1) Uploading issues: CDR, ROD • 13 MS reported under Directive 76/160/EEC Files uploded under existing reporting obligation folder (e.g. “Directive 76/160/EEC Report”); folders are created and named by NFP or Eionet Helpdesk; NFP or Eionet Helpdesk make link(s) of each folder to corresponding reporting obligation(s); • 14 MS reported under Directive 2006/7/EC Majority of files uploded under the folder, linked to reporting obligation “Directive 76/160/EEC”
ROD with link to CDR folders: http://rod.eionet.europa.eu/obligations/531/overview
Message (Reportnet – CDR, ROD): Upload files (Directive 2006/7/EC) under reporting obligations: • “New Bathing Water Directive 2006/7/EC Report - Monitoring and classification” • “New Bathing Water Directive 2006/7/EC Report - Identification of bathing areas” (before the start of the bathing season) Two possibilities: • create new folder for the reporting obligations under the New Bathing Water Directive OR • add a link of the reporting obligations under the New Bathing Water Directive into the existing BWD folder Contacts (with authority to create and organize folders in CDR): • National Focal Points (list available at http://rod.eionet.europa.eu/contacts?roleId=eionet-nfp-mc) OR • Eionet Helpdesk (email@example.com).
2) Before the start of the bathing season reporting Facts: After the list of BWsis reported to the EC (before the start of the bathing season): • newBWs can be opened during the season (DE: 1 BW, NL: 3 BWs) • BWs can be de-listed during the season (NL: 5 BWs) Message: • MS have to notify changes in annual reporting on 31.December in two attributes: • “BW type” • “Change” in table “Inventory of bathing waters”.
3) Reporting Issues: • Problems with BW type, statusand location (de-listed, banned/closed, not sampled, re-opened BWs, BWs with replaced ID, BWs with replaced water category, coordinates) • Problems with only NewBWD reporting: - sampling frequency (more samples per day, intervals)….reporting under Directive 2006/7/EC, transition period assessment - assessment under Directive 2006/7/EC (number of samples, frequency)….reporting and assessment under Directive 2006/7/EC - grouping of BW….reporting under Directive 2006/7/EC, transition period assessment - classification CG – CI (not limit value for FS ~ IE issue)….reporting under Directive 2006/7/EC, transition period assessment
3a) Problems with BW type, status: • ES: “closed”BWsare not monitored • DE: a part of “closed”BWs are not monitored • IT:BWs are “banned” for several years and not monitored • UK: not accessible (and therefore not monitored) BWsare assigned as“not sampled” • HU: if closed because of poor water quality, BW should be (is) monitored, HU assigned it as “closed” since “The Directive at least in Art 2. 7) (h) and Art 5. 4) (a) (i) clearly though indirectly obliges MS to close bathing waters in order to prevent bathers’ exposure to pollution and in the same time to monitor bathing waters until a permanent bathing prohibition is introduced”. • HU: if closed (‘not operated’) because of other causes (e.g. access for the public being denied), but not monitored, HU assigned them as “de-listed”; ETC/W re-assigned them as “not sampled” • DE: “temporary closed” BWs reported under attribute “Change” (InvBWs table) • FI: “temporary closed” BWs reported under attribute “ManMeas” (SIofBWs table) • SK: “temporary closed” BWs reported in separate report (pdf file) • LV, HU: “ temporary closed” BWs commented in the reply to the first draft assessment; HU clarified that BWs were temporarily closed because of abnormal situation (listed in Abnormal situations table)
Message in regard to ‘temporary closed’ (Directive 2006/7/EC): ‘Banned’ or ‘Temporarily closed bathing water’ are categories used for OldBWD reporting. They have the same meaning (Outline questionnaire for reporting on Directive 76/160/EEC). BWs that are closed throughout the season are categorised as ‘banned’ (special attribute in the table “General Data”). It is not classified into quality class and it is treated as ‘banned’ (or ‘Closed’) ‘Closed’ is the only category used in reporting under Directive 2006/7/EC. (1) In 2010 assessment BW has not been classified into quality class and was treated as ‘Closed’ (equal to ‘temporarily closed’): • if BW is closed >= 14 days per season • in case of microbiological contamination that exceeds the short term pollution (approximately 3 days). (2) Reporting under Directive 2006/7/EC: Information in regard to ‘closed’ or ‘temporarily closed’ should be presented in two attributes (‘InvBWs’ table): - “Closed”with ‘Y ‘ (‘Y’ also apply for closed BWs throughout the season) - “Change” with remark ‘temporarily closed’ (important information given in a National Report under General information) In 2009 ETC/W proposed to add third category in the attribute “closed” (YT); Existing: Y, N;
To be further developed: ‘temporary closed’, ‘ permanently closed’ (Directive 2006/7/EC): Article 5. 4 (b): • However, notwithstanding the general requirement of paragraph 3 (“sufficient” by the end of 2015), bathing waters may temporarily be classified as ‘poor’ and still remain in compliance with this Directive. In such cases, Member States shall ensure that the following conditions are satisfied: • (a) in respect of each bathing water classified as ‘poor’, the following measures shall be taken with effect from the bathing season that follows its classification: (i) adequate management measures, including a bathing prohibition or advice against bathing, with a view to preventing bathers' exposure to pollution; (ii) identification of the causes and reasons for the failure to achieve ‘sufficient’ quality status; (iii) adequate measures to prevent, reduce or eliminate the causes of pollution; and (iv) in accordance with Article 12, alerting the public by a clear and simple warning sign and informing them of the causes of the pollution and measures taken, on the basis of the bathing water profile. • (b) If a bathing water is classified as ‘poor’ for five consecutive years, a permanent bathing prohibition or permanent advice against bathing shall be introduced. However, a Member State may introduce a permanent bathing prohibition or permanent advice against bathing before the end of the five‑year period if it considers that the achievement of ‘sufficient’ quality would be infeasible or disproportionately expensive. Shoud we add fourth category in the attribute “closed” (YP)? Existing: Y, N, (YT);
3b) Changes of NumInd and BWID Message: • If reporting under Directive 76/160/EEC and NumInd is changed: provide old NumInd under attr. “Rem”. • If reporting under Directive 2006/7/EC and BWID is changed, provide old BWID under attr.“Change” (give old BWID); “BWType” should be ‘1’ (existing!).
3c) Changed water type (Directive 76/160/EEC)/ category (coastal, fresh) (Directive 2006/7/EC) Message: • If the water type/category of BW is changed from coastal to freshwater or opposite, the statistics by coastal and freshwater BWs are not consistent when the current and the previous seasons are compared. • Reason for the change should be provided. 3d) Changed BW type (Directive 2006/7/EC) Message: • If BW is re-opened, attr. “BWType” is‘1’ (existing) and remark“re-opened” under attr. “Change” • If BW was (temporarily) closed in the previous season and already re-opened before the end of that season, this BW is reported as “re-opened”in the next season.
4) Assessment issues – proposal for discussion! 4a) Transitional period assessment rules (IE = FS has no mandatory value): rule no.1: BW is CG if:EC is CG and IE is CGrule no.2: BW is CI if: EC is CG and IE is not CGrule no.3: BW is CI if: EC is CI and IE is CGrule no.4: BW is CI if: EC is CI and IE is not CG CI: Compliant with the mandatory value of the Directive 76/160/EEC for Escherichia coli and not compliant with the guide values of the Directive 76/160/EEC for Escherichia coli or intestinal enterococci CG: Compliant with the mandatory value of the Directive 76/160/EEC for Escherichia coli and the more stringent guide values for the Escherichia coli and intestinal enterococci However, NL disagrees with rule no.2 (“Non complaints of the FS parameter (monitored as IE) with the non mandatory G-value can never lead to a status for a location of C(I)”). 4b) MS can report samples of EC and IEfor the previous seasons and be assessed under the Directive 2006/7/EC (four or three consecutive years needed).
4c) MS should provide information on the analytical methods used and the minimum detection limit of the method (zero values to be replaced by LOD (or 1 if LOD is 0) in status calculation). 4d) If MS already grouped their bathing waters, they have to inform the EC and ETC/W if BW profiles have been already established. The deadline for establishment ofBW profiles is 24.3.2011. 4e) Assessment with BW groups is in initial phase and should be developed further. Two options: include only “representative BW” of a group or all BWs in a group.
4f) Sampling frequency DE: Several samples per day for the same BW, but not on the same location: to be treated as single samples. ETC/Wcompared three different approaches for DE (average of day samples, the maximum value of day samples, all day samples). The differences are small: changes at 7 BWs (out of 77); if we take all day samples: the status is worse at 2 BWs and the status is betterat 5 BWs. ETC/W satisfied the request by DE. 4g) Short term pollution and abnormal situations Some MS did not describe the reasons for short term pollution or abnormal situation and actions taken. Samples to be reported. They are not included into status calculation, if replaced sample is taken within 7 days. 4h) General information This section of the national report varies by MS in length and involved themes. Some MS did not report, send links to national websites or updated general information for the 2009 season. ETC/W had to translate reports into English.
first sample shortly after the start of the bathing season before the start of the bathing season
ETC/W would appreciate: • careful check of status calculation and text of draft assessments • if you findany mistakes in the figures/text or if you have additional notes to the text (e.g. reasons for increase or decrease of water quality) • notes on our translated text in English (if something was misunderstood …).