1. Groundwater Monitoring Groundwater Monitoring Kaan Tunçok Antalya, 2015 Module 2: Water Budget, Pressures and Impacts, Significant Water Management Issues, Monitoring, Characterization Report

2. Groundwater Resources  Millions of m 3 pumped every year: Monitored? Who? How?  100’s of thousands of users: Registered? Controlled?  10’s of thousands of wells/boreholes: Registered? Maintained? Info. about location, abstraction levels, water levels, water quality, formation, etc -  1000’s of sources of pollution: Location, nature & quantity of pollutants? aquifer vulnerability?  Many governing departments/institutions: Joint management ? Coordination / cooperation?

3. One way to make groundwater visible...  by MONITORING it, e.g: Monitoring groundwater level shows a declining water table – which allows water managers to obtain an appreciation of the status of the resource. Year-wise depletion of groundwater

4. Some Consequences of GW abstraction Normal consequences of any groundwater pumping When pumping is further increased Excessive pumping One way to make grdwater visible...(contd.)

5. Types of data for Groundwater Management DATA TYPEBASELINE DATA (from archives) TIME-VARIANT DATA (from field stations) Groundwater Occurrence & Aquifer Properties  hydrogeologic logs, grdwater levels, quality, etc.  well & aquifer pumping tests grdwater level monitoring grdwater quality monitoring Groundwater use  water well pump installations  Water use inventories  Population registers & forecasts  Irrigation energy consumption water well abstraction monitoring (direct/indirect) grdwater level variations Supporting Information  climatic data  land-use inventories  geologic maps/sections riverflow gauging meteorologic observations satellite land-use surveys

6. The Monitoring Cycle static & dynamic water levels, water quality Mgt question & monitoring objectives, e.g. trends & changes, impacts & risks, etc. Mgt of info. & actions Define actual info. needed, what for, wherefrom..? etc.

7. ring Effectiveness of groundwater monito ring....is improved by careful attention to:  network design  system implementation  data interpretation  data storage from past monitoring activities  accessibility of monitoring stations...  participatory monitoring amongst water users

8. Monitoring data Historic data reveals over-abstraction..

9. Many cities have experienced rapid growth of urban & industrial waste disposal to the ground.... Early warning of potential threats to Aquifer + Grdwater supply quality

10. .....thus, necessitating a focused groundwater quality management monitoring, using sampling piezometers. Early warning of potential threats to Aquifer + Grdwater supply quality

11. Network Design  objectives must be defined and program adapted accordingly  groundwater flow system must be understood  sampling locations and monitoring parameters must be selected by objectives System implementation  appropriately-constructed observation + abstraction wells must be used  field equipment + laboratory facilities must be appropriate to the objectives  a complete operational protocol + data handling system must be established  groundwater + surface water monitoring should be integrated where applicable Data interpretation  data quality must be regularly checked through internal and external controls  decision makers should be provided with interpreted management- relevant datasets  program should be periodically evaluated and reviewed Basic rules for a successful groundwater monitoring programme Network Design System implementation Data interpretation  objectives must be defined and program adapted accordingly  groundwater flow system must be understood  sampling locations and monitoring parameters must be selected according to objectives  appropriately-constructed observation + abstraction wells must be used  field equipment + laboratory facilities must be appropriate to the objectives  a complete operational protocol + data handling system must be established  groundwater + surface water monitoring should be integrated where applicable  data quality must be regularly checked through internal and external controls  decision makers should be provided with interpreted management-relevant datasets  program should be periodically evaluated and reviewed

12. Design of groundwater monitoring programmes

13. Monitoring Guidance for GW-GD 15 3 GENERAL PRINCIPLES 3.1 CONCEPTUAL MODELS AS BASIS FOR MONITORING 3.2 AQUIFER TYPES 3.3 GROUPING OF GROUNDWATER BODIES 3.4 INTEGRATED MONITORING 3.5 NETWORK REVIEW AND UPDATE 4 CHEMICAL STATUS AND TREND MONITORING 4.1 DESIGN OF THE SURVEILLANCE MONITORING PROGRAMME 4.1.1 Selection of surveillance monitoring determinands 4.1.2 Selection of representative surveillance monitoring sites 4.1.3 Monitoring frequency 4.2 DESIGN OF THE OPERATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAMME 4.2.1 Selection of operational monitoring determinands 4.2.2 Selection of representative operational monitoring sites 4.2.3 Monitoring frequency 5 QUANTITY MONITORING 5.1.1 Monitoring parameters 5.1.2 Selection of monitoring density 5.1.3 Monitoring frequency 6 PROTECTED AREA MONITORING 6.1 DRINKING WATER PROTECTED AREA MONITORING 7 PREVENT AND LIMIT MONITORING 8 ENSURING QUALITY OF MONITORING DATA 8.1 QUALITY REQUIREMENTS 8.2 QUALITY CONTROL 9 METHODS FOR SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS 10 REPORTING

14. Monitoring Programme Design  Article 5 characterisation and risk assessment procedure and conceptual model/understanding of GW  establish monitoring network representative for groundwater body  focus on phenomena affecting overall state of groundwater body.  Local scale pollution processes: target of different monitoring activities by authorities  local impacts not relevant unless evolution in t and x endangers environmental objectives  Consider three-dimensional nature of GW system, spatial and temporal variability, to determine location of monitoring sites and selection of appropriate site density  existing quality and/or quantity data (length, frequency, range of parameters)  construction characteristics of existing sites and abstraction regime  spatial distribution of existing sites compared to the scale of groundwater body  practical considerations relating to long-term access, security, health and safety.  Appropriate monitoring site types: understanding of objectives of monitoring and understanding of travel times and/or groundwater ages  Integrated monitoring: cost-efficient monitoring by using appropriate components of existing monitoring networks and operating integrated groundwater and surface networks

15. Conceptual models as basis for monitoring  regional conceptual model – an understanding of the factors at groundwater body scale that identifies the need to establish a monitoring network/point and how the data will be used;  local conceptual model – an understanding of the local factors influencing the behaviour, both in chemical and quantitative terms, of individual monitoring points.

16. Conceptual Model-Basis for Monitoring

17. Overview of monitoring objectives 1 ) Results will support characterisation in future RBMP cycles 2 ) Assumes new Groundwater Directive will require DWPA objectives to meet good status

18. What parameters and quality elements should be monitored? Groundwater quantitative status  Most appropriate parameters to monitor quantitative status will depend on conceptual model/understanding of the groundwater system.  spring flows or even base-flows in rivers may be more appropriate than the use of boreholes in low permeability fractured media  where the risks of failing to achieve good quantitative status are low and information from the surface water monitoring network can adequately validate this assessment.

19. Groundwater chemical status and trends  Where surveillance monitoring is required, the Directive requires that a core set of parameters be monitored. These parameters are oxygen content, pH value, conductivity, nitrate and ammonium.  Other monitored parameters for both surveillance and operational monitoring must be selected on the basis of (a)the purpose of the monitoring programme, (b)the identified pressures and (c)the risk assessments made using a suitable conceptual model/understanding of the groundwater system and the fate and behaviour of pollutants in it.

20. How often should monitoring be undertaken? Groundwater quantitative status  Most appropriate monitoring frequency will depend on conceptual model/understanding of the groundwater system and the nature of the pressures on the system.  Frequency chosen should allow short-term and long-term level variations within the groundwater body to be detected.  Where monitoring is designed to pick up seasonal or annual variations, the timing of monitoring should be standardised from year to year.

21. Groundwater chemical status  Guidance documents provide examples of frequencies that Member States have found appropriate in a number of hydrogeological circumstances and in relation to different pollutant behaviours.  No minimum duration for groundwater chemical status surveillance programme is specified.  Surveillance monitoring is only specified in the Directive for bodies at risk or which cross a boundary between Member States.  However, to adequately supplement and validate Annex II risk assessment procedure, validation monitoring will also be needed for bodies, or groups of bodies, not identified as being at risk.

22. Methodologies applied for the establishment of threshold values

23.  126 groundwater threshold values established at Member State level  79 at Groundwater body level  Germany and Belgium established on administrative level (region), an additional level to GWD Article 3.2.  15 Member States established all their threshold values at the same level,  9 Member States established their threshold values at different levels.  Most Member States procedure for threshold values considered:  both protection of associated aquatic and dependent terrestrial ecosystems (15)  uses and functions of groundwater – mainly drinking water use (23)  4 Member States took regard of saltwater intrusion, where this problem was relevant.

24. Methodologies applied for the establishment of threshold values  15 Member States based on environmental quality objectives - international or national (e.g. EQS Directive 2008/105/EC)  Drinking water standards as basis of threshold values, EU Drinking Water Directive (98/83/EC7) or international (e.g. WHO)  4 Member States mentioned Directive 2008/105/EC6 for establishing environmental quality standards.  2 Member States did not consider environmental objectives due to no risk or non-substantial impact;  2 other Member States this is due to limited knowledge about groundwater-surface water interactions.  1 Member State reported on transboundary cooperation within the establishment of threshold values.

25. Pollutants/indicators for which at least 10 Member States have established threshold values, including the range of threshold values

26. 5 Member States reported more stringent threshold values for nitrates than groundwater quality standard (Annex I.1 GWD (50 mg/l)) Range from 18 mg/l to 50 mg/l –

27. 6 Member States - threshold values for 36 different active substances in pesticides, below the quality standard of 0.1 μg/l. (0.0001 μg/l to 0.1 μg/l) 1 Member State reported a stricter threshold value (0.375 μg/l) than in GWD for total pesticides (0,5 μg/l). 20 Member States established threshold values in total for 106 substances which do not belong to the Annex I (nitrates and pesticides) and II substances of the GWD. 62 belong to the group of synthetic substances.

28. Pollutants posing risk to more than 100 groundwater bodies or causing poor status to more than 50 groundwater bodies in Europe