COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the quality of water intended for human consumption (recast)
Date: 2018-02-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: consumer protection, drinking water, human nutrition, public health, quality standard, water management, water pollution, water protection, water supply

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 1.2.2018  SWD(2017) 448 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a  Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the quality of water intended for human consumption (recast) {COM(2017) 753 final} - {SWD(2017) 449 final} - {SWD(2017) 451 final}  
 
 
Executive Summary Sheet 

Impact assessment on a revised Drinking Water Directive 98/83/EC 

A. Need for action 

Why? What is the problem being addressed? 
Safe  drinking  water  is  essential  for  public  health  and  well-being.  Contamination  or  shortage  cause  high  social 
and  economic  costs.  The  REFIT  evaluation  of  Directive  98/83/EC,  a  follow-up  action  to  the  first  European 
Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) Right2Water, confirmed that this directive fulfils its purpose to protect human health from 
the  adverse  effects  of  tap  water  contamination.  However,  the  evaluation,  stakeholders'  consultations  and  the 
Court of Auditors identified five problem areas: 1) outdated quality standards; 2) outdated approach; 3) flexibility 
on  provisions  for  materials  in  contact  with  drinking  water  creating  an  internal  market  obstacle;  4)  lack  of 
transparency  and  of  access  to  up-to-date  information  for  consumers  and  too  complex  reporting;  5)  around  2 
million people have no access to tap water according to the citizen's initiative. 

What is this initiative expected to achieve? 
The initiative's aim is to ensure the sustainable provision of high drinking water quality for decades to come by 
modernising the Drinking Water Directive. 

What is the value added of action at the EU level? 
Protecting  human  health  and  the  environment,  removing  internal  market  obstacles,  improving  access  to  water 
and sustainable management of water supply cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States alone. Citizens, 
Member States, and businesses rely on EU-wide common and updated drinking water quality standards. 

B. Solutions 

What  legislative  and  non-legislative  policy  options  have  been  considered?  Is  there  a  preferred 
choice or not? Why? 
Based on the identified options in the impact assessment, two policy packages were considered, both containing 
1) an extended and updated parameter list; 2) promotion of risk-based approach; 3) removal of internal market 
obstacles concerning products in contact with drinking water; 4) provision of SMART information to consumers 
and more focused reporting obligations. The second package also includes 5) improving and promoting access 
to drinking water. Both preferred policy packages correspond best to the general objective of the initiative, taking 
advantage of the synergy between an expanded parameter list and the full application of a risk-based approach, 
maximising health benefits while reducing costs. The second package addresses more directly "access to water" 
identified  by  the  ECI  'Right2Water',  including  the  obligation  to  ensure  access  to  safe  water  for  vulnerable  and 
marginalised groups. 

Who supports which option? 
Water suppliers and authorities strongly advocated in favour of an extended and updated parameter list and the 
introduction of the risk-based approach. Strong support was provided by industry, consumers, and authorities to 
remove internal market obstacles. Consumers supported more transparency and improved access to water for 
all.  Part  of  the  water  operators  disbelieved  the  need  for  increased  access  to  SMART  information.  The  bottled 
water industry contested using bottled water consumption as indicator of citizens' confidence in tap water. 

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)?  
Both preferred packages would ensure the sustainable provision of high quality drinking water. The introduction 
of  the  full  risk-based  approach  would  improve  coherence  with  other  policies,  such  as  the  Water  Framework 
Directive,  and  allow  better  identifying  potential  contamination  sources,  to  reduce  risks  and  therefore  to  better 
focus treatment and monitoring efforts. Both packages would reduce the 20 million people currently potentially at 
health  risk  in  the  EU  to  between  4.7  and  4.1  million.  The  risk  of  potential  long-term  marginal  effects  and 
corresponding  health  costs  would  also  be  reduced.  Increased  transparency  on  water  supply  would  empower 
consumers to incite providers to ensure resource-efficient services. Confidence in tap water would be improved, 
with  additional  positive  social  and  environmental  impacts:  reduced  bottled  water  consumption  by  about  17  % 
(compared  to  2015),  resulting  in  decreased  greenhouse  gas  emissions  and  plastic  pollution.  The  burden  of 
reporting would be reduced by requiring only essential information (exceedances, incidents) to be transmitted to 
the Commission. 

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? 
The current annual cost of the drinking water sector is € 46.3 billion and is expected to rise to € 47.9 billion in 

1 

 
 
 
2050. The significant positive health benefits of safer drinking water supply come at moderate additional costs. 
The packages entail an estimated additional increase in set-up costs of € 5.9 billion to € 7.3 billion1. Employment 
in  the  water  supply  sector  would  increase  between  17 000  and  26 000  full  time  equivalent  (FTE),  but  would 
decrease by 9 000 FTE under the baseline scenario. Costs would mainly be passed on to consumers, but EU 
funding or national policies could reduce this impact. Regarding affordability, the packages will slightly increase 
household spending on water services from 0.73 % to between 0.75 % and 0.76 % of the average household 
income.  The average cost  per  household,  estimated  for  2015  at €  229, would  increase  between  € 7.90 and  € 
10.40 per year. Since Member States have margin of discretion (e.g. for subsidizing), actual costs would most 
likely be smaller. Also, the reduction of bottled water consumption can help households to offset costs by around 
€ 600 million. 

How will businesses, SMEs and micro-enterprises be affected? 
The  water  suppliers  would  be  most  affected.  The  distinction  between  small  and  large  suppliers  will  be 
maintained and refined. In particular, the smaller suppliers will benefit of a simplified and staged implementation 
of  the  risk-based  approach.  Overall,  the  changes  will  all  bring  additional  employment  opportunities.  The 
packages  will  have  positive  effects  for  SMEs  in  the  sector  of  treatment  and  analysis  (secondary  employment 
effects  can  rise  to  1  000  jobs).  In  contrast  to  potential  small  negative  impacts  on  the  bottled  water  industry, 
positive effects are expected in the sector manufacturing products and materials, on SMEs, market access and 
innovation, and in the ICT sector. 

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations? 
The  modernisation  of  a  well  implemented  existing  legislation  will  have  minor  impacts  on  national  budgets  and 
administrations.  The  main  impacts  for  authorities  relate  to  administrative  burden  reduction  through  simplified 
reporting (€ -0.35 million in operating cost). Member States will need to transpose the legal text and may develop 
specific national risk assessment plans and/or guidance, together with trainings. 

Will there be other significant impacts?  
Yearly  cost  savings  related  to  reducing  internal  market  obstacles  are  estimated  at  €  669  million,  but  these 
savings  come  at  the  potential  loss  for  some  national  product  approval  bodies.  The  provisions  included  in  the 
second package will contribute to improved access to water (Sustainable Development Goal 6). 

D. Follow up 

When will the policy be reviewed?  
No later than 12 years after its transposition date the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of the Directive. 
Review clauses to adapt technical Annexes regularly to scientific progress will be maintained. 

1 The difference in annual operating costs between the two policy packages are considered negligible. 

2