1. WORKING GROUP on IMPLEMENTATION
contributions from ETC/ACC
Frank de Leeuw

2. WG Implemantation
..to support harmionised implementation of FWD, its DD and NECD by Member States.
Identify existing problems
develop guidance
streanline/harmonise reporting
representatives of MS, stakeholders and EEA 6/
contr to WG Impl

3. Activities so far: Action plans during alert situations
zones for protection of ecosystems and vegetation
AQ assessment around point sources
recommendations P&Ps (art 8.3; 8.4, annex IV of FWD) 6/
contr to WG Impl

4. 6/
contr to WG Impl

5. Review of first DD Commission service report (March 2004)
based on WG Impl report
informal questionnaire om implementation
Position paper PM10
summary report on 1DD Q2001/2002
results from contract on the use of AQ models
JRC ERLAP views on AQ monitoring (AQUILA) 6/
contr to WG Impl

6. Discussion items on review of 1DD
Zones
limit values
derogations
measuring strategy
measuring methods
modelling
measures 6/
contr to WG Impl

7. Changing networks? Hypotheses:
There is a shift towards more urban stations!!
The FWD has resulted in a more uniform monitoring strategy in EU Member States 6/
contr to WG Impl

8. Classification of stations6/
contr to WG Impl

9. Proxy variables 6/
contr to WG Impl

10. 6/
contr to WG Impl

11. 6/
contr to WG Impl

12. 6/
contr to WG Impl

13. 6/
contr to WG Impl

14. 6/
contr to WG Impl

15. 6/
contr to WG Impl

16. Conclusions Increasing number of stations but no change in fractions
large differences in monitoring strategy; FWD did not result (yet?) in more uniformity
DD monitoring requirements not in all MS realised ? 6/
contr to WG Impl