The environment is increasingly being recognized for the role it might play in the global spread of clinically relevant antibiotic resistance. Environmental regulators monitor and control many of the pathways responsible for the release of resistance-driving chemicals into the environment (e.g., antimicrobials, metals, and biocides). Hence, environmental regulators should be contributing significantly to the development of global and national antimicrobial resistance (AMR) action plans. It is argued that the lack of environment-facing mitigation actions included in existing AMR action plans is likely a function of our poor fundamental understanding of many of the key issues. Here, we aim to present the problem with AMR in the environment through the lens of an environmental regulator, using the Environment Agency (England’s regulator) as an example from which parallels can be drawn globally. The issues that are pertinent to environmental regulators are drawn out to answer: What are the drivers and pathways of AMR? How do these relate to the normal work, powers and duties of environmental regulators? What are the knowledge gaps that hinder the delivery of environmental protection from AMR? We offer several thought experiments for how different mitigation strategies might proceed. We conclude that: (1) AMR Action Plans do not tackle all the potentially relevant pathways and drivers of AMR in the environment; and (2) AMR Action Plans are deficient partly because the science to inform policy is lacking and this needs to be addressed.

This paper provides a review of the types of emerging organic groundwater contaminants (EGCs) which are beginning to be found in the UK. EGCs are compounds being found in groundwater that were previously not detectable or known to be significant and can come from agricultural, urban and rural point sources. EGCs include nanomaterials, pesticides, pharmaceuticals, industrial compounds, personal care products, fragrances, water treatment by-products, flame retardants and surfactants, as well as caffeine and nicotine. Many are relatively small polar molecules which may not be effectively removed by drinking water treatment. Data from the UK Environment Agency's groundwater screening programme for organic pollutants found within the 30 most frequently detected compounds a number of EGCs such as pesticide metabolites, caffeine and DEET. Specific determinands frequently detected include pesticides metabolites, pharmaceuticals including carbamazepine and triclosan, nicotine, food additives and alkyl phosphates. This paper discusses the routes by which these compounds enter groundwater, their toxicity and potential risks to drinking water and the environment. It identifies challenges that need to be met to minimise risk to drinking water and ecosystems.

Abstract. Implementation of the Nitrates Directive (NiD) and its environmental impacts were compared for member states in the northwest of the European Union (Ireland, United Kingdom, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, Northern France and Germany). The main sources of data were national reports for the third reporting period for the NiD (2004NiD ( -2007 and results of the MITERRA-EUROPE model. Implementation of the NiD in the considered member states is fairly comparable regarding restrictions for where and when to apply fertilizer and manure, but very different regarding application limits for N fertilization. Issues of concern and improvement of the implementation of the NiD are accounting for the fertilizer value of nitrogen in manure, and relating application limits for total nitrogen (N) to potential crop yield and N removal. The most significant environmental effect of the implementation of the NiD since 1995 is a major contribution to the decrease of the soil N balance (N surplus), particularly in Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. This decrease is accompanied by a modest decrease of nitrate concentrations since 2000 in fresh surface waters in most countries. This decrease is less prominent for groundwater in view of delayed response of nitrate in deep aquifers. In spite of improved fertilization practices, the southeast of the Netherlands, the Flemish Region and Brittany remain to be regions of major concern in view of a combination of a high nitrogen surplus, high leaching fractions to groundwater and tenacious exceedance of the water quality standards. On average the gross N balance in 2008 for the seven member states in EU-ROSTAT and in national reports was about 20 kg N ha −1 yr −1 lower than by MITERRA. The major cause is higher estimates of N removal in national reports which can amount to more than 50 kg N ha −1 yr −1 . Differences between procedures in member states to assess nitrogen balances and waterPublished by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. H. J. M. van Grinsven et al.: Benchmarking the Nitrates Directive in northwestern Europequality and a lack of cross-boundary policy evaluations are handicaps when benchmarking the effectiveness of the NiD. This provides a challenge for the European Commission and its member states, as the NiD remains an important piece of legislation for protecting drinking water quality in regions with many private or small public production facilities and controlling aquatic eutrophication from agricultural sources.

No abstract

Aim:  To investigate the potential health hazard from infectious viruses where coliphages, or viruses by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), have been detected in groundwater. Two aspects were investigated: the relationship between infectivity and detection by PCR and the stability of coliphage compared to human viruses. Methods and Results:  Virus decay (1 year) and detection (2 years) studies were undertaken on groundwater at 12°C. The order of virus stability from most to least stable in groundwater, based on first‐order inactivation, was: coliphage ΦX174 (0·5 d−1) > adenovirus 2 > coliphage PRD1 > poliovirus 3 > coxsackie virus B1 (0·13 d−1). The order for PCR results was: norovirus genotype II > adenovirus > norovirus genotype I > enterovirus. Conclusions:  Enterovirus and adenovirus detection by PCR and the duration of infectivity in groundwater followed similar trends over the time period studied. Adenovirus might be a better method for assessing groundwater contamination than using enterovirus; norovirus detection would provide information on a significant human health hazard. Bacteriophage is a good alternative indicator. Significance and Impact of the Study:  PCR is a useful tool for identifying the health hazard from faecal contamination in groundwater where conditions are conducive to the survival of viruses and their nucleic acid.