Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on minimum requirements for water reuse (rolling programme)’

(COM(2018) 337 final)

(2019/C 110/18)

Rapporteur:

Mindaugas MACIULEVIČIUS

Referral	European Parliament, 2.7.2018 Council, 26.6.2018
Legal basis	Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Bureau decision	19.9.2017
Section responsible	Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment
Adopted in section	27.11.2018
Adopted at plenary	12.12.2018
Plenary session No	539
Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions)	140/1/0

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

1.1.

This is a timely and very positive initiative from the European Commission. The proposed regulation will greatly encourage the development of safe, additional water resources for agricultural irrigation — water which can be processed to be safe for agricultural use and also, when appropriate, retain a valuable content of useful nutrients as well as appropriate and soil-enriching organic matter.

1.2.

The added value of such provision will primarily relieve stress on drinking water supplies and also facilitate both public and private investment into creating these supplementary water resources. These separate and dedicated treatment and supply infrastructures for agricultural use will be in addition to existing sources and supply infrastructure which, depending on the Member State, are essential services operated under state, municipal or private responsibilities.

1.3.

The EESC welcomes this proposed regulation as a useful addition in realising the intentions of the Water Framework Directive and also as contributing to the Circular Economy Package. It will encourage existing water resources to be used more sustainably and increase consumer confidence in the safety of those agricultural products affected.

1.4.

At present consumers are unaware of the varying standards on water reuse that exist between Member States and many are unaware that reclaimed water is widely used in irrigation. As this regulation provides for a consistent approach based on strong scientific advice, it can be seen as a necessary foundation block in food safety policy.

1.5.

Contrary to the impression created by the general title of the regulation, the actual substance of the proposal is tightly focussed on the reuse of urban waste water for irrigation purposes. It is recommended that, although this is mentioned in the exploratory memorandum to the regulation, greater prominence is given to this focus to minimise concerns that industrial and domestic reuse opportunities are being ignored.

1.6.

The potential of water reuse for aquifer recharge, although not the object of the regulation, remains of interest and further technical analysis should be undertaken to resolve the complex problems identified in the impact assessment.

1.7.

The Committee strongly recommends that, for this regulation to have its maximum intended impact, effective policing of water resources and an active accountability and enforcement regime needs to be followed in all Member States. In particular, the enforcement of prohibitions on illegal water extraction needs to be applied more consistently.

1.8.

There is a good business case supporting the necessary capital investment required to establish the infrastructure needed for water reuse, but construction of such infrastructure would be assisted by support from structural funds, primarily the rural development fund and the Cohesion Fund.

1.9.

Although impacts on competition with imports from third countries are expected to be neutral, the EESC urges the Commission to take this opportunity to use this development of standards at EU level, in conjunction with the European Food Safety Authority, to reinforce the stance in international standard-setting discussions on water reuse so imports from third countries are also compliant. The EESC has regularly argued for consistency in international agricultural standards and this regulation can set a global benchmark for water reuse (1).

2.   Introduction

2.1.

Due to climate change and increasing demand, many parts of the EU are already experiencing water stress (2), with scarcity and quality problems already affecting one third of EU territory all year round (3). Previous opinions from the Committee have highlighted these concerns, urged more investment in waste water treatment for reuse and pointed out that the objective of closing the water cycle no longer seems unrealistic (4). A large proportion of water resources is used for agricultural irrigation, particularly in southern Member States, where agricultural produce makes a significant economic contribution. The intention of this regulation is not to extend the area already under irrigation but to use existing water resources more safely and efficiently.

2.2.

Maintaining consumer confidence in food supplies and the regulatory and inspection system which ensures their safety is, understandably, one of the highest priorities in the Union. This regulation will increase certainty in this area, where currently standards vary considerably between Member States. Potentially, this regulation could increase by 4,9 billion m3 per year the water available for irrigation, with a more than 5 % reduction of water stress overall. It will guarantee the safety of reclaimed water and ensure a high level of protection for human and animal health and the environment.

2.3.

This regulation can be regarded as strengthening the circular economy, enhancing the food security of the EU and contributing to public health. It directly addresses the need to set harmonised minimum requirements on the quality of reclaimed water, the great majority of which is used in agriculture. Greater public transparency is provided for by requiring that adequate and up-to-date information on reuse of water is available online. In addition, the proposed regulation contributes to the EU’s implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and in particular SDG 6 on Clean Water and Sanitation. It complements the Commission’s proposal for a new Common Agricultural Policy by contributing to better water management in agriculture, with farmers having access to a more sustainable water supply.

2.4.

It should be noted that this regulation is presented as part of a rolling programme and the long-term intention is to consider other areas of water reuse. However, this specific regulation is very tightly focussed and deals almost exclusively with the processing of already treated urban waste water to enable it to be used in various forms of agricultural irrigation. Domestic and industrial reuse lie outside the scope of the present proposal and, to some extent, are already covered — for example in the urban waste water treatment directive, currently under revision (5).

3.   Gist of the Commission proposal

3.1.

The proposed regulation forms part of an integrated water management approach to tackle the severe and increasing problem of water stress across the EU. Alongside water savings and water efficiency measures, treated water from urban waste water treatment plants can contribute by providing a reliable alternative supply.

3.2.

Water reuse generally has a lower environmental impact than other alternative water supplies and can offer a range of environmental, economic and social benefits. The regulation focuses on water reuse for agricultural irrigation, which currently accounts for around a quarter of total freshwater abstracted in the EU.

3.3.

As well as to Member States, the regulation will be directly applicable to business operators, potentially stimulating environmental technology development and uptake. The proposal sets minimum requirements for quality and monitoring of reclaimed water, introduces key risk management tasks and offers a harmonised approach to water reuse for irrigation across the EU. Specifically, the proposal sets out:

3.3.1.

Minimum requirements for quality of reclaimed water and monitoring, covering microbiological elements (for example, levels of E. coli bacteria) and monitoring requirements for routine and validation monitoring. These will guarantee that reclaimed water produced in accordance with the proposed regulation is safe for irrigation.

3.3.2.

Key risk management tasks which add an additional layer of protection on top of the minimum requirements, i.e. the identification of any additional hazard that needs to be addressed for water reuse to be safe. This primarily involves the reclamation plant operator drawing up a Water Reuse Risk Management Plan, necessary for issue of a permit by the competent authority, which shall be reviewed at least every five years.

3.3.3.

Increased transparency. New transparency rules require that the public will get information online, in a user-friendly way, about water reuse practice in their Member States. An implementing act will be required in order to lay down detailed rules regarding the format and presentation of the information to be provided.

3.4.

It is envisaged that Member States will develop data sets containing information on water reuse with the support of the European Environmental Agency, which will regularly provide overviews of the regulation’s implementation at Union level. The first evaluation is scheduled six years after the entry into force of the regulation.

3.5.

It should be noted that the proposed regulation does not require Member States to undertake waste water treatment for irrigation. Its primary purpose is to create confidence in the wide range of stakeholders — water authorities, farmers, investors and consumers — that the highest standards of safety have been applied consistently in the provision of water used for irrigation purposes. This will be a considerable advance on current practice.

3.6.

There is a detailed analysis of technical issues, particularly detection, safety standards and threshold parameters, in the impact assessment as well as in supporting research documentation.

4.   General comments

4.1.

The Committee positively supports this regulation as contributing to mitigating the pressures of climate change and as being a useful addition to the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the circular economy in general. We note the positive examples of extensive water reuse combined with agricultural production, notably Cyprus and Israel, where nearly 90 % of treated waste water is presently reused. The EESC wonders whether the regulation on water reuse should also have examined the issue of heat recovery from water before it goes to the treatment plant. Such equipment should be installed in single- and multi-family homes, swimming pools and hotels.

4.2.

The proposed regulation recognises the primacy of water saving and efficiency measures in the water management hierarchy. The voluntary reuse option will be selected only when it is relevant, safe and cost-efficient. There is considerable scope for the application of water reuse for irrigation, particularly in some of the southern EU Member States where modest levels are prevalent; for example Italy and Greece reuse 5 % and Spain 12 %, and it is encouraging that water reuse is now increasing at a steady pace.

4.3.

The Committee notes that the regulation is designed to establish a uniform approach to quality standards for water for reuse. At present this is not the case. Consumers are generally unaware of the wide variations between Member States concerning the quality of water reused for irrigation. A single minimum standard will encourage uptake and investment as well as provide greater security about health issues for consumers.

4.4.

The Committee also notes that concerns about pathogens, contaminants of emerging concern, disinfection by-products and antibiotic resistances have now been provided for (in Annex 2), based on the JRC Science for Policy technical report which explores in great detail the management of health and environmental risks for water reuse in agricultural irrigation (6). This should ensure that on a project by project basis soils, groundwater, drinking water and food products are protected.

4.5.

There are many situations where conventional water resources are generally under-priced and do not reflect the environmental and resource cost. Also, there remains considerable illegal abstraction from rivers and though private boreholes. For this regulation to have its maximum intended impact, effective policing of water resources and an active accountability and enforcement regime needs to be followed in all Member States.

4.6.

The proposed regulation establishes a defined authorisation procedure for water reuse projects. This should contribute to a clear distribution of responsibilities among different water cycle players for water reuse.

4.7.

The Committee values the opportunity offered by the regulation, which encourages reuse treatment plants being adapted or designed to facilitate ‘fertigation’. This is the retention in the processed water, with due regard for safety, of soluble fertilizers such as nitrogen and phosphorus and beneficial, soil enriching organic matter which, in the course of domestic and industrial use, have entered in the water cycle. These additional benefits are understood to be secondary to the primary benefit of providing new water resources through reuse.

5.   Specific comments

5.1.

It should be noted that the term ‘water reuse’ refers to the use of water which is generated from (primarily urban) wastewater and which, after treatment, achieves a quality that is appropriate for its intended use.

5.2.

The focus of this regulation is primarily on ensuring the quality and safety of water reuse from urban wastewater treatment plants. It is not concerned with the regulation of potable water or with direct water efficiency measures. However, the Committee notes that the effective treatment of wastewater and its reuse has considerable environmental benefits when compared with other options. For example in 2017 drought resulted in an estimated loss of EUR 2 billion for the Italian farming sector and the extreme weather conditions experienced by many Member States in the summer of 2018 are likely to increase this figure across the EU. Water reuse could, however, cover an estimated 47 % of all irrigation demand in Italy but presently is only used to a very limited extent.

5.3.

Although the potential for reclaimed water use in agricultural irrigation is overwhelmingly present in the southern Member States, the technical and operational stimulus that this regulation will generate will be of future benefit throughout the EU.

5.4.

The responsibility for ensuring food safety standards, which in general are set by the EU with reference to the General Food Law Regulation, lies, as is appropriate, with the Member States. The proposed regulation will ensure that where water is reused for irrigation of food crops consumer safety is paramount. Agricultural imports from third countries are included in the necessity to comply with EU food safety laws though presently there are no specific requirements concerning irrigation practices in third countries. It is argued that common EU standards could serve as a model for third countries, and in particular our bilateral trade partners, though this will be subject to negotiation at international level. Already there is significant use of both untreated and treated waste water for irrigation worldwide, including many countries from which the EU imports agricultural produce.

---

(1)  EESC opinion on Agriculture in trade negotiations, paragraph 4.3 (OJ C 173, 31.5.2017, p. 20).

(2)  Water stress occurs when the demand for water exceeds the available amount during a certain period or when poor quality restricts its use.

(3)  COM(2012) 672 final.

(4)  EESC opinion on A Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Water Resources (OJ C 327, 12.11.2013, p. 93).

(5)  Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment (OJ L 135, 30.5.1991, p. 40).

(6)  JRC publication: Towards a legal instrument on water reuse at EU level.