Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament Pursuant to Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 648/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on detergents, concerning the use of phosphates.
Date: 2007-05-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: biodegradability, environmental protection, eutrophication, phosphate, polishing and scouring preparations, public health, report

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 4.5.2007 
COM(2007) 234 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT 

Pursuant to Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 648/2004 of the European Parliament and 
of the Council of 31 March 2004 on detergents, concerning the use of phosphates. 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT 

Pursuant to Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 648/2004 of the European Parliament and 
of the Council of 31 March 2004 on detergents, concerning the use of phosphates. 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 648/2004 on detergents1 lays down that “by 8 April 2007, 
the Commission shall evaluate, submit a report on and, where justified, present a legislative 
proposal  on  the  use  of  phosphates  with  a  view  to  their  gradual  phase-out  or  restriction  to 
specific applications.” 

1.1. 

Phosphates in detergents 

Phosphates  are  one  of  the  most  commonly-used  and  abundant  ingredients  in  domestic  and 
industrial  detergents.  Their  function  is  to  combat  water  hardness  in  order  to  allow  efficient 
cleaning  by  the  detergents.  The  type  of  phosphate  most  commonly  used  is  STPP  (sodium 
tripolyphosphate,  Na5P3O10,  CAS  No  7758-29-4,  EINECS  No  231-838-7).  Overall,  STPP  is 
an efficient ingredient in detergents with the following functions: 

•  efficient sequestering of hardness salts (and keeping them in solution); 

•  removal and prevention of encrustation on fibres; 

•  enhancement of the washing process; 

•  carrier for other detergent ingredients. 

The annual consumption of phosphate containing detergents in the EU-25 is about 1.8 million 
tonnes, a value equivalent to a phosphorous content of about 110,000 tonnes. 90-95% of these 
are  consumed  in  domestic  laundry  and  dishwashing  detergents.  For  comparison,  the  use  of 
phosphates in fertilisers is equivalent to around 1.25 million tonnes of phosphorus per year.  

There  are  no  concerns  over  adverse  health  effects  associated  with  the  use  of  STPP  in 
detergents. Recent scientific evidence2
 indicates very low acute toxicity of STPP by ingestion 
or dermal application, while no mutagenic or genotoxic effects have been observed. 

Phosphates are essential nutrients as their use in fertilisers indicates. The prime concern over 
the use of phosphate in detergents is that it can lead to an excess of nutrients in the aquatic 
environment which, in turn, can lead to problems of eutrophication.  

1 

2 

Regulation (EC) No 648/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council on detergents, OJ L104, 
8.4.2004, p.1 
Sodium  Tripolyphosphate  (STPP)  CAS:  7758-29-4  Human  &  Environmental  Risk  Assessment  on 
ingredients of European household cleaning products, HERA (2003) 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
Eutrophication  has  been  defined  as:  “the  enrichment  of  water  by  nutrients  especially 
compounds of nitrogen and phosphorus, causing an accelerated growth of algae and higher 
forms of plant life to produce an undesirable disturbance to the balance of organisms and the 
quality of the water concerned”3. 

Eutrophication  is  a  complex  phenomenon  in  which  phosphates  frequently,  but  not  always, 
play the major part. Increasing concerns over the contribution of STTP to eutrophication have 
lead to a move in many countries towards phosphate-free laundry detergents. Table 1 (Annex) 
shows  the  current  market  share  in  the  EU-25  of  phosphate-free  detergents.  Detergents  are 
mainly discharged to the aquatic compartment via  waste water treatment. The proportion of 
STPP  from  detergents  that  enter  the  aquatic  environment  varies  considerably  across  the  EU 
Member  States  depending  on  the  degree  of  tertiary  treatment  of  waste  water.  Tertiary 
treatment  is  costly  and  is  not  required  for  all  sewage  discharges  (in  particular  smaller 
settlements lack appropriate treatment). Phosphate from fertilisers applied to agricultural land 
is mainly absorbed by crops, but there is some run off to surface waters. A third main source 
of phosphorus is human metabolic waste.  

The  main  alternatives  to  STTP  in  laundry  detergents,  with  a  market  share  of  over  60%,  are 
zeolites (mainly zeolite A) which, however, are used in conjunction with increased amounts 
of other ingredients, such as co-builders and bleach.  

Dishwashing detergents are still mainly phosphate-based. With the introduction of phosphate-
free  laundry  detergents,  the  contribution  of  dishwashing  detergents  to  the  total  detergent 
phosphate release has risen to about 25%. 

1.2. 

EU legislation concerning eutrophication 

Several  EU  Directives  have  the  effect  of  limiting  the  concentration  of  nutrients  in  surface 
waters, and thereby help to counter eutrophication: 

Directive  91/271/EEC3  concerning  urban  waste  water  treatment  (UWWTD)  under  which 
tertiary  treatment  (which  removes  phosphates)  is  required  at  waste  water  treatment  plants 
serving agglomerations of more than 10,000 population equivalents, and which discharge into 
areas sensitive to eutrophication; 

Directive  91/676/EEC4  concerning  the  protection  of  waters  against  pollution  caused  by 
nitrates  from  agricultural  sources  (the  Nitrates  Directive)  under  which  Member  States  are 
required  to  identify  vulnerable  zones  and  to  establish  and  implement  action  programmes  in 
order to reduce water pollution from nitrogen compounds.  

Directive  96/61/EC5  concerning  integrated  pollution  prevention  and  control  under  which 
Member States are required to issue permits for certain industrial installations according to the 
best  available  techniques  (BAT).  Annex  III  of  the  Directive,  the  indicative  list  of  the  main 
polluting  substances  to  be  taken  into  account  for  fixing  emission  limit  values,  includes 
substances which contribute to eutrophication, in particular nitrates and phosphates. 

3 
4 
5 

Directive 91/271/EEC, OJ L135, 30.5.1991, p. 40 
Directive 91/676/EEC, OJ L375, 31.12. 1991, p.1 
Directive 96/61/EC, OJ L 257, 10.10.1996, p.26 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Directive 2000/60/EC6, the Water Framework Directive (WFD), has led to an increased focus 
on eutrophication and to a more holistic approach to water management7. Member States must 
enact  programmes  of  measures  to  ensure  that  water  bodies  throughout  the  EU  reach  "good 
status"  by  2015.  In  cases  where  WFD  monitoring  and  assessment  shows  that  phosphorus 
inputs  are  significantly  contributing  to  eutrophication,  Member  States  must  implement 
measures to address this problem. 

1.3. 

Legislation in Europe concerning phosphates in detergents 

Pending harmonisation at European level, the Detergents Regulation allows Member States to 
maintain existing national measures, or to introduce new ones, to limit the phosphate content 
of  detergents.  However,  as  with  any  other  national  measures  outside  the  harmonised  area, 
Member  States  must  notify  draft  measures  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  Directive 
98/34/EC8  and  demonstrate  that  these  are  both  justified  and  proportionate.  The  WFD  can 
provide  a  mechanism  whereby  Member  States  can  demonstrate  through  the  risk  analysis 
(Article 5) and the establishment of a cost-effective programme of measures (Article 11) that 
restrictions are justified and proportionate. 

Italy,  Belgium,  Czech  Republic,  Germany,  and  the  Netherlands  have  already  adopted 
legislation to reduce or ban phosphates in detergents with the aim of reducing eutrophication. 
Sweden and France have recently announced their intention to do likewise. Austria, Ireland, 
Denmark, and Finland rely on voluntary commitments by detergents formulators to phase-out 
phosphate-based  detergents.  Seven  Member  States  have  only  phosphate-free  laundry 
detergents – see Table 1 in the Annex. With this report, the Commission does not intend to 
put these existing measures into question.  

2. 

COMMISSION  ACTION  TO  EVALUATE  THE  USE  OF  PHOSPHATES  IN 
DETERGENTS 

2.1. 

Actions taken before adoption of Regulation (EC) No 648/2004 

As one of its first activities with regard to phosphates in detergents, the Commission asked a 
consultant,  WRc,  to  investigate  the  costs  and  benefits  of  substituting  phosphorus9  in 
household detergents with other builders, and to recommend the most appropriate methods of 
reducing  phosphorus  concentrations  in  surface  waters.  The  study,  published  in  June  200210, 
concluded that: 

6 
7 

8 
9 
10 

Directive 2000/60/EC, OJ L327, 22.12.2000, p.1. 
Directives 91/271/EEC, 91/767/EEC and 96/61/EC are "basic measures" under the WFD and must be 
coordinated and, where necessary complemented to achieve the mandatory objectives. 
Directive 98/34/EC, OJ L 204, 21.7.1998, p. 37 
In environmental reports the term “phosphorous” denotes phosphorous compounds in general. 
“Phosphates and alternative detergent builders” available at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-urbanwaste/info/docs_en.htm 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  A  number  of  countries  have  been  successful  in  reducing  eutrophication  through 

implementation of measures to reduce their phosphorus loads by 70-90%; 

•  A  ban  on  the  use  of  phosphate  based  detergents  can  achieve  a  phosphorus  load 
reduction  of  up  to  40%,  which  however  is  not  sufficient  in  isolation  to  result  in 
any substantial improvements in eutrophication; 

•  Zeolite A was found to be a suitable alternative to STPP. Only minor differences 
with STPP were observed in overall production cost in terms of energy used and 
sludge produced in waste water treatment plants, while zeolite A was also found 
to  be  non-toxic  to  aquatic  fauna  and  humans,  and  manufacturing  produces  less 
toxic waste by-products. 

The  Commission’s  Scientific  Committee  on  Toxicity,  Ecotoxicity  and  the  Environment 
(SCTEE) gave an opinion11 in March 2003 on the WRc report which identified a number of 
weaknesses,  found  that  the  report’s  conclusions  were  not  adequately  substantiated,  and 
suggested that a more complete literature review might allow the identified weaknesses to be 
adequately addressed. The weaknesses concerned both the assessment on the impact of STPP 
on eutrophication, and the lack of knowledge concerning the environmental risks associated 
with  the  alternatives  to  STPP,  not  only  on  zeolite  A  but  also  the  other  substances  such  as 
polycarboxylic acids that are used in combination with it. 

The  Commission  services  followed  the  suggestion  of  the  SCTEE  and  collected  additional 
literature  data,  including  HERA  risk  assessments  on  STPP  and  Zeolite  A,  and  requested 
SCTEE to review issues that had not been adequately treated in the WRc report. 

In its opinion of November 2003 the SCTEE concluded that:  

•  In  the  absence  of  measures  for  reducing  the  STPP  content  in  detergents,  the 
contribution  of  this  phosphorus  source  to  the  total  phosphorus  load  in  surface 
water  can  be  very  variable  (roughly  ranging  from  10  to  40%)  as  a  function  of 
different  human  activities  and  land  use.  Therefore,  STPP  in  detergents  would 
produce  a  significant  increase  of  phosphorus  load  in  surface  water  and  a 
significant risk for eutrophication in some areas of the enlarged EU; 

•  The present situation in Europe has substantially changed in comparison with the 
1980s,  because  many  European  countries  have  undertaken  measures  to  reduce 
STPP so that detergent phosphorus is no longer a substantial contributor and other 
sources contribute a higher percentage to the overall phosphorous load;  

•  The  contribution  of  phosphate-based  detergents  to  eutrophication  is  extremely 
variable  country  by  country  as  well  as  in  different  hydrographic  basins  as  a 
function of human activities and land use.  

11 

available at: http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committees/sct/sct_opinions_en.htm 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Overall,  the  SCTEE  noted  that  the  HERA  risk  assessment  on  STPP  had  not  addressed  the 
eutrophication  problem  and  suggested  how  this  could  best  be  done:  “…  a  quantitative 
assessment of the extent of eutrophication in EU waters in relation to phosphorus load from 
different sources, and in particular in relation to STPP contribution, could be performed on 
the  basis  of  existing  experimental  and  modelling  information”  and  “  …  a  landscape 
evaluation with probabilistic outcomes for each landscape scenario” was requested. 

2.2. 

Actions completed since adoption of Regulation (EC) No 648/2004  

A further study was performed in line with the SCTEE opinion of November 2003 to obtain 
quantitative estimates of the effects on eutrophication of switching from phosphate-based to 
phosphate-free  detergents.  The  study  was  financed  by  the  industry  federation  for  detergent 
phosphate  manufacturers,  CEEP  (Centre  Européen  d’Etudes  des  Polyphosphates),  and 
performed  by  a  consultant,  Green  Planet  Research,  in  collaboration  with  a  research 
organisation,  INIA  (Spanish  National  Institute  for  Agriculture  and  Food  Research  and 
Technology).  

The  methodology  for  a  probabilistic  risk  assessment  was  developed  by  INIA  by  September 
2005, and was refined in the light of discussions with a group of 17 experts on eutrophication 
at a workshop held in Madrid in November 2005. The final report entitled “Development of a 
European  Quantitative  Eutrophication  Risk  Assessment  of  Polyphosphates  in  Detergents”12 
was published in October 2006 and concluded that:  

•  additional eutrophication risks related to detergent phosphates are very variable in 
the  different  regions  of  the  EU  as  a  result  of  factors  such  as  the  hydrological 
characteristics, population density and agricultural intensity; 

•  in both analysed ecoregion types, i.e. (i) Atlantic, Northern and Central European 
shallow lakes, and (ii) Mediterranean water bodies, the eutrophication risk did not 
increase linearly at higher phosphorus concentrations; 

•  the  difference  between  the  total  eutrophication  risk  and  the  risk  without 
phosphate-based detergents is typically around 2-8% based on the Mediterranean 
effect  assessment,  and  around  0.4-2%  based  on  the  Atlantic,  North  &  Central 
shallow effect assessment.  

A further study by RPA (Risk & Policy Analysts Ltd) was commissioned to fill the data gaps 
concerning  the  use,  properties  and  environmental  impact  for  a  representative  range  of  non-
surfactant organic detergent ingredients, and to assess the socio-economic impact of switching 
from phosphate-based detergents to zeolite-based detergents.  

The study found that  some of the additional  co-builders needed  for  zeolite-based detergents 
are also used in STPP-based detergents, though in smaller concentrations. A switch to zeolite-
based  detergents  would  therefore  not  necessarily  introduce  a  greater  number  of  cobuilder 
substances into the environment, but their concentrations might increase.  

12 

available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/chemicals/legislation/detergents/index_en.htm. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Polycarboxylates and phosphonates were identified as two groups of co-builders that do not 
readily  biodegrade  in  the  environment.  The  toxicity  and  ecotoxicity  of  polycarboxylates  is 
low  and  they  are  not  considered  to  be  harmful.  In  contrast,  the  aquatic  toxicity  of  some 
phosphonates,  e.g. 1-Hydroxyethane-1,1-diphosphonic acid (HEDP) and  its salts,  may be of 
some  concern.  However,  there  was  a  lack  of  environmental  monitoring  data  for  this 
substance, and the environmental risk could not be assessed. 

The second part of the study aimed to complement the INIA/CEEP eutrophication study by 
assessing  the  overall  costs  and  benefits  of  a  move  from  STPP  to  zeolites  in  detergents, 
including  the  health  and  environmental  risks,  cost  savings  for  authorities  on  tertiary  waste 
water treatment plant, and cost increases for manufacturers in reformulating detergents.  

The  report13  entitled  “Non-surfactant  organic  ingredients  and  zeolite-based  detergents”, 
delivered in June 2006, recommended that: 

•  the detergents industry should be encouraged to develop phosphate-free detergents 

for dishwashing machines; 

•  discussions  should  be  held  with  the  detergents  industry  to  agree  a  data  set  (on 
properties,  health  and  environmental  effects)  which  could  be  collated  and 
published for the various polymer ingredients; 

•  the  use  of  phosphate-free  detergents  should  not  be  encouraged  unless  all  the 
ingredients  can  be  demonstrated  to  present  no  risks  to  human  health  or  to  the 
environment.  

The key benefit of a move to phosphate-free detergents will be to reduce the phosphorus load 
in  the  environment  which,  in  turn,  may  reduce  problems  of  eutrophication.  In  qualitative 
terms, the greatest benefits would accrue in those countries with:  

•  a high phosphate detergent use;  

•  a low provision of tertiary waste water treatment and 

•  problems of eutrophication 

By applying weighting factors to these three criteria, a single indicator for each country was 
derived  of  the  potential  benefits  of  a  move  to  phosphate-free  detergents  –  see  Table  2 
(Annex).  This  fairly  simplistic  analysis  shows  that  the  potential  benefits  of  a  move  to 
phosphate-free detergents vary significantly from country to country.  

The costs associated with a move to zeolite-based detergents include: 

13 

available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/chemicals/legislation/detergents/index_en.htm. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  Disruption of the phosphate supply chain. Six EU manufacturers of STPP would 

be significantly affected.  

•  A  need  for  detergent  formulators  to  reformulate/re-brand  detergents  (more 
complex  and  difficult  for  smaller  formulators)  with  an  average  cost  of  20,000  € 
per formulation. 

•  A  potential  increase  in  risks  to  humans  and/or  the  environment.  Costs  of 

additional testing due to the need for further assessment of risks. 

The Detergents Working Group discussed the two reports in November 2006 and found that 
the RPA report provided useful information on the costs and benefits of moving to phosphate 
free detergents. 

Concerning the INIA report, it was noted in particular that:  

•  the data used for modelling was rather limited and that results were available for 

only two generic geographic scenarios; 

•  the modelling was limited to river basins (and lakes) whereas eutrophication in the 
EU is also a problem in the coastal and marine environment, e.g. in the Baltic, the 
North, the Black and the Adriatic Sea.  

•  The  ongoing  MARE/HELCOM  project  for  the  Baltic  and  to  the  UNDP-GEF 
project  on  the  Danube  basin  should  also  be  taken  into  account  before  final 
conclusions  are  drawn  on  the  effects  of  phosphate-based  detergents  on 
eutrophication in the EU. 

The  UNDP-GEF  Danube  Regional  Project  funded  by  the  United  Nations  Office  for  Project 
Services (UNOPS) to develop recommendations for the reduction of phosphorus in detergents 
in  the  Danube  River  Basin,  has  generated  detailed  data  on  phosphate  concentration  and 
eutrophication in the Danube. The final report14 concludes:  

“Whilst  it  is  recognised  that  other  actions,  such  as  improved  urban  waste  water  collection 
and treatment, as well as ‘good agricultural practices’ are necessary complementary actions, 
the  study  has  shown  clearly  that  there  is  ample  scope  for  contributing  to  a  successful 
resolution  of  the  problem  of  eutrophication,  by  replacing  phosphate  detergents  with 
phosphate-free detergents, thereby reducing the total phosphate burden”.  

The  policy  recommendation  to  countries  of  the  Danube  River  Basin  is  therefore  to  proceed 
with  national  legislation  and/or  further  voluntary  agreements  to  replace  phosphate-based 
detergents  to  protect  the  Danube  and  Black  Sea  from  eutrophication  while  awaiting  the 
outcome of the Commission’s evaluation of the need for measures at EU level. This was re-
iterated at the recent High-Level Meeting of all 16 Danube and Black Sea Countries and the 
European Commission in a Declaration on Water Protection15. In the absence of harmonised 
Community action, this approach appears to be justified and proportionate. 

14 

15 

UNDP/GEF  report  at  Danube  River  is  available  at:  http://www.undp-drp.org/drp/activities_1-
8_detergents.html 
http://www.icpdr.org/icpdr-pages/water_protection_declaration.htm 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.3. 

Actions still ongoing in April 2007 

2.3.1.  Further evaluations by SCHER 

The latest RPA and INIA reports were submitted to the Scientific Committee for Health and 
Environmental Risks (SCHER) in November 2006 for opinion.  

The  mandate  requested  SCHER  to  assess  the  overall  scientific  quality  of  the  reports  and 
comment on their methodology and the assumptions used in particular: 

•  the quality of the conceptual model;  

•  the accuracy and validity of the estimations, results and conclusions; 

•  whether  the  use  of  phosphates  in  detergents  contributes  significantly  to 

eutrophication at EU level.  

Concerning the RPA report SCHER was asked to give an opinion on: 

•  whether  a  move 

to  phosphate-free  detergents  would 

increase  health  & 

environmental risks; 

•  the 

risks  associated  with  co-builders, 

including  polycarboxylates  and 

phosphonates. 

Two working groups have been set up and an opinion is expected not before the end of May 
2007. 

2.3.2.  Commission activities under the Water Framework Directive 

The WFD requires Member States to achieve good ecological and chemical status of surface 
water by 2015. A Guidance Document16 provides a harmonised methodology for assessing the 
risk  of  eutrophication  in  the  context  of  EU  policy.  All  Member  States  have  reviewed  the 
environmental impact of human activity on the status of surface and groundwater and reported 
to  the  Commission  in  200517.  The  reports  show  that  eutrophication  is  still  a  major  problem 
and  that  in  many  river  basins,  pollution  from  phosphorus  arises  from  a  number  of  different 
sources. Member States must prepare a programme of measures by December 2009 in order 
to  achieve  the  WFD  objectives  which  may  include, where  justified, mandatory or  voluntary 
agreements to limit phosphates in detergents. According to the WFD, such measures have to 
be cost-effective and proportionate. 

16 

17 

available at: 
http://forum.europa.eu.int/Public/irc/env/wfd/library?l=/framework_directive/thematic_documents/13_e
utrophication 
WFD reports available at: 
http://forum.europa.eu.int/Public/irc/env/wfd/library?l=/framework_directive/implementation_documen
ts_1&vm=detailed&sb=Title  

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
An intercalibration process is ongoing to make the understanding of 'good ecological status' in 
all  Member  States  more  comparable  and  consistent  with  the  definitions  of  the  WFD  and 
therefore  harmonise  the  assessment  procedures  to  determine  eutrophication  risk.  Work  is 
ongoing  to  establish  the  boundaries  of  'good  ecological  status'  applicable  to  all  national 
classification systems. 

The  intercalibration  exercise  will  use  several  thousand  datasets  from  at  least  1500 
representative monitoring sites (Commission Decision 2005/646/EC18) across Europe. 

The  Commission  is  currently  preparing  a  Decision  on  publishing  the  results  of  the 
intercalibration exercise which should be adopted in late 2007 in accordance with Article 21 
of Directive 2000/60/EC. 

2.3.3.  MARE/HELCOM project on the Baltic Sea Area  

This project assesses various policy options (including use of “phosphate-free detergents”) in 
order  to  improve  water  quality  in  the  Baltic  Sea  Area.  A  scenario  in  which  phosphate-free 
detergents are used in all Baltic countries while maintaining waste water treatment at the same 
level as in the year 2000 shows less improvement than a scenario in which use of phosphate-
based detergents is maintained but waste water treatment is improved in line with the Urban 
Waste Water Treatment Directive. A combination of improved waste water treatment with the 
use  of  phosphate-free  detergents  would  decrease  nutrient  loads  and  thereby  improve  the 
marine environment more than either of these measures taken alone.  

3. 

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

The  Commission  has  taken  a  significant  number  of  steps  to  establish  the  knowledge  base 
needed  to  evaluate  the  impact  of  the  use  of  phosphates  in  detergents  on  eutrophication,  as 
required by Article 16 (1) of Regulation 648/2004. 

Building on the results of an earlier study on the impact of phosphates contained in detergents 
on  eutrophication  by  WRc  in  2002,  and  on  opinions  of  the  Commission’s  Scientific 
Committee in March and November 2003, two further studies were carried out to fill the data 
gaps  identified  in  the  Committee’s  opinions.  The  results  of  those  two  further  studies  were 
discussed  with  delegates  from  Member  States  and  industry  at  a  meeting  of  the  Detergents 
Working Group in November 2006, and have then also been submitted to the Commission’s 
Scientific Committee for an opinion, which is currently still pending.  

According to reports submitted in the context of the WFD, eutrophication remains one of the 
most important threats to fresh and marine waters. Significant improvements in understanding 
have  been  achieved  over  the  past  years.  However,  in  April  2007  the  state  of  knowledge 
concerning eutrophication is still developing rapidly, and extensive additional data on water 
quality  assessment  throughout  the  EU  is  expected  shortly  through  the  inter-calibration 
exercise of the Water Framework Directive. 

18 

Commission Decision, 2005/646/EC, OJ L 243, 17.9.2005, p. 1. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
A decision on whether restrictions on phosphates in detergents are justified at EU level will be 
taken  once  sufficient  evidence  has  been  acquired  and  various  policy  options  have  been 
assessed  in  consultation  with  the  Detergents  Working  Group.  In  particular,  justification  for 
harmonised measures should await the outcome of the opinion of the Commission’s Scientific 
Committee  on  the  already  completed  studies.  The  Commission  will  initiate  an  impact 
assessment  in  2007  with  the  aim  of  concluding  it  in  2008,  if  possible,  depending  on  the 
forthcoming Scientific Committee opinion and the extent of the open issues identified. . The 
Commission  will  present  a  legislative  proposal  without  delay  once  a  decision  is  taken  that 
restrictions are justified. 

Pending a decision, the Commission recalls that Member States may proceed with measures 
to replace phosphate-based  detergents where this can be justified on  environmental  grounds 
(e.g.  on  the  basis  of  the  WFD).  Member  States  wishing  to  introduce  "technical  regulations" 
falling  under  Directive  98/34/EC  will  have  to  notify  the  Commission  and  justify  that  these 
measures are in accordance with the requirements of the Directive. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
ANNEX 

Table-1 Degree to which EU-25 Member States are Phosphate-
Free* in laundry detergents 

Member State 

Population (millions) 

% Phosphate-free 

Belgium 

Czech Republic 

Denmark 

Germany 

Estonia 

Greece 

France 

Ireland 

Italy 

Cyprus 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

Luxemburg 

Hungary 

Malta 

Netherlands 

Austria 

Poland 

Portugal 

Slovenia 

Slovakia 

Spain 

Finland 

Sweden 

10.4 

10.2 

5.4 

82.5 

1.3 

11.0 

59.9 

4.0 

57.8 

0.7 

2.3 

3.4 

0.4 

10.1 

0.4 

16.2 

8.1 

38.2 

10.4 

2.0 

5.4 

42.2 

5.2 

9.0 

United Kingdom 

EU-25 

59.5 

456.0 

100 

35 

80 

100 

20 

50 

50 

100 

100 

20 

20 

20 

100 

30 

20 

100 

100 

15 

30 

95 

20 

40 

90 

85 

55 

66 

* The term “phosphate free” indicates compliance with national legislation limiting phosphate 
content (not necessarily zero).  

(RPA Report 2006, http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/chemicals/legislation/detergents) 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
Table-2 Benefits of Moving to Phosphate-Free Detergents  

Score 

Description 

Member States 

>10 

Maximum Benefits 

5-10 

Some Benefits 

1-5 

Few Benefits 

Czech Republic, Poland, 
Spain, Latvia, Lithuania, 
Portugal, Slovakia 

Greece, Cyprus, Estonia, 
UK, Luxembourg, Hungary, 
Belgium, France 

Denmark, Finland, Austria, 
Sweden, Ireland, Slovenia, 
Italy, Netherlands, Germany 

0 

No Benefits 

Malta 

A “score” indicator of which EU-countries would benefit most from a move to P-free detergents, 
based on three factors: (1) annual per capita consumption of detergent phosphate (2) percentage 
of population provided with tertiary water treatment (3) extent of concern over eutrophication 

(RPA Report 2006, http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/chemicals/legislation/detergents) 

EN 

13 

   EN