WFD implementation and UWWTD Questionnaire-2007 European Research input for River Basin Management Annual meeting of the subgroup on water statistics Luxembourg, 9-19 October 2007 Violeta Vinceviciene European Commission, DG Environment Unit D.2 – Water and Marine, WFD Team

Contents WFD implementation: Reporting for UWWTD: Key messages on implementation process Follow-up work programme Reporting for UWWTD: Questionnaire 2007 Follow-up process within WISE system Links of reporting under UWWTD with OECD/ESTAT JQ-IW Conclusions

Water Framework Directive: key elements Protecting all waters, surface and ground waters: Covering all impacts on waters; integrated approach of emission controls and water quality standards, phasing out of particularly hazardous substances Good quality (‘good status’) to be achieved, as a rule, by 2015 Water management based on the River Basin The challenge of shared river basins River Basin Management Plans Economic instruments: economic analysis, and getting the prices right - to promote wise use of water, cost recovery and equitable charging Public Participation: getting the citizen involved

Different scales Sub-basin/Sector/ Water type element of district to deal with particular aspects  no link with pollution Heavily modified water bodies (HMWB) human activity carried out makes it impossible to reach the goal without disproportionate costs (change activity…) sea District river basins + associated groundwaters and coastal waters Water bodies scale of evaluation of the achievement of good status

WFD Timetable Transposition into national law Dec 2003 Administrative arrangements Dec 2003 Environmental/economic analysis Dec 2004 Monitoring programmes Dec 2006 Final river basin management Dec 2009 plans Implementation, assessment, 2015 till adjustment 2027

Implementation report (1) Communication ‘Towards Sustainable Water Management in the European Union’ (COM(2007) 128 final) Supported by Annexes 1) WFD 1st Impl. Report (SEC(2007) 362) 2) UWWD 4th Impl. Report (SEC(2007) 363) Snap-shot of the situation reported in 2004-2006 Based on reports from Member States Assesses 3 components of WFD: Legal transposition into national law (Art. 24) Administrative arrangements (Art. 3) Environmental/economic analysis (Art. 5)

Main messages (2) Implementation well advanced with some positive examples – it is possible to implement the WFD well and in time! Significant shortcomings – Member States have to do better! Still time to rectify situation – decisive milestone is 2009 RBMP!

Implementation results (3) Legal Transposition: - 19 MS with major shortcomings Administrative Arrangements: 110 different RBDs, 40 are international >60 % of EU territory is international RBD size between 1.000 and 800.000 km2 International cooperation is not adequate everywhere Economic analysis: Low level of information on cost-recovery in different sectors

J K K J L J K “WFD Scoreboard” Country Trsp RBD Rep. Art5 rep. Art8 rep. Austria J Belgium K Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany “WFD Scoreboard” Country Trsp RBD Rep. Art5 rep. Art8 rep. Greece K J L Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxem-bourg Malta Nether-lands Country Trsp RBD Rep Art5 rep. Art8rep. Poland J Portugal Slovakia Slovenia Spain K Sweden United Kingdom Scoreboard and all MS reports publicly availble through: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/water/water-framework/

TITLE 170 national RBDs 110 RBDs 40 international

Implementation Results Article 5 analysis (6) Results: some facts and figures 70.000 water bodies in 23 MS Average drainage area per water body between 19 km2 and 312 km2 Average size of a groundwater body between 300 km2 and 1000 km2 25% of water bodies is heavily modified or artificial (average of 24 MS) 29% of surface water bodies NOT at risk (average of 23 MS) 43% of groundwater bodies NOT at risk (average of 24 MS) NOT at risk means that they meet or will meet WFD objectives

Implementation Results Article 5 analysis (7) Risk analysis for surface water bodies (average per MS) at risk insufficient data not at risk

TITLE

WISE viewer: WFD part (example)

Implementation Results Article 5 analysis (10) Results: economic analysis Low level of information available When available, cost recovery level vary significantly between 1-100% for agriculture 40-100% for industries 70-100% for households Few considerations of environmental and resource costs or baseline scenarios

Reporting of Monitoring Networks – Art.8 (11) Article 8 requires establishment of monitoring network and making them operational in Dec 2006; Deadline to report 22/03/07 First WFD reporting supported electronically through new WISE input portal (REPORTNET hosted by EEA) Commission report - by end 2008 Status: 23 Member States reported through WISE (+2 MS) for a total 144 RBDs; Missing reports: Greece and Malta Preliminary analysis of the data available by the end of May’07 in WISE (23 countries): > 50000+ GW stations and >51000+ SW stations Data quality: mapping of monitoring stations vs. Art.5 water bodies - possible for only 60% of the stations

Implementation Results (13) Main shortcomings: lack of data and no follow up identified variability of approaches and methodologies (e.g. size of water bodies) designation of heavily modified water bodies diffuse source pollution of surface water (incl. lack of inventory) diffuse and point source pollution of groundwater (incl. lack of inventory) assessment of overexploitation and salt intrusion in groundwaters (analysis of) current levels of cost recovery and consideration of environment and resource costs

Follow - up Recommendations for MS (14) Recommendation 1: overcome shortcomings Implement fully basic measure legislation (uwwd, nitrates, ippc) Apply economic instruments more widely Put ecological assessment tools in place Improve methodologies and close data gaps Recommendation 2: enhance integration Match financing priorities (national and EU) better with WFD analysis and implementation Recommendation 3: improve transparency Use public participation as an opportunity Make information available, also through WISE https://water.europa.eu

Analysing reported information further: Comparability of reported data (15)

Density of surface water stations Number of stations per 1000 km2 (16) Extrapolated to EU27 results in ~53000 stations Mean 17 countries

Lack of data (18) Risk analysis for surface water bodies (average per MS) at risk insufficient data not at risk

Future issues for WFD – 2007 and beyond Comparability of implementation – improving step-by-step towards the river basin management plan Intercalibration and ecological assessment Reporting and Water Information System for Europe to be continued: fully implemented & operational by 2010 for entire WFD & furthermore! Implementation of new EU water policies - groundwater, priority substances and flood protection Streamline with other EU water policies: ‘old’ directives related to water  programme of measures for RBMP

Data needs from ‘statistical world’ water services water uses water prices cost recovery etc.

WISE is the most important mean for data visualisation to make integrated analyses of the status of water bodies

Reporting for UWWTD: Questionnaire 2007 (Art.15) Official data request from Commission - 16 June’07 Member States must report within 6 months – i.e. by the end of 2007

The concept of reporting under UWWTD Chain is linked up through stable IDs + coordinates Agglom.  Collect.syst  UWWTP  DP  Receiving area/RWB Size of agglom. Receiving area type defines treatment level requirements Inventory +mapping of sensitive areas first before going to agglomeration questionnaire

Reporting for UWWTD-Q2007 (on art.15) UWWTD Questionnaire 2007: The structure: Designated receiving areas (sensitive areas and their catchments: list and GIS files) Agglomeration level Member State level (sewage slugde management and water reuse) Agglomeration level: Covers information on urban wastewater collection, treatment and monitoring of discharges for all agglomerations with the total organic load of >2000p.e. Reporting every 2 years as a rule based on the Commision request Fully implemented reporting (INPUT side) through WISE (via EEA ReportNet) for UWWTD next questionnaire in 2009 Some previously reported data (OUPUT side) is already on WISE viewer

WISE viewer in 2007 for UWWTD

Contents of UWWTD Q2007 Reporting sheets/forms: Contact details Receiving areas Inventory of sensitive areas (GIS + textual inform.) Agglomeration level Master data on agglomerations (IDs etc.) Collecting systems: 3 simple questions Treatment level & performance MS level Information on sludge and wastewater reuse Food processing industries

Discharge Points/ Receiving areas/ RWBs UWWTD Questionnaire 2007 Generated wastewater Discharge Points/ Receiving areas/ RWBs Collection Treatment

UWWTD Questionnaire 2007 Urban waste water: domestic Agglomeration Generated wastewater Discharge Points/ Receiving areas/ RWBs Collection Treatment UWWTP Collec-ting systems (system of conduits) DP2 Colected but NOT treated DP3 Agglomeration Urban waste water: domestic industrial

UWWTD Questionnaire 2007 Urban waste water: domestic Agglomeration Generated wastewater Discharge Points/ Receiving areas/ RWBs Collection Treatment UWWTP Collec-ting systems (system of conduits) DP2 Colected but NOT treated DP3 Agglomeration Urban waste water: domestic industrial Collection through IAS NOT collected

UWWTD Questionnaire 2007 Urban waste water: domestic Agglomeration Generated wastewater Discharge Points/ Receiving areas/ RWBs Collection Treatment Stand-alone At.13 industries IWWTP DP1 UWWTP Collec-ting systems (system of conduits) DP2 Colected but NOT treated DP3 Agglomeration Urban waste water: domestic industrial Collection through IAS NOT collected

Main challenges shortcomings under UWWTD Designation of sensitive areas and their catchments for defining treatment level requirements to ensure protection of the environment Helpful activities under CIS  guidance on the assessment of eutrophication (defining trophic status of receiving waters)

Linking UWWTD-Questionnaire with OECD/ESTAT JQ-IW

Integration of other EU water policy areas into WISE EU ‘old’ directives on water Urban Water Water Treatment Directive– 2007/8 Nitrate Directive – 2008 Bathing Water Directive –2007/8 Drinking Water Directive –2008 Other EU policies and reporting activities by 2010 ESTAT/OECD Joint questionnaire on inland waters (e.g. emissions data, water uses, water services, data on water economics, water prices) Marine protection strategy Floods directive Priority substances directive via streamlining with EPER/e-PRTR reporting http://water.europa.eu

Linking UWWTD-Q with OECD/ESTAT JQ-IW The aim is to streamline reporting to EU level as agreed between 4 European Institutions (EEA, ESTAT, ENV, JRC) under WISE Implementation Plan To establish the links (parameters and data to report) with other reporting systems (e.g. ESTAT, JRC, ENV, EEA), checking the overlapping issues, adjusting reporting by fulfilling the needs of partners To organise/adjust reporting following WISE rules To ensure that both reporting formats ESTAT JQ-IW and UWWTD questionnaire corresponds with WISE rules, therefore interoperability and data exchange is ensured!

Linking UWWTD-Q with OECD/ESTAT JQ-IW OECD/ESTAT JQ-IW: Reporting frequency – even years; data are voluntary to report Differences of JQ-IW with UWWTD Questionnaire is territorial coverage: UWWTD: for agglomerations >2,000 p.e. but no or partly information on agglomerations < 2,000 p.e. Possible solution to use already reported data on UWWTD for the next JQ-IW: pre-fill JQ-IW with the data reported for UWWTD Q2007 by aggregating at the level required before launching JQ in 2008 The remaining data (for small agglomerations < 2000p.e.) from MS could be added through reporting cycle for JQ

A set of overlapping and interacting ‘worlds’ WISE ‘world’ MS level ‘world’ River basin approach ‘world’ UWWTD ‘world’ ESTAT/OECD JQ ‘world’ EEA/EIONET ‘world’ A set of overlapping and interacting ‘worlds’

Conclusions on implementation of WFD and UWWTD It is possible and feasible to implement EU water legislation by using CIS and its advantages via close dialog with MS To prepare timely, comprehensive, precise and achievable RBMPs in achieving good ecological status needs to implement programme of measures (where the ‘old’ and new EU water legislation plays a significant role) Constant use of management by objectives for each component of WFD implementation steps Transparency and control of the process is ensured via WISE and through WISE ensuring coordination, streamlining and interoperability of data/information exchange reported under other EU policies/reporting activities (e.g. JQ-IW) Monitor check Plan Do Improve review

Conclusions: the role for sub-group on ‘water’ of WG on ‘Statistics of the environment’ Close coordination and adjustment of reporting in the frame of WISE for the needs of other end-users and partners (group of 4) at the EU level: streamline reporting on OECD/ESTAT JQ-IW and WFD/other EU water policies fulfilling the needs of collection of data related to water uses, water services, water prices, cost recovery, etc. streamline of existing reporting obligations, which are linked to, e.g., reporting under UWWTD  Work programme for this sub-group for 2008-2010 for future link, streamlining and coordination of reporting on water statistics within WISE system with reporting on WFD, UWWTD and other data needs for the EU water policy

Thank you for your attention

More information Water Information System for Europe (WISE): http://water.europa.eu On EU water policy: http://ec.europa.eu.int/environment/water WFD CIRCA Information Exchange Platform http://forum.europa.eu.int/Public/irc/env/wfd/library Email: env-wfd-circa@ec.europa.eu Notes for the Speaker: More information on the Directive, the implementation process and also the guidance documents are available on the internet.