Main authors: | Froukje Maria Platjouw, Harriet Moore, Susanne Wuijts, Sandra Boekhold, Susanne Klages, Isobel Wright, Morten Graversgaard and Gerard Velthof |
FAIRWAYiS Editor: | Jane Brandt |
Source document: | »Platjouw F. M. et al. (2021) Coherence in EU law and policy for the protection of drinking water resources. FAIRWAY Project Deliverable 6.1R 200 pp |
Here we discuss the legal requirements imposed by the Groundwater Directive on states and/or the farming industry with a focus on ecological, monitoring and reporting, public participation (including farmer organisatons) and coordination requirements. The ecological requirements are subjected to a (vertical) coherence assessment of their contribution to FAIRWAY's objectives of protecting drinking water resources against pollution by nitrates and pesticides from agricultural practices. Finally we subject the GWD to a (horizontal) coherence assessment with the Water Framework, Drinking Water, Nitrates and Pesticides Directives to see how well each supports or constrains and counteracts the others.
Details of the analyses are contained in the Appendices of the full report:
1. Overview of the Groundwater Directive
Water bodies are at particular risk from certain hazardous substances which can affect ecosystems and threaten human health. Therefore, under the WFD, complementary directives have been adopted on the protection of groundwater against pollution and deterioration and on environmental quality standards establishing the standards which constitute the chemical status criteria for the Water Framework Directive. Both the Groundwater Directive and the Directive on Environmental Quality Standards follow from obligations under the WFD and are directly relevant to the determination of the environmental objectives and standards specified under the WFD.
To illustrate, the 2006 Groundwater Directive (GWD) contains an elaboration of the goals for groundwater specified in the WFD. Groundwater protection is a priority in EU environmental policy for several reasons. Firstly, once contaminated, groundwater is much more difficult to clean than surface water and the consequences can last for decades, if not indefinitely. Secondly, as groundwater is frequently used for the abstraction of drinking water, for industry and for agriculture, groundwater pollution can endanger human health and threaten those activities. Thirdly, groundwater provides the base flow for many rivers (it can provide up to 90% of the flow in some watercourses) and can thus affect the quality of surface water systems. Fourthly, it also acts as a buffer through dry periods, and is essential for maintaining wetlands.
The GWD establishes specific measures to prevent and control groundwater pollution by forming criteria for (1) assessment of good groundwater chemical status and for (2) identification and reversal of significant and sustained upward trends in groundwater pollution and for the definition of starting points for trend reversals (Art. 1). Another goal of the GWD is the establishment of measures to prevent and limit indirect discharges of pollutants into groundwater (Art. 6).
Groundwater is considered to have a good chemical status when measured or predicted nitrates levels do not exceed 50 mg/l, while those of active pesticide ingredients, their metabolites and reaction products do not exceed 0.1 µg/l (a total of 0.5 µg/l for all pesticides measured). Furthermore, the levels of certain high-risk substances should be below the threshold values set by EU countries. These substances should, at the very least, include arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, ammonium, chloride, sulphate, nitrites, phosphorus (total)/ phosphates, trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene.
The concentration of any other pollutants should conform to the definition of good chemical status as set out in Annex V to the Water Framework Directive. If a value set as a quality standard or a threshold value is exceeded, an investigation needs to confirm, among other things, that this does not pose a significant environmental risk.
By 22 December 2008, EU countries had to set a threshold value for each pollutant identified in any of the bodies of groundwater within their territory considered to be at risk. As a minimum, they had to set threshold values for the list of pollutants indicated above. For each pollutant on the list, information (as defined in Annex III GWD) must be provided on the groundwater bodies characterised as being at risk, as well as on how the threshold values were set. These threshold values must be included in the River Basin District Management Plans provided for under the Water Framework Directive.
EU countries must identify any significant and sustained upward trends in levels of pollutants found in bodies of groundwater. In order to do so, they must establish a monitoring programme in conformity with Annex IV GWD.
As described, the Groundwater Directive is closely connected to the WFD. These connections are also apparent in the context of preventing and limiting discharges of pollutants. To illustrate, the programme of measures drawn up for each river basin district under the WFD must include preventing indirect discharges of all pollutants, in particular those hazardous substances mentioned in Points 1 to 6 of Annex VIII to the Water Framework Directive, as well as the substances mentioned in Points 7 to 9 of the Annex, when deemed to be hazardous. Furthermore, pollutants not listed as hazardous must also be limited if they pose a real or potential risk of pollution.
Except in those cases where other EU legislation establishes more stringent requirements, preventive measures may exclude, among other things, the results of authorized direct discharges, pollutants present in such small quantities that they pose no risk, the results of accidents or natural disasters, or pollutants resulting from discharges which, for technical reasons, the competent authorities consider to be impossible to prevent or limit without resorting to measures that would increase the risk to human health or to the environment or to measures that would be disproportionately costly.
In order to ensure consistent protection of groundwater, member states sharing bodies of groundwater should coordinate their activities in respect of monitoring, the setting of threshold values, and the identification of relevant hazardous substances.
2. Contribution of the Groundwater Directive's requirements to achieving FAIRWAY's objectives
Table 2. 2 Requirements and objectives of the GWD.
Requirements and objectives are scored as positive (‘+3 indivisible’, ‘+2 reinforcing’ or ‘+1 enabling’), neutral (0), or negative (‘-1 constraining’, ‘-2 counteracting’ or ‘-3 cancelling’)
Label | Requirements and objectives of the GWD |
Prevent pollution | To prevent and control groundwater pollution by forming criteria for (1) assessment of good groundwater chemical status and for (2) identification and reversal of significant and sustained upward trends and for the definition of starting points for trend reversals (art. 1) |
Establish chemical thresholds | Threshold values applicable to good chemical status shall be based on the protection of the body of groundwater, having particular regard to its impact on, and interrelationship with, associated surface waters and directly dependent terrestrial ecosystems and wetlands (art. 3.1) |
Introduce stricter thresholds | Where threshold values from Annex II (50 mg/L for nitrates and 0,1 µg/L for pesticides) are not sufficient to prevent damage to environment or safety of humans… more strict values shall be established (Annex I) |
Ensure sufficient measures | MSs shall ensure that the programme of measures established in accordance with Article 11 of the WFD includes all measures to prevent inputs into groundwater of any hazardous substances and also non- hazardous pollutants when considered by MS to be dangerous for environment (art.6) |
Figure 2.2 demonstrates that respondents perceive that the requirements related to threshold values (Art.3.1 GWD and Annex I) are indivisible (+3) to the FAIRWAY objective. Further, respondent scores contained little variability. Between 70% and 80% of respondents gave a score of +3, suggesting that the participants believe that these provisions are highly contributive to the FAIRWAY objective.
Figure 2.2
Scores related to requirements to establish criteria (Art.1 GWD) and to include preventive measures in the programme of measures (Art. 6 GWD) suggest that these requirements are also contributive to the FAIRWAY objective. Yet responses were more varied; only 60% of the respondents gave a score of +3 to these requirements. Overall, the average value of all responses to all survey items related to the contribution of requirements of the GWD to achieving the FAIRWAY objectives was highly positive (M = 2.6). A score of +3 suggests requirements are ‘indivisible’, while a score of +2 indicates requirements are ‘reinforcing’. The average value falls between these categories which suggests that participants believe that the general requirements of the GWD contribute positively to the protection of drinking water resources against pesticides and nitrates from agricultural practices.
Responses to open-ended survey items give some explanation about the overall positive scores, and variability between scores for different provisions. Most respondents suggest that the GWD requirements are directly reinforcing or indivisible with the FAIRWAY project objectives as they all contribute to improvements in drinking water quality. For example, one participant suggested that 37 the GWD reinforces the FAIRWAY objectives by influencing industry standards beyond the agricultural sector. Similarly, the threshold values, criteria, and measures stipulated under the GWD reinforce the objectives of other sectors by creating supportive institutional conditions.
In contrast, other respondents suggested that requirements of the GWD related to threshold levels of pollutants do not support the FAIRWAY objectives. For example, threshold levels of nitrates (50 mg/L) and pesticides (0.1 μg/L) are not necessarily sufficient for controlling pollution. One respondent suggested that a fixed threshold level for pesticides is not always effective in all environmental contexts, or for all categories of pesticides. Fixed thresholds could limit the leakage of less harmful pesticides to the environment, while not being stringent enough for other more harmful types of pesticides. Another respondent also questioned the accuracy of how thresholds are calculated. It is possible that the type of evidence needed to inform these calculations might be unclear and not described specifically enough in the Directive.
These varying perspectives from respondents suggest that there are elements of GWD requirements that support the FAIRWAY objective, and elements that may conflict with the objective. For example, setting threshold values may support wider institutional frameworks, however, the effectiveness of thresholds may vary depending on context.
3. Coherence of the Groundwater Directive with other Directives
The GWD contains several requirements and objectives. For the purpose of this assessment, we asked respondents to score four key requirements related to criteria for assessment, chemical threshold values, establishing strict thresholds, and programme of measures. These four requirements have been assessed and scored in terms of their coherence with key requirements of the WFD, DWD, ND and PD.
Table 3.2 Four key requirements of the GWD
Label | GWD Article |
Criteria for assessment | To prevent and control groundwater pollution by forming criteria for (1) assessment of good groundwater chemical status and for (2) identification and reversal of significant and sustained upward trends and for the definition of starting points for trend reversals (art. 1). |
Chemical threshold value | Threshold values applicable to good chemical status shall be based on the protection of the body of groundwater, having particular regard to its impact on, and interrelationship with, associated surface waters and directly dependent terrestrial ecosystems and wetlands (art. 3.1). |
Establish strict thresholds | Where threshold values from Annex II (50 mg/L for nitrates and 0,1 µg/L for pesticides) are not sufficient to prevent damage to environment or safety of humans… more strict values shall be established (Annex I). |
Programme of measures | To ensure that the programme of measures established in accordance with Article 11 of the WFD includes all measures to prevent inputs into groundwater of any hazardous substances and also non-hazardous pollutants when considered by MS to be dangerous for environment (art.6) |
Criteria for assessment
Art. 1 GWD requires member states to prevent and control groundwater pollution by forming criteria for (1) assessment of good groundwater chemical status and for (2) identification and reversal of significant and sustained upward trends and for the definition of starting points for trend reversals. It has been assessed to what extent the requirements of the WFD, DWD, PD and ND are coherent with this, and whether there are any requirements that impede the attainment of the requirement to form criteria.
Overall, the requirements of the other directives are perceived to be neutral (0) or enabling (+1) for establishing criteria for assessment (M = 1.2). Of all requirements, those judged the most contributive were: the requirement to adopt National Action Plans and to encourage integrated pest management (Art. 4.1 PD), the aim to reduce pollution of ground-, surface and estuarial water by nitrates from agricultural sources, and prevent further such pollution (Art. 1, ND), as well as certain requirements of the WFD (Art. 1 and 4.1 (a)(ii) WFD). These requirements were deemed to be reinforcing (+2). The partner emphasized that in the context of groundwater protection, there is a high focus on the effects of pollution by nitrates and pesticides.
For the purpose of forming criteria, no negative interactions have been identified.
Figure 3.5
Chemical threshold value
Art. 3.1 GWD stipulates that threshold values applicable to good chemical status shall be based on the protection of the body of groundwater, having particular regard to its impact on, and interrelationship with, associated surface waters and directly dependent terrestrial ecosystems and wetlands (art. 3.1). It has been assessed to what extent the requirements of the WFD, DWD, PD and ND are coherent with this, and whether there are any requirements that impede the attainment of the requirement related to chemical threshold values.
Overall, the scores given by the assessor suggest that the directives are perceived to contribute positively to the requirement (M = 1.4). The scorings showed little variation; the average scores of the directives vary between 1.2 and 1.7. The requirements of the ND are considered to be most important.
In the context of chemical threshold values, no negative interactions have been identified.
Fig 3.6
Establish strict thresholds
Where threshold values from Annex II (50 mg/L for nitrates and 0,1 µg/L for pesticides) are not sufficient to prevent damage to environment or safety of humans, more strict values shall be established (GWD, Annex I). A project partner scored the extent to which the requirements of the WFD, DWD, PD and ND are coherent with this, and whether there are any requirements that impede the attainment of the requirement to establish strict thresholds.
Overall, the scores allocated by the respondent suggests that the directives are neutral for the purpose of establishing strict thresholds (M = 0.1). However, there is some variability between the scores given for specific directives and requirements. While the WFD, DWD, and PD are considered to be neutral (0), the ND is perceived to be slightly constraining (M=-0.5). Particularly the limits to the amount of livestock manures applied on land (170 kg/ha each year) (ND, Annex III), the requirement to apply common criteria for water pollution (not more than 50 mg/l nitrates) (ND, Annex I), and the requirement to identify vulnerable zones (ND, Annex I) are all considered to be constraining (-1). Respondents suggested that one explanation for this interaction is related to the fact that a fixed threshold of 170 kg N can vary in its pollution risk. Under certain circumstances, these amounts can adversely affect groundwater quality. It needs to be stressed though that these threshold values are only one of the measures of a long list of measures prescribed by the ND.
Of all requirements, the aim to protect human health from the adverse effects of any contamination of water intended for human consumption by ensuring that it is wholesome and clean (DWD, art. 1) is perceived to be most contributive (reinforcing, +2).
These results suggest similar distinctions to those highlighted in Chapter Two. More general requirements are perceived to be related to protecting water quality and preventing pollution more positively than requirements associated with fixed thresholds. This seems to be due to the risk that a fixed threshold may be appropriate in some contexts, and insufficient in others. Thus, one potential area for improving coherence may be including terms in requirements to necessitate more strict 74 thresholds under certain environmental conditions. For example, it may be possible to identify biophysical conditions that pose a greater risk to groundwater quality than others, and thus, determine that stricter thresholds should be adopted.
Figure 3.7
Programme of measures
Art. 6 GWD stipulates that member states ensure that the programme of measures established in accordance with Article 11 of the WFD includes all measures to prevent inputs into groundwater of any hazardous substances and also non-hazardous pollutants when considered by member states to be dangerous for the environment. It has been assessed to what extent the requirements of the WFD, DWD, PD and ND are coherent with this, and whether there are any requirements that impede the attainment of the requirement to prevent deterioration.
Overall, the scores assigned suggest that the directives are perceived to be neutral or slightly constraining for the attainment of this requirement (M = -0,1). While requirements related to the PD and the ND are considered to be neutral (0), both the WFD and the DWD are scored slightly negatively with average scores of -0,2. The requirements considered to be most negative, and constraining ( -1) are the overall protection aim of the WFD (Art.1 WFD), and the requirement related to micro-organisms and parasites (Art.2 and Annex I DWD). The respondents considered that these requirements contribute the least to achieving a programme of measures related to nitrates and pesticides pollution.
Figure 3.8
Conclusion
Overall, the requirements and objectives of the WFD, DWD, ND and PD are considered to be coherent with the GWD, yet some negative interactions have been identified. For example, several requirements of the ND are considered to be moderately inconsistent with the requirements of the GWD. These include: the limits to the amount of livestock manures applied on land (170 kg/ha each year) (ND, Annex III), the requirement to apply common criteria for water pollution (not more than 50 mg/l nitrates) (ND, Annex I), and the requirement to identify vulnerable zones (ND, Annex I). Comments about these interactions suggest that one reason that these requirements do not support the GWD is the risks associated with setting fixed threshold values in diverse biophysical environments.
Of note, no positive interactions were identified between the requirement to establish a programme of measures and other directives. This may reflect disconnect between the environmental objectives of the directives, and the institutional processes required to ensure those objectives are achieved.
Note: For full references to papers quoted in this article see