Vereniging van rivierwaterbedrijven
RIWA
RIWA was established in 1951 as a joint venture of Dutch water companies that use surface water for the preparation of drinking water.
ID: 877880248347-93
Lobbying Activity
Response to Fitness check of how the Polluter Pays Principle is applied to the environment
9 Dec 2022
The association of river water companies RIWA welcomes this consultation. Micropollutants are a growing concern for drinking water companies. They are increasingly found in the aquatic environment and especially persistent and mobile pollutants pose significant problems to drinking water companies. The European legislative basis to tackle this problem is very clear with the TFEU (Art. 191.2) stipulating that the Union policy on the environment shall be based on the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventive action should be taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay. However, the Polluter Pays Principle (PPP) has not yet been successfully implemented. The experience of Dutch and Belgian drinking water companies that are members of RIWA shows that the PPP is not applied in the case of surface water pollution. This situation leads to substantial extra treatment costs and, hence, negatively affects the affordability of drinking water services although they are considered as essential services according to EU law. The Water Framework Directive (WFD) stipulates in its article 9.1 that Member States shall take account of the principle of recovery of the costs of water services, including environmental and resource costs, in accordance in particular with the PPP. However, for most of the pollutants found in the water cycle, control-at-source measures remain largely insufficient and the PPP is not applied. Deterioration of drinking water resources due to micropollutants has already led to increased treatment costs. These additional costs are not being borne by polluters, but by drinking water consumers. (Very) Persistent and mobile pollutants are extremely hard to remove with existing treatment. The costs arising from the installation and operation of additional treatment technology to remove micropollutants must in future be borne by the polluters in accordance with EU law. RIWA fully supports the comments that have been made by Vewin (feedback reference F3372107). We also support the conclusions of a study which EurEau had performed by Deloitte on the required changes in EU legislation to control the release of pollutants at the source and, if these measures are not sufficient, to implement the PPP to finance mitigation measures at other life-cycle stages through extended producer responsibility or EPR (source: https://www.eureau.org/resources/publications/4380-deloitte-eureau-report-extended-producer-responsibility-modules-1-2-3/file): Micropollutants represent an increasing problem for the aquatic environment. Current regulatory measures must, therefore, be considered as insufficient. Control-at-source measures must be taken first, not only because it is a requirement stemming from the TFEU, but also because such measures are usually far more effective due to the many pathways of micropollutants to the environment. Therefore, EPR alone will not be able to solve the problem, but it is an important tool to finance downstream mitigation measures when control-at-source measures alone are not sufficient. Mandatory control-at-source and EPR requirements are generally more effective and acceptable then voluntary initiatives. EU legislation offers many pathways to include EPR provisions with some pieces of legislation (pharmaceutical, pesticides) being more easily adaptable than others. A full cost-benefit analysis is required not only covering end-of-pipe measures but measures along the full product life-cycle ranging from product development down to waste treatment options. Its goal is to determine at which life-cycle stage mitigating measures would be most effective while ensuring the affordability of the related services. More work is necessary to develop fair, effective, efficient and proportionate EPR schemes for micropollutants, in particular with regards to the identification of responsible producers and avoiding free riders.
Read full response