  the method. 
No C 286/8 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 15.12.  75 
2.5.3.  A  possibility  exists  that  discharges  of waste 
water  will  cause  peak  pollution  to occur  at a time  of 
the day  (e.g.  in the  morning)  which  does  not 
coincide  with  the maximum  density  of bathers. 
2.5.4.  The  extent  of the  bathing  area  is not 
prescribed  in Article  1. Moreover,  the  location  of 
sampling  points  with  respect  to the  point  of 
discharge  should  not be overlooked. 
3. Comments  on the annexes 
3.1. The  Committee  trusts  that  it will  be possible 
to adapt  standards  to suit  specific  circumstances, 
although  this  should  not  lead  to laxity  in applying 
the Directive. 
3.2. For  one  thing,  it might  be worth  instructing 
the responsible  authorities  in the  Member  States  to 
ensure  that  pollutants,  other  than  those  listed  in the 
annexes,  are  not  present  in excessive  quantities  in 
bathing  waters.  This  would  particularly  apply  to cases 
where  there  is reason  for suspecting  the presence  of 
such  pollutants  (e.g.  because  of the  presence  of 
industry).  In addition,  a special  study  should  be 
made  of the upsetting  of natural  balances  by factors 
such  as particularly  hot summers. 3.3. The  Committee  trusts  that  the  Commission 
will expand  the annexes,  so as to include  inspection 
to ascertain  the presence  or absence  of cyanophyceae 
(myxophyceae  or blue  algae).  Such  inspection  should 
particularly  be carried  out  in eutrophic  waters.  The 
temperature  regime  in eutrophic  waters  is favourable 
to the multiplication  of such  micro-organisms,  whose 
long-  and  short-term  toxicity  (action  on proteins)  is 
well known. 
3.4. On  a more  general  note,  the Committee  finds 
that the increase  in the discharging  of hot  water  into 
seas and  waterways  by industry  is causing  water 
temperatures  to rise.  This  is liable  to alter  the micro-
biological  characteristics  of the  water  thus  affected, 
and the  Committee  trusts  that  particular  attention 
will be paid  to this  problem. 
3.5. Similarly,  a systematic  search  should  be 
carried  out  for  a relatively  common  amoeba  which 
causes  certain  forms  of meningitis  for which  there  is 
at present  no known  cure. 
3.6. Apart  from  the floating  materials  listed  in the 
annexes,  other  solid  matter,  such  as fragments  of 
glass  and  metal,  can constitute  a hazard. 
Done  at Brussels,  24 September  1975. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Henri  CANONGE 
Opinion  on the communication  of the Commission  to the Council  concerning  equality 
of treatment  of men  and  women  as regards  access  to employment,  vocational  training, 
promotion  and  working  conditions 
The text  referred  to the  Committee  was  published  in the  Official  Journal  of the 
European  Communities  No  C 124  of 4 June  1975,  page  2. 
A. LEGAL  BASIS  FOR  THE  OPINION 
On 28 February  1975,  the  Council  referred  the  abovementioned  proposal  to the 
Economic  and  Social  Committee  in accordance  with  Article  198  of the  Treaty 
establishing  the European  Economic  Community,