1. PFRA reporting – Output from test phase FD Drafting Group, Meeting 16 February 2011 Mette Wolstrup

2. Test phase – kick off Email sent to MS 19.01.2011 - three weeks testing Volunteer MS: FR, CZ, AT, UK (comments from AT, UK) -Additional comments received from FI

3. Tools and documents to be tested Database/schemas Database to xml conversion tool Desktop validation tool User Manual, v2.0 User Guide to the reporting schema v2.0 User Guide to reporting spatial data v2.0 Stylesheets Upload in cdrtest and QA's Ressource page: http://water.eionet.europa.eu/schemas/dir200760ec/resources/ http://water.eionet.europa.eu/schemas/dir200760ec/resources/

4. Outcome

5. Database CAUoM data in updated database? Import function in database

6. Database (2) AT: UOMcode in the PFRA schema should be prefilled with information from either WFD or the CAUOM schema. UK: Could Mandatory, Conditional, Optional be included in the field descriptions?

7. PFRA Schema UK: As with WFD, the attribute table should include a [Classified] field to allow member states to identify xml files as either: - Unclassified, available for general circulation - Confidential, available for EC reporting only

8. PFRA Schema (2) UK: Datatype of [DurationofFlood] be changed to allow decimals (for part days) UK: Possibility to include range in [Recurrence] and [Frequency]

9. PFRA Schema (3) UK: Fatalities and FatalitiesDescription have a 1:1 relationship with flood events so would be better placed either in the PFRA_FloodInformationArt4 table or in a table on their own. -> same for APSFR, 1 to 1 relationship with AreasofFloodRisk

10. PFRA Schema (4) AT: possible to report both FloodEventCode and/or NameofLocation

11. PFRA Schema (5) AT/UK: Unclear how to report Art13.1.a and b New annotation text: Yes/No code to indicate if article 13.1.a has been applied. If Yes has been chosen but no SpecificArea has been reported it is assumed that Article 13.1.a has been applied for the entire UoM.

12. PFRA Schema (6) AT: Only Source of flooding should be mandatory (table A1)

13. PFRA Schema (7) AT: Annotation text should be more clear for FloodEventCode. Unique code for the flood event - up to 40 characters in total. Only to be used if a polygon/line/point is reported to establish link between spatial feature (eg. polygon) and information in xml schema.

14. PFRA Schema (8) AT: Inconsistency in wording PFRA: Type of consequences APSFR: Type of potential consequences The element HumanHealth should follow the wording from List of flood types and consequences -> HumanHealth (Social)

15. Database to xml conversion tool AT/UK: both experienced problems with the DB to xml conversion – ghost tags and mapping levels – Atkins to correct the conversion tool.

16. Upload files in test environment, QA's, factsheets AT/UK: No errors when running QA's AT/UK: Factsheets ok AT/UK: No feedback generated and not possible to complete envelope.

17. Ressource page http://water.eionet.europa.eu/schemas/dir200760ec/resources/ AT: Missing links (corrected) AT: GIS Guidance (uploaded 11.02.2011)

18. GIS Guidance document

19. Short introduction to version 2.0 Map examples inserted for UOM Description and examples of maps to be shown in WISE on the basis of the reported information in the PFRA and APSFR schemas New templates added to be used when reporting spatial information in both PFRA and APSFR Description of the data behind the maps added (Data production)

20. Maps of the river basin district (RBD) or unit of management (UOM) at the appropriate scale including the borders of the river basins, sub-basins and, where existing, coastal areas, showing topography and land use

21. Maps showing if articles 4, 5 or 13.1(a) or (b) have been applied.

22. Areas with potential significant flood risk (APSFR schema)

23. Areas with potential significant flood risk (APSFR schema) shown together with applied Article

24. Map of river basin, sub-basins, coastal stretches or other areas where there has in the past been a significant flood event or where potential future significant floods could occur.

25. 3 new templates to be used when reporting PFRA and APSFR Attribute name ObligationTypeDescription EU_CD_FEMandatorystring (42)Unique code for the flood event - up to 40 characters in total as defined in the PFRA reporting schema (FloodEventCode). Codes MUST have a 1-to-1 relationship with further attribute data described in the related XML file. Attribute name ObligationTypeDescription EU_CD_FAMandatorystring (42)Unique code for the specific area - up to 40 characters in total as defined in the PFRA reporting schema (SpecificAreaCode). Codes MUST have a 1-to-1 relationship with further attribute data described in the related XML file. This shape file covers submissions for TransitionalMeasuresArt13.1.a or TransitionalMeasuresArt13.1.b. It will be derived from the schema by matching the SpecificAreaCode which Article is applied Areas are as a default option, assumed to be subject to article 4-5, but there would not be a need to ask for that information again. Attribute name ObligationTypeDescription EU_CD_FRMandatorystring (42)Unique EU code for the area of potential significant flood risk as defined in the APSFR reporting schema (APSFRCode). Codes MUST have a 1-to-1 relationship with further attribute data described in the related XML file.

26. Schema change

27. Past floods Added the possibility to report past floods under article 13.1.a and b in the PFRA schema to make it more intuitive and userfriendly

28. Report same area several times? FI: Is it required to report the same area (or line/point) several times if there are several flood events connected to the same location?

29. Next step

30. Timetable (preliminary, exact dates of further follow-up to be confirmed) January/February: Testing phase February/March - Corrections and new versions on ressource page 22.12.2011: Deadline for finalisation of PFRA