1. EXPERT GROUP ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS (EG-EQS)
NOTES
1. PLACE, DATE AND EVENT NAME
1.1. Access the slide-set place, date and event name text box beneath the JRC logo from the Slide Master.
1.2. Do not change the size nor the position of that text box.
1.3. Replace the mock-up texts for the place (“Place”), the date (“dd Month YYYY”) and the event name (“Event Name”) with your own texts.
1.4. Set it in MetaPlus Book Roman, if you own the typeface. Otherwise, keep the original typeface – Arial.
1.5. Keep the original flush-left justification.
1.6. Keep the original font colour (white).
1.7. Keep the original font body size (7 pt) and the text on one single line.
2. SLIDE NUMBER
2.1. The slide number on the banner’s lower right-hand side is automatically generated.
3. SLIDES
3.1. Duplicate the first slide as needed.
3.2. Do not change the size nor the position of the slide’s text box.
3.3. Try not to place more text on each slide than will fit in the given text box.
3.4. Replace the mock-up heading text (“Joint Research Centre (JRC)”) with your own text heading.
3.5. Set it in Eurostile Bold Extended Two or in Helvetica Rounded Bold Condensed, if you own one of these typefaces. Otherwise, keep the original typeface – Arial.
3.6. Keep the original flush-left justification.
3.7. Keep the original font colour (100c 80m 0y 0k).
3.8. Keep the original font body size (28 pt) and the heading on one single line whenever possible. Reduce the font body size if needed.
3.9. Replace the mock-up text (“The European Commission’s Research-Based Policy Support Organisation)”) with your own text.
3.10. Set it in MetaPlus Book Roman, if you own the typeface. Otherwise, keep the original typeface – Arial.
3.11. Keep the original flush-left justification.
3.12. Keep the original font colour (100c 80m 0y 0k). Use black if you need a second colour.
3.13. Keep the original font body size (22 pt) or reduce it if unavoidable.
3.14. Replace the EU-27 map mock-up illustration with your own illustration(s).
3.13. Try to keep your illustration(s) right- and top- or bottom-aligned with the main text box whenever possible.
EXPERT GROUP ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS (EG-EQS)
Deriving Quality Standards for Priority Substances of the EU Water Framework Directive
Geneviève Deviller
European Chemicals Bureau-Toxicology and Chemical Substances (TCS) Unit
WG E meeting 3rd March 2008
NOTES
1. PLACE, DATE AND EVENT NAME
1.1. Access the slide-set place, date and event name text box beneath the JRC logo from the Slide Master.
1.2. Do not change the size nor the position of that text box.
1.3. Replace the mock-up texts for the place (“Place”), the date (“dd Month YYYY”) and the event name (“Event Name”) with your own texts.
1.4. Set it in MetaPlus Book Roman, if you own the typeface. Otherwise, keep the original typeface – Arial.
1.5. Keep the original flush-left justification.
1.6. Keep the original font colour (white).
1.7. Keep the original font body size (7 pt) and the text on one single line.
2. SLIDE NUMBER
2.1. The slide number on the banner’s lower right-hand side is automatically generated.
3. SLIDES
3.1. Duplicate the first slide as needed.
3.2. Do not change the size nor the position of the slide’s text box.
3.3. Try not to place more text on each slide than will fit in the given text box.
3.4. Replace the mock-up heading text (“Joint Research Centre (JRC)”) with your own text heading.
3.5. Set it in Eurostile Bold Extended Two or in Helvetica Rounded Bold Condensed, if you own one of these typefaces. Otherwise, keep the original typeface – Arial.
3.6. Keep the original flush-left justification.
3.7. Keep the original font colour (100c 80m 0y 0k).
3.8. Keep the original font body size (28 pt) and the heading on one single line whenever possible. Reduce the font body size if needed.
3.9. Replace the mock-up text (“The European Commission’s Research-Based Policy Support Organisation)”) with your own text.
3.10. Set it in MetaPlus Book Roman, if you own the typeface. Otherwise, keep the original typeface – Arial.
3.11. Keep the original flush-left justification.
3.12. Keep the original font colour (100c 80m 0y 0k). Use black if you need a second colour.
3.13. Keep the original font body size (22 pt) or reduce it if unavoidable.
3.14. Replace the EU-27 map mock-up illustration with your own illustration(s).
3.13. Try to keep your illustration(s) right- and top- or bottom-aligned with the main text box whenever possible.

2. EG-EQS Sub Group for Standards setting Outline
Role of the sub group
Organisation of the sub group
Progress reports
Future planning

3. Role of the sub group for Standards setting
Revise the methodology for EQS setting
• based on existing guidance (Lepper 2005)
take account of the scientific committee comments (SCTEE, 2004) and gaps identified by INERIS (Bonnomet and Alvarez, 2006)
consistent with EU TGD (2003) and incorporate REACH new guidance (RIPs) or highlight any deviations and their significance
take note of other documents e.g. SETAC Workshop on Standards 2006
The role of the ORG_WB sub group is …
The sub-group is made of 13 participants having expertise mainly in chemistry, ecotoxicology and risk assessment in fresh and marine waters. They belong to academies or to the industry sector. Tatiana is the Temporary Rapporteur up to now.

4. Role of the sub group for Standards setting
Deliverables
• Technical Guidance Document for EU-wide and national EQS derivation to be reviewed by scientific committee
EQS for the list of priority substances for Water, Sediment and Biota

5. EQS setting sub group organisation Drafting groups
Themes
Rapporteurs
Members
General issues
K. Romijn
P. Whitehouse
J Jagger, A Puig, A Berends, C
Stevens, H Clausen, Y Aujolet, H
Piha, A Paya -
Perez
Metals
Water/Sediment/Biota
H. Clausen
K Delbeke, F Van Assche, J
Fridmanis, D Sheahan, K
Johansson, P Lepper, M Sobanska,
K Daginnus, B Brown
Organics
Water Biota
(T. Netzeva)
V Kliment, E Hahlbeck, D. Schudoma
L Mrafkova, D Van Wijk, K Mots,
A Ilchena, C Pagotta, L Vinas, M
Linderoth, A James,
Sediments
M. Babut
I Simensen, V Marti, B Kolar, T
Ten Hulscher, W Rodinger, W de
Coen
Grouping
substances
to set EQS
K. Daginnus
N Johansson, M. Crane, L.Carlsen,
N. Djemel, A.M. David
M. Janssen
G. Deviller

6. Progress report DG1 General issues
Criteria to develop EQSs for water, sediment and biota
decision tree based on physico-chemical properties, persistence and bioaccumulation (and availability of ecotox data?)
Data issues
Minimum data requirements for sediment and biota; Use of Field and mesocosm data; Review criteria for QA of data – different for ‘critical’ and ‘supporting’ data? Fresh water (FW) vs. salt waters (SW) datasets for both FW and SW EQSs?
High levels of uncertainty
Extrapolation techniques allow (AF/SSD); how to deal with high AFs? Trigger for further data collection like in risk assessment? Use only as advisory or guideline?
Guidance on implementing standards
This first results of the overview on the existing methodology allowed us to identified some important unresolved issues.
Based on this exercise and considering further input from the expert received in the mean time we propose a draft framework for the group which is still open for discussions. The draft framework intend to select the more relevant issues to be address according to their impact on the development of the EQS, to identify the relevant literature and collaborations for each issue.

7. Progress report DG2-Metals: Water, Sediment and Biota
Inorganic metals (and transformation to organometallics)
Criteria for triggering the need for water, sediment and biota EQS
Metal bioavailability in water and sediment: dependence to quality parameters, speciation and BLM models, possible approaches to integrate bioavailability in setting EQS and to assess sediment toxicity
Natural background levels in water, sediment and biota compartments?
Metal uptake, accumulation, biomagnification and secondary poisoning
INERIS questionnaire summary report (2007): 21 MS’s send monitoring data corresponding to the 2000/2006 period. Among them 6 MS monitored chemical in biota mainly FI,FR and ES and the number of substances monitored by those countries are indicated in brackets. Substances currently monitored in biota are metals, pesticides and other organic hydrophobic compounds but no methodology is given.
We expect to get more information from the new data collection made by INERIS: 9 MS have submitted data so far.
In order to identify relevant substances for secondary poisoning we think a literature overview should be performed on the relative importance of the food and the water exposure on the toxic effect observed in the organisms.
Identification of substances should give us also information to define a trigger value to derive QS in biota instead of water. In the current methodology only the BCF is taken into account and it is questioned if other properties should also be included as trigger criteria's. Some of them have been mentioned: water solubility, surface tension or ionisation. The domain approach like for example the Substance property domain approach from Wania et al and other modelling techniques could be used for this issue
This issue have also been prioritize by the General group so we intend to discuss with that group to establish a collaboration. We also belive that the output from the EG Prioritisation group will be very useful to answer those questions.

8. Progress report DG3-Organics: Water and Biota
Criteria for triggering the need for biota EQS
monitoring feasibility, trigger values for biaccumulation…
Monitoring in biota
appropriate indicator organisms for different EU aquatic systems
Toxic effect on Pelagic species
water versus food exposures and applicability of Critical Body Burden (CBB) methodology to set EQS
Improvement of Bioconcentration, Bioaccumulation and Food Web models
High AFs for secondary poisoning assessment of Top predators and Humans review of the Canadian and US-EPA methodologies
It have to be decide if the monitored Biota should only be an integrator of water concentration including passive sampler or also a prey entering the food web to assess the risk of secondary poisoning for the Pelagic species, Top predators and/or Humans
It have to be kept in mind that the indicator organisms will be different in different European aquatic ecosystem. We believe that the chemical monitoring should comply with the biological monitoring strategies in order to reduce the biota sampling.
Current situation: few organisms (e.g. Fish, shellfish and seabird eggs) and scarce standardised analytical methods (metals, PAH, PCB, other organic contaminants).
Literature: INERIS data collection/ Draft Guidance on surface water chemical monitoring under the WFD/ OSPAR JAMP and HELCOM Guidelines for marine water which are the most developped for monitoring in biota and proposed different sampling stategies according to the information needed/ EU REBECCA project which intend to establish links between ecological and chemical status of surface waters
dentified collaboration: EG EQS ORG_Sediment/ EG EQS Metals but also already at this stage theChemical and Biological Monitoring groups under the WFD in order to develop a realistic methodology for biota monitoring

9. Progress report DG4-Organics: Sediments
Refers to the bottom sediment
Criteria to trigger the need of EQS for sediment
Current monitoring practices among member states
Review of existing methodologies for deriving sediment EQS
Guidance on sediment quality assessment

10. Progress report DG5-Grouping of substances to set EQSs
How to group substances? – analysis of chemicals legislation (e.g. REACH)
Possible Application of non-testing Methods in setting EQSs
How to set EQS for multi-constituent substances such as UVCBs (Unknown or Variable Composition, Complex Reaction Products, and Biological Materials)? e.g. Hydrocarbon Block Method for petroleum substances
How to group substances by their toxicological properties?

11. Guidance on drafting sections for EQS Guidance by UK
EG-EQS Planning
May 2007
Nov 2007
EG-EQS Kick-off meeting
2nd EG-EQS meeting
Guidance first draft
Rapporteurs meeting
3rd EG-EQS meeting
March 2008
June 2008
Sept 2008
Timescales
Guidance on drafting sections for EQS Guidance by UK
Source documents/ Organisation of text (RIPs template)/ Writing style/ Editorial matters

12. The END
Questions?