1. 2012 reporting on PoMs
Balázs Horváth
DG ENV Water Unit

2. Legal base PoMs in RBMPs
Article 11(7) WFD: measures in PoMs have to be made operational by December 2012
Article 15(3) WFD states that Member States shall, within three years of the publication of each river basin management plan, submit an interim report to the Commission describing progress in the implementation of the planned programme of measures.
Article 18(4) WFD: the Commission shall, by December 2015, publish an interim report addressed to the European Parliament and to the Council describing the progress in implementation of the programme of measures on the basis of the 2012 interim reports of the Member States

3. Purpose of 2012 reporting
Provide information on the progress in implementing the PoMs
concrete information to provide COM with a clear picture of which measures are being implemented, how, when and by whom
enable a good understanding of the steps that are being taken to achieve the WFD environmental objectives and to improve the status of water bodies – what is being done to improve the environment
allow comparing the efforts across the EU river basin districts and measure them
should be relatively simple and at the same time it should contain easily extractable information

4. Commission report based on 2012 reporting
COM intends to
compare the actual implementation with the PoMs of 2009
compare the implementation efforts in different MS and RBDs
extract some statistics to underpin these comparisons and assessments
make the information publicly available through the WISE

5. What the 2012 reporting is not
MS are not required to provide information on
the effectiveness of the measures,
how the environment is expected to improve (this has been reported in 2010 as part of the 2009 RBMP environmental objectives)
how the environment has improved in the mean time (this will be reported as part of the 2015 updated RBMP).
issues already reported in 2010 (although links to it are necessary)

6. What has happened to date?
Concept paper prepared and agreed in WG D October 2010
First draft of reporting sheet prepared
Drafting group formed – first meeting 24 February 2011
Revised reporting sheet circulated for written comment
Example indicators developed and internet survey launched in March – 36 answers from 15 MS
Information to WG D about the progress – 7 April
Reporting sheet V3 and sketch of schema agreed with Drafting Group – 8 April
WG D written comments incorporated in the V4 and presented to SCG

7. Difficulties of the exercise
Measures were reported by MS in different levels of detail
The right balance has to be achieved:
Reporting needs to be as flexible as possible to allow for different situations in different Member States – but still allowing for a minimum comparability
Commission report must be meaningful – and should be able to report on progress

8. Main new elements
Limit the information reported for single measures to a minimum qualitative indicator of progress (not started, ongoing, completed),
Identify a number of key types of measures for each plan for which structured information is requested, including quantitative indicators of relevance and progress in implementation,…
…in order to
limit the reporting effort by requesting basic qualitative information on the progress of all measures reported in 2010, considering that the total number of measures reported is in many cases high, in the order of hundreds, and
gather quantitative information for a number of key types of measures that will provide the bulk of the improvements towards achieving the WFD objectives.

9. Content of 2012 reporting No geographic information is expected
Basic measures [Art 11(3)(a)] - Text field
summary on the progress made in implementation, in particular aspects relevant for the implementation of the WFD
Overall quantitative information on the state of implementation should be reported if available
Other basic measures [Art 11(3)(b-l)] – measure level reporting (structure 1)
Supplementary or additional measures [Art 11(4) & 11(5)] – measure level reporting (structure 1)
Key types of measures – type of measure level reporting (structure 2)
Other information
Brief summary of the overall progress in implementing the POMs – Text field
Brief summary (optional) on how the measures are being financed, main achievements, progress and obstacles in securing the budget for the PoMs – Text field

10. Reporting of other basic measures and supplementary measures}
Measure 1 – Structure 1
M2 - Structure 1
M3 - Structure 1
M4 - Structure 1
M5 - Structure 1
M6 - Structure 1
M7 - Structure 1
M8 - Structure 1
M9 - Structure 1
M10 - Structure 1
M11 - Structure 1
M12 - Structure 1
M13 - Structure 1
M14 - Structure 1
M15 - Structure 1
M16 - Structure 1
M17 - Structure 1
M18 - Structure 1
M19 - Structure 1
M20 - Structure 1
M21 - Structure 1
M22 - Structure 1
M23 - Structure 1
M24 - Structure 1
Key Type of Measure 1 - Structure 2
Key
Types Of
Measures }
KTM2 - Structure 2 }
KTM3 - Structure 2
Reporting of other basic measures and
supplementary measures

11. Measure level reporting
Code (only for supplementary measures) of the measures as reported in 2010.
Name (only for supplementary measures) of the measures as reported in 2010.
Description (only for suppl. measures) of the measures as reported in 2010.
Responsibility: which authority/authorities is/are responsible for adoption and/or execution of the measure
Status of implementation of the measure (towards the end 2012)
Not started
Ongoing but with substantial delays
Ongoing and on track
Completed
Cost: cost of the measure estimated
Finance: description of how the action is going to be financed
Comments: any additional useful information or clarification (optional)
Hyperlink to further information (optional)

12. Key type of measure level reporting
Limited number of key types of measures developed
commonly used types of measures that are implemented in most of the basins.
they are flexible to accommodate diversity of situations.
Develop quantitative progress indicators
they are meaningful but as simple as possible.
preferably, they are based on the ones already in use in the MS to follow implementation
Reporting the key types of measures
In case the MS judges that the type of measure is a key one in the RBD, then it will report the additional information including the values for the indicators for those types of measures
For other than key types of measures possibility for MS to include their own quantitative progress indicators

13. Example key type of measure with indicators
Reduction of Point Source Pollution
Key Type of Measure 1: Construction or upgrades of wastewater treatment plants beyond the requirements of the Directive on Urban Waste Water Treatment (e.g. more advanced treatment than required in the UWWT Directive or constructions below the size threshold given in the UWWT Directive; please consider only WFD measures).
The three figures (“Not started”, “On-going” and “Completed”) need to be reported for at least one indicator and should reflect the total foreseen in the first RBMP cycle.
Indicator
Status estimated towards the end of 2012
Not started
On-going
Completed
Number of population equivalent covered by measures beyond the requirements of the UWWTD
Number of projects/measures[1]
Estimated Total Costs (€) of the measures
[1] This generic indicator “Number of projects/measures “ is possible to use only if measures reported refer to the detailed level of water body or groups of water bodies. It is not possible to use this indicator if measures refer to aggregated measures at the level of sub-unit or river basin district.

14. Key types of measures [1]
Construction or upgrades of wastewater treatment plants beyond the requirements of the Directive on Urban Waste Water Treatment
Reduce nutrient pollution in agriculture beyond the requirements of the Nitrates Directive
Reduce pesticides pollution in agriculture
Remediation of contaminated sites
Improving longitudinal continuity (e.g. establishing fish passes, demolishing old dams).
Improving hydromorphological conditions of water bodies other than longitudinal continuity (e.g. river restoration, improvement of riparian areas, removal of hard embankments, reconnecting rivers to floodplains, improvement of hydromorphological condition of transitional waters, etc.).
Improvements in flow regime and/or establishment of minimum ecological flow.

15. Key types of measures [2]
Water efficiency measures for irrigation (technical measures).
Progress in water pricing policy measures for the implementation of the recovery of cost of water services
from households
from industry
from agriculture
Advisory services for agriculture
Drinking water protection measures (e.g. establishment of safeguard zones, buffer zones etc.)
Research, improvement of knowledge base reducing uncertainty.
Measures for the phasing-out of emissions, discharges and losses of priority hazardous substances or for the reduction of emissions, discharges and losses of priority substances
Upgrades or improvements of industrial wastewater treatment plants (including farms) beyond the requirements of the IPPC Directive

16. Action
By whom
When
Development of concept paper including identification of compliance indicators
DG Env
Mid September 2010
Discussion of concept paper and agreement of working method and timetable
Working Group D
Meeting October 2010
Development of first draft of reporting sheet and schema
End December 2010
Circulation of first draft for written comment
January 2011
Ad-hoc meeting of Drafting Group to discuss first draft and comments (only if necessary)
February 2011
Production of final draft reporting sheet and schema
March 2011
Final discussion of the reporting sheet and schema at the WG meeting
April 2011
Final approval of reporting sheet and schema
SCG/ Water Directors
May 2011
Development of reporting tools including consultation and testing
Autumn 2011
Release of tools for the 2012 reporting
January 2012
Reporting
Member States
December 2012