Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive concerning the quality of bathing water () (94/C 393/02)

On 14 June 1994 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 130 S of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

The Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 15 July 1994. The Rapporteur was Mr Pearson.

At its 318th Plenary Session (meeting of 14 September 1994), the Economic and Social Committee unanimously adopted the following Opinion.

1. Background

1.1. The Commission proposal is an amending Directive to the original Directive 76/160/EEC, which has already been amended a number of times. It has to operate in the light of bordering Directives concerning environmental issues and health and safety issues. Thus to increase accessibility and transparency the present proposal is a consolidated one, taking account of the advance of technology in this area, while not changing the scope of the original Directive.

1.2. The aims of the proposal as identified by the Commission are:

- maintaining and improving protection of the environment and public health;

- taking advantage of technical progress and focusing on the most significant parameters;

- simplifying the operation of the Directive, thus consequently reducing the financial burden on Member States;

- ensuring action by Member States while allowing the necessary time for bathing waters to be brought in line with the Directive's standards.

2. General remarks

2.1. The Committee welcomes the principles outlined in the Commission proposals but would point to matters of practical concern and as to whether they can achieve the desired results effectively.

2.2. The stated aims of the Directive in seeking to benefit from the experience of the last fifteen years, together with the latest technology, recognizes that the levels of protection afforded by the existing Directive are adequate and that only the parameters are altered.

2.3. The proposals take account of the 5th Environmental Programme with its targets for clean waters by the year 2000. However, the Committee thinks it regrettable that it has not been able to consider the proposals for the new Directive on 'The Ecological Quality of Water' - all surface water - in parallel, as that Directive will lay down a framework for the whole subject into which the current proposal will need to fit.

2.4. The Committee understands the definition of 'Bathing Water', accepting that it applies to fresh water and to seawater equally. The adoption of common standards, irrespective of the type of environmental water is appropriate and it is recognized that the standards referred to are specific to the particular use of water. The identified bathing waters - currently 16,400 - are individually decided upon by the Member States. It is recognized that with some waterways, particularly some commercial waterways, it will be difficult to have waters identified as official bathing areas.

2.4.1. The Committee is pleased that those countries who are likely to join the European Union in the near future have indicated their acceptance of the parameters of the proposed new Directive.

2.5. The Council meetings at Edinburgh (11-12 December 1992) and Brussels (10-11 December 1993) included and approved a list of Directives which should be reviewed, amongst which was the Directive on Bathing Water. The outcome of that decision has been the change in the legal basis in accordance with the Treaty on European Union at Maastricht, and is now 130S(1). The original Directive was subject to Article 100. There is thereby a radical change in voting procedure, a weighted majority against a necessary unanimous decision previously and the Committee welcomes this change.

2.6. The Committee supports the Commission in its stance that basic microbiological requirements cannot vary from Member State to Member State whilst realizing that it is permissible to set more stringent levels appropriate to their own Regions.

2.6.1. With respect to visual and olfactory parameters the Committee realizes that Member States will be, under the subsidiarity principle, determining the definition of 'abnormal' as required under the Directive Annex.

2.7. The scientific basis is changed due to the considerable growth in scientific knowledge on microbiology and in the improvement in analytical techniques: this enables the results of recent findings in microbiological research to be taken into account. Likewise, increased information from epidemiological studies has provided greater understanding of pollution indicators relating to health protection. All this has led to a change in the indicators proposed for microbiological quality.

3. Specific comments

3.1. The Committee has looked at the revised proposal of the Commission concerning the monitoring of Salmonella and wishes the Commission to further research and establish the public health significance of the changes proposed in the Directive. The Committee welcomes the proposal in the Directive to oblige competent authorities to take appropriate action to identify such sources of Salmonella and to avoid pollution from them. It is recognized that this will require monitoring for Salmonella in relevant circumstances.

3.2. One significant change proposed is the adoption of an imperative (I) value for faecal streptococci (): there is no wide ranging information from the Member States concerning such a change. There is considerable variance with evidence of the consequential effects of the compliance with the proposed new standard for faecal streptococci. Examination of available data (assessed on the bases of non-harmonized methods of analysis on a Community level) indicates that in some Member States the proposals would result in an effective tightening of standards. This appears to be contrary to the Commission assertion that there be no tightening of standards as a consequence of the changes proposed. Further statistics are necessary to clarify the position.

3.3. The proposals as set out in the Directive are stated to have only 'minor cost implications' over and above those arising from existing Directives. The improvements resulting from the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (91/271) are acknowledged, but in that legislation no specific provision is made concerning the microbiological quality of discharges; however, this Directive contains in the Annexes provisions in order to ensure that the requirements of other Council Directives are fulfilled. Therefore, the investment and financial costs incurred in providing additional waste-water treatment and disposal facilities to meet the proposed faecal streptococci parameter and to ensure full compliance with the enterovirus parameter, are likely to be substantial in some Member States with the consequential on-cost to the consumer. A more cost-neutral proposal would be achieved if a faecal streptococci standard was adopted which, in all Member States, is equivalent to the existing faecal coliform standard, whilst ensuring public health remains fully protected.

3.4. Bacterial pollution from freshwater rivers discharging close to the bathing water can impact on compliance with the existing Directive already. Under the new proposal the impact of freshwater inputs is likely to become more significant due to the introduction of an 'I' value for faecal streptococci which have a longer survival time in waters.

3.5. Enterovirus () monitoring is subject to the new Directive and the idea is accepted. The Committee however would prefer the approach as set out in the explanatory memorandum and in the Annex to use Bacteriophage and which is envisaged by the Commission in the near future in place of Enteroviruses as being a more practical and cost effective alternative.

3.6. The imperative requirement that there should be no sewage solids visible is obviously desirable, but presents practical difficulties due to the non-biogradable plastics in a number of sanitary products. Fine screening of all land-based sewage discharges, including storm discharges, is necessary to remove such solids from sewage. The Commission however needs to make it quite clear in the Directive at Article 4(1) Col. 1, table 1 of Annex 1 that the monitoring is of any relevant discharges and not of the bathing water itself.

3.7. Article 5.2 of the Directive introduces the concept of 'excellent quality' for waters of a higher quality than required by the 'I' value. The Committee believes this to be unwise as the proposed designation in the legislation suggests that compliance with 'I' values alone does not provide bathers with adequate protection. The concept of 'excellent quality' is better dealt with outside the Directive.

3.8. The Committee believes that clean bathing waters, with a deserved reputation for such, are a huge attraction for leisure activity, are an indispensable factor for employment and commercial interests and are important in promoting the health of the population. The 'spin off' for the tourist industry is very considerable, going far beyond the activities of swimming and boating. The proposal in Article 5.4 whereby bathers are informed of bathing water quality is important and innovative. Further consideration should be given to competent local authorities publishing annually this readily available information.

3.9. It is clear that the dates set out in Articles 12 and 13 are not practicable. It would suggest a period of three years subsequent to the adoption of the Directive by the Council of Ministers especially as the Urban Water Treatment Directive sets dates for the years 1998 and 2000.

Done at Brussels, 14 September 1994.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Susanne TIEMANN

() OJ No C 112, 22. 4. 1944, p. 3.

() Streptococci are bacteria which are key indicators of faecal contamination.

() Enteroviruses are micro-organisms which can be pathogenic and are characteristic of faeces.