Sign in to save articles.
The week in brief · Week 41 · 5–11 October
The question of who pays for removing pharmaceuticals and cosmetics residues from Europe's sewage was reopened this week. Poland, backed by seven other member states, asked the European Commission to reassess the extended producer responsibility (EPR) scheme of the recast Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive and to consider pausing its deadlines. Across the Atlantic, the week's news was more prosaic but no less telling: utilities weighing what consent-decree money actually buys, while ageing pipes failed and federal wastewater surveillance changed hands.
A Council note dated 8 October, tabled for the Environment Council of 12 October, set out Poland's case with support from Bulgaria, Estonia, Greece, Italy, Lithuania and Slovakia (Council of the European Union, 2026a); a revised version issued the following day added Czechia (Council of the European Union, 2026b). The target is Article 9 and Annex III of Directive EU 2024/3019, which assign at least 80% of the cost of removing micropollutants to two sectors, pharmaceuticals and cosmetics. The signatories argue that other polluters' contributions were not properly accounted for, and that pending court cases are compounding legal uncertainty for member states, water operators and industry alike.
The note is more measured than its headline suggests. Its authors say they back the directive's environmental objectives and do not question quaternary treatment or EPR as such. They ask the Commission for four things: clarity on its next steps, a new independent assessment of the EPR system, a transparent method for attributing micropollutants to sectors, and, if that reassessment finds serious shortcomings, a temporary adjustment or suspension of deadlines.
