WFD revision: What changes is the mining industry aiming for?

This summer the European Commission will present a revision of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) to reduce administrative burdens and boost mining activity. What is needed according to the mining industry? Water News Europe asked several mining companies about WFD barriers, but received no responses. And most meetings with the industry are taking place behind closed doors. Based on the recently closed call for evidence and desk research an industry wish list has been composed.

Raw Materials Europe, a coalition of eight organisations representing the European mining industry, published a joint statement in February 2026. These organisations state that the WFD has to address the permitting issues to facilitate mining.‘This concerns the improvement of exceptions to the management objectives, the extension of deadlines, the improvement of less stringent management objectives and a pragmatic definition of deterioration’, is said in the joint statement published on the website of Euromines.  

Request to be involved in policy making

Raw Materials Europe has asked to be involved in the EU Commission’s work on the WFD review to ensure that the solutions proposed are workable. They state that ‘the expertise of the raw materials sector that encounters these bottlenecks daily must be integrated into the drafting process for both the guidance and the amendments to the WFD’. A wish that has been honoured by the European Commission and has led to numerous closed-door meetings between the industry and the European Commission.  

Postpone decision making on updated priority substances

The eight organisations of Raw Materials Europe also asked the European Commission to suspend decision making on the WFD amendments on priority substances. A wish that has not been granted. The European Parliament adopted an updated list of priority substances at the end of March. The new list of priority substances includes pesticides, pharmaceuticals and PFAS. The directive also tightens environmental standards for several substances and strengthens monitoring across the EU.

Undermining amendments

According to the industry these rules ‘further tighten the WFD in particular by codifying the far too strict definition by the European Court of Justice of deterioration in the Water Framework Directive. Raw Materials Europe emphasized in their joint statement that adopting these rules before a revision of the Water Framework Directive creates a fait accompli and undermines the measures announced by the European Commission in the ReSourceEU Action Plan.

Call for evidence

On 17 March, the European Commission opened a call for evidence to gather feedback from citizens and organisations in the Have your Say-portal that closed on 14 April. During this short period the portal received 3,113 reactions from citizens, water companies, industry and other organisations. Most of these reactions are against a revision of the Water Framework Directive and state that reopening the Water Framework Directive would be a threat to Europe’s water bodies. Also, eight trade associations, including drinking water providers and food and beverage producers warned on the platform that reducing raw water quality would translate into higher treatment costs.

Federation of Norwegian Industries

The Federation of Norwegian Industries asked on the call for evidence platform for ‘realism in environmental objectives and harmonisation with the Industrial Emissions Directive (IED)’. The organisation states that the current application of the one-out-all-out rule means that any industrial discharge risks being treated as a potential contribution to deterioration. This poses an increasing risk to new and existing industrial permits. Therefore, the federation wants to adapt the deterioration principle.

Adapt the deterioration principle

“Following the Weser ruling, there are examples where permitting authorities are reluctant to grant derogations even for fully BAT-compliant operations”, writes the federation. The Weser ruling refers to a judgment by the Court of Justice of the European Union in 2015 concerning the interpretation of the EU Water Framework Directive. Member States must refuse authorisation for a project if it may cause deterioration of the status of a water body. The European Court defined deterioration very strictly. Even if the overall classification of the water body does not change, a decline in one parameter can trigger a breach.

Adapt unachievable targets

The Federation of Norwegian Industries believes that current baselines for ‘good status’ in European water bodies may reflect unachievable targets. “As an example, persistent substances may be embedded in sediments as a result of decades of historical activity. In cases where legacy contamination already places a water body below good status, any new discharge risks being assessed as contributing to further deterioration regardless of the operators own performance”, writes the Federation

Better integration of IED and WFD

Several industrial organisations call for an evaluation of the relation between the Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) and the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The European Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) was tightened in 2023. The EU has to provide a workable derogation system for new and modified industrial activities, as long as the operator fully complies with the IED. Compliance with Best Available Techniques under IED does not guarantee compliance with WFD objectives. A plant can meet IED-rules and still contribute to a water body failing ‘good status’.

WFD has created a deadlock for industrial permitting

According to the European Precious Metals Federation from Belgium the current implementation of the WFD has created inconsistencies that now hinder the industrial transformations required for the EU to achieve strategic autonomy. Current interpretations of WFD principles have progressively created a ‘deadlock’ for industrial permitting, affecting both existing plants and cutting-edge projects.

Copper industry

The International Copper Association Europe, located in Belgium, says the EU “has a strong copper industry, but high operating costs and regulatory complexity, for a large part driven by environmental regulation, are making it difficult for copper producers to invest in maintaining or expanding operations in the EU. To secure the EU’s resilience in strategic raw materials and secure the metals needed for the energy and digital transitions, it is crucial to ensure that the EU environmental acquis is fit for purpose and that legislation is targeted, proportionate, coherent and simple. Water policy is of particular importance to the copper value chain. Copper production processes rely on water for operational purposes and are subject to comprehensive permitting and monitoring requirements.”

Industry wish list Living Rivers Europe

The wishes of the industry align with the list that was composed by Living Rivers Europe. They have identified the following wishes. Adapt the ‘one-out, all-out’ principle, weaken the non-deterioration requirement, postpone the 2027 deadline, broaden exemptions to facilitate mining projects, align permitting rules with Best Available Techniques (BAT) under the Industrial Emissions Directive and challenge Environmental Quality Standards.