Floods Directive : Transposition checklist update Maria Brättemark, WFD Team, DG ENV.D.2, European Commission

State of play 1st draft issues for information for WGF 4 Comments received by December 2008 Comments circulated to WG F for information Some clarifications given now Next version

Status of future document Pilot project on “Compliance promotion” For consultants checking transposition of texts (1st assessment always outsourced for resource reasons, follow-up always in house) Disclaimer : Indication of interpretation at this point in time. Not necessarily all of COM. Reserve the right to change point of view, for instance new case-law. Final interpretation always the Court. Implementation vs. transposition …. The purpose of transposition checklist being to check that provisions are correctly transposed, including if transposition resrticts implementation… for this some examples of implementation are given. Text to be made clearer though…

Key issues of interpretation Definition of a flood : List in 2.1 not exhaustive” Only one source of flooding excluded No knowledge how to assess and manage, not excuse for exclusion CA and UoM/RBD Not preference as such Annex I- WFD information provided Clear – CA (transposition /notification) Link UoM and CA – Court ruling

Key issues of interpretation International cooperation/coordination requirements : Not for MS without transnational waters Not necessarily same methodology, coordination, transparency of criteria, information, depending on the article “Significance” to be defined by MS – transparency needed Coordination with WFD required – also recall other (legal instruments in Annex) Art 13 applied for PFRA in 1st cycle only “Equivalence” case-by-case basis Mapping – plans – checklist to change...