PIANC, Chair of WFD Navigation Task Group Operating in the area of WFD-MSFD overlap: practical challenges for the ports and navigation sector Jan Brooke PIANC, Chair of WFD Navigation Task Group 19th June 2012

Scope of presentation Background and context WFD and MSFD coastal water body objectives Challenges for operators Implications for new development Potential issues Why it matters What is needed

MSFD Preamble 12 Coastal waters, including their seabed and subsoil, are an integral part of the marine environment, and as such should also be covered by this Directive in so far as particular aspects of the environmental status of the marine environment are not already addressed through [the Water Framework Directive] or other Community legislation, so as to ensure complementarity while avoiding unnecessary overlaps.

For those people in the audience that are not familiar with PIANC, I will start with a short overview of who we are and what we do. The core business of PIANC is and stays the publication of high quality technical reports that provide guidance worldwide about new developments in navigation related subjects. These reports are drafted by international working groups of experts that on a non paid basis contribute to this work. Japan manages to be represented in many of these working groups for which we are grateful.

Navigation in coastal water bodies Vessel movements Approach channel maintenance dredging Dredged material disposal Breakwaters, training walls, quaylines Port and harbour infrastructure Port operations New developments (e.g. reclamation; capital dredging)

MSFD Descriptors Related to or to be delivered (in whole or part) by WFD in coastal water bodies Hydrographical conditions Contaminants (and contaminants in fish) Eutrophication Not covered by WFD Noise Marine litter Marine mammals

Challenges for operators Sector welcomes efforts to date to ensure compatibility of WFD and MSFD objectives However, for port or navigation authority confusion between GES and …… GES WFD river basin management plan and marine strategy two sets of measures with different deadlines and, in many Member States, two different competent authorities

Navigation in coastal water bodies Vessel movements Approach channel maintenance dredging Dredged material disposal Breakwaters and quaylines Port and harbour infrastructure Port operations New developments (e.g. reclamation; capital dredging)

New development considerations Scale: WFD water body vs. MSFD marine (sub-) region

New development considerations Scale a WFD Article 4.7

WFD Article 4(7) Allows new physical modifications affecting surface water status if: all practicable mitigation measures no economically and technically viable, environmentally better alternative overriding public interest or equivalent set out reasons for development in RBMP No equivalent provision in the MSFD Related to scale?

New development considerations Scale a WFD Article 4.7 a Heavily modified water bodies

New development considerations Scale a WFD Article 4.7 a Heavily modified water bodies a Consistency in use of exemptions between two Directives?

New development considerations Scale a WFD Article 4.7 a Heavily modified water bodies a Consistency in use of exemptions between two Directives a Cumulative and in-combination effects

Cumulative effects EIA / Habitats Directives require assessment of cumulative or in-combination effects Developer typically provides the information necessary to inform assessment Similar requirement, by implication, in WFD - but less clear who provides data No equivalent provision in MSFD However, given scale issue, cumulative effects likely to be much more relevant to status than the effects of a single project ……

Why does all this matter? Operators / developers are understandably not familiar with the Directives If developer /operator receives contradictory advice from the respective competent authorities, it will be difficult for them to be sure that their activities are compliant Unintended consequences: economic costs of confusion, duplication or delays – and the associated administrative burden – could be considerable, not only for the operator but also for the regulator Potential for effect on competition

So, what is needed? ‘Coastal water bodies’ document? Not the answer Clear, consistent interpretation of WFD-MSFD inter-relationships: not only objectives, but measures, the use of exemptions and the plan/strategy documents Practical guidance for operators and developers Consideration given to cumulative effects Regulators / advisors aware of agreed approach Ongoing communication and coordination

Thanks for listening! jan@janbrooke.co.uk