1. Threshold Values rationalisation – way forward
Water Framework Directive Common Implementation Strategy – Working Group Groundwater
Johannes Grath (Umweltbundesamt GmbH-AT), Christoph Leitner (DG ENV, COM)

2. 1. Context and General information
Establishment, assessment and harmonisation of groundwater TVs
Report from the Commission in accordance with Article 3.7 of the Groundwater Directive 2006/118/EC on the establishment of groundwater threshold values:
A. Scheidleder 2012: Groundwater Threshold Values – In-depth assessment of the differences in groundwater threshold values established by Member States. Umweltbundesamt, Austria.
Threshold Values, Initial analysis of 2015 Questionnaire responses:
WGGW Malta, April 2017

3. Activities following the last WG GW meeting Oct. 2016 in Bratislava
The findings and conclusions were integrated in the draft TOR
Further comments received by mid November 2016 were integrated as well
Upload of final version on CIRCABC
Volunteers for the group: NL, UK, Eurogeosurvey, DK, CZ, MT, IT
Readyness for case studies expressed by: HU, LT, DK, IT
WGGW Malta, April 2017

4. Proposed procedure
Due to some other, additional urgent activities for the group (natural conditions, contribution to ATG 4.7, …) and limited resources of WG GW, the following stepwise approach in accordance with the TOR and the minutes of the last WG GW meeting is proposed:
Start with selected issues from objective 1 as outlined in the TOR
Main emphasis: existing information and general quality assessment test; pollutants causing the greatest risks and translating into poor status of GWBs
WGGW Malta, April 2017

5. Starting point: Objective 1 Terms of Reference
a more in-depth assessment for those pollutants causing the greatest risks and translating into poor status of GWBs considering results of 2nd RBMP (e.g. nitrate, inorganic substances occurring naturally e.g. arsenic, synthetic organic substances, etc.)
… Main emphasis shall be put on general quality assessment (GQA) test. With selected pollutants (as mentioned above), it should be analysed whether for that particular test the presentation of TVs provides comparable results.
WGGW Malta, April 2017

6. GQA-Test (CIS Guidance No
GQA-Test (CIS Guidance No. 18 on groundwater status and trend assessment
The reason for starting with TVs for GQA-test:
– the test does not require
receptor specific issues
consideration of dilution factors, attenuation rates etc.
 assumption: variability of TVs for this test – compared to others will be rather low, comparability should be better
WGGW Malta, April 2017

7. Available information on TVs – inventory by Tony Marsland (AmecFW) in 2015
Information collected in 2015 for GQA-test (by Tony Marsland, AmecFW - Report: Threshold Values, Initial analysis of 2015 Questionnaire responses):
TVs provided by 24 MS
Pollutants, presented in the report
Nitrate, Arsenic, Ammonium, Cadmium, Nickel – assessed information for the GQA-test see below; Chloride is mentioned in the report as well, but not specifically presented (pollutants in bold are from Annex II GWD)
WGGW Malta, April 2017

8. Summary information – CVs and TVs for GQA Test inventory by Tony Marsland (AmecFW) in 2015
17 MS provided TVs for 2nd RBMP
13 MS reported for GQA Test:
TV=CV=DWS
partly with excemptions for
synthetic substances
inorganic substances i.e. considering NBL
some substances consideration of EQS
2 MS reported for GQA Test:
TV = CV = 75 % DWS or EQS respectively
WGGW Malta, April 2017

9. Nitrate and Arsenic Nitrate:
Source: Tony Marsland, AmecFW - Report: Threshold Values, Initial analysis of 2015 Questionnaire responses
Nitrate:
- 19/20 (95%) MS are within range categories 35 – 50 mg/l
- 1/20 (5%) MS is within category 25 – 29.9 mg/l
Arsenic:
- 14/17 (82%) MS are within range categories 5 – 10 µg/l
- 3/17 (18%) MS are within range categories 10 – 20+ µg/l (NBL?)
WGGW Malta, April 2017

10. Ammonium
Source: Tony Marsland, AmecFW - Report: Threshold Values, Initial analysis of 2015 Questionnaire responses
Ammonium
11/16 (69 %) MS are within range categories – 0.5 mg/l
remark: some MS provided more than 1 TV – highest category < 2 mg/l (it is assumed due to NBL)
WGGW Malta, April 2017

11. Cadmium
Source: Tony Marsland, AmecFW - Report: Threshold Values, Initial analysis of 2015 Questionnaire responses
Cadmium
17/17 (100%) MS are within range categories <2 – 5 µg/l
remark: some MS provided more than 1 TV – highest category µg/l (it has to be assumed due to NBL)
WGGW Malta, April 2017

12. Nickel Nickel 10/10 (100%) MS are within range categories 15 – 20 µg/l
Source: Tony Marsland, AmecFW - Report: Threshold Values, Initial analysis of 2015 Questionnaire responses
Nickel
10/10 (100%) MS are within range categories 15 – 20 µg/l
remark: one MS provided more than 1 TV – highest category µg/l (it is assumed due to NBL)
WGGW Malta, April 2017

13. Further procedure Further procedure – subject to discussion:
Collect information, for which synthetic pollutants or other pollutants from Annex II, TVs for the GQA test were laid down by MS
Assessment of TVs for synthetic substances – in particular pesticides - and for other selected pollutants from Annex II List GWD
Presentation of results – in particular variability of TVs for GQA test compared to overall variability of TVs for all tests
Which information (concerning TVs) is available according to current reporting guidelines
Continuation of work, according to objectives outlined in the TOR for this activity
WGGW Malta, April 2017