WGC-2 Status Compliance and Trends Drafting Group meeting guidance document Drafting Group meeting Johannes Grath Rob Ward Lisbon – 20 September 2007 European Commission - DG Environment Unit D.2: Water and Marine

Working Group C (2007-2009) Activity WGC-2 (Status compliance & trends) What happened so far Presentation of 1st drafts: 2 May 2007, Berlin Drafting Group Leader Meeting: 3 July 2007, Vienna Inclusion of comments received so far Elaboration of 2nd drafts Chemical status assessment – version 1.2 (draft text) Trend assessment – version 0.1 (list of content) Quantitative status assessment – version 1.2a (draft text) Internal circulation on 3 September 2007 Presentation of drafts in DG meeting 20 September 2007

Chemical Status Assessment Comments General comments Quote text coming from Directives and guidelines – Laszlo Guidance style not rule style – Leo Appreciates the use of flow charts - Magnus Introduction Introduction to be harmonised with other guidance – Laszlo, Manuel Compliance testing Testing of GWB not at risk is not feasible as no TVs are available - Manuel

Chemical Status Assessment Comments Kind of aggregation Annual-/ multi-annual aggregation? Clarify LOQ treatment - Manuel Extent of exceedance Agrees approach – Laszlo Procedure not applicable for groups of GWBs. Amendments proposed – Magnus Weighting according to the conceptual model principles - Leo

Chemical Status Assessment Comments Saltwater intrusion 1 upward trend and impact on 1 point too stringent – Laszlo DWPA Approach not acceptable at all – Laszlo Separate tests for 7.2 (DWD) and for 7.3 - Manuel Annex - Leo several comments to statistics and to confidence

Chemical Status assessment Content Introduction Background and requirements General principles / Pre-requisites Guidance for compliance testing 5 Tests Reporting Glossary References Annex: Methods for calculation Annex 2: Case Studies ???? No changes

Chemical Status assessment 2. Background and requirements 2.1.1 Definition of good chemical status WFD, Annex V 2.3.2 2.1.2 Criteria GWD, Article 3 (TV and GW-QS) 2.1.3 Procedure GWD, Article 4, Annex III 2.1.4 Classification elements and tests No changes

No changes Classification Element Classification Test No significant impairment of human uses (GWD Article 4.2 b (iv)) General assessment of quality of the groundwater body as a whole. No significant environmental risk from pollutants across a groundwater body. (GWD Article 4.2 b (i) and paragraph 3, Annex III). No Saline or other Intrusions (WFD Annex V 2.3.2) Entry into the groundwater body of either: saline water of substantially higher conductivity/salinity from connate or sea water; or water of substantially different chemical composition from other groundwater bodies or surface waters and which is liable to cause pollution. No significant diminution of surface water ecology. (WFD Annex V 2.3.2) No significant diminution of surface water chemistry and ecology due to transfer of pollutants from the GWB No significant diminution of surface water chemistry. (WFD Annex V 2.3.2) No significant damage to GWDTE. (WFD Annex V 2.3.2) No significant damage to GWDTE due to transfer of pollutants from the GWB No deterioration in quality of waters for human consumption (GWD Article 4.2 b (iii)) and paragraph 4, Annex III) Meet the requirements of WFD Article 7(3) - Drinking Water Protected Areas No changes

Chemical Status assessment 2. Background and requirements 2.2 Risk Assessment – Compliance Assessment New

Chemical Status assessment 2. Background and requirements 2.3 Threshold value – Criteria‘s values Link to TV guidance paper. Criteria‘s values = intermediate TV for each receptor TV = most stringent criteria‘s value. Reported in RBMP 2.4 Schedule of compliance testing For GWBs at risk WHEN????? At the end of RBMP? New

Chemical Status assessment 2. Background and requirements 2.5.1 Need for data aggregation at monitoring points RBMP-average = average of average over RBMP period Impairment of human use Significant env. risk from pollutants across GWB Saline and other intrusion Annual arithmetic mean – maximum values more relevant Diminution/damage of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem No deterioration – DWPA Substantial Changes

Chemical Status assessment 2. Background and requirements 2.5.2 Extent of exceedance Impairment of human use Significant env. risk from pollutants across GWB Saline and other intrusion 2.5.3 Location of exceedance Diminution/damage of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem No deterioration – DWPA assess amount and impact of pollutants transferred to ecosystems 2.5.4 Confidence in the assessment Substantial Changes

Chemical Status assessment Elements of testing Trends

Chemical Status assessment 3. General principles 3.1 Conceptual model 3.2 Network design 3.3 LOQ/LOD Changes due to comments

Chemical Status assessment 4. Guidance for compliance testing The assumption for this guidance is Each test has to be performed. Do not stop after the first ‚not of good status‘ result. Measures might be needed for several classification elements. Perform each test for each pollutant, group of pollutants (e.g. sum of pesticides) and indicator of pollution posing a risk separately. No summary assessment! For each receptor consider individual criteria‘s values.

X – Criteria’s value: 25 µg/l (account of NBL + interactions) – DW safeguard zone (DW standard of 10 µg/l): minimum treatment should apply = compliance to Art. 7(3) of WFD AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM GROUNDWATER BODY= DWPA DW safeguard zone Criteria‘s value: 14 µg/l X X X X X X X X X TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEM X X X Criteria‘s value: 8 µg/l X X X aquatic ECOSYSTEM Criteria‘s value: 12 µg/l

Chemical Status assessment 4. Guidance for compliance testing Classification Element Classification Test No significant impairment of human uses (GWD Article 4.2 b (iv)) Significant env. risk or significant impairment of human uses No significant environmental risk from pollutants across a groundwater body. (GWD Article 4.2 b (i) and paragraph 3, Annex III). No Saline or other Intrusions (WFD Annex V 2.3.2) Saline or other intrusion No significant diminution of surface water ecology. (WFD Annex V 2.3.2) Significant diminution of quality of aquatic ecosystem No significant diminution of surface water chemistry. (WFD Annex V 2.3.2) No significant damage to GWDTE. (WFD Annex V 2.3.2) Significant diminution of quality of terrestrial ecosystem No deterioration in quality of waters for human consumption (GWD Article 4.2 b (iii)) and paragraph 4, Annex III) Drinking Water Protected Areas (DWPA) test

Trend assessment

Trend assessment Trend assessment largely based on the technical report developed in 2002 (WG 2.8), will provide recommendations to Member States on how to undertake and interpret trend studies (including considerations on lag time of groundwater systems and how to integrate this in trend assessment);

Trend assessment (list of content) Working Group C (2007-2009) Activity WGC-2 (Status compliance & trends) Trend assessment (list of content) Legal background and requirements General principles Classification tests Trend assessment for individual monitoring points Statistical procedure! Different for springs and wells / pumped and not pumped Identification of upward trends at GWB scale Level of confidence and precision Baseline level Identification of upward trends which present significant risk of harm to ecosystems, human health or legitimate uses Where necessary… for assessing plumes do not expand Definition of starting point for trend reversal Reporting

Trend (reversal) assessment Corner stones Identify trends GWB at risk (Article 5(1) GWD) Identify and Reverse trends which present a significant risk of harm to the quality of aquatic ecosystems or terrestrial ecosystems, to human health, or to actual or potential legitimate uses of the water environment  Identification of GWB‘s subject to a significant and sustained upward trend and a reversal of that trend How do trends of individual monitoring points within the GWB contribute to that trend/reversal? (GWD Art. 5, 4(a) Starting point for reversal 75 % or earlier or later (but: no delay in meeting env. objectives)

Trend assessment Key elements Statistical method - at monitoring points Regression method, etc Statistical significance – usually 95%, but might deviate in justified cases – minimum requirement? Need for distinguishing between natural variation and trends with an adequate level of confidence and precision Baseline level (natural and anthropogenically occuring substances) – attention: don‘t mix with Background level Identify base year or period from which trend identification is to be calculated

Trend assessment Key elements Treatment of values below LOQ Replace values below LOQ by half of highest LOQ (GWD) Proposed procedure of WG2.8 Calculate LOQmax = constant LOQ over the whole period Eliminate all values where LOQ > LOQmax Replace all values below LOQmax by half of LOQmax Examples – Case study??

Trend assessment Key elements Procedure for ‚assessment‘ of trends at GWB-level (aggregation procedure?) (GWD Art. 5, 4(a), WFD Annex V, 2.5) Trend assessment on whole GWB data (e.g. WG 2.8) Aggregation of monitoring point trend results For both: Considering conceptual model (recharge zone, residence time, …) Confidence in assessment

Trend reversal assessment Key elements Key elements for trend reversal Starting point for trend reversal – GWD Annex IV, A 2a(ii), B 1a;b;c 75% Or earlier (<75%), or different (>75%) – enabling most cost-effective achievment of environmental objectives the reasons for starting points to be reported in RBMP (5.4) Statistical demonstration Level of confidence in the identification Proposed procedure in WG 2.8 report?

Trend (reversal) assessment General principles Length of time series, considering conceptual model, residence time, etc. Recommended minimum length, how to deal with „long“ time series? Monitoring frequency, … Conceptual model Network design LOQ/LOD

Trend (reversal) assessment Tests Tests + Flow charts (to be developed) No harm to legitimate uses No harm to aquatic ecosystems No harm to terrestrial ecosystems Plume assessment No saline intrusion No deterioration (DWPA) Part of status assessment

Trend (reversal) assessment Parameters Open issues Parameters significant and sustained upward trends to be identified in concentrations of pollutants, groups of pollutants or indicators of pollution found in groundwater bodies at risk all parameters?? - not explicit restriction but: Starting point is linked to GW-QS and TV  parameters causing risk – subject to trend assessment Recommendation: As trend assessment is part of the risk assessment  consider all parameters subject of pressures – which are present in significant amounts – see TV guidance 4.1.B

Trend (reversal) assessment Schedule Open issues Schedule First identification 2009, if possible Then at least every 6 years thereafter (2015, 2021, …) What means ‚at least‘? Trend results part of RBMP map. Draft RBMP to be published 1 year before. (2014, 2020, …)

Status & trend (reversal) assessment Case studies In accordance with the guidance – to illustrate the guidance To illustrate how status and trend assessment is being carried out in different Member States To cover ranges of hydrogeological and environmental settings Template for the case studies Limit case study to a maximum of 3 pages Inform DG leaders on part of guidance being covered Deadline:

Working Group C (2007-2009) Activity WGC-2 (Status compliance & trends) Tentative timetable DATE - Comments from WG C-2 Drafting Group Members DATE – Distribution of revised draft 21 April 2008 – Ljubljana: WG C plenary meeting