1. 1st Implementation Report of the Water Framework Directive
Water Directors Meeting - INARI
30 November 2006
1st Implementation Report of the
Water Framework Directive

2. Content
WFD Scoreboard
Preparation of WFD implementation report
First results on key issues
First results on MS performance
Next steps

3. J K J L J K “WFD Scoreboard” - Nov 2006
Country
Trsp
RBD Rep.
Art5 rep.
Austria J
Belgium
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Country
Trsp
RBD Rep.
Art5 rep.
Greece K J
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxem-bourg L
Malta
Nether-lands
Country
Trsp
RBD Rep.
Art5 rep.
Poland J
Portugal
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain K
Sweden
United Kingdom
Scoreboard and all MS reports publicly availble through:

4. Implementation Report
Commission Implementation report in accordance with Art. 18 (3)
Based on (only) assessment MS reports on Art 3 and 5 and legal transposition instruments
Form of publication:
Communication
Overall performance on WFD, links to wider context areas, policy messages and way forward
Commission Staff Working Document
Assessment per MS/RBD or issues, indicators and statistics, more detailed analysis

5. Implementation Report
Documents will contain information on:
Status of European Waters
Performance of Member States so far
Recommendations for period until 2009
Commission Actions
Priniciples:
Snap-shot of the situation in 2005/2006, no update envisaged
Only based on formal MS reports (even if additional information is available) – thereby demostrating the advantages of WISE
Highlighting perspectives for improvements until 2009

6. First results on key issues
General aspects:
Different ways of presentation under testing
Few general figures in Communication, more details in technical document
Incomplete data availability will limit the number of meaningful figures/maps
Current examples:
Surface water bodies at risk
Implementation of UWWT Directive
Percentage of HMWB

7. Example 1

8. Example 2
Current implementation levels for Urban Waste Water (91/271/EEC)
“distance to target”

9. Example 3
Percentage of HMWB per (national part of) RBD

10. Performance of Member States
Issues for which performance indicators have been developed:
Legal transposition
Administrative arrangements (quality of implementation Art. 3)
Environmental and economic analysis (quality of implementation of Art. 5)
Administrative performance (aggregation of Art 3 and 5 performance)

11. Performance of Member States
Administrative arrangements (Art. 3)
5 key issues:
Designation of river basin districts
Competent authorities
Administrative set-up
Int. Co-ordination
Data submission
Scoring system - example:
QUESTIONS…
Is the RBD designated (largely) on the basis of hydrological catchment boundaries?
Are the coastal and groundwaters clearly attributed to the RBD?
ANSWERS/SCORES…
5 points: RBD clearly and correctly designated, 0 points if no or entirely inappropriate designation

12. Administrative arrangements (Art. 3)
Performance – example 1
Administrative arrangements (Art. 3)
Best practices
Best practices
Distance to target
EU15
EU10

13. Performance – example 2
Administrative performance
(deadline, complete & clear reports, follow-up)

14. Performance of Member States
Environmental and economic analysis (Art. 5)
Analysis of characteristics (4 questions – max. 8 points)
Example question: Is the methodology for delineation of surface water bodies clear?
Impact of human activity (15 questions – max. 30 points)
7 questions on surface waters, 8 questions on groundwater
Example question: Is information on significant pollutants and their loads provided?
Economic analysis of water use (3 questions – max. 6 points)
Example question: Has information of the level of cost recovery been supplied?
Protected areas (1 question – max. 2 points)
Four key issues – many sub-issues:

15. Example: economic analysis
Resource cost

16. Eight ideas for recommendations
to Member States
Implement fully ‘older’ EU environmental legislation
Improve the implementation of economic instruments
Put the ecological assessment schemes in place
Assess impacts of new projects – apply 4.7 correctly
Improve methodologies and comparability
Close the data gaps in the Art. 5 reports
Fully exploit financing tools
Work with Commission/EEA to implement WISE

17. Eights ideas for
Commission actions
Continued partnership for CIS
Fully implement WISE in collaboration with EEA/MS
Assist in improving ecological assessment schemes
Promoting the use of economic instruments
Establish EU approach on cost/benefit assessment in water policy
Address water scarcity and droughts
Factoring climate change into river basin management
Improve policy integration – agriculture, …

18. Follow-up until March
Finalise technical analysis and validate internally results, if possible verify with WISE data
Finalise Communication and technical report by mid-March
Early-warning of Water Directors (submission on 20 March)
EU Water Conference, 22 and 23 March 2007
Launch of WISE: water.europa.eu

19. Follow-up after March
Bilateral contacts with some MS
Priority according to analysis (where potential for progress is biggest)
Regular feedback to WD and SCG
Expand and improve public WISE together with MS!
Next Commission report on Art 8 in Dec 2008
Big review report on RBMP in 2012 – major milestone!
Until then, cooperation has precedence over formality – use the time!

20. Your are all invited to the European Water Conference
22/23 March 2007 in Brussels
Invitations and programme will be available shortly