Brussels, 01/07/2015 (Agence Europe) -The Water Framework Directive's (2000/60/EC) ultimate objective is to achieve “good status” of all EU surface waters by 2015. It involves general obligations to prevent deterioration of the status of all bodies of surface water and to protect, enhance and restore all those bodies of water but also clearly apply to individual projects such as the deepening of various parts of the river Weser in the north of Germany so that larger container vessels can call at the ports of Bremerhaven, Brake and Bremen.
Such a project should be prohibited if it is proved that it may cause a deterioration of the status of the body of water concerned and no derogation applies under the directive.
This is the substance of the ruling made by the European Court of Justice on Wednesday 1 July (C-481/13), in response to questions from the Federal Administrative Court, Germany (Bundesverwaltungsgericht), which received a complaint for the authorisation given by the competent federal authority for the deepening of various parts of the river Weser in the north of Germany so that larger container vessels can call at the ports of Bremerhaven, Brake and Bremen. The Bundesverwaltungsgericht has doubts as to whether the Water Framework Directive is applicable to the authorisation procedure for this individual scheme or whether it simply set outs mere management-planning objectives. It has also asked the Court what the decisive criteria are for determining whether there is a deterioration of the status of a body of water within the meaning of the directive.
In its decision, the Court finds that the ultimate objective of the Water Framework Directive is to achieve, by coordinated action, “good status” of all EU surface waters by 2015. Member States are to prevent deterioration of the status of all bodies of surface water and to protect, enhance and restore all those bodies of water with the aim of achieving good status by the end of 2015 at the latest. The Member States are subsequently required to refuse authorisation for an individual project if it goes against these objectives, unless a derogation provided for by the directive is granted such as reasons of general interest, protection of health and safety of persons, impossibility of carrying out alternative projects because of technical reasons or excessive costs as stipulated in Art.4§7 of the directive.
As to the question about criteria from what moment there is 'deterioration of the status' of a body of surface water, the Court replies that such deterioration is established as soon as the status of at least one of the quality elements (e.g. aquatic flora and fauna, shortages, connection to subterranean water mass, deepness and width of the water in question, river bed structure and substrata, temperature, oxygen, salinization, acidification, nutriments and pollutants deteriorate and even if “this is serious and is not translated by a deterioration in the classification of the mass of water as a whole” (on a scale of 5 benchmarks ranging from “very good” to “poor”). However, the Court explains that if the quality element concerned, within the meaning of that annex, is already in the lowest class, any deterioration of that element constitutes a “deterioration of the status” of a body of surface water in the sense of the directive. (Francesco Gariazzo)