Water Framework Directive (WFD) - Status for Norway

Transcription

1 Water Framework Directive (WFD) - Status for Norway Jon Lasse Bratli, Climate and pollution agency 5 th NORDIC WFD CONFERENCE Iceland september 2012

2 Norway and the WFD (the long and winding road) Directive adopted in EU December Regarded in Norway as EEArelevant in Full Norwegian participation in CIS, incl. the intercalibration Part of Norwegian legislation- separate water regulation - December 2006 Part of the EEA-agreement in Sept 2007 Inclusion of the directive in the EEA-agreement approved by the Norwegian Parliament - February (St. prp. 75)

3 What does this mean? Deadlines 8 years delayed First planning cycle is voluntary 29 selected water areas Second planning cycle in line with Member States

4 Status for most relevant articles: Coordination of administrative arrangements within river basin districts (Art. 3) Environmental objectives (Art. 4) Characteristics of river basin districts (Art. 5) Monitoring (Art. 8) Recovery of costs for water services (Art. 9) Programmes of measures (Art. 11) River basin management plans (Art.13)

5 Coordination of administrative arrangements within river basin districts (Art. 3) National competent authority : Ministry of the Environment (2004) River Basin Authorities: The County Governor (2006) 9 river basin districts River basin authorities: From the County Governor to the County Municipalities (2008) 11 river basin districts + 5 running to SE and FI

6 WFD organization in Norway 11 River Basin Districts 105 Sub- Districts

7 Water management - organisation Government, Parliament : Coordinated policy Ministry of Environment Ministry of Petroleum and Energy Ministry of Health and Social Affairs Min. of Agriculture Min. of Transp. & Comm. Min. og Fisheries Min. of Local Gov. & Reg. Dev. etc. SFT (Poll. Contr. Auth.) DN (Nature Management NVE Wat.Res. and Energy Adm. Board of Health Norw. Food Safety Auth. County Governor (18) Regional Off. (6) County Offices (18) Reg. offices Regional Offices County Municipality (19) Prim. municipality (435) Local Health Offices Local offices Municipal- and County planning : Coordination

8 Integrated water management? Does that mean the we have to work together?

9 WFD organization in Norway

10 Group of directorates (agencies) WHAT coordination on directorate level arrange for good cooperation and within the RBD s HOW guidances and tools competence seminars, conferences exchange of experiences advice to the group of ministries (Min. Env.) coordinate participation in CIA

11 Working groups under the group of directorates (10 WGs) guidances produced, often late The procedure of approval is heavy, three levels Aim: the right guidance to the right time. 2 guidances ready. New guidance on Planning process and organisation. Update of guidances (characterisation, measures etc.) Other topics: Protected areas, Art 4.7, climatic change

12 Vannportalen (DN): News, Info Guidance Regional pages Visitor each month: Autumn 2008: over Spring 2010: over Electronical tools Vann-nett (NVE): Data from sectors involved Generates reports and statistics Light-version with photographies of WB. Reports to ESA in the future

13 Environmental objectives (Art. 4) SVÆRT GOD GOD MODERAT DÅRLIG SVÆRT DÅRLIG Shift from discharge goals to environmental goals Foto: Marianne Gjørv

14 Classification systems SFT-systems from 1989, 1992, 1997 General water quality, pollution «grade», user objectives No water types, few biological quality elements New WFD class. system in 2009 Revised system early in 2013, intercal. types, new Norw. types User objectives

15 The Climate and Pollution Agency as a sector authority following up Art 4.7 Letter and memo to the Ministry of the Environment dec stating how to deal with Art 4.7 Art 4.7 covers all applications - new and altered permits Our application form and template is adjusted to cover Art 4.7 Key questions to the applicant: Which waterbody(ies) is the recipient? What is the present status for the WB - relevant quality elements How will the planned discharge/outlet influence the chemical and ecological status? Will it change class? SVÆRT GOD GOD MODERAT DÅRLIG SVÆRT DÅRLIG

16 Characteristics of river basin districts (Art. 5) Worked with characterisation since 2003/2004 Full characterisation of the whole country, deadline 1. July 2012 Some differences in view possibly at risk will be phased out - continuing until 1. May 2013 Risk on the basis of chemical status is not very much emphasized Central job on groundwater Economic analysis: recovery of water services municipal sewage Trend analysis

17 Pressures on water bodies in Norway The 10 most important pressures on watercourses in Norway Hydropower Acid rain Agricultural runoff Runoff from scattered houses Invasive species Runoff from urban areas Pollution form sewage plants Polluted sediments Flood protection Aquaculture

18 Påvirkninger i innsjø pr august 2012 oppgitt i antall vannforekomster Vannkraftsregulering Langtransportert forurensning Fremmede arter Landbruksavrenning Spredte avløp Vandringshinder Avløp Vannforsyning Annen påvirkning Moderat Stor Svært stor Annen diffus avrenning Biologisk påvirkning Avrenning byer/tettsteder Avrenning fra transport Vannuttak fiskeoppdrett Gruveavrenning

19 Risk assessment pr 23. sept. 2012

20 Monitoring (Art. 8) The regional programmes for monitoring, including surveillance, operational and investigative monitoring, will be delayed from the end of 2012 to the end of 2013 A template for the regional programmes is made and sent to the RBDA and the County Governors Working group on monitoring (group of directorates) will make a suggestion for the surveillance monitoring The County Governors will together with the sectors and municipalities suggest the operational and investigative monitoring

21 COMs comments to many countries: «The monitoring effort appears to be governed in some cases by a fixed amount of resources available from the start. Given the fact that measures to be applied as a result of the monitoring results are much more expensive than the monitoring programmes, the cost effectiveness of this approach is doubtful as it may lead to the application of the wrong measures. This issue is more worrying in cases where the lack of confidence in monitoring or status assessment is given as a reason to delay the achievement of the WFD objectives». Tildelt EØS-prop (justert etter forv. reformen) «Etterslep»

22 Lack in monitoring and research Do we have enough capacity and competence?

23 Recovery of costs for water services (Art. 9) Perhaps the most difficult article not decided upon Climate and pollution agency and Directorate for Nature Management will give our Ministry some recommendations Interpretation of water services tends to be wider than «some» other countries: Not only water supply and waste water treatment But, in doubt if the time is right for more incentive pricing or a new water tax Should be differentiated depending on water status Should cover most large sectors (water supply/treatment, industy, regulation, agriculture) Should be collected regionally and used on water measures within the region

24 Programmes of measures (Art. 11) and River basin management plans (Art.13) - Make a common plan to reach common objectives!

25 Contact with ESA Assessment with pros and cons to our first voluntary plans Not official yet but not very surprising we know our weak spots Complaint from several NGOs to ESA on the setting of objectives concerning hydropower rivers and lakes.

26 Two tasks 1. Implement the approved PoMs and plans 2. Prepare for the next plan (2015)

27 All sectors are responsible Royal resolution from 2006: The involved authorities responsibility for legislation and instruments are not changed 22: The sectors have within their own management areas the responsibility for reviewing: Basis for the objective setting Proposals of the measures

28 Klif as a sector Licences to large industries, urban wastewater/aquaculture/agriculture delegated Licensing must take the water regulation into account Art. 4.7 new activities Renew the licences if they include priority substances Letters to about 100 companies possible measures

29 The Climate and Pollution Agency as a sector authority following up adopted plans/measures and reviewing the next A letter is sent to the Ministry of the Environment stating how to deal with adopted and new plans/measures Our measures are singled out from the adopted POMs Some measures will be reviewed in more detail and necessary permits will be changed The Poll. Contr. Act gives wide opportunities to alter permits New measures will be reviewed as input to the next planning period

30 Interim report 2012 The measures should be operational by 2012 County municipality (RBDA) as an accountant All sectors are now reporting to RBDA

31 Reporting on measures from the sectors to RBDA

32 Significant water management issues 11 regional reports are sent out from the RBDA for comments The characterization is much of the basis for the hearing All sent out in time (1. July 2012) earlier than other countries? Based on a guideline from the group of directorates

33 Summing up Challenges: Resources for monitoring and process Unusual for sectors and problem owners -working together at local and regional level Satisfied with: Local water areas (sub-catcments) with project leaders Plans anchored to practical politics at three levels (local, regional and central)

34 Thank you!