Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

1

Case Study : Danube Case Study Váh Sub-catchment

Monika SupekováWater Research Institute

Bratislava, Slovak Republic

Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

2

Introduction case study: Váh Sub-catchment

• the biggest river catchment (RC) in the SR:– 18 769 km2 (38 %)– 2.5 million inhabitants (46 %)

• curiosity - 2 springs (White Váh and Black Váh)– longest river - 406 km

• diversified landscape (mountains, lowlands):– 52.2 % agricultural land– 40.7 % forests– 6.6 % artificial area– 0.5 % inland waters

• main use - hydropower production (the “Váh cascade” of water reservoirs (WR) and derivation canals - 11 WR)

• river system is recipient of highest input of pollution load (nutrients, other dangerous substances)

Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

3

Introduction case study: Váh Sub-catchment

• 1 Competent Authority – Ministry of Environment of the SR– responsible for all WFD implementation issues (national, international

level)– DRBMP, ITRBMP, bilateral agreements– 1 Common RBMP, 10 RBMPs for Sub-catchments

• the Váh RC - national planning unit• water bodies:

– 633 SWBs (6 HMWB, 10 AWB, 204 OK, 255 still candidates on HMWB, 188 no data)

– 8 SWBs with changed category (8 HMWB)• main pressures of chemical pollution:

(according WFD - PSs – for CHS assessment, RSs – for ES assessment)• industry• agriculture• agglomerations

• PAHs, DEHP, NP, Hg, Cd

Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

4

2 % of the DRB

Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

5

Specific challenges

• previous monitoring network:• old approaches / methodology• not monitored PSs / RSs

• new monitoring network:• monitoring according WFD requirements• limited sites of surveillance monitoring

• incomplete databases (e.g. WR sediments – missing data on resuspension coefficient, deposition rates,…)

• problems in many WR – minimum flow below WR, unknown sediment quantity and quality (PSs), water and sediment balance

• emission estimations • stakeholders (industry) willingness to cooperate /

participate• weak inspection and control

Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

6

• Step 0: System definition• general characterization; possible stakeholders identified

• Step 1: Problem definition• monitoring data 2007 provided in accordance with WFD requirements• Risk Analyses 2005 (actualisation in 2008)

– info on industrial sources exists – data mostly from polluters and only for permitted parameters – need to strengthen instruments for mandatory monitoring / reporting on data and to strengthen inspection - control

• Step 2: Inventory of sources• national databases – NRP and IISR (E-PRTR), IPPC, CWE, and others (UWWTP,

WR)– to quantify emissions - challenge– to strengthen policy instruments– to revise permits

• Step 3: Definition of a baseline scenario• assumption of socio-economic development in line with Draft RBMP

– baseline scenario for socio-economic development uncertain – need for regular revise – economic crisis

Lessons learned from case study

Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

7

Lessons learned from case study• environmental fate modelling

– PAHs, DEHP, NP– calculation of emissions into 8 WRs– required emission reduction – with aim to achieve „good CHS“ in WBs– system recovery time periods

• Step 4: Inventory of possible measures• WFD objectives should be reached – according basic measures in RBMP

– exemptions – Directive 96/61/ECconcerning IPPC – exemptions – Directive 76/464/EEC on pollution caused by certain

dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment– supplementary measures in 2nd Planning Cycle– monitoring (investigative monitoring)

• Step 5: Assessment of the effects of the measures• chemical status shall be improved - but uncertain, if the good status will be

reached up to 2015– assumption that additional measures will be needed

• Step 6: Selection of the best solutions• stakeholders have to meet standards – apply measures

– include findings into RBMP (stakeholder – water manager interlinkage)– dialog with stakeholders – consultation of the Draft RBMP is ongoing

Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

8

Lessons learned from case study

Conclusions:• to strengthen Stakeholder willingness to follow rules:

• open communication; problem / WFD objectives understanding• effective policy including penalties• effective controlling instruments• better competence distribution

• although not all steps of DSS is possible to follow exactly, DSS provides a methodological approach which can be very useful for those who would like to deal with PSs

General in circumstances of the SR:• to change the way of thinking – focus on young generations