Post a comment on the text below
The WFD defines its Environmental Objectives in Article 4 and sets the aim for long term sustainable water management. Article 4(1) defines the WFD’s general objective to be achieved in all surface and groundwater bodies, i.e. good status (for natural water bodies) or potential (for Artificial or Heavily Modified Water Bodies) by 2015, and introduces the principle of preventing any further deterioration of status. A number of exemptions to the general objectives are possible under certain conditions.
- Article 4(4) allows for an extension of the deadline beyond 2015.
- Article 4(5) allows for the achievement of less stringent objectives.
- Article 4(6) allows a temporary deterioration in the status of water bodies.
- Article 4(7) sets out conditions in which deterioration of status or failure to achieve certain of the WFD Environmental Objectives may be permitted for new modifications to the physical characteristics of surface water bodies, and deterioration from high to good status may be possible as a result of new sustainable human development activities.
The WFD provides the general framework on exemptions but there is scope for differences in understanding and implementation. From the outset of implementation, it was clear that the use of exemptions needed to be explained further and the rules for application had to be made clearer. These clarifications can be found in the CIS Guidance Document No. 20: Exemptions to the Environmental Objectives published in 2009.
Annex V of the WFD specifies how Member States are to monitor and present overall ‘status’ classification for each of their water bodies in all water categories, as well as the status for each of the Biological Quality Elements (BQEs) / Quality Elements (QEs) used.
You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.
Previous comments
In chapter 2.4.2.1. the source of data and the way of thier aggregarion in oder to preparation report „Percentage of surface water bodies of unknown status” has not been provided and needs to be completed.
For reporting and data collection on nitrogen and phosphorus compounds "Trend in median (a) total ammonium, (b) total phosphorus, and (c) nitrate concentrations of river water bodies, grouped by the ecological status / potential class" national reporting methods of their measurements should be considered. The WISE system must enable the administration of test results, both in the form of N and P concentrations, as well as real ions (Poland reports the results as N and P concentrations, which allows better verification of the obtained results by increasing the quality of data). The reporting system must enable unambiguous definition of how to report these values, so that they can be correctly converted into reporting purposes.
In chapter 2.4.3.2 of the guidance is written:
Reporting of the status assessment of Quality Elements (QEs) is expected not only where monitoring results are available for specific water bodies but also for all water bodies for which this information is available (e.g. through grouping or extrapolation). A status value should, therefore, be given for each of the relevant QEs that have been assessed for the water body and subsequently used to classify the ecological status or potential of the water body.
If the status of QEs is not reported then it is assumed that it is not used in the classification of the ecological status of the water body.
This last sentence isn't correct for the RBSP. In this table you only can report the failing substances, not the substances that are good. There is no distinction between unknown status, not applicable and good status.
Overall remark, a more technical guidance how to group/extrapolate the status values in the water bodies where there are no monitoring results would be very helpfull.