Summary of discussion (1) Where are we now? work is going well progress since last time many interesting features in the presentations countries should be proud of the work done National assessments should include three main points (results of emission reduction - trends, present status, needs for further action). Up to now countries were focused on point one. Work on points 2 and 3 needs connection and coordination with the Working Group on Effects Priorities: Finish point 1 and attack points 2 and 3

Summary of discussion (2) Many countries have a problem with recognition of the work on national assessments, resources and projects on national level. The point 1 can be finished but lack of resources for points 2 and 3. Help needed. An official letter referring to SB decision has been sent from the Secretariat to Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Environment in the countries. In some countries it had no practical effect. Two possible solutions of the problem: 1) one more letter to high level persons concerning EMEP, in the countries who need it. 2) report these problems to coming soon EB meeting. Broad interpretation of points 2 and 3 requires very large resources. Scope of the work on these points in the frame of national assessments should be limited. A lot of interesting information on point 1 was already provided. It is important to investigate similarities and differences with the neighboring countries.

Summary of discussion (3) We all should think where to find resources for the national assessments. EMEP Assessment Report Leader will try to investigate this problem and is waiting for suggestions. Austria: Large decrease in SO2 concentration because of reduced long range transport from Slovakia No trend in NO2 and reduced nitrogen concentrations Problem with EMEP stations around Austria. Enough stations in Slovakia and Czech Republic, not enough coverage in Hungary. What about co-ordination within the EMEP concerning locations of the measurement stations? Czech Republic: Episodes with high concentrations of sulphur not so frequent anymore Ozone remains a very serious problem but episodes with very high concentrations not so frequent Problem: change of the method for measuring wet deposition Suggestion: investigate sources for operation of EMEP in EU authorities

Summary of discussion (4) Slovakia: Substantial decrease of SO2 and sulphate in the air concentrations. The decrease of measured concentrations is faster than decrease of SO2 emissions in Europe and is closer to decrease of Slovakian SO2 emissions (78% form 1990 to 2000) NOx and NO2 concentrations also decrease but not so fast as S. Increase of ozone concentrations (1 ug/m3) between 1970 and 1990. Since 1990 no trend, although Slovakian emission of NOx and VOC reduced by more than 50%. Emission reduction reflected in the reduction of maximum ozone concentrations Problem: Amount of wet deposition is systematically underestimated in the mountains because of the important role of occult deposition. France: Sulphur concentrations are going down Lack of trends for nitrate and a problem to explain it. Main problem - photochemical pollution, especially ozone (typical for Mediterranean countries) and secondary aerosols. Acid rain is not a problem in France

Summary of discussion (5) Italy: SO2 significantly decreasing and NO2 slowly decreasing, pH more neutral Ozone maximum hourly concentration decreasing, but mean values slower decrease SO2 emission - sharp decrease, NOx emissions under control Ispra station goes to Italian data because of geography Nothing strange, but high ozone concentrations Ozone more important than acidification Germany: Interesting problem for investigation: The ratio of sulphur particles to nitrogen particles in TSP have not changed even if concentrations of S are relatively much lower. Why?

Summary of discussion (6) Slovenia: Urban measurements will be included in the national assessment. Cluster analysis of transboundary transport. Main problems: High concentrations of SO2 and ozone and probably PM (but lack of data) Discussion with neighbouring countries: comparison of results of the air components with Italy and precipitation data with Croatia. Reductions in SO2 emissions Slight decreasing trend in SO2 and particle concentrations Suggestion for Part 1: Show all countries in comparable way, like in the annual EMEP reports. Reasons: comparable results and all countries included.

Summary of discussion (7) UK Large reductions in emissions of sulphur in the UK, amounting to 80% since the peak, have considerably reduced S deposition to the UK as a whole. However, some regions, especially close to the west coast show much smaller reductions in deposition than in emissions, and are indicative of the growing importance of marine S emissions to S deposition in W. Britain. Nitrogen deposition to the UK, especially to semi-natural ecosystems, exceeds critical loads for eutrophication widely and is dominated by reduced N from agricultural sources. Ground level ozone concentrations show a decline in peak concentrations between 1986 and 1998 of 30%. However, background concentrations are increasing and at remote and upland locations, the trend is approximately 0.3 ppb year-1. Croatia: Sulphur goes down in air and precipitation Two EMEP sites have upward trends but the rest not – interesting Problem: Measured and model data close but not precipitation

Summary of discussion (8) Sweden: Sulphur concentrations in air and precipitation have decreased substantially from 1980 - 2000. The number of episodes with high concentrations have decreased. There is a decrease in yearly means of SO2 with approximately a factor of10. The same decrease is seen for 99-percentiles, 95- percentiles and 5-percentiles. This decrease is somewhat larger than the decrease in emissions in the countries in northern Europe influencing Sweden. There is an increase pH in precipitation of approximately 0.4 pH-units. The decrease in NO2 concentrations is around 40% in the southern part of the country and somewhat more in the north. Comparison of measured and model calculations show considerable deviations; measured data are mainly larger than calculated and the disagreement is larger in the first part of the period.