WFD CIS 4th Intercalibration Workshop - Introduction and Expected Outcome Anna-Stiina Heiskanen European Commission Joint Research Centre Ispra, Italy

WFD, Annex V, Article 1.4.1: Comparability of biological monitoring results - Intercalibration exercise (iii) (…) The value for the boundary between the classes of high and good status, and the value for the boundary between good and moderate status shall be established through the intercalibration exercise (.…) (iv) The Commission shall facilitate this intercalibration exercise in order to ensure that these class boundaries are established consistent with the normative definitions (..) and are comparable between Member States

Normative definitions of ecological status classification high good moderate poor bad 1 (nearly) totally undisturbed slight alterations moderate alterations major alterations severe alterations OK measures needed

Intercalibration: consistent interpretation of class boundary definitions What are ‘slight’, moderate’, ‘major’ and ‘severe’ alterations from reference conditions? Class boundaries should be consistent with the normative definitions, and Comparable between Member States

Comparison timetables MS implementation vs. intercalibration Member States’ Intercalibration implementation timetable timetable 2003 2004 2005 2006 Compilation of Draft Intercalibration register Analysis of characteristics (typology and analysis of pressures and impacts) Final Intercal. Register Intercalibration exercise Monitoring programmes operational Intercalibration completed, and results published

Limitations of WFD intercalibration IC aims highly ambitious: harmonized class boundaries in MS monitoring systems - including good/moderate Only ONE intercalibration exercise foreseen that should be completed in 2006 Intercalibration planned simultaneously with the development of typology and monitoring systems WFD has no intercalibration strategy for longer term Intercalibration in 2003-2006 has to be limited (types, pressures, quality elements)

Steps for the establishment of the Intercalibration Network

WFD, Annex V, Article 1.4.1: Comparability of biological monitoring results (v)(…) For each surface water body type selected, the network shall consist of at least two sites corresponding to the boundary between the normative definitions of high and good status, and at least two sites corresponding to the boundary between the normative definitions of good and moderate status. The sites shall be selected by expert judgement based on joint inspections and all other available information.

Selection of intercalibration sites Rivers Lakes Transitional waters Coastal waters Heavily modified waters Selection of water types for each Ecoregion 1 > 2 sites between high ---- good status > 2 sites between good -- moderate status Selection of sites Using expert judgement and all available information 2 Draft intercalibration network SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED 2003

Establishment of intercalibration network Member States & Candidate Countries propose IC sites for the draft register (2003) IC sites represent national views of the high-good and good-moderate boundaries - not a common view Differences in national views of class boundaries will be reflected in the draft IC network IC Guidance: procedure to achieve maximum consistency involving expert groups

WFD, Annex V, Article 1.4.1: Comparability of biological monitoring results (vii)(…) Within three years of the date of entry into force of the Directive, the Commission shall prepare a draft register of sites to form the intercalibration network which may be adapted in accordance with the procedures laid down in Article 21. The final register of sites shall be established within four years of the date of entry into force of the Directive and shall be published by the Commission

Establishment of IC register Member States select sites for the draft register Expert groups & Intercalibration Working group evaluate selections in 2003 Draft register discussed in a joint workshop of MS (CC), experts, and Commission in autumn 2003 Draft register submitted to the WFD Committee in Dec. 2003; draft register may be amended in 2004 May 2004: New MS join the EU & WFD committee Final register approved and published after Committee decision in Dec. 2004 (New MS participate)

Way forward to the Intercalibration exercise in 2005-6

WFD, Annex V, Article 1.4.1: Comparability of biological monitoring results (vi) Each Member State monitoring system shall be applied to those sites in the intercalibration network which are both in the ecoregion and of a surface water body type to which the system will be applied pursuant to the requirements of this Directive. The results of this application shall be used to set the numerical values for the relevant class boundaries in each Member State monitoring system.

Process of the intercalibration exercise Commission IC data base Publishing (Dec/06) Data (Jan/05- Jun/06) Reporting (Jun/06) Member States’ assessment system Potential additional sampling Sites selected for intercalibration (2003/4) Classification of intercalibration site (EQR-value) Member State

Roles of the Member States & Commission Intercalibration will be carried out by the Member States Role of the Commission is to facilitate information exchange and to publish the results

Background EEWAI The Joint Research Centre, in collaboration with DG ENV, has undertaken the initiative to launch European Centre for Ecological Water Quality and Intercalibration (EEWAI) coordinate and assist in the intercalibration exercise, as required by the WFD Operational since January 2003

Expected outcome of the Intercalibration Workshop

Steps for selection of IC network MS nominate: Experts on 1) Rivers& Lakes 2) Coastal/Transitional waters subdivivion into (eco)regional groups Provisional identification of intercalibration (eco)regions (REFCOND, COAST) Propose water body types for Intercalibration network (REFCOND, COAST) Propose major pressures and quality elements for each water body type to be included in the IC network (IMPRESS, MONITORING) IC working group (March 17-18) Select types, pressures and quality elements to be included in the IC network

Expected Outcome - IC network To reach agreement on : Geographical Intercalibr. groups (MS & CC?) Common types for the Intercalibr. network Major pressures for each water body type Major quality elements for the intercalibration network/ exercise This will allow MS and CC to start the process to look for IC sites within the agreed types.

Expected Outcome - Process for continuation Agree on next steps for intercalibration network selection process Agree on process for metadata analysis Agree on drafting groups for ECOSTAT (i.e. develop guidance for IC exercise) Involvement of Accession Countries - how? Need for harmonization/ standardization of biological monitoring methods?