WG A Ecological Status Progress report April-October 2010

Issues ECOSTAT meeting 6-7 October, Ispra: focus on intercalibration Guidance on comparability criteria (IC process guidance Annex V) Progress of ongoing intercalibration work Problems with deadlines - requests for extension

Guidance on the IC process 2008-2011 Guidance endorsed by Water Directors in Malmö, December 2009 (except Annexes III, V, VI) Annex III (Reference conditions/Benchmarking) and VI (Reporting) endorsed by WD spring 2010 Remaining open issue: Annex V - comparability criteria ECOSTAT was requested to complete this Annex autumn 2010 for WD endorsement in Spa

Intercalibration Guidance Annex V common procedure to compare and harmonize the national class boundaries of good ecological status for the second phase of intercalibration First proposal was discussed at the WGA ECOSTAT meeting of 8-9 April 2010 No agreement was reached on this version due to its complexity and need for testing on several existing situation Testing took place spring/summer 2010 by several IC groups Improved version discussed and agreed at WGA ECOSTAT meeting of 5-6 October 2010

ANNEX V - General principles Comparability is always checked with analysis of 2 components: boundary bias and class agreement, using EQRs Boundary harmonization = upper boundaries do not differ more than 0.5 class between MSs (= the maximum boundary deviation above or below each national boundary is a quarter of a class). Class agreement is calculated after boundary harmonization to show the performance of the methods after required adjustments are made to the boundaries

Boundary bias Class agreement Class agreement over all MSs Boundary bias _ compare each MS boundary with common view Class agreement over all MSs Mean average absolute class difference All options ≤ 0.25 classes < 1.0 > 0.25 classes ≥ 1.0

ANNEX V - Application Annex V procedure assumes that the requirements specified in the IC guidance are met WFD compliant assessment methods Feasibility checks (typology, assessment concept, etc) IC guidance gives IC groups that do not meet those criteria the flexibility to apply alternative approaches (e.g. expert judgment based)  key principle 9 Not possible to give general guidance for this

ANNEX V - Application JRC / IC steering group has developed Excel templates to carry out the calculations Training workshops have been organised to ensure harmonised application Lakes: 4 November Coastal/Transitional: 10-11 November Rivers: early 2011 if needed Results will be checked and validated centrally (early 2011) Calculation templates will allow concistent application of the procedures in the future, if needed

Request to Strategic Coordination Group: Version 5.1 of the IC Guidance Annex V is agreed by WGA ECOSTAT on 5 October 2010. The SCG is invited to: send any remaining comments in writing to the 3 contacts mentioned below, by 05.11.2010 (none received) discuss any outstanding issues agree to forward the final draft to the Water Directors for their endorsement during their meeting in Belgium on 2-3 December 2010.

Intercalibration: Progress of ongoing work General timetable 2008-2012

Intercalibration: Progress of ongoing work “Milestone 3” reports delivered by the intercalibration groups and discussed at the October EOSTAT meeting In total there are 68 BQE/GIG combinations 43% of the groups is on track 37% of the groups have problems/delays 20% of the groups will not finish

Extra efforts needed 37% ‘yellow’ – still possible to complete! Extra effort is needed and expected – it is still possible to complete these BQEs! Especially for Coastal/Transitional – WITHOUT EXTRA EFFORT 2/3 OF THE BQEs WILL FAIL! Some GIGs need more time 

Requests for extension ECOSTAT discussed the possibilities/benefits of a (limited) extension of the deadlines DGENV emphasized that wherever possible the agreed deadlines (draft results in April 2011, final results in June 2011) should be met Only in exceptional circumstances, and with sufficient justification, will a maximum 6 month extension (to the end of 2011) be considered (i.e. not automatically granted).  IC steering group has contacted group leads and prepared an overview of the requests

Rivers green – on track; orange – problems; red – will no finish X – 6-month extension requested

Lakes green – on track; orange – problems; red – will no finish X – 6-month extension requested

Coastal green – on track; orange – problems; red – will no finish X – 6-month extension requested

Transitional green – on track; orange – problems; red – will no finish X – 6-month extension requested

Requests for extension - summary