When the exception becomes the rule - Overuse of exemptions from reaching the

15 Directive 2006/118/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the protection of groundwater against pollution and deterioration (OJ L 372, 27.12.2006, p.19) 16 Directive 2008/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on environmental quality standards in the field of water policy, amending and subsequently repealing Council Directives. [...] The potential scope of application depends on the respective exemption: whereas Article 4(7) WFD can be applied both in the singular permit procedure of the ‘project’ causing the failure to achieve the objectives of the WFD and in the relevant RBMP23, Article 4(4) and Article (5) WFD may solely be applied in the RBMP.24 In contrast, Article 4(6) WFD is not relevant when a RBMP is produced because. [...] summarize the reasons for any significant delay in making these measures operational, and the expected timetable for the implementation of those delayed46 measures in the RBMP include a review of the implementation of those measures and a summary of additional measures in the following updates of the RBMP. [...] It can be argued that the adoption of the WFD includes the European legislator's assessment that the costs associated with the implementation of the objectives are generally justified by the ecological benefits.56 Hence, the margin by which costs exceed benefits should be appreciable and have a high level of confidence.57 Secondly, Article 4(5) requires that the environmental and socioeconomic – p. [...] The restoration of good water ecology is not only the responsibility of the authority producing the programme of measures, but of the state or country as a whole.72 This is illustrated by a decision of the ECJ stating that Member States are required to refuse authorisation for a project, where it is such as to result in deterioration of the status of the body of water concerned or to jeopardise th.