European Geologist Journal 56

Legal protection of water sources and application of geoscientific principles in concession grants in Croatia

 

by Ratko Vasiljević 1

1 Expert Witness For Mining, Geology and Petroleum Engineering in 2nd Mandatory, nominated by Ministry of Justice and Public Administration, Republic of Croatia

Contact: rvcro@yahoo.co.uk

Abstract

The concession of water resources often leads to a public misunderstanding, with concerns raised about privatisation and threats to public water supply. These concerns are frequently expressed without a clear understanding that obtaining a concession for the exploitation of any water resource does not confer ownership rights, but rather grants the right to exploit defined quantities, along with accompanying obligations outlined in the concession contract. The distinction between ownership and concession is often overlooked by the public. This paper presents the application of the Croatian legislation in the process of obtaining a concession for the water use, with special emphasis on the principle of prioritising the use of water resources. Additionally, it highlights the significance of a geoscientific approach to characterise these water resources.

Cite as: Vasiljević, R. (2023). Legal protection of water sources and application of geoscientific principles in concession grants in Croatia. European Geologist, 56. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10463612

1. Introduction

Water resources are indispensable and play a crucial role in the smooth functioning of society, and consequently municipalities and the state and that depend on it.

A few years ago, the public sphere was frequently filled with statements expressing concerns like, “Water is a public good and what will happen to the public water supply when foreigners take control? Croatian water sources are being privatised, leading to a loss of national control over major sources of drinking water. Foreigners ownership is a threat. We should prohibit the sale of water resources. What about the public good after the sale of the water bottling companies with concessions? The Government is urged to intervene to safeguard national interests.” The question arises, is there a justified reason for panic?

These statements result from the lack of understanding of legal practices and their application. It is crucial to recognise that, obtaining a concession for the exploitation of water resources, does not confer ownership, instead, it grants the right to exploit defined quantities, along with obligations outlined in the concession contract. The public often fails to distinguish between the concept of ownership and the concept of concession, leading to discussions on privatisation. In reality, the company that “owns” the water source actually only holds exploitation rights in accordance with the conditions under which the concession was obtained. This paper addresses frequently asked questions, providing answers based on the current regulations in the Republic of Croatia. It emphasises the need for the public to differentiate between water used for municipal supply, water exploited for commercial purposes and water exploited for industrial and technological purposes.

Groundwater reserves for the Municipal water supply are evaluated in compliance with Article 100 of the Law on Waters – Identification of water for human consumption. To prioritise the use of water for water supply, the competent authority, Croatian Waters (Hrvatske vode), undertakes identifying all water sources for human consumption that deliver an average of more than 10 m³ of water per day or that supply more than 50 people. All such groundwater bodies are reserved for these purposes in future planning.

These groundwater bodies are eligible for concessions to commercially extract water for technological and similar needs, exceeding 10,000.00 m3 per year. Concessions may also be granted for the purpose of distributing water on the market in its original form, or in a processed form, such as bottling or other packaging.

The concession holder should be aware that the exploitation of water resources is subject to the Order of precedence by purpose in compliance with Article 96 of the Law on Water [14]. That implies that water supply for human consumption and sanitary needs, as well as for fire protection and defence, has priority over the use of water for other purposes. In situations where water shortages are so severe, that it becomes impossible to fulfil the needs of all users in a certain area, the restrictions on the use of water may be imposed concessionaires in accordance with Article 93 of the Law on Water.

Every company seeking concessions must conduct a hydrogeological study, based on surveys or other data, to assess the impact of the pumping on the water resources of the aquifer. This type of study should only be undertaken by a contractor (company) certified for such work, as stipulated in article 109, 110 of the Law on Water [14] and the accompanying Ordinance [22]. The Ordinance defines specific conditions that must be satisfied, particularly regarding technical equipment, the number of employees and their expertise.

There is no standardised methodology for assessing the impact of groundwater pumping on the aquifer due to variations in aquifer types (intergranular, confined, non-confined, aquifers in karst areas etc.), varying levels of knowledge and diverse histories of water exploitation. Consequently, the responsibility lies with the contractor who must demonstrate competence in compliance with regulations. The hydrogeological study should be approved by the competent authority, Croatian Waters, which grants permits (concessions) to water users.

This paper explains application of the Croatian legislation in the process of obtaining a concession for water usage, with a specific focus on the principle of prioritising the use of water resources. The geoscientific approach is particularly important for their characterisation of these sources.

This paper outlines the approach to obtaining a concession for groundwater pumping from the Zagreb Aquifer, with a focus on two locations. The first location is the Chromos factory at the eastern part of the city, and second location is a pharmaceutical factory, Pliva, located in the western part of the city. The emphasis will be on adhering to regulatory requirements throughout the application process.

Two distinct techniques were employed: an aquifer test for Location 1 and modelling for Location 2. The choice of technique was based on available data for each location.

2. Study area

The study areas encompass two locations situated on the Zagreb Aquifer. Location 1 is positioned in the eastern part, while Location 2 is situated in the western part.

Location 1 corresponds to a company named Chromos, located on the eastern part of the Zagreb aquifer. On-site, there is a well with a diameter of about 40 cm, from which water is drawn for the company’s technological needs.

The water supply well was drilled to a depth of 15 meters, the diameter of the well is 40 cm (0.4 m), and the pump is installed at a depth of 10 m. The declared capacity of the pump is 1200 l/min (20 l/s), and the actual capacity measured during pumping was 15 l/s.

The depth from the surface to the groundwater level is approximately 7 m, and the thickness of the saturated part of the well is about 8 m. The well is perforated along its entire profile. The specified task was to demonstrate that the pumping of groundwater, in line with the declared capacity, would not adversely impact the hydrogeological conditions in the vicinity of the location.

The estimated thickness of the aquifer at the location is roughly 90 meters, comprising approximately 20 meters of alluvium and around 70 meters of lacustrine deposits [1].

Location 2 is a company named Pliva, located in the western part of the Zagreb aquifer. The company has submitted an application for a concession to pump 100,000 m3 of water per year.

Location 2, Pliva is located in the marginal area of the Zagreb aquifer, formed from proluvial deposits transported from the southern slopes of Medvednica by watercourses and erosion processes. To gain a get a better understanding of the interplay of the geological components, below is a description of the alluvial part that constitutes the Zagreb aquifer [2].

The hydrogeological studies for both locations assessed the sustainability of pumping specified quantities over the maximum period for which obtaining a concession is possible (30 years), in accordance with Regulation [3]. The locations are displayed in the figures (Figure 1 , Figure 2).


Figure 1: Locations 1 and 2 displayed on the topographic maps with hydro contours of groundwater (high groundwater level), modified [4].


The Zagreb aquifer almost entirely consists of Quaternary deposits, predominantly deposited by the Sava River, with minor exceptions. Coarse gravels dominate in this composition. The geological relationships of the considered terrain are presented based on geological data from the Basic Geological Map, sheets Zagreb [5] and Ivanić Grad [6] along with associated interpreters [7 , 8]. According to this data, the oldest rocks that make up the Zagreb aquifer system are Pleistocene loess. Above them, deposits formed through the influence of surface flows, including those from the Sava River and its tributaries, as well as deposits of floodplains and swamps. Additionally, there are floodplain deposits created by the erosion of marginal parts of the surrounding mountains.


Figure 2: Locations 1 and 2 displayed on the geological map, modified [4 – 6].


Plioquaternary (Pl,Q) deposits constitute the youngest Neogene and partially Pleistocene sediments, forming the lower sections of the Zagreb aquifer system in certain areas. In the marginal basin region, these deposits lie discordantly on various rocks of Tertiary, Mesozoic and Palaeozoic age. The Plioquaternary deposits were deposited in marginal zones of pre-existing lakes, with an assumed maximum thickness in the wider area reaching up to 150 m [7, 8].

Holocene Alluvium of the second Sava terrace (a2): The second Sava terrace was developed with minor interruptions along the entire course of the Sava River in the wider research area. It was created by the River Sava cutting into older sediments. The second Sava terrace consists of an alternation of coarse-grained gravel and sand. The amount of sand compared to gravel increases from northwest to southeast, i.e., in the direction of the Sava River. The size of the sand grains decreases in the same direction. Due to intense erosion and significant influence from neotectonic movements, the thickness of the deposits on the second Sava terrace varies considerably [7, 8].

Alluvium of the first Sava terrace (a1): After the deposition of gravel and sand that makes up the second Sava terrace, a phase of erosion and denudation occurred. The Sava cut into its own sediments, as was the case with the second and third terraces. In many places throughout the entire terrace, the old Sava riverbeds are visible. The thickness of the alluvial deposit of the first Sava terrace is usually 10-25 m, and in some places, it is known to be up to 45 m thick.

Alluvium of recent streams (a): Under this name, sediments in the area immediately adjacent to the Sava and stream alluvium deposits, formed by flooding during high water levels and floods. Predominantly composed of gravel and sand, the granulation of which varies greatly. The thickness of these deposits does not exceed 10 m.

Deluvian – proluvian (dpr): Deluvial – proluvial deposits are found in smaller quantities on the southern and western slopes of Medvednica. They are developed mainly in the form of coarse-grained slightly rounded pebbles, which are mixed with sand and clay. The thickness of these deposits is not known, but it is assumed to be ten meters [9 – 12].

3. Materials and methods

The methods employed in the study, included a review of legislation, pumping tests and modelling. Decision criteria were established based on their impact on hydro contours.

3.1. Review of legislative framework

Water resources are comprehensively addressed by all three levels of the Croatian legislation:

  1. Fundamental law of the state – the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia [13];
  2. Law on Water [14];
  3. Regulation [3].

In the Republic of Croatia, in accordance with the principle of tripartition, laws are passed by the legislative government, the Croatian Parliament. On the other hand, regulations and ordinances are passed by the competent authorities, typically the ministries, which are the executive bodies. It is these competent authorities that are responsible for issuing concessions. According to Article 52 of the Constitution, waters are of interest to the Republic of Croatia and have its special protection [13].

Law on Water defines how water can be used and exploited, the rights, fees and restrictions are also determined by the Law and regulations. Pursuant to Article 12, the public water resource is owned by the Republic of Croatia, it is inalienable, and no right of ownership can be exercised over it. Pursuant to Article 16, the public water resources are managed by the competent authority, Croatian Waters. The public water resource on which the spring with a minimum capacity of 10 m3/day is located is managed by the public supplier of water services. From which it follows that public water supply services can only be provided by a public supplier. Therefore, according to the current Law on Water, “foreigners” cannot manage public water resources. According to Article 86, this includes the capture of water for the supply of drinking water and for placing it on the market in its original or processed form in bottles or other packaging. Furthermore, according to Article 87, individuals are granted the right to utilise water, provided it done so judiciously and economically. The usage should be safeguarded from waste and harmful alterations to its quality, while ensuring it does not impede the legal rights of other individuals to use water. As per article 96, the commercial use of water should not threaten the public water supply. The use of water to supply the population with water for human consumption and sanitary needs, for the purposes of fire protection and defence has priority over the use of water for other purposes. The total amount of water that can be exploited commercially is defined according to Article 102.

Capturing water for human consumption in its original form in an amount greater than 3,500,000 m3 per year for the purpose of selling it on the markets of other countries is an activity of interest to the Republic of Croatia [14]. For example, Company Jamnica has a concession for pumping 280,000 m3 per year, that is, almost 11 times less than the quantities prescribed by Article 102. For comparison, the Mala Mlaka municipal water pumping station in the City of Zagreb pumps about 5 m3/s, meaning that every 15.5 hours it exhausts the amount of water equivalent to the annual concession for the source of Jamnica [15].

The commercial use of water is regulated by the Regulation [3]. According to Article 177 of the Regulation, a concession for the use of water is required for the capture of water for human consumption, for the purpose of placing it on the market in its original form or in a processed form, in bottles or other packaging. As for the regulation of public water supply, the right to use water for this purpose is governed by the water permit issued by Croatian Waters.

The concession is not granted for the performance of public water supply activities (Article 186 of the Regulation). Pursuant to Article 2 of the Regulation, a concession for capturing spring, mineral and thermo-mineral waters for marketing in original or processed form, in bottles or other packaging can be granted for a period of up to 30 years.

When obtaining a concession, it is necessary to pay a one-time fee for the concession (Article 4). The one-time fee is not defined, but for the extraction of spring, mineral and thermo-mineral waters for the purpose of placing them on the market in their original form, the one-time fee cannot be less than 50% of the amount of the annual fee (Article 6). This is determined by the amount of water for which the concession is granted, whereby the most favourable bidder is selected, in other words, the one offering the highest payment. Furthermore, throughout the concession period, as outlined in Article 5, the annual fee for capturing spring, mineral and thermo-mineral water for the purpose of placing it on the market in its original form is calculated based on the quantity of captured water. This fee stands at HRK 30.00/m3 (approximately 4 EUR) [3]. For comparison, the cost of one cubic meter, inclusive of all charges for water supply, drainage, fees, etc., in Zagreb is just under HRK 20.00/m3 or slightly less than HRK 0.02/l (approximately 0.27 Euro Cents) [15].

The Croatian public often refers to the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia in which, according to Article 70a, every individual has the right to drinking water. Water resources are a public good in state management and serve as a priority. Additionally, the sustainable supply of drinking water and water for households are not a marketable commodity [16]. The supply of drinking water and water for households is facilitated by the state through direct and non-profit self-governing local communities. However, this does not mean that it is not possible to obtain a concession for the commercial use of water. In accordance with Article 136 of the Slovenian Law on Water [17], a concession must be obtained for the use of water to produce beverages, and it can be obtained for a maximum of 50 years. In comparison, the Croatian legislative framework, as per your conclusion, is more stringent in granting concessions [15].

3.2. Pumping test and modelling

At the first location, a pumping test was carried out to determine the hydraulic characteristics and properties of water flow within the aquifer. Prior to pumping, the groundwater level was measured, and during pumping, the decline in the groundwater level was monitored, correlating with the pumping volume. The hydraulic characteristics of the affected aquifer segment, the transmissivity coefficient (T) and hydraulic conductivity (k) were determined based on the collected data.

The hydraulic characteristics of the affected part of the aquifer are calculated using a formula that includes: decrease of groundwater level, pumping volume and time.

Prior to pumping, a check was made of the immediate surroundings of the location to determine that there are no pumping or aquifer recharge locations in the immediate vicinity (active wells, watercourses) that could significantly affect changes in the hydrogeological conditions at the micro location.

Conceptual model – For conducting the experiment and interpreting the results, the following assumptions were taken into account:

  • The boundaries of the aquifer are far enough for them not to have influence on pumping;
  • The aquifer is homogeneous, isotropic and of uniform thickness in the part affected by pumping;
  • Before the start of pumping, the groundwater level in the area affected by pumping is approximately horizontal;
  • The well is completely perforated in the saturated part of the aquifer and accepts the total horizontal flow of water;
  • The flow towards the well is radial;
  • Darcy’s law applies;
  • The usefulness of the well is 100%, there are no losses in the well;
  • The hydraulic parameters of the affected part of the aquifer are constant.

Well capacity – The capacity of the well is the amount of exhausted water per unit of time, according to the formula (1):

Q = V/t (m3/s) (1)

Where: Q is the capacity [m3/s], V is the volume of pumped water [m3] and t is the measurement time [s]

The capacity of the well at the location is determined by the capacity of the pump whose declared capacity is 1200 l/min (20 l/s). During pumping, the water flow on the meter was monitored and the actual pumping capacity was determined, which is 15 l/s. The difference between the declared and measured capacity is caused by overcoming the pump delivery height. Q = 15 l/s (0.015 m3/s).

On the second location, only modelling was applied due to a significant reduction in the pumping rate. The current concession for the Pliva location allows for an extraction of 1,000,000 m3 per year. Considering the existing pumping volumes, which are approximately 100,000 m3 per year (only 10% of concessioned amount), a new concession will be obtained for pumping volumes of up to 100,000 m3 per year.

Modelling of the groundwater level’s response to pumping at the Pliva water pumping station was conducted for low water conditions over a 30-year period (rounded to 11,000 days). This duration represents the maximum term for which a concession can be obtained, to model a worst-case scenario.

The hydraulic conductivity values for the northern edge of the Zagreb aquifer system were taken from previous explorations [18], k = 0.4 cm/s (345.6 m/day).

With an average thickness of the saturated part of the aquifer measuring 3 meters and a hydraulic conductivity of k = 345.6 m/day, the calculated transmissivity T = 1036.8 m2/day (12 x10-3 m2/s).

Groundwater levels vary between 112 meters above sea level (low water level) and 114 meters above sea level (high water level), respectively, between 8 and 10 meters below surface.

The MLU software was used to model the impact of pumping on the decline in the groundwater level in a single well, considering a maximum pumping rate of 411 m3/day (equivalent to 150,000 m3 per year, 17 m3 /h, 5 l/s).

The MLU (Multi-Layer Unsteady state) Aquifer Test Analysis software was employed to model the impact of the well.

4. Results

4.1. Location 1 Results of pumping test

4.1.1. Results of pumping test

During the pumping test, water level experienced a decline of 1.8 m, dropping from -7.6 m below the surface to -9.4 m below the surface.

The water level stabilised during pumping after 170 seconds, indicating that a stationary flow had been achieved. After seizing the pump’s operation, the water in the well returned to its pre-pumping level, a process that took 180 seconds [1].


Figure 3: display of decline in groundwater level during pumping and subsequent recovery [1].


4.1.2. Determination of hydrogeological parameters of the affected part of the aquifer

The hydrogeological parameters of the affected part of the aquifer were derived from the conducted test pumping, employing the Theis method, specifically designed for an unconfined aquifer.

Hydrogeological parameters were determined for two forms of pumping tests:

  1. Pumping test with a constant pumping rate;
  2. Recovery test involving return of water in the pumping well.

Calculation of the transmissivity coefficient:

The transmissivity coefficient is a hydrogeological parameter that describes the permeability of the aquifer (formula 1), and is equal to the product of the coefficient of the hydraulic conductivity (k) and the thickness of the saturated part of the aquifer (m):

 

𝑇 = 𝑘 ∙ 𝑚 [ m2⁄𝑑𝑎y, 𝑐m2⁄𝑠, m2⁄𝑠]

(2)

Where k is the coefficient of hydraulic conductivity [m/day] and m is thickness of the saturated part of the aquifer [m].

4.1.3. Determination of hydrogeological parameters based on test pumping with a constant pumping quantity

The calculation of the transmissivity of the affected part of the aquifer during pumping was done graphically according to Jacob’s method.

The direction of lowering of the groundwater level (s) is plotted on the ordinate (y axis) and time (t) in logarithmic scale on the abscissa (x-axis). In such a semi-logarithmic diagram, the entered values lie approximately on a straight line (Figure 4). On the line, the reduction (Δs) is determined for one logarithmic period, and the transmissivity is calculated according to the formula (2):

T = (2.3 x Q) / (4p x Ds)  (3)

In this study, a stable drop in the groundwater level was recorded in two logarithmic periods 1 – 10 s and 10 – 100 s. The transmissivity coefficient was calculated as the average transmissivity value for both logarithmic periods T1 (1 – 10 s) and T2 (10 – 100 s).


Figure 4: Jacob plot depicting the decline in groundwater level over time.


Decline data:

T1 = (2.3 x Q) / (4p x Ds) = (2.3 x 0.015 m3/s) / (4 x 3.14 x 0.8 m) = 0.003434 m2/s (4)
T2 = (2.3 x Q) / (4p x Ds) = (2.3 x 0.015 m3/s) / (4 x 3.14 x 0.8 m) = 0.003763 m2/s (5)

T = (T1 + T2)/2 = 0.0036 m2/s (311 m2/d)

 

(6)

From the value of transmissivity and the thickness of the part of the affected aquifer, the coefficient of hydraulic conductivity was calculated according to the formula (2):

𝑘 = 𝑇 / 𝑚 (7)

 

T = 0.0036 m2/s (8)
m = 15 m – 7.6 m = 7.4 m (9)

𝑘 = 0.00049 m/s = 1.764 m/h = 42.34 m/day.

 

(10)

Storage S represents the volume of water released or received by the aquifer per unit volume of the saturated part of the aquifer for a unit drop in the groundwater level. In an aquifer with a free water surface, this value is approximately equal to the effective porosity (ne).

When extending the line and intersecting the abscissa at s = 0, the intersection point coordinates are s = 0 and t = t0. Inserting these values into Jacob’s equation gives formula 11:

S = (2.25 ∙ T ∙ t0) / r2 (11)

Where, r is 0.2 m and S = (2.25 x 0.0036 m2/s x 0.7 s) / 0.04 m2 = 0.14.

Given that the Zagreb aquifer is unconfined, ne = 0.14 = 14%.

4.1.4. Determination of hydrogeological parameters based on recovery

Based on the recovery diagram (Figure 10), transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity were calculated according to Darcy’s filtration law (Formula 5):

Q = k x F x I (12)

Where, Q is the amount of water that flows through a given area in a unit of time, F is surface of the profile, k is the coefficient of hydraulic conductivity and I is the hydraulic gradient.

The recovery lasted 179 seconds, during which the water level rose by Ds is 1.8 m, the radius of the well is 0.2 m and the total volume of water in return, V = (0.2 m)2 x 3.14 * 1.8 m = 0.23 m3, therefore:

Q = 0.23 m3 / 179 s = 0.0013 m3/s (13)
Q = 0.23 m3 / 179 s = 0.0013 m3/s (14)
I = 1.8 k = Q / (F x I) = (0.0013 m3/s) / (2.26 m2 x 1.8) = 0.00032 m/s (27.65 m/d) (15)

The transmissivity was calculated based on the height of the saturated part of the well m = 7.3 m according to formula 1.

T = k x m =0.00032 m/s x 7.4 m = 0.0024 m2/s (207 m2/d) (16)

Given that there was no data on well drilling – lithological composition and granulometry, the storage coefficient was calculated by including transmissivity in the formula (Formula 4):

 

S = (2.25 x 0.0024 m2/s x 0.7 s) / 0.04 m2 = 0.095

(17)

ne = 0.095 = 9.5 %.

 

(18)

Table 1: Hydrogeological parameters of the affected part of the aquifer obtained by pumping test.

Test

Hydraulic coefficient

k (m/d)

Transmissivity

T (m2/d)

Storage

S

Effective Porosity

ne (%)

Pumping 42.34 311 0.14 14
Recovery 27.65 207 0.095 9,5

4.2. Location 2

4.2.1. Results of modelling

In case of maximum pumping rate, the drop in the water level in the well in a 30-year period will amount to – 0.7 m (Figure 5).


Figure 5: Groundwater level drop at Pliva site due to continuous pumping of 411 m3/day in 30 years in low water level conditions [2].


Considering that the ground water levels at the location are 1-2 meters higher than the lowest measured, the expected lowering of the water in the wells should be 20-30 cm less, i.e., from -0.4 m to -0.5 m.

The impact of pumping on the water surface will be visible only in the immediate vicinity of the well (up to 10 m), particularly under low-water conditions during prolonged continuous operation. Based on the information above, it can be inferred that extraction of ground water at the Pilva location, up to the maximum modelled quantity of 150,000 m3 per year, is sustainable for a 30-year period.

5. Discussion

This paper highlights the application and significance of a geoscientific approach within the legislative framework for obtaining concession grants. Anyone acquiring a concession for the use of groundwater, whether through establishment or acquisition of a company, is required to transfer the concession. This involves submitting an application to the competent Ministry for the transfer of concession rights, as stipulated by Article 66 of the Law on Concessions [19]. It is crucial to note that obtaining a concession does not confer ownership of the water source, rather, it grants the right to extract defined quantities [15].

Every company that acquires concession rights also assumes the associated obligations outlined in the concession contract. Additionally, foreign companies seeking concession rights must establish a company in the Republic of Croatia, requiring them to employ the local population and automatically become taxpayers. The details of this process are also regulated by other laws not covered in this text, including the Law on Commercial Companies [20], the Law on Obligations [21] and others. The two examples presented in this paper are only a subset of the legal obligations [15].

To obtain a concession, every company should submit a hydrogeological study to the competent authority. The hydrogeological study should be performed by contractor competent in performing hydrogeological surveys and certified for such activities in compliance with the Ordinance [22].

There is no prescribed methodology for a hydrogeological study, the certified and competent contractor is responsible for evaluating existing data and prescribing additional surveys as needed.

According to the results obtained from Location 1, the hydrogeological parameters and the pump operation dynamics indicate that the maximum influence can only be visible in the immediate vicinity of the well.

At the Location 2, only modelling was employed, given the company’s requests for a concession covering significantly lower quantities. It is crucial to highlight that the company is obligated to pay annual fees for the quantities granted in the concession, as these quantities are, in fact, reserved for company’s specific purposes. Therefore, each company has a direct economic interest in minimising water usage, and subsequently, its exploitation.

The economics of water bottling, though not covered in this text, is a less lucrative business than commonly thought. The obligations faced by the concessionaire partially answer the question of how a water bottling plant can fail to operate. The price of bottled water varies based on the packaging, and roughly amounts to 10 HRK (1.5 EUR) per liter, making it about 500 times more expensive than publicly supplied water. It is essential to consider that besides concession fees, equipment, packaging, transportation, labour, marketing, margins, etc. also contribute to the overall price. In principle, the sale of bottled water only represents a fraction of the product range companies offer. Based on the review of key questions and answers within the regulation, it becomes evident that the commercial use of water resources is not in conflict with the public water supply. Examining the case of the Republic of Slovenia, where the right to drinking water is constitutionally protected, reveals that there are no legal obstacles for the commercial use of water. Moreover, concessions for commercial use can be obtained for as long as 50 years, a duration of 20 years longer than in the Republic of Croatia.

6. Conclusions

This paper outlines the process of obtaining concession grants for companies, using two examples where different approaches were performed for hydrogeological studies. Hydrogeological studies can be performed only by a certified contractor, given the absence of a standardised methodology due to varying aquifer types, exploration levels, exploitation histories, and other factors. As a result, the selected contractor must be competent to design and perform a hydrogeological study according to the requirements.

This procedure is essential for detecting and preventing potential negative impacts on the aquifer. Additionally, it serves as a crucial input for aquifer management, especially in cases of heightened demand for municipal water supply. This is the reason why the water resources cannot be privatised.

The fact that privatisation of water resources is not possible, does not mean that supervision and questioning of regulations by the public are not essential or desirable. Questions of this nature, highlight a growing public willingness to assume responsibility for the management of strategic resources, including drinking water.

Although occasionally misunderstandings and misinterpretations occur due to a lack of familiarity with the subject, geoscientists should welcome and support this trend through proactive participation. This involvement should include: education, clarification of legislative obligations and comparison of pumping quantities with those of the public water supply.

The delicate aspect is that geoscientists, especially if they serve as the expert witness, should be equipped to integrate two roles – scientific and legal – into a cohesive material understandable to decision-makers within the legal system.

Funding: This research received no external funding

Acknowledgments: I would like to thank my colleagues from PE on Oil and Gas and colleagues from the Serbian Geological Society, Section of Eurogeologists for their support in my work.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.


References

  1. ECOINA ltd (2018): Hydrogeological study for obtaining a water permit for a well at the location of Chromos colour factory, in Croatian: Hidrogeološki elaborat za ishođenje vodopravne dozvole za bunar na lokaciji Chromos boje i lakovi d.d., Radnička 173 d, Zagreb, August, 2018.
  2. ECOINA ltd (2018): Hydrogeological study for obtaining a concession for pumping of ground water at the location of Pliva, In Croatian: Hidrogeološki elaborat za ishođenje koncesije za crpljenje podzemne vode na lokaciji Pliva Prilaz Baruna Filipovića
  3. Regulation on the conditions for granting concessions for the commercial use of water (Official Gazette 89/2010, 46/2012, 51/2013, 120/2014). In Croatian: Uredba o uvjetima davanja koncesija za gospodarsko korištenje voda (Narodne Novine 89/2010, 46/2012, 51/2013, 120/2014)
  4. Vasiljević (2012): Identification of the impact of the Jakuševec – Prudinec landfill on the groundwater of the Zagreb aquifer, Dissertation, In Croatian: Identifikacija utjecaja odlagališta Jakuševec – Prudinec na podzemne vode Faculty of Mining, Geology and Petroleum Engineering, University of Zagreb, 173 p.
  5. Šikić, K., Basch, O., Šimunić, A. (1972): Basic geological map M 1:100,000, sheet Zagreb, L38-80, Institute for Geological Research, Osnovna geološka karta M 1:100.000, list Zagreb, L38-80, Institut za geološka istraživanja, Zagreb.
  6. Basch, O. (1981.): The basic geological map M 1:100,000, sheet Ivanić Grad, In Croatian: Osnovna geološka karta M 1:100.000, list Ivanić Grad, L33-81, Savezni geološki zavod, Beograd.
  7. Šikić, K., Basch, O., Šimunić, A. (1972): Interpreter for the basic geological map M 1:100,000, sheet Zagreb, L38-80, Institute for Geological Research, Zagreb. Tumač uz osnovnu geološku kartu M 1:100.000, list Zagreb, L38-80, Institut za geološka istraživanja, Zagreb.
  8. Basch, O. (1980): An interpreter with the basic geological map M 1:100,000, sheet Ivanić Grad, In Croatian: Tumač uz osnovnu geološku kartu M 1:100.000, list Ivanić Grad, L33-81, Geološki zavod, Zagreb.
  9. Kovačević, S., Capar, A. (1972): Water investigation works in the Sava valley near Samobor. Proceedings of the 2nd Yugoslav Symposium on Hydrogeology and Engineering Geology Vodoistražni radovi u dolini Save kraj Samobora. Zbornik radova 2. Jugoslovenskog Simpozija o hidrogeologiji i inžinjerskoj geologiji l, Beograd.
  10. Borčić D., Capar A. (1968): A contribution to further knowledge of the alluvial water-bearing horizon in the wider area of Zagreb. Geol. Herald Prilog daljnjem poznavanju aluvijalnog vodonosnog horizonta na širem području Zagreba. Geol. vjesnik 21, Zagreb.
  11. Velić, J. & Saftić, B. (1991): Subsurface Spreading and Facies Characteristics of Middle Pleistocene Deposits between Zaprešić and Samobor. Geološki vjesnik, 44, 69–82.
  12. Velić, J. & Durn, G. (1993): Alternating Lacustrine-Marsh Sedimentation and Subaerial Exposure Phases during Quaternary: Prečko, Zagreb, Croatia. Geologia Croatica, vol. 46, no. 1, p. 71–90.
  13. Constitution of Republic of Croatia (Official Gazette 56/90, 135/97, 08/98, 113/00, 124/00, 28/01, 41/01, 55/01, 76/10, 85/10, 05/14) In Croatian: Ustav Republike Hrvatske (Narodne Novine: 56/90, 135/97, 08/98, 113/00, 124/00, 28/01, 41/01, 55/01, 76/10, 85/10, 05/14)
  14. Law on Water (Official Gazette 66/2019, 84/2021), In Croatian: Zakon o vodama (Narodne Novine 66/2019, 84/2021),
  15. Vasiljević (2019) Legal protection of water sources, Croatian Water Supply, In Croatian: Zakonska zaštita izvora voda, Hrvatska vodoprivreda, Croatian Waters, November / December No 229 , pp 36 – 38
  16. Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia (Official Gazette of RS, no. 66/00) / Ustav RepublikeSlovenije (Uradni list RS, št. 66/00)
  17. Slovenian Law on Water (Official Gazette of RS, no. 67/02, 2/04 – ZZdrI-A, 41/04 – ZVO-1, 57/08, 57/12, 100/13, 40/ 14, 56/15) Zakon o vodah (Uradni list RS, št. 67/02, 2/04 – ZZdrI-A, 41/04 – ZVO-1, 57/08, 57/12, 100/13, 40/ 14 in 56/15)
  18. Bačani, A., Posavec, K. (2009): Elaborate of the protection zones of the Velika Gorica water pumping station, In Croatian: Elaborat zaštitnih zona vodocrpilišta Velika Gorica, Faculty of Mining – Geology and Petroleum Engineering, Institute of Geology and Geological Engineering, Zagreb, pp. 77.
  19. Law on Concessions (Official Gazette 69/2017, 107/2020), In Croatian: Zakon o koncesijama (Narodne Novine 69/2017, 107/2020)
  20. Law on Commercial Companies (Official Gazette 111/93, 34/99, 121/99, 52/00, 118/03, 107/07, 146/08, 137/09, 125/11, 152/11, 111/12, 68/13, 110/15, 40/19, 34/22, 114/22) In Croatian: Zakon o Trgovačkim društvima  (Narodne Novine 111/93, 34/99, 121/99, 52/00, 118/03, 107/07, 146/08, 137/09, 125/11, 152/11, 111/12, 68/13, 110/15, 40/19, 34/22, 114/22)
  21. Law on Obligations (Official Gazette: NN 35/05, 41/08, 125/11, 78/15, 29/18, 126/21, 114/22, 156/22), In Croatian: Zakon o obveznim odnosima (Narodne Novine: NN 35/05, 41/08, 125/11, 78/15, 29/18, 126/21, 114/22, 156/22)
  22. Ordinance on special conditions for the performance of water research works and other hydrogeological services, preventive flood defense activities and activities and measures of regular and extraordinary flood defence and maintenance of detailed structures for melioration drainage and irrigation structures (Official Gazette: 26/2020), In Croatian: Pravilnik o posebnim uvjetima za obavljanje djelatnosti vodoistražnih radova i drugih hidrogeoloških usluga, poslova preventivne obrane od poplava te poslova i mjera redovite i izvanredne obrane od poplava te održavanja detaljnih građevina za melioracijsku odvodnju i građevina za navodnjavanje (Narodne Novine 26/2020)

This article has been published in European Geologist Journal 56 – Geoscience in policy making: Past experience, current practice and future opportunities

Read here the full issue: