1. Preliminary feedback on analysis of Article V reports
Session 1: Article V Reports and Member State Implementation
Preliminary feedback on analysis
of Article V reports
Lauriane Gréaud-Hoveman (INERIS), Benoît Fribourg-Blanc (IOW)
Workshop, CCAB, Brussels, 03/10/2006

2. Content I. Context II. Approach used III. The analysis
III.1. Relevant pollutants in MS and IRDB
III.2. Monitoring
III.3. Current sources and associated pressures
III.4. Risk assessment
III.5. Reduction measures of significant point and diffuse pressures
III.6. Data gaps
III.7. Transition towards WFD
IV. Main conclusions
V. Open questions

3. WFD, substances and guidances (1/2)
“Article 5: Characteristics of the River Basin District, Review of the environmental impact of human activity and Economic Analysis of water use” (WFD)
 a summary report (March 2005, Dec.2013, every 6 years)
Supporting tools
Guidance Document No. 3: Analysis of Pressures and Impacts
Reporting Sheets for 2005 Reporting (SWPI1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9)
Guidance Document No. 7: Monitoring under the WFD +
Guidance Document on elements for pollution reduction programmes under article 7 of Council Directive 76/464/EEC

4. WFD, substances and guidances (2/2)
Source : Impress guidance
[...] covers all sources and pathways into the aquatic environment
SWPI1 : Summary of all significant pressures on surface waters in the River Basin District
SWPI3 : A list of the significant pollutants [...] from point sources, [...] estimates of load [...]
Priority Substances
Other significant pollutants (WFD Annex VIII)
[...] summary of the methodology
SWPI4 : A list of the pollutants from diffuse sources [...] estimates of load [...]
- Priority Substances
- Other significant pollutants (WFD Annex VIII)

5. Context (1/2) : objectives
Need of data and metadata on chemical substances of concern for prioritisation
implement new data collection
make best use of available data sources
DSD (76/464/EEC) Article 7 reports
WFD (2000/60/EC) Article 5 reports with 4 types of reports :
roof report part A (7)
roof report part B (19)
national summary (18)
RBD summary (33)
Synergies with EEA activities on emissions
Data / information mining, not compliance checking!

6. Context (2/2) : existing RBDs and reports assessed
Source :
WFD RBDs
Source : GIS layer : Nilsson et al: International River Basin Districts under the EU Water Framework Directive, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), IOW treatment
area analysed
Currently 23 MS:
134 RBDs
Norway: 14 RBDs
RO, BG, HR: 9 RBDs
No double counting:
96 RBDs (for 23 MS)
69 national
27 international (area 70%)
7 IRBD roof reports, part A
11 National summary reports
1 RDB report from UK
18 MS, 2 AC (RO, BG), 1 CC (CS), 7 others

7. Approach used : setting the scene
Dangerous substances in summary Article 5 reports
Source : Impress guidance

8. Approach used : the assessment
Detailed analysis :
each report: pressure and impact
1. Substances of concern
2. Data collection
3. Current sources and associated pressures
4. Risk assessment: national EQS derived? SWB at risk?
5. Reduction measures: ELV settled?
6. Gaps mentioned
7. General conclusion; Specific remarks
SWB
Summary of all reports :
summary tables,
identification of common elements and gaps.

9. Summary table (countries)
*EQS from DSD daughter directives. No national EQS derived.
** ELV were used for the risk assessment.
*** no national ELV. ELV set site by site.

10. Summary table (IRBD)
* in one MS

11. Analysis: relevant pollutants in MS and IRBD
List of relevant substances rarely provided,
Groups of substances (HM, pesticides, PCBs) mentioned,
Variable number of substances (from <10 to >100)
Different number from Art 7: why?
Identification: use of existing datasets on emission and discharge or monitoring and EQS (national programmes)

12. Analysis: Monitoring National and IRBD monitoring are mentioned:
DE, AT, FR, UK national networks
Ireland: National Monitoring Screening Programme (200 sub.)
Danube: TNMN, Joint Danube survey
...
Widely used for the assessment,
Information on data type (surveillance, screening, research, discharge) is often unclear,
Details not given (number of stations, parameters, temporal coverage, ...)
Analysis used to identify gaps/recommendations

13. Analysis: Current sources and associated pressures
Significant pressures identified (point and diffuse pollution)
Link with sources often unclear
Main sources identified (urban, industry, agriculture), but extension not clear (thresholds...)
Rare reference to other reportings (EPER, national inventory)

14. Analysis: Risk assessment (1/2)
Cornerstone of the report
Impact based, pressure based or both
Criteria used:
hydromorphology,
trophic status, nutrients pressure
pollution by priority substances or other specific pollutants
High number of WB “at risk”
A number of which at risk from chemical substances
e.g. 75% for BE (Flanders) or 85% for NL
A majority “possibly” at risk due to a lack of data
30 to 40%

15. Water bodies at risk of failing good chemical status
Source: IMPACT ASSESSMENT : Proposal for a Directive on EQS, IOW treatment

16. Analysis: Risk assessment (2/2)
National EQS already defined in some MS (AT, DE, FR)
Sometimes different number from DSD Art 7: why?
But number of substances or value unclear
And the type of quality objective sometimes unclear (BG, RO)

17. Analysis: Reduction measures of significant point and diffuse pressures
More a national question than (I)RBD one
Issue for new MS (EU10) and AC
Mainly setting ELV and permit systems

18. Analysis: Data gaps Issue merged with “Recommendation for monitoring”
Main gaps
data on PHS, PS
availability of measured data on point and diffuse pressures
at IRBD level: lack of comparable data from each bordering countries
Examples of recommendations
increase and development of surveillance monitoring
creation of a common data and information system (FR, LT)
development of methodologies to estimate pressures from diffuse sources

19. Main conclusions
Data on dangerous substances available but
Article 5 is more focussed on risk assessment for WB
Good gaps identification
Next step for MS: improvement of monitoring network
A lot of guidance on WFD and implementation
 A need to consolidate existing guidance or develop a dedicated (to DS) guidance?

20. WFD implementation - dangerous substances
Preliminary review of WFD Art. 5 reports
information reported by MS is variable
often incomplete as regards dangerous substances
Pollution reduction programmes under Art. 7 Dir 76/464/EEC
Dir 76/464 will be fully repealed by 2013: during this transitional period, MS are invited to apply the principles of the WFD for implementation of Art. 7
Guidances
list of guidances
WS-PS, Dulio, Brussels, 03/10/2006

21. Proposal: development of a Cookbook
consolidate existing guidance
build on experience gained by MS in the first round of Art. 5 reporting (problems encountered and best practice)
Do MS feel a specific guidance as regards dangerous substances would be useful?
What this guidance doc should look like? Input from participants in the workshop of today
WS-PS, Dulio, Brussels, 03/10/2006