1. Clearing the Waters for All
WFD assessment guidance for activities in estuarine and coastal waters
Aim is to introduce the forthcoming WFD assessment guidance for transitional and coastal water bodies
Chris Cesar – Technical Specialist (Marine)
Environment Agency
Estuarine and Coastal Monitoring and Assessment Service

2. WFD Assessment Process in brief
The WFD aim is for water bodies to achieve Good status
A WFD assessment must show if an activity will:
cause or contribute to deterioration of status
jeopardise the water body achieving good status
CWA guidance – 3 stages:
Screening
Scoping
Impact Assessment
It is up to the developer to demonstrate that their development is not going to cause a deterioration. They will use the guidance product to ensure they are doing what they should so we still meet objectives and the development does not result in deterioration . Final judgement rests with the regulator advised by the competent authority

3. Key features of new guidance
Simple risk-based screening & scoping
Proportionate approach
All quality elements & receptors should be assessed
Deterioration at water body and element level should be avoided in all water bodies
WFD "Quality Elements"
Biological Quality Elements
Phytoplankton
Macroalgae (e.g. Rocky Shore Seaweeds; Nuisance Green algae)
Angiosperms (eg Saltmarsh, Seagrass)
Benthic invertebrate Fauna
Fish Fauna
Hydromorphological Quality Elements
Tidal Regime
Morphological Conditions
Physico-chemical Quality Elements
General Conditions (nutrients, DO, Temp., Transparency)
Pollutants.
Simple risk-based screening & scoping
Proportionate approach:
Expectation that fewer projects & activities will require targeted, detailed assessment
All quality elements & receptors should be assessed
New approach allows us to carry out an assessment even where we have incomplete classification data
If additional monitoring data is gathered as part of a WFD-A, we strongly encourage use of WFD Methods
Deterioration at water body and element level should be avoided in all water bodies - including HMWBs
We don’t (and currently can’t) monitor everything in every water body, so we’re moving away from relying on classifications alone. Instead we’re using water body characteristics, thresholds to establish risk and the habitats present

4. What resources do we have?
Main guidance
Clearing the Waters for All (on .gov.uk)
Supporting document
Scoping template [Optional]
Information sources:
Water body summary table
River Basin Management Plans
Catchment Data Explorer
MAGIC map layers
Local knowledge
We have made much information available, but nothing can replace detailed local knowledge

5. Water body summary table

6. MAGIC Map Link: http://magic.defra.gov.uk/
MAGIC should be considered a first port of call to get general idea about a location. Depending on location, can provide high resolution information about habitat coverage (scale of centimetres for some sites)
Shouldn’t replace other information

7. How does CWA work?

8. WFD Assessment Process
Up to 3 stages (may not require all 3):
Screening
Scoping
Impact Assessment
Complex activities/developments
Need to consider each aspect of activity separately
Up to 3 stages (may not require all 3):
Screening
Exclude low risk activities
Scoping
Identify receptors potentially at risk
Impact Assessment
Consider potential impacts. ID ways to avoid/minimise.
Assess for deterioration; protected areas; invasive non-native species; measures to achieve Good status
Complex activities/developments
Need to consider each aspect of activity separately

9. WFD Assessment Process
SCREENING

10. Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
Some activities may be exempt from needing WFD assessment (e.g. emergency, low risk or already assessed ongoing maintenance activities)
If previous assessment exists, using CTW guidance, new assessment not required

11. WFD Assessment Process
SCOPING

12. Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
Identify all potential risks to each receptor:
Hydromorphology
Biology
Habitats
Fish
Water quality
Protected areas
Also consider invasive non-native species (INNS)
These receptors are based on the WFD quality elements

13. Hydromorphology risk issue(s)
Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
Hydromorphology
Consider if your activity:
Yes No
Hydromorphology risk issue(s)
Could impact on the hydromorphology (for example morphology or tidal patterns) of a high status water body
Requires impact assessment
Impact assessment not required
Could significantly impact the hydromorphology of a water body at less than high status.
Is in a water body that is heavily modified for the same use as your activity
Here is what the gov.uk text says.
Below is the scoping template
NOTE: The scoping thresholds are NOT used for regulation, but based on best available knowledge. They are not set in stone.
Thinking about potential impacts on morphology and tidal patterns
Thinking about already heavily-modified water bodies – will the activity modify it further?

14. Biology habitats risk issue(s)
Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
Biology: Habitats
Higher sensitivity
Lower sensitivity
chalk reef
cobbles, gravel and shingle
clam, cockle and oyster beds
intertidal soft sediments like sand and mud
intertidal seagrass
rocky shore
maerl
subtidal boulder fields
mussel beds, including blue and horse mussel
subtidal rocky reef
polychaete reef
subtidal soft sediments
saltmarsh
subtidal kelp beds
subtidal seagrass
Consider if the footprint4 of your activity is:
Yes No
Biology habitats risk issue(s)
0.5km2 or larger
Yes to one or more – requires impact assessment
No to all – impact assessment not required
1% or more of the water body’s area
Within 500m of any higher sensitivity habitat
1% or more of any lower sensitivity habitat
Here is what the gov.uk text says.
Below is the scoping template
Thinking about extent of habitats impacted
Are there sensitive habitats in the vicinity?
Does the footprint of the activity cover 1% or more of a lower sensitivity habitat?

15. Biology fish risk issue(s)
Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
Biology: Estuarine fish
Thinking about changes to how fish carry out their lives (movement, spawning, migration)
Physical impacts (entrainment & impingement)
Consider if your activity:
Yes No
Biology fish risk issue(s)
Could prevent normal fish behaviour like movement, migration or spawning (for example creating a physical barrier, noise, chemical change or a change in depth or flow)
Requires impact assessment
Impact assessment not required
Could cause entrainment or impingement of fish

16. Water quality risk issue(s)
Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
Water Quality
Consider if your activity:
Yes No
Water quality risk issue(s)
Could affect water clarity, temperature, salinity, oxygen levels, nutrients or microbial patterns continuously for longer than a spring-neap tidal cycle (about 14 days)?
Requires impact assessment
Impact assessment not required
Is in a water body with a phytoplankton status of moderate, poor or bad
Is in a water body with a history of significant and persistent algal blooms or toxic algal blooms
Thinking about impacts on physico-chemical parameters
Directly related to phytoplankton

17. Water quality risk issue(s)
Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
Water Quality: chemicals
If your activity uses or releases chemicals (for example through sediment disturbance or building works) consider if:
Yes No
Water quality risk issue(s)
The chemicals are on the Environmental Quality Directive (EQSD) list
Requires impact assessment
Impact assessment not required
It disturbs sediment with contaminants above Cefas Action Level 1
Thinking about actual release of EQSD chemicals

18. Water quality risk issue(s)
Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
Water Quality: mixing zones
Thinking about whether activity will release EQSD chemicals and activity has a mixing zone
If your activity has a mixing zone
(like a discharge pipeline or outfall) consider if:
Yes No
Water quality risk issue(s)
It will release Environmental Quality Directive (EQSD) listed chemicals
Requires impact assessment5
Impact assessment not required

19. Protected areas risk issue(s)
Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
Protected Areas
Activity is close to a WFD protected site
Consider if your activity is:
Yes No
Protected areas risk issue(s)
Within 2km6 of any WFD protected area
Requires impact assessment
Impact assessment not required

20. Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
Invasive non-native species
More info available at:
Thinking about potential for activity to introduce/spread INNS
Consider if your activity could:
Yes No
INNS risk issue(s)
Introduce or spread INNS
Requires impact assessment
Impact assessment not required

21. Summary Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
For each receptor identified as being at risk from an activity during the Scoping stage, an Impact Assessment must be carried out
Receptor
Potential risk to receptor?
Note the risk issue(s) for impact assessment
Hydromorphology
Biology: habitats
Biology: fish
Water quality
Protected areas
Invasive non-native species
Any receptors that get scoped IN go through to Impact Assessment

22. WFD Assessment Process
IMPACT ASSESSMENT

23. Assess protected areas (MCA packages/HRA)
Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
Identify pathway(s) linking a pressure to the receptor
Consider if pressure might cause a deterioration of the receptor
Mitigation
Avoid or minimise
Assess protected areas (MCA packages/HRA)
Assess INNS (biosecurity plan?)
Assessments are tailored to the specific activity, risk & location
ID pathways using pressure-pathway matrix
Explain how activity may cause deterioration
Direct & immediate – same time and place of activity
Indirect – happen later or further away (including other water bodies)
Is activity the sole cause, or might other activities in the water bodies together cause deterioration?
If not avoidance not possible/practical, ID ways to minimise. e.g. changes to
Materials/substances used
Size/scale of activity
Ways of working
Timing and duration of activity
Location of activity
If protected site is an N2k site, refer to Marine Conservation Advice packages & make clear reference to HRA
Temporary effects from short duration activities do not count as deterioration if water body would recover in a short time without restoration measures

24. Jeopardising good status
Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
Jeopardising good status
Every water body has a target status to achieve by a set date
Consider if activity will jeopardise reaching target status
Reduce effectiveness of measures (improvement activities)
Prevent measures taking place in future
As well as preventing deterioration of current status, need to consider if activity is jeopardising future meeting of good status (and/or target status)

25. Simple Complex Screening → Scoping → Impact Assessment
Assessments are tailored to the specific activity, risk & location
Simple
Small-scale activity but located <2 km from SPA ↓
No other notable impacts
~1 or 2 paragraphs outlining no pathway for the pressure (activity) to act on the receptor (habitat)
Complex
Estuary-scale enhancements to flood defences within a HMWB ↓
Potential impacts on intertidal mudflats, saltmarshes and fish
Thorough & detailed assessment of each receptor and mitigation measures
Simple example could be as little as one paragraph explaining that the potential for impact has been considered, but that no further consideration of an element is required
More complex activities may require extensive highly technical documents

26. EXAMPLES http://bit.ly/2aPdMl0 http://bit.ly/2af8C3D