1. Draft concept to assess quality of monitoring database
Agenda Item 7.2 :
Draft concept to assess quality of monitoring database
…from current situation to recommendations for the future
B.FRIBOURG-BLANC, IOW

2. Context and Objective
The monitoring-based ranking uses a big database:
14.5 million analyses on 1151 substances
4 Waterbody types
stations
28 countries
The quality of the provided data = responsibility of data provider
The assessment of analytical data quality is a difficult task
BUT: A learning by doing process
A need to steer future improvements
 a country specific approach

3. The approach Assessment of the data at three levels:
1. Quality of reporting
2. Quality of analyses
3. Quality by substance
Presentation of the results by country and at the complete database level
Short assessment + more detailed annexes

4. quality of reporting: overall
A commonly defined template
A software tool used by most data providers
A relatively low level of completeness (Q1 is lowest, Q6 highest):
Analyses with the lowest score
BUT samplings and stations higher
AND significant quantity of stations with scores 4 and 5

5. quality of reporting: the stations
- Uneven geographical distribution
- Some location errors: 2433 with wrong RBD
of which 1159 not in the reporting country
- Uneven waterbody type distribution

6. quality of reporting: the analyses
Uneven waterbody type distribution
Uneven matrix distribution
Uneven temporal distribution

7. quality of analyses
-Quality information reported

8. quality of analyses
-Analytical information reported

9. quality of analyses
-Analytical method reported
-Plausibility

10. quality by substance: Directive 2008/105/EC
performance criteria set in Directive 2009/90/EC: LoQ < 0,3 x EQS
Some substances with many analyses where no LoQ (red)
Some substances with many analyses where to high LoQ (red)
Some substances with significant part already complying

11. quality by substance: Directive 2008/105/EC
performance criteria set in Directive 2009/90/EC: LoQ < 0,3 x EQS

12. quality by substance: LoQ distribution (all data, by fraction)
LoQ value reflects the analytical method used
Wide distributions, from minimum to maximum found in the datasets
All substances ranking high or very high
A selection of substances of EU wide relevance

13. quality by substance: LoQ distribution (cyanides)
Summary statistics

14. quality by substance: LoQ distribution (cyanides)
Sediment <2mm
Whole water

15. quality by substance: LoQ distribution (Pentachlorophenol)
Summary statistics

16. quality by substance: LoQ distribution by country
Wide distribution (up to 10e11)
All substances monitored in >11 countries
28 countries,
percentage of their analyses in the class
5 classes
8 classes

17. quality by substance: LoQ distribution by country
One example of metal (copper)
One example of organic substance,
(1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene)

18. Main conclusions Future data collection will require:
additional collection rules (mandatory fields, checks…)
more quality information (LoD and LoQ, accreditation…)
Use of WISE and INSPIRE reference lists
Data providers are invited to have a thorough look at the report (end March) to:
Improve their analytical methods
Improve their data management
With in view future monitoring based ranking

19. Thanks for your attention…