1 / 46

Agenda Item 1 Adoption of agenda

7th Expert Advisory Forum on Priority Substances 14-15 June 2004 Article 16 on priority substances under the Water Framework Directive. Agenda Item 1 Adoption of agenda. Formal Draft Directive (+ Explanatory Memorandum) Impact assessment

nani
Download Presentation

Agenda Item 1 Adoption of agenda

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 7th Expert Advisory Forum on Priority Substances14-15 June 2004Article 16 on priority substances under the Water Framework Directive

  2. Agenda Item 1Adoption of agenda

  3. Formal Draft Directive (+ Explanatory Memorandum) Impact assessment Communication “Strategy against chemical pollution of surface water “ Scientific Committee opinion Informal Technical background documents (to be published) EQS methodology / datasheets AMPS background document Emission control concept paper (measures tables/source screening) PHS review background document Final report Economic Impact Study Documents in the pipeline

  4. Follow-up • Comments draft Directive > • Comments supporting documents > • Submission additional information EQS for datasheets >

  5. Agenda Item 2Minutes of previous meetings

  6. Draft final minutes • Final draft report EAF (6) – written comments incorporated • EAF for adoption • Final draft minutes AMPS expert groups • EAF for information • Written adoption by AMPS group

  7. Agenda Item 3Draft proposal for a Directive

  8. Overview • Part I : General • Part II : Environmental Quality Standards • Part III : Pollution control • Part IV : Analysis, monitoring and reporting • Part V : Implementation • Annexes : • EQS • Background concentrations • Best environmental practice for the protection of surface waters • Reporting • PHS identification • Repeal daughter Directives

  9. Part I : General • Article 1 : Purpose • Article 2 : Scope • Article 3 : Definitions

  10. Part II : Environmental Quality Standards • Article 4 : Surface water chemical status • Article 5 : MAC exceedance follow-up • Article 6 : Background concentrations

  11. Part III : Pollution Control • Article 7 : Pollution reduction programmes for emissions, discharges and losses • Article 8 : Timetable for cessation of emissions, discharges and losses of PHS • Article 9 : Baseline • Article 10: Industrial installations falling under the scope of Directive 1996/61/EC • Article 11 : Other point sources • Article 12 : Other pollutants for which a risk to or via the aquatic environment has been identified under Regulation REACH

  12. Part IV : Analysis, monitoring and reporting • Article 13 : Monitoring, sampling and analysis • Article 14 : Reporting

  13. Part V : Implementation • Article 15 :Amendment of existing legislation (WFD & IPPC) • Article 16 : Repeals • Article 17 : Review • Article 18 : Technical adaptation (art 21 WFD Committee) • Article 19 : Penalties • Article 20 : Implementation • Article 21 : Entry into force • Article 22 : Addresses

  14. Annexes • Annex I : EQS for PS and other pollutants • Part I: PS-EQS (AA-MAC) • Part II: Other pollutants (AA) • Part III: Calculation AA and DQR • Annex II: Methods to establish background concentrations • Annex III : BEP for PPP • Annex IV: Reporting • Annex V: Review Annex X WFD (PHS identification) • Annex VI: Repeal DDs timetable

  15. 14-15.6 : EAF mtg 22-23.6 : Water Directors, Dublin 30.6 : deadline external comments END EXTERNAL CONSULTATIONS at least 3 months for Inter service agreement, translation and adoption (including holiday…) July : Internal consultation External and Internal consultation

  16. Agenda item 4:Environmental Quality Standards

  17. Opinion of the CSTEE • Questions: • General methodology and specific values • Specific questions on : • Drinking water abstraction QS • Transitional waters • Sediment & Biota • Use of the Added Risk Approach • Group standards • QS for Mercury • CSTEE opinion adopted 28.5.2004

  18. Opinion of the CSTEE cont’d • Implications for the process • additional work on data sheets (1 month) (FHI) • update methodology (FHI) • implications for draft text • certain EQS values will change • added risk approach metals questioned • biota and sediment standards • “intelligent monitoring” - AMPS • certain issues recommended but only feasible in a longer term • bioavailability models for metals • group standards Toxicity Equivalence Rations for PAH

  19. Question 1: general methodology / values • Concern data collection and validation • Specific request to data providers • No distinction Industrial chemicals/PPP • Distinction AA-QS and MAC-QS • Bio accumulation • Species sensitivity distributions • Use of mesocosm data (twa) • Transparency / presentation of the methodology

  20. Substance specific comments • Data validation : • request to EAF data providers to send full report to DG ENV consultant • New data : renewed request for update • Review AF used • Other methodological concern • bio-accumulation in MAC

  21. Question 2: drinking water • Key scientific issues to be considered • Removal rates • Existing Drinking water standards • Risks to terrestrial vertebrates • Group three - alternative solution • Regulatory decision / DWA areas / monitoring at tap • Re-evaluation of eco-toxicological data (other exposures) • Use of US EPA data

  22. Question 3: Sediment/biota QS • Trend monitoring and assessment of no deterioration • CSTEE proposes Biota (and sediment) QS as alternative to Water QS for certain substances • Recognises problems such as sensitivity to partition coefficients to local circumstances.

  23. Question 4: Transitional waters • Agrees with “case by case” application of AF for marine waters • Identify and justify choice of values for transitional waters.

  24. Question 5: Metals • Rejection of the added risk approach • Recommends bioavailability models • Cadmium : water hardness • Other evidence of quantitative relationships for Cd, Ni, Hg, Pb sought to enable setting of EU- QS

  25. Question 6: Group standards • Agree with general approach: • Worst case • Toxic equivalent rations (TER) • Recommends other substance groups for consistency • HCH/Lindane recommendation • PAH : • extend list of PAHs considered • TER

  26. Question 7: Hg • No overall water QS • too many uncertainties and knowledge gaps • Biota QS for methyl-mercury

  27. Part II : Environmental Quality Standards • Definitions 1 - 10 • Article 4 : Surface water chemical status • Article 5 : MAC exceedance follow-up • Article 6 : Background concentrations • Annexes : 1 & 2

  28. Agenda item 5 :Emission controls

  29. Pollution control • Pollution Reduction Programmes • Substance specific • Thematic : Pesticides & multiple and diffuse • Phase-out timetable • Baseline • IPPC • Coordination measures – in WFD • Specification – amendments IPPC • Other point sources • Non-IPPC Industrial • Municipal • REACH mirror paragraphs (to be further developed)

  30. Part III : Pollution Control • Article 2 Definitions 11 -16 • Article 7 : Pollution reduction programmes for emissions, discharges and losses • Article 8 : Timetable for cessation of emissions, discharges and losses of PHS • Article 9 : Baseline • Article 10: Industrial installations falling under the scope of Directive 1996/61/EC • Article 11 : Other point sources • Article 12 : Other pollutants for which a risk to or via the aquatic environment has been identified under Regulation REACH • Article 15.2 : Revision of IPPC • Annex III (BEP/PPP) and Annex VI (repeal)

  31. Communication

  32. Communication - aim • Explain links with other legislation. • Identification of specific ideas for how the implementation of existing legislation can be changed, possibly leading to modification of the legislation or on implementation (new marketing and use restrictions, CAFE studies into effects of air pollution etc).

  33. Key policy areas • Other water policies • Air • Soil, agriculture & fisheries • Pesticides and biocides • Chemicals legislation • Industry, product and consumer policy • Waste • Other environmental legislation • Other environmental strategies • Research • Other policy areas( transport safety, workers exposure, development policies, trade…)

  34. Impact assessment

  35. Impact assessment • Scenarios : • 0 – no action, that is only WFD • 1 – EQS, PHS identification, AMPS, flexible/framework solution on Emission controls focussed on direct releases to water, interim target phase-out 10 years. • 2 – EQS, PHS identification, AMPS as scenario 1, detailed Emission Limit Values, control of all sources to air and soil, phase-out of direct discharges in 10 years. • 3 – End-of –pipe solutions • Study (Consultant ECOLAS) : • Questionnaire to MS and industry sent April – deadlines May • Response rate • Member States : 17/25 • Industry approx : 12/33 sectors • Draft report end-June – final report July

  36. Agenda item 6 :Analysis, monitoring & reporting

  37. Analysis and monitoring • Brief legal text – minor clarifications existing WFD requirements • A&M: Guidelines and guidance to be developed to be adotped by Article 21 (in comitology) • Future of the AMPS expert group • Reporting format : developed separate instrument = link E-PRTR proposal

  38. Analysis, Monitoring & Reporting • Analysis and monitoring • Article 13 • Article 18 (comitology) • Annex 1, part III • Annex 2 – Background concentrations • Reporting • Article 14 • Annex IV

  39. Agenda item 7:Priority Hazardous Substance Review

  40. PHS review – state-of-play • Consultation to date • PHS: Anthracene, Endosulfan, TCB • Not PHS: Atrizine, Chlorpyrifos, DEHP, Diuron, Isoproturon, Lead, Naphtalene, Octylphenols, Pentachlorophenols, Simazine, Trifluralin • Report to be further edited • Updates for at least two substances foreseen (Trifluralin, Endosulfan)

  41. PHS review • Article 15.1 – revision article • Annex V – amendment Annex X WFD

  42. Other pollutants and repeal of 76/464/EEC ‘daughters’

  43. Other pollutants • 76/464 - daughter Directives • 9 PS substances ( as other PS, but ELVs) • 8 non-Priority substances :Aldrin, Dieldrin, Endrin, Isodrin, DDT, Carbon tetrachloride, Perchlorethylene, Trichlorethylene • Repeal of all old directives taking over, at least, same level of protection • Repeal in stages

  44. Repeal 76/646 “daughters” • Article 1 Purpose • Article 2 Scope • Part I, II, III • Article 16 • Annex I, IV, VI

  45. Next steps

  46. Follow-up • Comments draft Directive > 30.6 • Comments supporting documents • CSTEE opinion (EAF(7)04/01) > 30.6 • PHS report (EAF(7)07/01) > 15.8 • AMPS report (EAF(7)06/01) > 15.8 • Submission additional information EQS for datasheets > 30.6 • Deadlines to be confirmed • Emission control concept paper (EAF(7)05/01) • Economic study • EQS datasheets /methodology • « Non-paper » on Communication Circulation end-July – at least 6 weeks for comments • Minutes EAF(7) > circulated 2 to 3 weeks

More Related