© WRc plc 2010

Agenda item 3b: Summary of WISE electronic delivery:

presentation of an example

© WRc plc 2010

Summary of WISE electronic delivery

• MS publish(ed) RBMPs by 22 December 2009 and reported electronic data to the Commission through WISE by 22 March 2010.

• Automatic validation on XML data on submission to WISE• Validation process likely to lead to a number of issues being

identified• MSs will be asked to check and correct any detected errors or

invalid entries• EEA responsible for managing the validation process, for

checking the results, and liaising with MSs regarding the resolution of validation issue

• Summary based on validated information/data• Approximate machine generated translations (into English) of

text fields

WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE SUMMARY OF THE WISE ELECTRONIC DELIVERY OF RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLANS AND COMPLETENESS CHECKING (2010 REPORTING) Member State: United Kingdom River Basin District (in English): Thames River Basin District (in national language): Thames Language of the electronic submission: English Extracted from WISE submission of [date] Version of the Summary of WISE electronic delivery used: 1

Front cover

© WRc plc 2010

Table of contents

1 GOVERNANCE ................................................................................................4

2 RIVER BASIN DISTRICT CHARACTERISTICS ...............................................9

3 CLASSIFICATION OF STATUS .....................................................................61

4 MONITORING.................................................................................................77

5 SURFACE WATER STATUS........................................................................147

6 GROUNDWATER STATUS..........................................................................242

7 STATUS OF PROTECTED AREAS..............................................................247

8 ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVES AND EXEMPTIONS...............................257

9 PROGRAMME OF MEASURES ...................................................................288

10 SUMMARY OF COMPLETENESS CHECK..................................................305

11 COMPLIANCE INDICATORS .......................................................................306

© WRc plc 2010

Governance

• Competent authorities• International co-operation• Overview of RBMP

• Introduction• Publication dates• Table of contents• More detailed programmes and management plans• Justification for inaction• Public participation• Update of RBMP• Detailed supporting documents

© WRc plc 2010

River Basin District Characteristics

• General• Surface waters

• Delineation of surface water bodies• Typology of surface water bodies• Designation of HMWB and AWB• Pressures on surface water bodies at a water body level• Pressures on surface water bodies at sub-unit an RBD level• Impacts on surface water bodies

• Groundwater• Delineation of groundwater bodies• Pressures on groundwater bodies at a water body level• Pressures on groundwater bodies at sub-unit and RBD level• Impacts on surface water bodies

© WRc plc 2010

River Basin District Characteristics (2)• Economic analysis

• Investment costs• Water services• Volumes and prices• Cost recovery• International coordination• Cost-effectiveness• Information gaps• Additional information

• Steps and measures taken to meet the requirements of Article 9• Definition of water services and uses• Implementing Article 9.1• Environmental and resource costs• Explanation of the use of Article 9(4)• Water pricing strategy• Cost recovery strategy• Data collection and gaps• Previous information and supporting documents

• Register of protected areas

© WRc plc 2010

Classification of status

• Surface waters• Ecological status of surface waters• Ecological potential of HMWB and AWB• Chemical status of surface waters

• Groundwater• Quantitative status of groundwater• Chemical status of groundwater

• Threshold values

© WRc plc 2010

Monitoring – surface waters

• Numbers of monitoring sites• Numbers of programmes and subprogrammes• Design of monitoring programmes• Design considerations - geographic scale, international aspects, start and end dates• Design considerations - links to supporting documents• Monitoring methodologies• Summary of site, and quality element information reported at subprogramme level.• Number of sites used for the surveillance and operational monitoring of quality

elements• Number of water bodies included in surveillance and operational monitoring• Inclusion of all required biological quality elements in the surveillance monitoring of

surface water bodies• Biological quality elements monitored for operational purposes in relation to the

significant pressures on a water body• Investigative monitoring of surface waters• Monitoring of surface waters protected areas

© WRc plc 2010

Monitoring – groundwater

• Summary and generic information• Numbers of groundwater monitoring programmes• Design of groundwater monitoring programmes• Design considerations - geographic scale, international aspects, start

and end dates• Design considerations - links to supporting documents• Monitoring methodologies• Summary of site and groundwater parameter information reported at

programme level.• Number of sites used for quantitative, chemical surveillance and

chemical operational monitoring of groundwater parameters• Number of groundwater water bodies included in quantitative, chemical

surveillance and operational monitoring• Inclusion of all required parameters in chemical surveillance monitoring

of groundwater• Parameters monitored for chemical operational purposes in relation to

the main pressures on groundwater bodies• Monitoring of groundwater protected areas

© WRc plc 2010

Surface water status

• Summary Statistics• Background information and data• Overall ecological status/potential of waterbodies• Overall chemical status of water bodies

• Ecological status of natural water bodies• Rivers• Lakes• Transitional waters• Coastal waters

• Ecological potential of heavily modified water bodies• (Water categories)

• Ecological status of artificial water bodies• (Water categories)

• Chemical status of surface waters

© WRc plc 2010

Groundwater status

• Quantitative status• Overall summary of status of water bodies• Reasons for failure to achieve good quantitative status:

• Chemical status• Overall summary of status of water bodies• Reasons for failure to achieve good chemical status• Pollutants causing failure• Natural background levels• Groundwater bodies with significant upward trends• Groundwater bodies with significant trend reversal

• Interpretation of maps on groundwater status

© WRc plc 2010

Status of Protected Areas

• Surface water Protected Areas• Status of groundwater Article 7 Drinking

Water Protected Areas

© WRc plc 2010

Environmental Objectives and Exemptions

• Information on how exemptions been applied to surface waters

• Surface waters - Ecological status exemptions• Surface waters - Chemical status exemptions• Information on how exemptions been applied to

groundwaters• Groundwater good quantitative status exemptions• Groundwater good chemical status exemptions• Surface water Protected Area exemptions• Groundwater Article 7 Drinking Water Protected areas

© WRc plc 2010

Programme of Measures

• Basic measures• Other basic measures• Supplementary and additional measures in

surface waters• Supplementary and additional measures in ground

waters• Cost of measures• Coordination of measures in international RBDs• Additional comments and links to more detailed

supporting documents

© WRc plc 2010

To be completed

• Summary of completeness check• Compliance indicators

© WRc plc 2010

WISE summary report contains

• Basic information e.g.• name of competent authority

• Basic statistics e.g.• number of water bodies

• Simple and derived indicators e.g.• ecological status of rivers, • number of quality elements used to classify ecological status

• Summarised in tables and visualised in charts and figures• Methodological and explanatory text e.g.

• for the classification of ecological status

© WRc plc 2010

Overall ecological status/potential of waterbodies

Class Overall High confidence

Medium confidence

Low confidence

No information

on confidence

N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%) All categories, natural, HMWB and AWB

High status 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) Good status/potential 142 (23) 102 (16.5) 31 (5) 5 (0.8) 4 (0.7) Moderate status/potential 333 (54) 297 (48.1) 22 (3.6) 14 (2.3) 0 (0) Poor status/potential 123 (20) 33 (5.3) 74 (12) 10 (1.6) 6 (1) Bad status/potential 19 (3) 10 (1.6) 4 (0.7) 4 (0.7) 1 (0.2) Unknown status/potential 0 (0) Total numbers 617 (100) 442 (71.6) 131 (21.2) 33 (5.3) 11 (1.8) Natural water bodies High status 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) Good status 107 (29.5) 82 (22.6) 12 (3.3) 11 (3) 2 (0.6) Moderate status 205 (56.5) 162 (44.6) 31 (8.5) 12 (3.3) 0 (0) Poor status 42 (11.6) 28 (7.7) 13 (3.6) 1 (0.3) 0 (0) Bad status 9 (2.5) 5 (1.4) 1 (0.3) 1 (0.3) 2 (0.6) Unknown status 0 (0) Total numbers 363 (100) 277 (76.3) 57 (15.7) 25 (6.9) 4 (1.2)

© WRc plc 2010

Simple indicator:Classification of the ecological status/potential and chemical status of all water bodies, natural water bodies, heavily modified and artificial water bodies in RBD

Number of water bodies (WB) in the RBD in each chemical status class

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

All Natural Heavilymodified

Artificial

Category of water body

Num

ber o

f WB

s

Unknown/not assessed

Failing to achieve good

Good

Percentage of water bodies (WB) in the RBD in each chemical status class

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

All Natural Heavilymodified

Artificial

Category of water body

Per

cent

age

of W

Bs

Unknown/not assessed

Failing to achieve good

Good

Number of water bodies (WB) in the RBD in each ecological status class

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

All Natural Heavily modified Artificial

Category of water body

Num

ber o

f WB

s

Unknown

Bad

Poor

Moderate

Good

High

Percentage of water bodies (WB) in the RBD in each ecological status class

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

All Natural Heavilymodified

Artificial

Category of water body

Per

cent

age

of W

Bs Unknown

Bad

Poor

Moderate

Good

High

© WRc plc 2010

Simple indicator: Confidence in ecological classification

Level of confidence associated with the classification of ecological status of ALL water bodies in RBD <x>

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

HighGoo

d

Moderat

ePoo

rBad

Unknown

Confidence of classificaton of water bodies in each status class

Per

cent

age

of w

ater

bod

ies

Unknown confidence

Low confidence

Medium confidence

High confidence

© WRc plc 2010

Simple indicator: Ecological status of rivers in RBD and each sub-unit – by river length

Current ecological status of river water water bodies in RBD<x>

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

RBD SU 1 SU 2 SU 3 SU 4 SU 5

RBD and sub-unit codes/name

% o

f riv

er le

ngth

Unknown

Bad

Poor

Moderate

Good

High

© WRc plc 2010

Derived indicator

Percentage of river water bodies (n = 780) with information on status/monitoring and the numbers of quality elements

monitored in water bodies

0% 0% 0% 0.4% 4%

41%55%

46%

100%

6% 0%0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

No infor

mation

Just

status

No BQEs

1 BQE

2 BQE

3 BQEs

4 or m

ore B

QEs

HYMO

PYSCHEM

Annex

VIII

Other s

pecif

ic

Per

cent

age

of w

ater

bod

ies

© WRc plc 2010

Derived indicator

Number and proportion of w ater bodies (WB) used for surveillance purposes that are monitored for all required biological quality elements

45%

100%

73%

90%

0

50

100

150

200

250

Rivers Lakes Transitional w aters Coastal w aters

Num

ber o

f WBs

0

20

40

60

80

100

% o

f WBs

Number of WBs used in surveillance monitoring Number of WBs compliant % WBs compliant

© WRc plc 2010

Methodological and explanatory text

Economic analysis - Volumes and prices • The methodology (e.g. aggregation) and assumptions used to estimate the

volume, costs and prices associated with water services of the investments for the period of 2009 to 2015 were: ________

Ecological potential of HMWB and AWB • The methodology used for the classification of ecological potential including the

determination of the relevant quality elements and their class boundaries for artificial and heavily modified water bodies was:_____________

Interpretation of the maps resulting from surface water monitoring programmes

• The summary text for visualising Map 1 (ecological status of natural water bodies) and Map 2 (ecological potential of heavily modified water bodies) was as follows: ___________________

© WRc plc 2010

Next steps

• Completed dummy to be distributed for information to WGD

• Summary of WISE delivery reports to be produced for each RBD after validation – summer/autumn 2010

• To be used in the Commission’s screening and assessment of RBMPs – starting autumn 2010

© WRc plc 2010

Thank you for your attention!!