1. Summary of replies to the streamlining questionnaire Agnieszka Romanowicz DG ENV B1

2. General overview Replies received so far: 24 MS +Switzerland DK,FI,MT are still missing Very detail replies that are helping understand complexity of monitoring at the MS level

3. 1. Institutional setup 1.1. As regards water monitoring under WFD, Nitrates Directive and SOE, please explain who is responsible for a) undertaking the monitoring b) data collection and preparation c) reporting

4. Who is responsible for undertaking the monitoring Governmental institutions at national or regional level (including option of subcontracting) Other statutory organisations Research institutes Consultants - tendering One national monitoring programme vs. different national monitoring programmes Samples sent to other MS for analysis

5. Who is responsible for reporting Use of one database does not guarantee that the delivered data are the same under different reporting Lack of coordination of data at national level

6. In case there are different organizations involved at each of the steps of the process is there a coordination mechanism in place? If yes, how is the consistency between the reported data ensured? The same protocols for sampling and analysis, certified labs. Checks of data at different steps Coordination between reporting if different organisations involved Coordination at the regional level but not at the MS level No coordination Improvement is needed N/A  no coordination?

7. 2. Streamlining:

8. Would your Member State support the process of streamlining reporting falling under the three reporting streams WFD, NiD and SOE, if not already in place? Already in place Technical comments, but positive Depending on the final proposal How the differences will be dealt with? No to streamlining of monitoring programmes but yes to data reporting streamlining Reporting should be kept separately

9. 3. Monitoring networks

10. What is the overlap of monitoring stations under WFD, NiD and SOE? One monitoring network A mixed setup – with some overlap or no overlap Monitoring at regional level Specific monitoring programmes used for some reporting or used during specific year Changes to the network in progress Overall conclusion: large overlap of most monitoring points.

11. What is the current status of monitoring network(s) used for reporting under WFD, NiD and SOE? Monitoring networks/programmes in place Revisions/changes due to: technical rezones, new programme in place Changes to one monitoring network, two, all Changes to specific network (GW, SW, costal) Note: figure represents monitoring network(s) not MS

12. If there are any changes envisaged in the future, could you indicate what type of changes are planned? Harmonization/streamlining of WFD, NiD, and SOE Coastal networks: compliance with WFD Better compliance with WFD Possible changes after completion of River Basin management plans in WFD More representative monitoring stations for surface waters and groundwater for NiD Integration and decrease of monitoring points because of budgetary reason Change due to Marine Directive implementation Possible changes due to external factors: technical development, land ownership

13. Next steps Note for the Water Directors –Summary of the replies –Based on the analysis and discussion between DG ENV and the EEA: suggestion for a work on integrated guidelines for three reporting streams –But keeping in mind: Obligatory vs. Voluntary reporting Looking for synergies Need for flexibility Keeping the time line i.e. ND trend analysis, support to CSI.