Development of a protocol for identification of reference conditions, and boundaries between high, good and moderate status in lakes and watercourses (REFCOND)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
How close are we in the Water Framework Directive’s Implementation ? Paul C.M. Frintrop Institute for Inland Water Management and Waste-Water Treatment.
Advertisements

Mats Wallin Swedish Univ. of Agricultural Sciences Dept. of Environmental Assessment Catarina Johansson Swedish Environmental Protection Agency Development.
A Practical Approach: The General Physico-Chemical Quality Elements and the Classification of Ecological Status.
Framework for the intercalibration process  Must be simple  Aiming to identify and resolve big inconsistencies with the normative definitions and big.
CIS Working Group 2A ECOSTAT Overall Approach to the Ecological Classification 01 July 2003 D/UK WGL CIS 2A.
NE ATLANTIC GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP (NEA GIG)
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Task on Harmonisation of Freshwater Biological Methods
Pilot River Basin Network: Environment Directorate
Background CRiteria for the IDentification of Groundwater thrEsholds BRIDGE Project Presentation Contract N° (SSPI) Co-ordinator: BRGM (Fr)
REFCOND EU Water Framework Directive project funded by the European Commission DG Environment Included in the EU Water Directors “Common Strategy on.
Marine Strategy Framework Directive: an introduction
Daughter Groundwater Directive
Synthesis of the intercalibration process Working group 2.5.
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Chemical Monitoring mandate
Intercalibration Report on State - of - play and way forward Presented by Anna-Stiina Heiskanen Joint Research Centre The Institute for Environment.
Task 1 - Intercalibration WG 2A ECOSTAT - Intercalibration
EurAqua 8th Scientific and Technical Review,
Working Group 2A ECOSTAT Intercalibration process - state of play Wouter van de Bund & Anna-Stiina Heiskanen Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment.
Water Directors meeting - Dresden
Claire Vincent Environment and Heritage Service United Kingdom
COAST Lisbon February Claire Vincent Environment and Heritage Service United Kingdom.
CIS workshop : assessment of the ecological status.
Horizontal Guidance on Wetlands Rome, 12nd June
WG 2.5 Intercalibration.
Claire Vincent Environment and Heritage Service United Kingdom
EAF - GW The EU Water Framework Directive: Statistical aspects of the identification of groundwater pollution trends, and aggregation of.
REFCOND Workshop Uppsala, May 2001
Update on progress since last WG meeting (13-14 June 2002)
at Umweltbundesamt GmbH Wien
EU Marine Strategy DG Environment B.1.
Outcome of 2^ Seminar of the WG 2.7 Roma, January
Background CRiteria for the IDentification of Groundwater thrEsholds BRIDGE Summary of BRIDGE achievements Contract N° (SSPI) Co-ordinator:
on a protocol for Intercalibration of Surface Water
Project 2.7 Guidance on Monitoring
CIS workshop : assessment of the ecological status.
of the Work Programme 17. March 2003
CMA Drafting group on sediment/biota monitoring
Background CRiteria for the IDentification of Groundwater thrEsholds: BRIDGE Co-ordinator: BRGM (Fr) Groundwater Characterisation workshop, 25 June 2004.
Outline of the EU greenhouse gas emission trend report
Comparison of methodologies for defining Good Ecological Potential
EU Water Framework Directive
Water Directors meeting Mondorf-les-bains, June 2005
Working Group A ECOSTAT progress report on Intercalibration Presented by Wouter van de Bund Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability.
Working Group 2A ECOSTAT progress report Presented by Wouter van de Bund Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability.
ECOSTAT 2013 – 2015 Tasks and Deliverables
WG 2.3 REFCOND Progress report for the SCG meeting 30 Sep-1 Oct 2002
Part I.
EU Water Framework Directive
WG E on Priority Substances
Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive
Legal issues and compliance checking in WFD implementation SCG meeting 5-6 November 2008 Jorge Rodríguez Romero, Unit D.2, DG Environment, European.
WG Integrated Testing in Pilot River Basins
Working Group 2A ECOSTAT Guidance for the intercalibration process Wouter van de Bund Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability.
Metadata analysis.
WFD CIS 4th Intercalibration Workshop
EIONET and EUROWATERNET Common Implementation Strategy
WGC-2 Status Compliance and Trends
Concept paper on the assessment of WFD River Basin Management Plans
ASSIGNING WATER BODY TYPES IN THE WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION Wouter van de Bund EC Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and sustainability,
River Fish Intercalibration group D. Pont,Cemagref, France)
EU Water Framework Directive
WG A ECOSTAT Draft Mandate
Working Group 2A ECOSTAT progress report Presented by Wouter van de Bund Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability Inland.
Chemical Monitoring Activity Final Draft Guidance Document on Chemical Monitoring of Surface Water Peter Lepom.
EU Water Framework Directive
Defining Reference Conditions Setting Class Boundaries
EU Water Framework Directive
Why are we reviewing reference conditions in intercalibration?
Presentation transcript:

Development of a protocol for identification of reference conditions, and boundaries between high, good and moderate status in lakes and watercourses (REFCOND)

REFCOND EU Water Framework Directive project funded by the European Commission DG Environment Included in the EU Water Directors “Common Strategy on the Implementation of the WFD”

REFCOND Lead country: Associated partners: Sweden Administration: Swedish EPA Co-ordination: Swedish Univ. of Agr. Sciences Associated partners: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain and UK.

Objectives To develop an operative definition of type specific reference conditions. To develop criteria for selecting techniques for establishing type specific reference conditions. To develop principles for setting the boundaries between high, good and moderate ecological status.

Background The WFD requires Member States to identify, for each type of body of water, reference conditions for the purpose of identifying a reference biological community; The reference conditions must satisfy certain chemical and hydro-morphological criteria set out in Annex V in WFD for each category of body of water.

Background Criteria for reference conditions: Hydro-morphological and the general physico-chemical parameters should reflect totally, or nearly totally, undisturbed conditions; Specific synthetic pollutants should have concentrations close to zero or at any rate below the limit of detection of the most advance analytical techniques in general use; Specific non-synthetic pollutants should have concentrations within the range normally associated with background levels.

Background Identification of reference conditions: Reference conditions can be either spatially-based or based on modelling or using a combination of these; Reference conditions based on modelling can be derived using either predictive models or hindcasting methods, using historical, paleoecological and other available data; Where it is not possible to establish reliable reference conditions due to high degrees of natural variability in the element, the element can be excluded from the assessment of ecological status.

Background Classification and boundaries: For biological elements good status is based essentially on a slight departure from the reference biological population; For hydro-morphological elements and general physico-chemical parameters, there are no separate criteria for good status, the condition being that the elements are such as to support a biological community of the requisite standard; For specific synthetic and non-synthetic pollutants the condition for good status is that waters comply with the quality standard for the relevant substance.

Classification of ecological status 1 Deviation Status  High No/minimal  Good Slight Biological parameter value observed Reference biological value EQR=  Moderate Moderate Poor Bad

Work programme Detailed work programme - work packages: 1. Co-ordination 2. Establishment of project web-site 3. Agreement on common definitions 4. Review of techniques 5. Evaluation of techniques 6. Elaboration of first protocol draft. 7. Review and validation of protocol 8. Finalisation of protocol and termination of project

Timetable 01 Dec 2000 — 01 Dec 2002

Co-ordination Co-ordination by lead country: To ensure the successful delivery of the results of the different work packages; To establish successful channels of communication between project partners; To establish successful channels of communication with the EU Comm., ETCw, JRC and other inter-related European and national projects.

Web-site A web-site will be designed to: Disseminate project plans and results; Provide a virtual forum for discussion and exchange of information; Provide active links to other relevant web-sites, e.g. EU Comm., EIONET-components and other relevant projects and research groups; http://www—nrciws.slu.se/REFCOND/index.htm The CIRCA system will also be used.

Definitions Agreement on common definition of key elements in the WFD, especially an operative definition of reference conditions: Proposal to a definition of reference conditions and the historical period or other circumstances corresponding to reference conditions; The web-site will be used for discussions about WFD definitions; To be completed Dec 2002.

Review of techniques Review of techniques for identification of reference conditions and principles for the identification of boundaries between classes. Principles and techniques used in Member States and elsewhere will be reviewed; Each participating Member State is expected to report on their own procedures; The results will be reported and discussed at a workshop, 14-15 May in Uppsala, Sweden. To be completed June 2001.

WORK PROGRAMME WORK PROGRAMME Evaluation of techniques Evaluation of techniques used for identification of reference conditions and principles for delineation of quality classes. A comparison and evaluation of techniques and principles will be made, taking into account ecological realism, environmental relevance, need for supporting data, robustness, precision, etc; The possibilities and limitations of different procedures in the context of the WFD will be highlighted;

WORK PROGRAMME WORK PROGRAMME WORK PROGRAMME Evaluation of techniques The evaluation is expected to be made by selected Member States, on a voluntary basis and with tasks distributed among participants according to expertise and interest; The results will be reported and discussed at a workshop, where the outline of a common protocol for the assessment of reference conditions will also be discussed; To be completed in December 2001 (workshop November).

First protocol draft Elaboration of first protocol draft. Based on the findings in the previous stage, a first draft outlining a common procedure for identification of reference conditions and boundaries between high, good and moderate status will be produced and submitted to Member States for comments. The draft will be produced by the leader. To be completed in May 2002.

Validation of protocol Review and validation of protocol. All Member States are expected to review and comment on the protocol, and those who want may perform one or several case studies; The results will be reported at a workshop, where modification of the draft that might be necessary will be discussed and the final protocol outlined; To be completed in October 2002 (workshop September).

Finalisation of protocol Finalisation of protocol and termination of project. Based on the findings in the previous step the protocol will be revised and a final report to the Commission will be written; To be completed in December 2002.

Overview