The Council of the European Union has published a request for contribution proposing revised deadlines and new monitoring rules for priority substances in water under Directive 2008/105/EC, affecting Member States. The document, dated 13 July 2026, follows up on a virtual meeting of the Working Party on the Environment (WPE) held on 22 November 2023, where the Commission and Presidency presented the proposals and called for comments.
Under the proposed revisions, revised environmental quality standards (EQS) for substances 5, 9, 13, 15, 17, 21, 23, 24, 28, 30, 34, 37, 41, and 44 in Annex I Part A, as well as new substances 46–70, would take effect on the first day of the month following 18 months after entry into force. Member States would be required to achieve good surface water chemical status by 22 December 2033, to be reflected in the 2027 river basin management plans. This represents a significant tightening of the timeline compared to the current framework.
Member States would also be required to report emissions, discharges, and losses of all priority substances and Annex II pollutants electronically to the Industrial Emissions Portal, using the year before analyses under Article 5(2) of Directive 2000/60/EC are completed as the reference period. From 18 months after entry into force, monitoring of estrogenic substances (E2, E1, EE2) must be conducted using effect-based methods for two years, at least four times yearly, at representative sites. The watch list would be limited to 10 substances or groups, with microplastics and antimicrobial resistance genes to be included once harmonised methods exist, and monitoring frequency set at no less than twice per year.
Member States must inform the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) of EQS for river basin specific pollutants within 18 months after entry into force. Results below the limit of quantification would not be considered for assessing chemical status. The "total pesticides" parameter would be removed from the priority list and may apply only to areas for drinking water abstraction. For PFAS group (No 65), the EQS refers to the sum of 24 PFAS listed in footnote 27, expressed as PFOA-equivalents.
The proposals entail trade-offs for stakeholders. For Member States, the tighter deadline of 2033 for good chemical status and new monitoring obligations for estrogenic substances and PFAS impose significant administrative and financial burdens, particularly for those with less advanced water monitoring infrastructure. However, the rules also provide clarity and harmonisation, potentially reducing long-term costs from fragmented national approaches. For industry, particularly chemical manufacturers and water utilities, the mandatory electronic reporting and expanded monitoring requirements may increase compliance costs, but the removal of the "total pesticides" parameter and the clear definition of PFAS EQS could reduce legal uncertainty. Environmental NGOs and civil society stand to benefit from improved water quality and transparency, though they may criticise the limited watch list and the exclusion of results below quantification limits from status assessment. EU regulatory bodies, such as ECHA and the Commission, gain enhanced data through the Industrial Emissions Portal, supporting better policy evaluation.
The next steps involve Member States submitting comments on the proposals, after which the Council will work towards a formal position. The European Parliament will also need to approve the final text under the ordinary legislative procedure.