WFD Stakeholder Meeting 4 May 2006: Classification/Environmental Standards. Rob Hitchen WFD Team, Defra

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "WFD Stakeholder Meeting 4 May 2006: Classification/Environmental Standards. Rob Hitchen WFD Team, Defra"

Sandra Griffith
6 years ago
Views:

1 WFD Stakeholder Meeting 4 May 2006: Classification/Environmental Standards Rob Hitchen WFD Team, Defra

2 Reminder - What is Classification? WFD requires that water bodies are classified (ie. assigned a status class) in the River Basin Management Plans (2008/9) Classification will: - set the status of where water bodies are at the time of classification; - define where the default objective of good status lies; - the boundaries by which the no deterioration obligation applies (deterioration between status classes is not permitted except from high to good and for physical modification where the criteria under the WFD are met)

3 Environmental Standards/Conditions Environmental Standards and conditions are the physico-chemical and hydromorphological parameters that are in support of the achievement of biological status Consistent UK approach - UK Environment Agencies (UKTAG) are developing biological classification tools and environmental standards and conditions. First tranche recently subject to scientific review via UKTAG website. Deadline was 18 th April (see UKTAG room document). Defra and the UK Administrations will consult on the accompanying partial RIA in Summer 2006 (see UK Admins Statement as room document and on Defra website). Specific pollutants also to be included in process

4 Environmental standards & RBMP Default objectives under WFD Good surface water status No deterioration Protected Areas status Status Classification Ecology High Good Mod Poor Bad Chemical Programme of Measures Alternative objectives Technical feasibility Costs Socio-economic issues River Basin Management Plan Objectives for each water body Adopted in each RMP

5 Characterisation Classification Typology Ecological quality Biological quality elements Lowest status by EQRs Biology Ecology High Rivers Lakes Risk assessment and monitoring data General conditions Physico-chemical quality elements (by typology) Lowest General conditions Lowest Good Mod Poor Bad Transitional Coastal Specific pollutants (Annex VIII EQS) Pass/fail Pass assessment Fail Pollutants [NB for high status hydromorphological conditions must be achieved] Chemical Chemical Pass/fail assessment Compliance with European Annex X EQS & DSD List 1

6 UK Environmental Standards Phase 1: By Summer 2006 W ater Quality (rivers, lakes, TRAC) Specific pollutants EQS Annex VIII Morphology (rivers) Hydrology (rivers, lakes) Endorsed as best current science Feb-April 2006 Spring 2006

7 Key changes resulting from 1 st tranche of environmental standards/conditions if UKTAG proposals were to be adopted Many standards remain the same as before Proposed tightening of ammonia standard New standards/conditions for P in rivers and lakes New standards/conditions for N in TrAC waters New morphological conditions (to help screen for morphological pressures) in rivers Specific pollutants (first tranche forthcoming shortly)

8 Feedback from UKTAG stakeholder review Verbal Update from Aileen Kirmond, EA [Refer to UKTAG summary room document]

9 Planning Phase 2: More development required likely for: Groundwater water quality & quantity Morphology (TRAC, lakes) Specific pollutants EQS Annex VIII Water Quality (TRAC-Transparency) Advise on likely approach: Summer 2006

10 Considerations Ministerial oversight is vital given the scientific uncertainties that may exist for some of the new standards/conditions especially in the 1 st planning round Distinction between classification and objective setting - according to the Directive and CIS Guidance, classification should be a technical and scientific exercise. Economic considerations should come in at the objective setting stage (part of the River Basin Planning process) However there will be judgements to be made where scientific uncertainties are high. This should be for the EU Water Directors (if addressed at EU level ie intercalibration) and Ministers.

11 This is why Defra and the UK Administrations. Are preparing a partial RIA on the costs and benefits associated with the proposed standards/conditions (including monitoring and administration costs) Will undertake a consultation this summer on the partial RIA taking into account the results of the UKTAG scientific review Will seek Ministerial and EE Clearance (including DA Ministers) during autumn 2006 on whether the UK agencies can start to plan measures and objectives for the first planning cycle (from mid 2006-mid 2008) on the basis of the first tranche of environmental standards/conditions In England a formal classification instrument is envisaged during 2007 which will set out the standards to be used in the first planning cycle

12 England timeline for 1 st tranche standards Stakeholder Presentations across UK Publication of note from the UK Administrations on the process for classification External scientific peer review process undertaken by UKTAG UK Administrations work up the partial RIA Responses considered by UKTAG and advice put to the UK Administrations. Partial RIA takes account of scientific review by UKTAG. Submissions to UK Ministers to seek clearance to consult on partial RIA for first tranche of standards. Consultation by Defra/WAG (and other UK Administrations) with partial RIA Responses considered and EE clearance sought for UK agencies to start to plan measures and objectives from mid 2006-mid 2008 If agreed UK agencies start to plan on this basis January 2006 Feb 06 Apr 06 May/June 2006 Late June 2006 (3 months) Early autumn 2006

13 Intercalibration A mechanism set out by the Directive whereby MS intercalibrate their own ecological classification systems so a common understanding is gained of GES across the EU a level playing field Overseen by WGA of the EU Common Implementation Strategy (CIS). Legal decisions adopted by comitology through the WFD Article 21 Committee Should deliver a common understanding between end 2006 and summer 2007 MS are organised into Geographical Intercalibration Groups or GIGs

14 European Intercalibration Exercise Inform class boundaries (equal levels across Europe) Identify how pressures (e.g. nutrients) affect biology Complete mid 2007

15 Intercalibration register 997 Rivers 327 Lakes 184 Coastal 38 Transitional

16 Geographical intercalibration groups R- Northern 5 Sweden R- Central 19 steering group: FR, GE, UK, JRC R- Alpine 6 Austria R- E. Cont. 8 ICPDR (Danube Basin) R- Med. 8 Portugal L- Northern 5 Sweden L- Atlantic 4 Ireland L- Central 13 steering group: DK, NL, PL, UK, JRC L- Alpine 4 Austria L- E Cont. 8 ICPDR (Danube Basin) L- Med. 8 Spain CT- Baltic 8 Denmark CT- NE Atl. 11 UK CT- Med. 7 Italy CT- Black Sea 2 Romania

17 All great in theory, but. MS don t currently monitor comprehensively for all the ecological parameters that need to be intercalibrated WFD monitoring not formally required to be in place until end 2006, and will take until 2010 to deliver robust datasets Therefore major gaps will exist in this first round of intercalibration MS have committed to review intercalibration outputs and fill in data gaps in the near future. Most likely time for review will be 2009/2010 in time to feed into 2 nd RBMP (signed off in 2015) Classification instruments within MS must therefore be flexible enough to take account of further intercalibration What happens if MS disagree on good status boundaries?

18 In Summary Distinction between classification as scientific/technical exercise and objective setting (exemptions) where socioeconomic considerations are brought in However, the uncertainties and potential cost implications that arise from classification/intercalibration will need to be overseen by EU Water Directors/Ministers This has led to our approach of separating out consultations on the science underpinning the standards/conditions used in classification (UKTAG review) to that on the associated cost/benefit implications (consultation on the associated RIA by the UK Administrations) Ministers make final decisions informed by scientific and economic information.

UK Technical Advisory Group (UKTAG) on the Water Framework Directive

UK Technical Advisory Group (UKTAG) on the Water Framework Directive Environmental standards for use in classification and the Programme of Measures for the Water Framework Directive (Public Working Draft)