Priority substances Classification and monitoring.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EMODNet Chemistry support to MSFD data reporting Examples from IT and Black Sea Giordano Giorgi (ISPRA) TG DIKE, 4 July 2013.
Advertisements

Date/ event: Author: Overview of ETC Water data outputs 2010 Miroslav Fanta ETC Water data manager WISE TG Meeting Madrid Miroslav Fanta.
WISE SOE reporting on Transitional and Coastal waters Beate Werner.
1 Europe’s water – an indicator-based assessment Niels Thyssen.
21. Jan 20141Martin M. L., Jesper H.A. Hazardous substance assessment tool CHASE 2.0 A first assessment of Hazardous substances in the North Sea, a presentation.
MARTIN M. LARSEN & JESPER H. ANDERSEN PHD QA COORDINATOR & PHD PROJECT MANAGER CHASE VERSION 2.X MARTIN M. L., JESPER H. A. CHASE-ING HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES.
Ecological Evaluation Index (EEI) A biotic index for the implementation of WFD by Sotiris Orfanidis (February 2008)
| Slide 1 Establishing Threshold Values for Groundwater Johannes Grath Andreas Scheidleder 26 June 2007.
Swedish databases- Screening database Katarina Hansson.
Extension of the EEA European Topic Centre’s Work Program to the West Balkan Countries in the field of water Norman Green, NIVA Nov 2006, Belgrade.
EEA – ”Chemicals and Water” workshop, Copenhagen December 2010 Norman Green (NIVA) Chemicals and Water workshop EEA, Copenhagen Levels.
Water.europa.eu Policy update with regard to Priority and Emerging Substances SOCOPSE Final Conference Maastricht, June 2009 Jorge Rodriguez Romero.
MODULE 1 Water Framework Directive, Relation of WFD with Daughter Directives, River Basin Management Planning, Water Bodies, Typology, Classification Environmental.
Monitoring Programs... A challenge for all of Europe Rivers draining >200km2 in Ireland compared to the Danube basin.
Monitoring Programme Design in Transitional and Coastal Waters - Classification Issues Dave Jowett, Coast Group Chair and NEA GIG Co-ordinator CIS Workshop.
Sign env. Risk Human uses What is the (weighted) extent of exceedance of a GW-QS or criteria’s value in a GWB? Further assessments verify GWB is of good.
International Office for Water B. Fribourg-Blanc, WG-E (4), Brussels, 14/10/2008 slide 1 Agenda Item 6.2 : (a) New data collection. Overview of the new.
Comparison between ECAP indicators and what EMODnet can offer in the Mediterranean Sea Intro Oostende, Belgium, 21st September 2015 Giordano Giorgi*, in.
Annual Meeting, June , Istanbul, Turkey Use of CHASE assessment tool with EMODNet Chemistry data EMODnet Chemistry Martin M. Larsen, Aarhus University.
WFD Characterisation Report Dr Tom Leatherland Environmental Quality Manager 29 October 2003.
A Practical Approach: The General Physico-Chemical Quality Elements and the Classification of Ecological Status.
Rob Collins Water Group EEA Hazardous Substances in Europe’s fresh and marine waters – An overview Report for publication – 1 st half of 2011 Rob Collins.
Integrated initial Assessment of pressures and state of the Mediterranean marine environment in the framework of the application of Ecosystem Approach.
Proposal for estimation of surface water bodies background levels for selected metals Slovak Republic.
Organized under UNESCO-IHP International Initiative on Water Quality (IIWQ) Hosted by Federal Institute of Hydrology, Germany International Centre for.
European Commission - DG Environment Unit D.2: Water & Marine 1 Need for continuous exchanges on chemical monitoring issues, in the light of the on-going.
Expert Sub-Group on EQSs –1. EQS Methodology Setting –2. Prioritization ? DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCES FOR WORKING GROUP E ON PRIORITY SUBSTANCES (Collaboration.
Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment in Lapland1 Classification and monitoring of the surface waters of Finland National.
CIS Working Group 2A ECOSTAT Overall Approach to the Ecological Classification 01 July 2003 D/UK WGL CIS 2A.
1 EUROPEAN TOPIC CENTRE ON WATER EUROWATERNET Towards an Index of Quality of the National Data in Waterbase.
Dedicated maps on contaminants
Types of information and data required
Identification of River Basin Specific Pollutants and Derivation of Environmental Quality Standards under Water Framework Directive: Turkish Experience.
Monitoring, assessing and classifying the environment
Blue economy in the Black Sea Panel 2a: Save the sea
Dangerous Substances Assessment under Art
D8 and D9 REVIEW PROCESS April-June 2014: February 2015:
Models for Assessing and Forecasting the Impact of Environmental Key
Results of breakout group
Berlin 2 May CMA 6° Plenary Meeting
Lisa Lefkovitz Battelle Carlton D. Hunt Maury Hall MWRA
on Priority Substances Strategic Coordination Group
WGC-2 Status Compliance and Trends
Successfully implementing EQSbiota?
Philippe QUEVAUVILLER
6th Framework Programme
Draft examples of possible GES Decision criteria Descriptor 9
Britta Hedlund, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency
Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE)
Philippe Quevauviller
Monitoring programs in Sweden
Jo King: OSPAR case study data flow comparability, streamlining and synergies of assessments of chemical loads and burdens The presentation summarises.
Draft concept to assess quality of monitoring database
- Priority Substances - Strategic Coordination Group
CMA Drafting group on sediment/biota monitoring
GWDTE Threshold Value development in UK
Meeting of the WFD CIS Working Group on Ecological Status (ECOSTAT)
CIS Working Group 2A ECOSTAT SCG Meeting in Brussels
Plenary Session 21° October Paris
Blue economy in the Black Sea Panel 3b: Save the sea
Part I.
PRIORITY (HAZARDOUS) SUBSTANCES
Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive
3rd meeting, 8 March 2006 EEA Copenhagen
Preparation of the second RBMP in Romania
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
WG Hazardous substances * Marine Strategy 19 November 2003
Netherlands Institute for Fisheries Research (RIVO)
CMA-1 activity Berlin – 2 May 2007
Assessment of Member States‘ 2nd River Basin Management Plans
Presentation transcript:

Priority substances Classification and monitoring

Good chemical status To achieve good chemical status, values of all priority substances that are emitted to the water body must be below limit values in – water – sediments – biota

EQS Under development: – EQS for water and sediments – QS for biota

While waiting for EQS: Norway are using limit values in freshwater and coastal water for – yearly mean value defined for 33 of 33 – maximum value defined for 18 of 33

Threshold values in sediments and biota Norway are using threshold values in sediments in coastal water. – defined for 20 of 33 In marine biota, values are defined for 8 substances – from 1 to 5 species of marine biota per substance (periwinkle, seaweed, blue mussels, cod liver, muscle of flounder, cod or herring)

Basis for limit values Current limits are based on risk of ecological effects. Origin is a 5-class system established in 1997, revised in Threshold for good chemical status is between class II/III.

Classification Water samples: – Concentration of all substances in all samples in the water body must be below the maximum limit (future EQS-MAC), and – Annual average concentration (arithmetic mean) must be below the mean limit for all substances (future EQS-AA).

Classification Sediment and biota: – The highest value measured within all monitoring stations in the WB must be below threshold value. – If high values are geographically concentrated to a specific part of the WB, one should consider delineation.

Classification - sediments Database Vann-nett Database Vannmiljø WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 WB St.1 St.2St.3St.4

Example of delineation based on sediment values: Note: These are Cu-levels, hence relevant for classification of ecological status. Principle of delineation is the same for pri-subst.

Monitoring of priority substances Based on knowledge of pressures, monitoring of a WB must include all priority substances that are being emitted. Monitoring should be performed in water, sediments and biota. MediumWaterSedimentsBiota Freq. (samples/year)1211

Detailed recommendations for monitoring in Norway are available at