P-564 Introduction: CEHAPE – Children's Environment and Health Action Plan for Europe provided a framework to define priority actions to reduce the adverse environmental impacts on children. Water is the first of the CEHAPE Regional Priority Goals. In this context, the project “Implementing Environment and Health Information System in Europe” (ENHIS) investigated the potential for assessing the health impacts of drinking-water pollution (DWP) using both the Health Risk Assessment (HRA) and the Environmental Burden of Disease (EBD) approaches, as an alternative to Health Impact Assessment (HIA). A case study producing estimates for HRA and EBD due to arsenic in drinking water (DW) was carried out in Puy de Dôme (France). Methods: Carcinogenic (skin cancer) and non-carcinogenic (skin diseases and vascular complications) health effects from As oral exposure were estimated using HRA methodology. Information on exposure characteristics of the population (93 194 inhabitants) were provided by the French Ministry of Health. Reference doses and cancer potency slope factors were obtained from EPA's Integrated Risk Information System. Regarding EBD method, the Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) were calculated using the duration of disease and severity weight provided by the Global Burden of Disease study. Different scenarios were considered on the basis of exposure patterns: normal (mean) and extreme (P95) daily DW intake rate (IR). Results: Among others, the results for HRA showed that, for lifetime oral exposure to arsenic under normal IR exposure patterns (general population, 0.6 L/day; children, 0.38 L/day) and As mean concentration of 14.6 μg/L, there would be an increase of 9.2 skin cancers per 100 000 in the exposed general population of Puy de Dôme over 70 years (3.3 per 100 000 in children). The impacts were higher in children than in older age groups for non-carcinogenic health outcomes. Under the normal IR scenario, the disease burden in general population for the estimated skin-cancer cases was 495 DALYS per 100 000 for mortality. Discussion and Conclusions: Special attention should be paid to the substantial impact of DWP on children's health. In case of non-feasible HIA, HRA and EBD seem to be a useful tool for quantifying the human adverse health effects due to DWP and in predicting the health impact of policies. Alban Robin, Charles Saout, Ministry of Health, Paris, and Henri Davezac, Regional Health Services, Toulouse, France. All ENHIS project partners. The ENHIS programme is supported by the European Commission DG SANCO (Grant: SPC 2003112).