1. NE ATLANTIC GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP (NEA GIG)
GIG Co-ordinator: Dave Jowett from the Environment Agency (England and Wales) UK
Support will be provided in kind by the EA and SEPA in the UK supports the work with a project secretary when needed

2. EXPECTED OUTCOMES from NEA-GIG
Agreement of the common intercalibration method/metric for the individual biological quality elements leading to the selection of a chosen option for intercalibration as specified in the WG2A Ecostat document “Guidance on the Intercalibration Process”
Collection of data for the chosen method/metric across the GIG
Agreement on recommendations for common reference conditions for the biological quality elements for each common European Intercalibration type

3. EXPECTED OUTCOMES cont.
Agreement on recommendations for the boundary setting protocol to identify the high/good and good/moderate boundaries for the chosen method/metric for the biological quality elements
Interim reports on progress from the GIG expert quality element sub-groups to the GIG Co-ordinator. Interim reports from the GIG Co-ordinator to JRC and on to WG2A Ecostat
Final type-specific report from the GIG including EQR boundary values

4. ORGANISATION and working methods
The NEA GIG covers 11 countries, Portugal, Spain, France, UK, Ireland, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Sweden and Norway. EEA is also represented.
All members have appointed a national lead contact
GIG meetings will be called as required, initially just before each reporting deadline from the GIG to JRC and WG2A Ecostat
Most of the work will be done in informal sub-groups of the main GIG and be responsible for the biological quality elements (benthic invertebrates, plants (phytoplankton, macroalgae and angiosperms) and fish (only mandatory in transitional waters)). These groups will meet in accordance to the overall timetable

5. Development of discussion papers
The GIG and its expert sub-groups will be responsible for producing discussion papers. The expert sub-groups will produce progress reports, which will be combined into overall GIG reports by the GIG Co-ordinator
The initial conclusions from the sub-groups during the first GIG meeting were as follows (note that not all countries were represented in the sub-groups):

6. Benthic Invertebrates
Concluded that no common monitoring system was in place in all GIG countries. (Option 1).
Agreed to test the use of the AZTI Marine Biotic Index (AMBI) as a common metric and if it is suitable to calibrate each member states assessment systems against it. (Option 2).
Agreed that the AMBI index could only initially be applied to coastal waters and high salinity areas within transitional waters. The index may be developed further to apply on lower salinity areas but other metrics may have to be considered.
Agreed that testing of other assessment systems should take place at a selection of sites across the GIG. (Option 3).
The overall approach will be a hybrid of Options 2 and 3.

7. Plants (Phytoplankton, macroalgae and angiosperms)
Concluded that no common monitoring system was in place in all GIG countries. (Option 1).
Agreed that chlorophyll could be used as a common metric. However different monitoring systems are in place for chlorophyll in member states so initially data would be assessed individually and then compared. (Option 3). It may be possible to come to a common agreement on assessment criteria e.g. using the OSPAR Comprehensive Procedure and agree common boundary criteria. (Option 2). So the overall approach for chlorophyll is likely to be a hybrid of Options 2 and 3.
Further work is required to agree approaches to intercalibration of phytoplankton species and macroalgae and angiosperm assessment systems.

8. Fish (transitional waters)
Concluded that no common monitoring system was in place in all GIG countries. (Option 1).
Identified four common metrics, species richness, number of estuarine resident species, number of diadromous species and number of marine juvenile species. (Option 2).
No common metric was available which included abundance of species. Member states own methods of assessing abundance would have to be initially used. (Option 3).
Identified that there was scope to agree a common sampling strategy and that the four agreed metrics could be combined into a new common index. There is a possibility of developing an Option 1 approach in this area.

9. FINANCING THE PROJECT
Member States will cover the costs of attending GIG and sub-group meetings and any costs they incur producing the required outcomes
Volunteers will be sought to host both full GIG meetings and any sub-group meetings required. The hosts will incur costs for any meeting venues, refreshments and if possible at least one dinner during the meetings. Attendees will be required to fund their own travel and hotel accommodation

10. 2-3 June 2004
First GIG meeting held in The Hague, Netherlands. GIG co-ordinator confirmed (Dave Jowett, EA, UK).
July 2004
Progress report made to WG2A Ecostat meeting, Ispra, Italy.
July-Sept 2004
Produce first draft workplan (GIG Co-ordinator) and send to JRC. Benthic Inverts sub-group meets Sweden September
Agrees option and common metrics
Agrees data collection and analysis requirements
Agrees workplan for sub-group
Output reported to GIG Co-ordinator
October 2004
Progress report made to WG2A Ecostat meeting, Ispra, Italy. Plants sub-group meets UK October
COAST expert group meeting October Edinburgh UK.

11. Nov 2004-Jan 2005
Fish sub-group meets UK November
Agrees option and common metrics
Agrees data collection and analysis requirements
Agrees workplan for sub-group
Output reported to GIG Co-ordinator
GIG workplan revised as result of sub-group meetings (GIG Co-ordinator)
Sub-groups continue to liaise, review boundary criteria, collect data and agree reference conditions.
February 2005
Full GIG meeting Bordeaux, France (tbc)
Report GIG progress on boundary setting protocol, reference conditions and data requirements to JRC (GIG Co-ordinator).
March 2005
Progress report made to WG2A Ecostat meeting, Ispra, Italy.

12. March-Aug 2005
Sub-groups continue to liaise to:
Collate data sets to apply boundary setting protocol for all types
Apply boundary setting protocol for all types (including setting values for reference conditions and good ecological status boundary values for common metrics or national metrics
Identify intercalibration sites representing agreed class boundaries (all options) and start compiling data for assessing comparability between Member States using those sites
Collate data sets relating common metrics with Member State’s national metrics and propose EQR values for national metrics using these data
September 2005
Full GIG meeting (tbc)
Report GIG progress on application of boundary setting protocol and identification of intercalibration sites representing agreed class boundaries to JRC (GIG Co-ordinator).
October 2005
Progress report made to WG2A Ecostat meeting, Ispra, Italy.

13. Oct 2005-Jan 2006
Sub-groups continue to liaise to:
Finalise data collection, review boundary setting protocol, develop EQRs and evaluate progress with chosen option.
February 2006
Report GIG progress on application of boundary setting protocol and identify inconsistencies within the GIG to JRC (GIG Co-ordinator)
Progress report made to WG2A Ecostat meeting, Ispra, Italy.
Feb-May 2006
Sub-groups continue to liaise to resolve any outstanding issues, inconsistencies and agree final boundary setting rules, EQRs, and agree final intercalibration site list.

14. May-June 2006
Final full GIG meeting
Sub-groups present type specific reports including EQR boundary values and identified sites representing good status boundaries
Final GIG report sent to JRC (GIG Co-ordinator)
Final report to WG2A Ecostat meeting, Ispra Italy.

15. NEA GIG Timeline
NEA GIG Timeline