EU drinking water directives

The Pastel UV proved to be a suitable tool for the rapid (within two days) assessment of the spatial variability of NO3" concentration in the Hardt catchment area. It demonstrated that most surface waters in the Weiherbachgraben and Sauruntz sub-basins were characterized by NCh- concentration higher than 40 mg L-1 and that NO3- concentrations in ground water were above the EQS defined in the EU Drinking Water Directive 98/83/CE (European Commission, 1998). A further outcome of this study was the identification of critical pressure points in each sub-basin that may need further investigation and monitoring. 

Testing the potential of pipe materials to promote biofilm growth is needed because it may affect the taste, odor or turbidity of drinking water and may cause non compliance with microbiological water quality parameters and a risk to consumers health. Because EU Drinking Water Directive (98/83/EC) controls the water quality at the consumers tap instead of the point of supply, it is important to be assessed if the pipe material in drinking water supply systems release substances that may enhance or inhibit attached microbial growth. 

Tables 1.5 to 1.7 present a selection of chemical and indicator parameters with specified requirements according to the EU drinking water directive (Cormcil Directive 98/83/EC, 1998). In Tables 1.5 to 1.7 are listed the parameter, the parameter specific defined maximiun contaminant levels, and limits of detection (LOD).

The Drinking Water Directive (EC 1998), concerns the quality of water intended for human consumption. The objective of the Drinking Water Directive is to protect the health of the consumers in the EU and to make sure the water is wholesome and clean (free of unacceptable taste, odor, color) and that it has a pleasant appearance (EC 2007a). 

EU Member States must transpose the Drinking Water Directive into their own national legislation. The Member States can include additional requirements, e.g., regulate additional substances that are relevant within their territory or set higher standards. But Member States are not allowed to set lower standards as the level of protection of human health should be the same within the whole EU. 

The Commission assesses the results of water quality monitoring against the standards in the Drinking Water Directive. After each reporting cycle the Commission produces a synthesis report, which summarizes the quality of drinking water and its improvement at a European level. The synthesis reports are available to the public (EU 2007). 

The drinking-water Directive of 1980 and its subsequent implementation is an excellent case study to illustrate this point. This Directive (as described earlier) was intended to convey the disapproval of the community regarding all accumulative chemical pesticides - their use was not to be allowed if they were found to accumulate in groundwater above trace levels. It has already been mentioned that this is an illogical objective it implies the prohibition of many substances precisely for those characteristics that render them useful. Unless the EU means to render entirely unlawful the use of the natural hydrological cycle as a transport vector (implying the use of natural organic and atmospheric media in its stead), then the objective as stated makes little sense. 

During 2007, the Commission decided to pursue revision of the 1998 Directive to accommodate concepmal and other requirements for effective implementation of EU drinking water protections. Toward that end, it sought WHO s preparation of WHO—Europe s support document, issued in October 2007 (see above WHO, 2007). In addition, it commissioned a detailed study on a list of chemical parameters for directive revision, with a final report released in September 2008 (DG Env/DHl, 2008). This report recommended retaining the 10 p,g Pb/1 standard, measured at the tap, but noted that four member states were having compliance problems, and there were problems in terms of lead connections and monitoring. 

The main objective of COST Action 637 is to stimulate better control of metals in drinking water and to minimise environmental and health impacts. The Action aims to contribute to the implementation of the European Drinking Water Directive and to the Environment and Health programme of the EU Commission and the UNAVHO Protocol on Water and Health. The Joint Research Centre of the European Commission provides scientific input in the COST Action but is also the link to the European Commission. COST stands for European Cooperation in Science and Technology and is the oldest and widest European inter-governmental network for cooperation in research. COST is supported by the EU RTD Framework programme (www.cost.esf.org). 

Some EU Member States have also applied similar lifetime cancer risk estimates in judging tolerable risk levels. There is as yet no EU harmonized view on such default risk estimates at a policy level, although the starting point for the derivation of limit values for the general population in relation to the EU directives on ambient air and drinking water quality is the 10 lifetime risk for genotoxic carcinogens. 

In the EU Directive on Drinking Water Quality [35], 23 individual chemical parameters have specific limits together with two group limits for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and pesticides. In the case of pesticides, no individual pesticide is permitted to exceed 0.1 pgL , and pesticides in total should not exceed 0.5 xgL" . These limits were a compromise, the original demand having been for a zero limit for pesticides in drinking water, and these standards were set, in 1998, as the effective analytical detection limit. The revision of this directive and its application to pharmaceuticals is currently under discussion, although it seems unlikely that specific limits will be set for individual pharmaceuticals [36]. 

The EU has adopted several directives setting the MRLs for pesticides, including OCPs and OPPs, in fruit and vegetables (90/642/EEC), cereals (86/362/EEC), and foods of animal origin (86/363/EEC). One of the main concerns in pesticide residue analysis is to reach detection limits as low as 0.1 yug/L, which is the MLR established by the EU for drinking water (80/779/ EEC) (28,29). 

Fumaric acid is not permitted under UK or EU legislation for direct use in soft drinks, although it is permitted under Annex IV of Directive 95/2/EC (modified by directive 98/72/EC), with strict limits, in instant powders for fruit-, tea- or herbal-based drinks. Fumaric acid finds wide use in other countries as an acidulant, notably in the US market, where it has GRAS ( Generally Recommended As Safe ) status. Fumaric acid is currently manufactured in the United States via the acid-catalysed isomerisation of maleic acid. In terms of equivalent palate acidity it can be used at lower levels than citiic acid and typical replacement is suggested at two parts fumaric acid per three parts citric acid in water, sugar water and carbonated sugar water. 

---