1. Point 2a - UWWTD implementation - 5th Commission Synthesis Report
Sophie Breul-Busson
European Commission
DG ENV, Water & Marine Environment

2. Background (1)
Based on questionnaire sent June 2007
Overview of implementation status in agglomerations > 2,000 p.e.
Most of MS have reported on year 2005, a few on year 2006
Cut off date 30 November 2008

3. → Report covers only 52% of the pollution load generated in EU-27
Background (2)
Only 18 MS replied in the agreed format by 30 November 2008
2 MS did not report at all by this date (IE, EL)
→ Report covers only 52% of the pollution load generated in EU-27
Reported : AT BE DE DK FI FR LU NL PT SW _ CY EE HU LT LV RO SI SK
Not completely reported :

4. Double-approach for assessing the implementation of the UWWTD:
Background (3)
Focus on the pollution load generated by the MS, rather than on the specific agglomerations
Double-approach for assessing the implementation of the UWWTD:
UWW infrastructure in place
Compliance with requirements of the UWWTD
Figures on agglomerations available in the detailed report

5. EU-27 Overview
23,000 agglomerations of more than 2,000 p.e. generating more than 600 M p.e.
2% of agglomerations are > 150,000 p.e. (big cities) and generate 40% of pollution load
66% of agglomerations are between 2,000 and 10,000 p.e. and generate 13% of pollution load
68% of the EU-27 territory considered as SA

6. EU-27 Sensitive Areas
14 Member States are considering their whole territory as a S.A.
13 Member States have identified certain water bodies in their territory as S.A.
Progress since the last reporting exercise
Accession of EU-12 (catchment of the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea and the Northern Adriatic)
revision of designation in EU15 (FR & ES)
Map as reported by MS
Blue vs green = 5(1) vs 5(8)
10 MS in 5(8) + 4 in 5(1) for all territory – 13 MS in 5(1) with specific SA
Romania + Bulgaria = as by date of Accession

7. EU-18 Overview
For the 18 MS which replied timely in the agreed format :
13,734 agglomerations > 2,000 p.e.
313 M p.e.
83% of the load is discharged in Sensitive areas
17% of the load discharged in Normal areas

8. UWW infrastructure in place & its performance
collection systems in place for 93% of the total load
secondary treatment in place for 87% of the load
more stringent treatment for 72% of the load
Non full performance of the treatment in place
Collection in place : 83% of agglo
2ary tt in place : 77% of agglo (OK 68%)
More stringent tt in place : 56 % of agglo (OK 47%)

9. UWW infrastructure in place & its performance
Collection in place : 83% of agglo
2ary tt in place : 77% of agglo (OK 68%)
More stringent tt in place : 56 % of agglo (OK 47%)

10. Infrastructure – Big Cities
Almost 300 big cities reported total pollution load of 129 M p.e.
More than 98% of this load is collected
90% of the load receive secondary treatment or more
at least 8% of the load receive less than secondary treatment (10 M p.e.).
Six big cities with a total load of 4,3 M p.e. had no waste water treatment at all
6 big cities : Barreiro/Moita, costa do Estoril (PT) , Bucarest, Braila, Craiova, Galati (RO)

11. Compliance with UWWTD requirements
Among the 18 MS, 11 MS had deadlines expired in 2005 : AT, BE, DK, FI, FR, DE, LU, NL, PT, SE and SK
Therefore the picture of compliance is lacking EL, ES, IE, IT, UK, PL and MT which had as well deadlines expired in 2005
These 11 MS record 10,300 agglomerations generating 270 M p.e.

12. Compliance rates – EU-11 11 MS subject to compliance by 31/12/2005
Compliance rates, expressed as % of the load which is subject to compliance :
Collecting systems : 99%
Secondary treatment : 86%
More stringent treatment : 85%

13. Compliance rates – EU-11

14. Compliance : overview
11 of 18 MS had deadlines expired by end 2005 (EU-15 + Slovakia)
Yellow = not subject to deadlines by end 2005
White : not reported timely in the agreed format
Purple grades = rates of compliance – the darker the more compliant

15. Overall assessment
High degree of inadequate or lack of reporting at the cut-off date
Non-comprehensive picture of implementation and of compliance
Establishment of collection systems progressing well
Big differences between Member States regarding establishment and compliance of secondary treatment - Varied implementation picture as regards more stringent treatment
Treatment in normal areas and sensitive areas under Art 5(2) is much less developed than in sensitive areas under 5(4)
Waste water treatment of big cities is elaborated at a very high level but 10 M p.e. still not treated.

16. The way forward
Accelerated efforts in some countries in particular regarding secondary treatment, more stringent treatment and big cities
Improved cooperation with individual Member States and across EU to facilitate implementation of the Directive - Continued use of infringement procedures
Fine tuning the data exchange, information and reporting between the Commission and Member States under WISE
Establishing a complete picture of the situation in EU-27 with the Q-2009 reporting exercise

17. Thank you for your attention…
Thank you for your attention… th Implementation report very soon on our website :