1. water.europa.eu Preparation of the Commission’s 2011 proposal on Priority Substances Part I – Technical process 13 th Working Group E meeting 15-16 March 2011 Helen Clayton Jorge Rodriguez Romero WFD Team DG Environment

2. water.europa.eu State of play of the technical process - contents 1.Prioritisation and EQS derivation and revision 2.PHS status of existing and proposed PS 3.Final technical steps

3. water.europa.eu 1. EQS derivation and revision TGD-EQS endorsed by MS members of SCG 3 March All available EQS dossiers submitted to SCHER for its opinion, i.e. dossiers for most substances EQS dossiers not yet sent to SCHER: Proposed PS: cyanides (pending outcome of additional industry studies and review of monitoring data), ibuprofen (pending SCHER opinion on key study), Existing PS: benzene (decision at 4 Feb SG-R meeting to consider under next review), mercury (pending discussion of biota standard), PCBs-NDL (agreed at 4 Feb SG-R meeting that not enough data for EQS). (PolyBDEs sent 14 March). Opinions (most) expected at 30 March SCHER plenary

4. water.europa.eu 1. Conclusions regarding Cyanides (free) Monitoring data in INERIS database are for total CN except from AT and UK. Preliminary literature review of background concentrations and total vs free ratio cites papers reporting – background concentrations 6-fold higher in industrial than in rural areas – approx 25 % of total CN in effluents as free However, data in monitoring database requires further checking and analysis. Industry studies on insects and higher plants still awaited for EQS setting. Could benefit from more monitoring of free cyanides

5. water.europa.eu 1. Conclusions regarding Zinc Results of the technical assessment of the risk to the aquatic environment (in the monitoring-based prioritisation) not conclusive. A large amount of the monitoring data was for total zinc, cf dissolved. Not enough info on background concentrations, nor on environmental variables (pH, hardness, DOC) needed to assess bioavailability. Therefore many uncertainties in assumptions made when trying to assess the risk. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the conclusions on risk are sensitive to these assumptions. Consultation with WG E confirmed that most MS have national standards for Zn and favour continued use of them. However, harmonisation of standards would be desirable, even if no EU EQS. EQS dossier prepared for Zn and submitted to SCHER for opinion. Need better monitoring (dissolved Zn and environmental variables) to allow use of biotic ligand models (BLMs) to calculate bioavailable Zn.

6. water.europa.eu 1. Changes to Existing PS (EQS) SubstanceRationale for review of EQS Anthracene Fluoranthene Naphthalene PAH 5-6 rings New information (Final EU RAR for Coal Tar Pitch, High Temperature, 2008) BenzeneNew information (Final EU RAR 2008); MS concern re carcinogenicity PolyBDEsTo include octaBDE (prioritised) LeadNew information (EU VRAR 2008, SCHER review of VRAR 2009, first draft of Chemical Safety Report for REACH registration) and need to consider bioavailability MercuryConcern about the biota matrix to be monitored NickelNew information (EU RAR 2008, SCHER review of RAR 2009, and additional industry studies related to REACH registration) and need to consider bioavailability

7. water.europa.eu 1. Conclusions regarding Mercury MS concerned about failing existing EQS Most MS monitor in biota Extent of failure depends upon biota chosen for monitoring Presentations: –German monitoring data –INERIS review of studies/possible options for biota EQS

8. water.europa.eu 2. Changes to status of existing PS SubstanceChange to PHS on technical grounds? Rationale DEHPLikelySVHC (reprotoxic); secondary poisoning risk, incl to humans LeadPossibleNon-threshold reprotoxicity? OctylphenolNo conclusion for the moment ED criteria being developed TCBsNoNot PBT, POP proposal withdrawn TrifluralinLikelyPBT, possible POP

9. water.europa.eu 2. Proposed status of new PS SubstancePHS? EE2N E2N Aclonifen? Cyanides (free)N CybutryneN CypermethrinN DichlorvosY DiclofenacN DicofolY DioxinY SubstancePHS? HBCDDY Heptachlor/HEY IbuprofenN BifenoxN PFOSY Quinoxyfen? TerbutrynN

10. water.europa.eu 2. Rationale for PHS status for new PS SubstanceRationale AclonifenPBT (?) DichlorvosNon-threshold carcinogen DicofolRecommended POP DioxinPBT HBCDDPBT, recommended POP HeptachlorPBT PFOSPBT, POP QuinoxyfenPBT (?)

11. water.europa.eu 3. Final technical steps Consider whether SCHER opinions necessitate revision of any EQS; revise where necessary. Consider whether the opinions affect proposals to list new substances: especially ibuprofen and quinoxyfen. Make final review of technical evidence regarding (PHS) status of the proposed and existing substances.