Section 1General WFD MonitoringFeatures

The Water Framework Directive: Ecological and Chemical Status Monitoring

Edited by Philippe Quevauviller, Ulrich Borchers, Clive Thompson and Tristan Simonart

© 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. ISBN: 978-0-470-51836-6

1.1Water Status Monitoringunder the WFD

Philippe Quevauviller1

1.1.1 Introduction

1.1.2 Main Legal Requirements with Monitoring Implications

1.1.3 Reporting Requirements

and their Implications

1.1.4 Supporting Research and Development

1.1.5 Conclusions, Perspectives

References

1.1.1 INTRODUCTION

Monitoring of chemical and/or biological parameters is required in a wide range ofenvironmental policies to evaluate the environmental status of relevant compartments(e.g. water, soil, air), assess environmental risks from different pressures (and follow upthe efficiency of e.g. control or remediation measures) and/or carry out trend studies.In this context, monitoring represents a cornerstone of water management systems(Figure 1.1.1).

The soundness of policy decisions is therefore directly related to the reliability ofthe environmental monitoring programmes. In turn, the design and development ofmonitoring programmes is directly linked to the availability of recommendations in

1 The views expressed in this chapter are purely those of the author and may not in any circumstances beregarded as stating an official position of the European Commission

The Water Framework Directive: Ecological and Chemical Status Monitoring

Edited by Philippe Quevauviller, Ulrich Borchers, Clive Thompson and Tristan Simonart

© 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. ISBN: 978-0-470-51836-6

4 Water Status Monitoring under the WFD

Information utilisation

Water management

Laboratory analysis

Data handling

Data analysis

Assessment and reporting

Information needs

Sample collection

Assessment strategy

Monitoring programme

The water Management cycle closely relies on measurements

Figure 1.1.1 Monitoring in the context of water management systems

the form of (nonbinding) guides, written standards (e.g. ISO or CEN standards), aswell as more generally to scientific and technological progress.

In this context, the Water Framework Directive is certainly the first EU legislativeinstrument which requires a systematic monitoring of biological, chemical and quan-titative parameters in European waters at such a wide geographical scale (coveringthe territory of the EU and beyond) (European Commission, 2000). The principles arefixed in the legislative text and exchanges of information among experts have enabledthe setting out of a common understanding of monitoring requirements in the formsof guidance documents (see paragraph 4). While water monitoring is obviously not anew feature, it should be noted, however, that the WFD monitoring programmes arein their infancy in that they had to be designed and reported by the Member States inMarch 2007. Monitoring data produced in 2007–2008 under the WFD will form thebasis for the design of programmes of measures to be included in the first River BasinManagement Plan (due to be published in 2009), and thereafter used for evaluating theefficiency of these measures. Monitoring data will hence obviously be used as a basisfor classifying the water status, and they will also be used to identify possible pollutiontrends. This is an iterative process in that better monitoring will ensure a better designand follow-up of measures, a better status classification and a timely identification ofadverse trends (calling for reversal measures), which puts a clear accent on the needsfor constant improvements and regular reviews (foreseen under the WFD) and henceon the needs to integrate scientific progress in an efficient way.

Metrological features, including discussions about monitoring data traceability, havebeen discussed in a previous book of Wiley’s Water Quality Measurements Series(Quevauviller, 2007). This chapter is meant as a general introduction of the newvolume of the series, which results from the International Conference on Status Mon-itoring under the Water Framework Directive held in Lille (France) on 12–14 March2007.

Main Legal Requirements with Monitoring Implications 5

1.1.2 MAIN LEGAL REQUIREMENTS WITHMONITORING IMPLICATIONS

The Water Framework Directive establishes ‘good status’ objectives to be achieved forall waters by the end of 2015. With regard to surface waters, good status criteria arebased on biological parameters (ecological status) and chemical parameters (chemicalstatus). The chemical status is linked to compliance to EU Environmental QualityStandards defined in a ‘daughter directive’, which negotiation is at its final stage at thetime of publication of this volume. For ground waters, good status refers to quantitativelevels (balance between recharge and abstraction) and chemistry (linked to complianceto groundwater quality standards established at EU, national, regional or local levelsunder another ‘daughter directive’ (European Commission, 2006b)).

Monitoring requirements are detailed in Annex V of the directive. The design of themonitoring programmes had to be developed in 2006 on the basis of an analysis ofpressures and impacts and of a characterisation work leading to the delineation of waterbodies (reporting units under the WFD) taking into account typologies, systematicclassification of types (in the case of surface waters), and to the identification of waterbodies ‘at risk’ of failing the WFD environmental objectives. In this respect, the legalrequirements covered by Annex V for surface waters include:

• Quality elements for the classification of ecological status for different types ofsurface water (rivers, lakes, transitional waters, coastal waters, and artificial andheavily modified surface water bodies).

• Normative definitions of ecological status classifications (high, good and moderate)for the above types of surface water.

• Monitoring provisions for ecological and chemical status for surface waters, cov-ering surveillance monitoring, operational monitoring and investigative monitoring,as well as requirements regarding the frequency of monitoring, protected areas’monitoring and standards for monitoring of quality elements.

• Requirements for the comparability of biological monitoring results, presentationand classification of ecological status and ecological potential, and presentation ofmonitoring results and classification of chemical status.

In the case of groundwater, requirements include:

• Parameters for the classification of quantitative status, groundwater level monitoringnetwork, including density of monitoring sites, frequency, and interpretation andpresentation of results.

• Parameters for the determination of groundwater chemical status, and related mon-itoring requirements (surveillance and operational), including monitoring for theidentification of pollution trends, and interpretation and presentation of results.

This chapter does not aim to provide an extensive overview of monitoring provisionsand their interpretation, which are largely described in guidance documents developed

6 Water Status Monitoring under the WFD

by expert groups under the Common Implementation Strategy (European Commission,2003, 2006a, 2007) and discussed for groundwater in the light of monitoring require-ments under a range of parent legislation (Quevauviller, 2005). Furthermore, thepresent book includes detailed descriptions of chemical monitoring of surface waters(Chapter 1.2) and ecological status monitoring (Chapter 1.3), as well as a series of casestudies on the monitoring of different aquatic environments, namely lake monitoring(Chapter 2.1), river monitoring (Chapter 2.2), groundwater monitoring (Chapter 2.3)and coastal and marine monitoring (Chapter 2.4).

EU Member States had to design monitoring programmes before the end of 2006and report them to the European Commission in March 2007. Basic requirements arethat monitoring data have to provide a reliable assessment of status of all water bodiesor groups of bodies. This implies that networks have to consider the representativenessof monitoring points as well as frequency. In addition, monitoring has to be designedin such a way that long-term pollution trends may be detected.

The various types of monitoring depend upon the pre-characterisation of pressuresand impacts on water bodies (requested under Article 5 of the directive). These are:surveillance, operational and investigative monitoring, which all imply biological,chemical or quantitative measurements, with different frequencies and parameters.

For example, groundwater surveillance monitoring will be used to supplement andvalidate the impact assessment procedure, and provide information to be used in theassessment of long-term trends both as a result of changes in natural conditions andthrough anthropogenic activity (European Commission, 2006b). Minimum monitoringparameters include dissolved oxygen content, pH value, electrical conductivity, nitrateand ammonia (for all groundwater bodies). Groundwater bodies which were foundto be at risk (following the 2004 impact assessment) will also have to be monitoredfor those substances which are indicative of the impact of these pressures. In thisrespect, operational monitoring will have to be undertaken in the periods betweensurveillance monitoring programmes in order to establish the chemical status of allgroundwater bodies determined as being at risk, and the presence of any long-termanthropogenically-induced upward trend in the concentration of any pollutant. The fre-quency of surveillance monitoring is not strictly defined in the WFD, but operationalmonitoring will have to be performed at a minimum once per year. Regarding theidentification of trends in pollutant concentrations, the monitoring programmes willhave to be adapted to local situations and the trends will have to be demonstratedstatistically, stating the level of confidence associated with the identification. As dis-cussed in the Groundwater Monitoring guidance document (European Commission,2006a), monitoring obligations also exist in parent legislation, e.g. the nitrates direc-tive (European Commission, 1991a), the pesticide directives (European Commission,1991b, 1998), etc.

Regarding surface waters, Annex V is more prescriptive concerning monitoringfrequencies, in particular for operational monitoring (see table in paragraph 1.3.4 ofthat annex). Technical specifications are detailed in a guidance document (EuropeanCommission, 2007), providing recommendations on key monitoring features.

Supporting Research and Development 7

1.1.3 REPORTING REQUIREMENTSAND THEIR IMPLICATIONS

Monitoring and data reporting for evaluating the environmental status and trends needto be coordinated at EU level in the framework of a common mechanism. This isthe goal of the Water Information System for Europe (WISE), which was launchedat the end of March 2007 (D’Eugenio et al., 2007) and which will allow making aconsiderable step forward at the horizon of 2008–2009. Coordinated reporting and datasharing should constitute the core basis for water policy implementation and reviewwithin the next decade.

Reporting requirements are closely linked to the need to ensure the quality of mea-surement data. Recommendations are being developed in this respect in the form ofnon-legally binding guidance documents and legally binding provisions under a draftCommission Decision on minimum performance criteria for analytical methods. This isalso discussed in this book in relation to supporting research and technology develop-ment (RTD) projects such as EAQC-WISE (see Chapter 9.1), NORMAN (Chapter 8.2)and networking discussions under SedNET (Chapter 8.3). Reporting requirements forpriority substances are also discussed in Chapter 9.1.

1.1.4 SUPPORTING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The need to timely and efficiently integrate scientific outputs in policy developments,implementation and review is extensively discussed in the water sector (Quevauvilleret al., 2005). This integration is intimately linked to dialogue establishment, trans-fer mechanisms and intensive multi-stakeholder consultations. The consideration ofscientific progress as one of the key aspects for the design of new policies and thereview of existing ones is fully embedded into the Sixth Environmental Action pro-gramme, which stipulates that ‘sound scientific knowledge and economic assessments,reliable and up-to-date environmental data and information, and the use of indicatorswill underpin the drawing-up, implementation and evaluation of environmental policy’(European Commission, 2002). This requires, therefore, that scientific inputs constantlyfeed the environmental policy process. This integration also involves various players,namely the scientific and policy-making communities, but also representatives fromindustry, agriculture, NGOs, etc.

In the context of the above discussions, which are leading to concrete proposalsfor the development of an operational science-policy mechanism (Chapter 10.1) andenhanced involvement of stakeholders (Chapter 10.2) and researchers (Chapter 10.3),several EU-funded projects are directly or indirectly contributing to the knowledgebase for more efficient and scientifically-based monitoring programmes. The ‘StatusMonitoring under the WFD’ conference provided a wide range of examples presentedin the form of either posters or keynote lectures. In the present book, examples concernemerging methods for water monitoring issued from the STAMPS and SWIFT-WFD

8 Water Status Monitoring under the WFD

projects (Chapter 3.1), as well as diagnostic water quality instruments (Chapter 3.2).Modelling tools also have a prominent role to play in monitoring programmes, asexemplified by Chapters 4.1 (joint modelling and monitoring of aquatic ecosystems)and 4.2 (harmonised modelling tools), which are derived from the CatchMod cluster.

Other types of research contribution are more specifically linked to groundwater,e.g. regarding hydrogeological science (Chapter 5.1) and georeferencing (Chapter 5.2).A focused EU-funded project has also contributed to build up the foundation for acommon methodology for the establishment of groundwater threshold values (envi-ronmental quality standards), as described in Chapter 5.3.

Finally, sediment monitoring has been extensively discussed within the SedNet andAQUATERRA projects, as described in Chapters 6.1– 7.2.

Other important features which are closely linked to research and policy are theassessment of metal ecotoxicity (see Chapter 7.3) and climate change impact on aquaticecosystems and their responses (Chapter 7.4).

1.1.5 CONCLUSIONS, PERSPECTIVES

This chapter provides a general introduction of the overall book, establishing linksto specific sections describing in detail various monitoring features, many of themclosely linked to RTD developments. Besides the need for an efficient mechanism fortransfer of scientific outputs into policy implementation, an EU-wide coordination isneeded to ensure that monitoring data produced at the level of more than 180 Europeanriver basins will be of comparable quality and fit for the intended purpose. The WFDpresents the advantage of offering a very wide testing framework, and the scientificcommunity should take this opportunity to examine how research findings may matchthe practice and be readily usable in the policy context.

The conference and the resulting book are among the many milestones that willbe required to establish strong bridges between the scientific, policy-making andstakeholders’ communities, which is one of the challenges to be faced within theforthcoming decades.

REFERENCES

D’Eugenio J., Haastrup P., Jensen S., Wirthmann A. and Quevauviller P. (2006) ‘General Intro-duction into WISE’, 7th Int. Conf. Hydroinformatics, Nice, September 2006.

European Commission (1991a) Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991, concerningthe protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources, OfficialJournal of the European Communities, L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1.

European Commission (1991b) Council Directive of 15 July 1991, concerning the placing ofplant protection products on the market, Official Journal of the European Communities, L 230,19.8.1991, p. 1.

European Commission (1998) Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of16 February 1998, concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market, Official Journalof the European Communities, L 123, 24.4.1998, p. 1.

References 9

European Commission (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Councilof 23 October 2000, establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy,Official Journal of the European Communities, L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.

European Commission (2002) 6th Environment Action Programme, European Commission,2002–2012, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/newprg/index.htm.

European Commission (2003) Monitoring under the Water Framework Directive, CIS GuidanceDocument No. 7, European Commission, Brussels.

European Commission (2006a) Groundwater Monitoring, CIS Guidance Document No. 15, Euro-pean Commission, Brussels.

European Commission (2006b) Directive 2006/118/EC of the European Parliament and of theCouncil of 12 December 2006, on the protection of groundwater against pollution and deterio-ration, Official Journal of the European Communities, L 372, 12.12.2006, p. 19.

European Commission (2007) Surface Water Monitoring, CIS Guidance Document, EuropeanCommission, Brussels, in press.

Quevauviller, P. (2005) Groundwater monitoring in the context of EU legislation: reality andintegration needs, J. Environ. Monit., 7(2), p. 89.

Quevauviller P. (2007) WFD monitoring and metrological implications, in: Rapid Chemical andBiological Techniques for Water Monitoring, Water Quality Measurements Series, John Wiley& Sons, Ltd, Chichester.

Quevauviller P., Balabanis P., Fragakis C., Weydert M., Oliver M., Kaschl A. et al. (2005) Science-policy integration needs in support of the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive,Environ. Sci. Pol., 8, p. 203.