EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL ENVIRONMENT Directorate B - Environmental quality of Natural resources ENV.B1 - Water, the Marine and Soil Brussels, 8 March 2004 MEETING OF THE STRATEGIC CO-ORDINATION GROUP FOR THE WFD COMMON IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY BRUSSELS, CENTRE CHARLEMAGNE 27-28 TH OCTOBER 2003 DRAFT SUMMARY The Commission, DG Environment B.1 (hereafter referred as COM) invited delegates for the eighth meeting of the Strategic Co-ordination Group (SCG) of the Common Implementation Strategy (CIS) for the Water Framework Directive (WFD) on 27-28 October 2003. The following Member States (MS) participated in the meeting: AT, BE, DK, DE, FR, FI, IRL, IT, LUX, NL, PT, SP, SWE and UK. In addition, the following Candidate Countries (CC) were present: HU, CY, CZ, SK, SLO, EST, RO, PL, LV and LIT. Furthermore, representatives of Norway, Iceland, CEFIC, ECPA, EEB, EPRO, EUREAU, EURELECTRIC, ESPO, EWA, WWF, ICPDR and EIC and the Commission (DG ENV, DG RTD and JRC) were represented. Moreover, the leaders of the Working Groups 2A, 2B, 2C and 2D, the drafting group on wetlands and the drafting group on classification took part. A full list of meeting participants is provided in Annex 1. The main objective of the meeting was to continue the CIS co-ordination process and to prepare the deliverables for the Water Directors (WD) meeting in November 2003.
Transcript
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONDIRECTORATE-GENERALENVIRONMENTDirectorate B - Environmental quality of Natural resourcesENV.B1 - Water, the Marine and Soil
Brussels, 8 March 2004
MEETING OF THE STRATEGIC CO-ORDINATION GROUP FOR THE WFD COMMON IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
BRUSSELS, CENTRE CHARLEMAGNE27-28TH OCTOBER 2003
DRAFT SUMMARY
The Commission, DG Environment B.1 (hereafter referred as COM) invited delegates for the eighth meeting of the Strategic Co-ordination Group (SCG) of the Common Implementation Strategy (CIS) for the Water Framework Directive (WFD) on 27-28 October 2003. The following Member States (MS) participated in the meeting: AT, BE, DK, DE, FR, FI, IRL, IT, LUX, NL, PT, SP, SWE and UK. In addition, the following Candidate Countries (CC) were present: HU, CY, CZ, SK, SLO, EST, RO, PL, LV and LIT. Furthermore, representatives of Norway, Iceland, CEFIC, ECPA, EEB, EPRO, EUREAU, EURELECTRIC, ESPO, EWA, WWF, ICPDR and EIC and the Commission (DG ENV, DG RTD and JRC) were represented. Moreover, the leaders of the Working Groups 2A, 2B, 2C and 2D, the drafting group on wetlands and the drafting group on classification took part. A full list of meeting participants is provided in Annex 1.
The main objective of the meeting was to continue the CIS co-ordination process and to prepare the deliverables for the Water Directors (WD) meeting in November 2003.
A number of draft documents were distributed before and presented at the meeting (see Annex 2). All documents are available on WFD CIRCA under the meeting sub-folder of the folder “D-Strategic Co-ordination Group” in the library using the following direct link:
The documents presented for Pilot River Basin Testing and the progress report for Working Group 2A (ECOSTAT) were presented as room documents and open to further written comment.
COM requested that the SCG participants to complete a CIRCA questionnaire, which was circulated, and return it by the end of the meeting.
2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Austria requested that quality standards for selected substances be included under other business.
The presented agenda including the amendments proposed by Austria was agreed.
3. WATER DIRECTORS MEETING PREPARATION
IT presented progress on preparation, including the provisional agenda, for the Rome WDs meeting (24-25 November). It was announced that additional information would be disseminated in a few days. Alternatively, information can be obtained from [email protected].
Italy acknowledged the inclusion of flood management and the status of research activities on the agenda for discussion at the meeting.
The date for the WDs meeting under the Irish Presidency is 22-23 June 2004.
4. COMMISSION ACTIVITIES
COM presented several recent activities, as summarised below.
4.1. Glossary
The process of harmonising the guidance document glossaries is complete and most terms have been successfully clarified. Where clarification was not possible, footnotes have been included in the Guidance Documents. For some key terms not defined in Art 2 it is necessary to agree on definitions and more formally publish them and translate into other Community languages.
A revised glossary of key terms was presented and discussed.
Conclusions:
SCG agrees to distribute the list of key terms to the relevant Working Group/s for comment and that the Working Groups will consult with former Working Groups and expert networks where necessary.
SCG agrees to collate comments with the view to presenting a final draft for agreement at the March 2004 SCG meeting. Additional consultation will take place on the revised definitions prior to the March meeting.
SCG agrees that the definitions should be consistent with international definitions and, where possible, literature citations will be included.
4.2. SEA Directive Guidance
The document ‘Implementation of Directive 2001/42 on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Plans and Programmes on the Environment’ was presented for information. The document is now published and available on CIRCA.
COM pointed out that close co-ordination is needed between competent authorities under the SEA Directive and WFD to ensure provisions under the SEA Directive do not duplicate provisions under WFD (e.g. public participation and planning).
Conclusion/s:
SCG invites written comments on issues for further discussion at the SCG meeting in March 2004.
4.3. Management of European Eel
The document ‘Development of a Community Action Plan for the Management of the European Eel’ (Communication by the European Commission (COM(2003) 573 final)) was presented for information.
DG Fisheries have reported eel decline and it is recognised that this issue must be addressed on the river basin scale. COM pointed out that there is a clear reference to WFD in that whatever measures need to be implemented to support eel stocks in the future will require consideration of the WFD.
Conclusion/s:
SCG encourages MSs/CCs to communicate to colleagues in their own country and establish the appropriate synergies (e.g. RB authorities and fisheries).
4.4. TENs-T Guidelines
The document ‘Amending Decision No 1692/96/EC on Community guidelines for the Development of the Trans-European Transport Network’ (Commission Proposal COM(2003) 564 final) was presented for information. COM recently published communication guidelines and a Draft Regulation on the Trans European Network regarding sustainable transport. COM highlighted the need for appropriate impact assessment to be undertaken and compliance with the WFD.
Conclusion/s:
SCG invites COM to provide regular updates on progress and initiate discussion where such projects may impact on the WFD implementation.
4.5. Annual planning for 2004
The overview table ‘Meetings 2004 under the WFD Common Implementation Strategy’ was presented and discussed.
3
Conclusion/s:
WGLs are invited to plan future meetings of the WGs at least 2 weeks prior to SCG meetings;
Future SCG meetings will be followed by meetings of the Article 21 Committee. Where no decision is required, the Committee meet briefly to take note of findings and agree on timetables;
SCG agrees that the Committee will not meet in December 2003, but will be requested in writing to take note of the Draft Intercalibration Register;
SCG agrees to move the December 2004 meeting of the Committee (for finalisation of the Intercalibration Register) to January 2005;
COM agrees to reconsider changing the proposed date of the November 2004 SCG meeting (11th coincides with B and Fr holiday), depending on meeting room availability;
Netherlands confirmed that the date for the WDs meeting under the Dutch Presidency is December 2-3 2004.
4.6. Participation of organisations and other activities
Applications have been received and accepted from two new organisations to participate in the SCG as observers which are the:
European Hydrological Services form the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO- UN); and,
European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO).
COM welcomed the new organisations.
COM informed the SCG that the 1st edition of the Newsletter has been finalised. The 2nd
edition will be available in December, following the WDs meeting in Rome. Further newsletters will be prepared on a regular basis to highlight emerging issues.
5. WORKING GROUP ON ECOLOGICAL STATUS (WG2A)
The progress report for WG 2A was presented as a room document. The JRC presented an overview of the overall progress of WG2A.
5.1. WG 2A: Progress on Intercalibration Sites Selection and Intercalibration Process
JRC presented a progress report on site selection for the draft intercalibration register and the intercalibration process.
4
COM proposed that a summary document be prepared (by DG Env and JRC) to the WDs and the Committee summarising the state of play, information available and proposed process and timetable for completion of the final register.
Countries that have not yet submitted sites were requested to provide an update on progress. DK, FR, HU and IT reported that their experts were currently working on site selection and should be able to meet the deadline of November 10. SLO reported that although experts are currently working on the site selection they are not in a position to provide sites by the November deadline.
LUX requested clarification as to whether they are required to participate as they propose to use the same methodology and outcomes as FR.
Conclusions
SCG takes note of the progress report, expresses their appreciation of the work achieved and urges further progress in filling the remaining gaps
SCG agrees on submitting (to WDs as well as Art 21) a short summary report plus an updated version of the presentation given at SCG and possibly an overview map of sites;
SCG agrees that there is no need for a meeting of the WFD Article 21 Committee in December 2003;
SCG underlines the importance of the intercalibration exercise in 2005/6, requiring further guidance, and agreed the proposals and time schedules to that aim put forward by the Working Group; and,
SCG confirms the commitment to future amendments of the list of sites, if and where appropriate.
5.2. WG2A: Finalisation of Classification Guidance
The final draft of the Guidance Document on Overall Approach on Classification of ecological Status and Ecological Potential (Version 4) was presented by Germany and UK as co-leaders of the ECOSTAT WG.
The conclusions on this point were agreed on the meeting in a separate document (see Annex 3).
6. WORKING GROUP ON INTEGRATED RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT (WG 2B)
Spain presented a report on the progress of activities of WG2B. COM (Thierry Davy) presented progress on economic activities.
6.1. WG 2B: Finalisation of Wetlands Guidance Document
Italy, as leader of the drafting group on Wetlands presented the final draft (Version 7) of the Horizontal Guidance Document on the Role of Wetlands in the Water Framework Directive.
5
The conclusions on this point were agreed on the meeting in a separate document (see Annex 4).
6.2. WG 2B: Pilot River Basins
COM (on behalf of JRC) presented a progress report on the Pilot River Basin (PRB) exercise.
COM acknowledged the excellent progress made to date but emphasised that the original deadline of 30 June was unrealistic. COM proposed to present the report on progress, table of contents of the PRB report and paper on deadline extension to the WDs with the view of obtaining endorsement of the new timetable and provision of guidance on the completion of tasks.
The conclusions on this point were agreed on the meeting in a separate document (see Annex 5).
7. GROUNDWATER WORKING GROUP (WG 2C)
COM presented a progress report on activities of WG 2C, including the draft mandate.
D and FR pointed out that the activities of WG 2C may change as a result of discussions in the European Parliament and the Council, so an evolving process would need to be reflected in the mandate.
Conclusion/s:
SCG invites COM to add a sentence to the mandate clearly specifying that the document will be reviewed by the end of 2004 in light of the outcomes of the co-decision process;
SCG agrees to present the revised mandate to the WD meeting in Rome for their approval.
8. REPORTING WORKING GROUP (WG 2D)
COM presented the following two documents for discussion:
Concept Report (version 6.1); and,
Guidance on Reporting under the WFD.
Discussion focussed on the content of the two documents in order to agree on the conclusions to be presented to the WDs.
Discussion (concept report)
Main issues for discussion were:
6
Some MSs wanted the relationship between mandatory and voluntary reporting to be clearly identified and reflected in the text of both documents;
FR requested that the Barcelona Convention should be mentioned under 1.2.3 International commissions;
Section 1.2.3 only refers to reporting data for WQ, should also include other obligations (CZ); and,
Netherlands requested that the text under Section 2 – purposes for reporting in relation to data use be changed to acknowledge that MSs be consulted in the outcomes of compliance checking.
The conclusions on this point were agreed in a separate document (See Annex 6).
Discussion (Guidance document)
SCG had a comprehensive exchange of views on the draft document “guidance on reporting under the WFD” version 2.0, 22 October 2003.
Main issues for discussion were:
The need for certain clarifications (e.g. use of the terms ‘groundwaters’ and ‘groundwater bodies’; reporting date/date for delivery/cut off date; thresholds etc);
The issue of mandatory use of the electronic reporting format and possible transition arrangements for the reporting due in 2004 and 2005 (Art 3 and 5 of WFD);
The character of part C ‘information to be reported in 2005’ being a first outline structure, to be further developed and filled with substance in line with progress of work;
The terms ‘mandatory’ and ‘voluntary’ in the list of reporting requirements in the WFD leading to misunderstanding
Conclusions:
SCG invites the COM to redraft the document taking into account discussions at SCG and to make the new draft available on CIRCA by 7 Nov 2003.
Discussion and possible agreement by the WDs should not be seen as endorsement at this stage, but as a report on the state of play and a request for feedback and guidance in particular for further development of the so-called ‘prototype’.
7
9. NEW ACTIVITIES
9.1 New Activities: Programme of Measures
COM (DG Env), with contributions from the leaders of WG2B, presented the draft discussion paper ‘Activity on River Basin Management Plans and/or Programmes of Measures under the WFD Common Implementation Strategy.
Comments were invited to the issues raised and, in particular, the different options presented in the discussion document.
This discussion regarding the options was divers and no clear preference was expressed by the SCG. It was highlighted that the options are interlinked and that one could think of a stepwise approach in working on these options starting with information exchange as outlined in option 1.
Conclusion/s:
SCG agrees the WGLs take the outcomes of discussion and, starting with option 1, prepare draft mandate for discussion at the next WG 2B meeting with the view to presenting a draft mandate to the March 2004 SCG.
SCG agrees that the WDs in November are informed about the outcome of the discussions and the intention of the SCG to discuss a revise mandate on its next meeting.
9.2 New Activities: Eutrophication
COM (DG Env) presented the draft discussion paper ‘Eutrophication – Activity in the context of the Common Implementation Strategy’.
Eutrophication was recognised as an important issue and support was received for starting the activity. It was emphasised that the activity must:
Consider other international organisations and existing work/ consistency of approach; and,
Focus on important issues first.
It was suggested that the new activity be co-ordinated by WG 2A.
Conclusions:
SCG agrees to present the discussion document to WDs taking on board comments received, along with a proposal for organisation and a timetable for preparation of a mandate.
9.3 New Activities: Article 5 – Risk Analysis
A presentation was made by COM in relation to Article 5 – Analysis of risk of failing the WFD objectives on the basis of the pressures and impact assessment.
8
The issue was raised to gauge if MSs had any specific concerns and if there is a need for a CIS activity to address these concerns.
There was general agreement that there is an issue that requires further discussion. Most Member States appreciated that these issues were raised and confirmed that similar discussions are ongoing on national level.
Conclusion/s:
SCG agrees that a discussion document will be prepared by the Commission for presentation and discussion at the next SCG and invites volunteers to assist in the preparation of the document, with input from MSs.
10. FLOOD INITIATIVE
COM presented the conclusions of the Athens WDs meeting in relation to the flood initiative.
Based on the findings of the Athens WDs meeting COM intends to present (before the summer break 2004) a package in relation to flood protection and prevention. This package will address instruments for flood protection and prevention and a legislative proposal on flood prevention closely related to the WFD. To avoid duplication of effort the package will build on the findings from the existing best practices paper and other international experiences.
Conclusion/s:
SCG invites COM to prepare a position paper to be presented at the Rome WDs meeting. The paper will be available on CIRCA November 7.
11. WFD IMPLEMENTATION AND TOOL WITHIN REGIONAL POLICY
A presentation was made by COM on the possible links between the tools within the Cohesion Policy to support implementation of the WFD. The aim of the presentation was establish whether discussions are taking place in MSs and determine the most appropriate way forward to address the issue so that the water policy makers ensure that Structural Funds will support the implementation of the WFD.
Conclusions:
SCG takes note of the presentation and encourages MSs to facilitate communication links between regional policy and the WFD in their own countries;
SCG agrees that no further work be undertaken on this activity for the moment but that the SCG should discuss this issue again when relevant new developments have occurred; and,
SCG invites COM to prepare a brief presentation outlining issues to the WDs.
9
12. OTHER ISSUES
12.1. Quality standards for selected substances
Austria proposed that discussion on the setting of national quality standards for copper, nickel and zinc be included on the agenda for the next EAF Priority Substances meeting.
COM confirmed that discussion on this issue would be included as an agenda item for the next EAF meeting but proposed to limit the discussion to copper and zinc since nickel is already on the list of priority standards and a European quality standard is under development.
12.2. Conference announcement
An announcement was made of the upcoming conference on the research project HARMONICA to be held in Brussels in February 2004. Close of Meeting
The Commission thanked the participants for a constructive meeting and all the work accomplished.
10
ANNEX 1
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Austria (AT) Karl Schwaiger
Belgium (BE) Veronique Van Den Langenbergh
Cyprus (CY) Charis Omorphos
Czech Republic (CZ) Jaroslav Kinkor
Denmark (DK) Steen Pedersen
Estonia (EST) René Reisner
Finland (FI) Airi Karvonen
Germany (DE) 1. Jörg Janning
2. Ulrich Irmer
Hungary (HU) Eszter Havas-Szilagyi
Iceland (ICE) Arni Snorrason
Ireland (IRL) Pat Duggan
Italy (IT) 1. Giorgio Pineschi
2. Rachel Bindlesi
3. Nic Pacini
Lithuania (LT) Violeta Vinceviciene
Luxembourg (LUX) Paul Hansen
Netherlands (NL) 1. Edwin Koning
2. Marc de Rooy
3. Loek Knyff
Norway (N) Runar Mathisen
Poland (PL) Bernadeta Czerska
Portugal (PT) Simone Pio
Slovak Republic (SK) Milan Matuska
Slovenia (SLO) Gabrijela Grcar
Spain (SP) Manuel Menendez
11
Sweden (SE) 1. Ulla-Britta Fallenius
2. Annika Nilsson
United Kingdom (UK) 1. Rob Hitchen
2. Peter Pollard
3. Nadia Tiwana
European Chemicals Industry Council (CEFIC)
Michel Michaux
European Environment Bureau (EEB) 1. Benjamin Clarwsse
2. Stefan Scheuer
European Irrigators Council (EIC) Mr Del Campo Garcia
Environmental Platform of Regional Offices (EPRO(
Mr Harald Gerstl
European Sea Port Organisation (ESPO) 1. Mr Jan Brooke
2. Mr Peter Barham
European Water Suppliers and Wastewater Operators Association (EUREAU)
Mr. Frederic de Hemptinne
EURELECTRIC Daniel Johansson
European Crop Protection Association (ECPA) Mr. Stuart Rutherford
European Platform of Regional offices (EPRO)
Harald Gerstl
European Water Association (EWA) 1. Mr. Sigurd van Riesen
2. Marlene Liebskind
World Wildlife Fund - WWF - European Policy Office
Ms. Eva Royo Gelabert
International Commission for the Protection of the River Danube (ICPDR)
Urslula Schmedtje
JRC Ispra Ms. Anna-Stiina Heiskanen
WRc Ms. Carla Littlejohn
European Commission (COM) - DG Environment
1. Helmut Bloech (Chair)
2. Joachim D’Eugenio
3. Marta Moren Abat
12
ANNEX 2
List of documents
Agenda item Agenda title Document title Presented by
1 Welcome and Introduction
No Documents
2 Approval of the agenda Draft Agenda COM, DG Env
3 Water Directors Meeting Preparation
No Documents
4.1 Glossary Glossary of Key Terms V1.1 COM, DG Env
4.2 SEA Directive Guidance Implementation of Directive 2001/42 on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Plans and Programmes on the Environment
COM, DG Env
4.3 Management of European Eel Communication
Development of a Community Action Plan for the Management of the European Eel
COM, DG Env
4.4 TENs-T Guidelines Amending Decision No 1692/96/EC on Community Guidelines for the Development of the Trans-European Transport Network
COM, DG Env
4.5 Annual planning Meetings 2004 under the WFD Common Implementation Strategy
COM, DG Env
5 Working Group on Ecological Status WG 2A) - Progress
Progress report for the Strategic Co-ordination Group
WGLs
5.1 Finalisation of Classification Guidance
1. Cover page – Finalisation of Classification Guidance
2. Guidance on Classification – Final Draft V4
D/UK
5.2 Progress on Intercalibration Site Selection and Intercalibration Process
Cover page – Progress on Intercalibration Site Selection and Intercalibration Exercise
JRC
6 Working Group on Integrated River Basin Management (WG 2B) – progress, including economics
Cover page – Progress Report to the Strategic Co-ordination Group – Working Group 2B Integrated River Basin Management
WGLs
6.1 Finalisation of Wetlands Guidance Document
1. Horizontal Guidance Document on the Role of Wetlands in the Water Framework Directive (Final Draft V 7)
It/COM
13
2. Cover page and draft conclusions – Guidance Document on the Role of Wetlands in the Water Framework Directive Final conclusions
6.2 Pilot River Basins 1. Progress Report to the Strategic Co-ordination Group – Pilot River Basins
2. Table of Content and Workplan
3. Cover page and explanatory document
It/JRC/COMs
7 Groundwater Working Group (WG 2C) – progress plus mandate
1. Progress Report to the Strategic Co-ordination Group – Groundwater
2. Draft Mandate (updated version 2.10.03)
COM
8.1 Concept paper Reporting for Water – Concept Report. Final draft version 6.2
COM
8.2 Guidance on reporting with focus in 2004
Guidance on Reporting under the Water Framework Directive. Draft version 2.0
COM
9.1 New activities – Programmes of Measures
Discussion paper : Activity on River Basin Management Plans and/or Programmes of Measures under the WFD Common Implementation Strategy (draft 13 Oct 2003)
COM
9.2 New activities - Eutrophication
Discussion document: Eutrophication – Activity in the context of the Common Implementation Strategy
COM
10 Flood Initiative No Documents
11 WFD implementation and the tools within Regional Policy
The Structural Funds and Their Co-ordination with the Cohesion Fund – Revised Indicative Guidelines
COM
12 Other Issues No Documents
14
ANNEX 3
The Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive
Final conclusions of the Strategic Co-ordination GroupVersion: 3.0Status: 27/10/2003Note for the SCG: The draft conclusions will be discussed on the meeting of
27/28 October 2003 and the final agreed version will be sent to the meeting of the Water Directors on 24/25 November 2003 in Rome.
AGENDA ITEM 5.1: FINALISATION OF CLASSIFICATION GUIDANCE1
The final draft of the “Guidance document on Overall Approach on Classification of Ecological Status and Ecological Potential” was presented by the Germany and the United Kingdom, co-leaders of the ECOSTAT Working Group 2.A.
The guidance document sets out a common understanding on how the classification of ecological status/potential is provided for under the Water Framework Directive. In addition, a general approach is presented with particular focus of the role of physico-chemical parameters in the ecological classification.
The document was finally discussed and agreed on the meeting of the ECOSTAT Working Group on 15-17 October 2003 and was presented on 21 October to the Strategic Coordination Group.
The Strategic Co-ordination Group (hereafter referred as SCG) has examined and discussed the guidance document on its meeting of 27/28 October 2003.
Further to the discussions, the Strategic Co-ordination Group draws the following conclusions:
The SCG congratulates the Working Group, and in particular the co-leaders Germany and United Kingdom, for the timely and high quality finalisation of the guidance document and welcomes the presented draft guidance document as a successful output of the work which will provide significant high quality guidance for the further implementation process.
The SCG takes note that there are no major open issues. However, the following points were identified which need clarification in the finalisation of the guidance, in particular:
1 Number and title relates to draft agenda of SCG meeting of 27/28 October 2003. It will be modified after the SCG meeting in order to align it with the final agenda of the Water Directors meeting.
15
The WG leaders will clarify bilaterally with the French experts of WG 2.A their concerns with Table 1a, regarding biological elements and paragraphs 6.6 of Annex 1.
The WG leaders will clarify the need to introduce some editorial comments presented by Spain in writing.
FIN will identify by the end of 31 October 2003 whether there are any open questions. In case there are open points identify, FIN will present them in writing to the WG leaders but also to the SCG and the Water Directors.
The SCG invites the WG leaders to revise editorially and finalise the guidance document, where necessary, taking also into account the outcome of the discussion on the SCG.
The SCG agrees to forward the final draft guidance document to the next Water Directors meeting for final examination and agreement.
The SCG recommends to the Water Directors to agree that the final guidance document is being made available to a wider public and that the document should be used in the further intercalibration process as well as in other relevant activities under the Common Implementation Strategy.
The final draft guidance document will be available on the WFD CIRCA (folder: “C-Water Directors/f – Italian WD – 24/25 November 2003 (Rome)/Meeting documents”2) for final examination and endorsement of the Water Directors on 7th November 2003 at the latest. Any changes in comparison to the version of 21 October 2003 should be highlighted in track changes.
The Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive
Final conclusions of the Strategic Co-ordination GroupVersion: 2.0Status: 27/10/2003Note for the SCG: The draft conclusions will be discussed during the meeting
of 27/28 October 2003 and the final agreed version will be sent to the Water Directors Meeting to be held on the 24/25 November 2003 in Rome.
AGENDA ITEM 6.1: GUIDANCE DOCUMENT OF THE WETLANDS DRAFTING GROUP ON THE ROLE OF
WETLANDS IN THE WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE 3
The final draft of the “Wetlands Horizontal Guidance Document on the Role of Wetlands in the Water Framework Directive” was presented by IT, leaders of the Drafting Group, on the 7th of October 2003. The guidance document creates a common understanding of the Water Framework Directive requirements regarding wetlands and identifies their role in its implementation.
The Strategic Co-ordination Group (hereafter referred as SCG) has examined and discussed the guidance document during its meeting on the 27/28 October 2003.
Further to the discussions, the Strategic Co-ordination Group draws the following conclusions:
The SCG congratulates the Drafting Group (DG) on the timely finalisation of the guidance document and welcomes the presented draft guidance document as a successful output of the DG which will provide significant high quality guidance for the pilot testing and the further implementation process.
The SCG takes note of the fact that no open issues were identified within the DG and the WG 2B. The SCG welcomes the proactive and constructive approach that the issue will take within the pilot river basin exercise. In addition, joint efforts to facilitate coordination have already begun.
The SCG invites the DG to revise editorially and finalise the guidance document taking into account the outcome of the SCG discussions including the comments by UK, SP, and EEB (RSPB) as resolved during the meeting, which led to the following modifications in the text of the GD:
1) Section 3.3 “Wetlands and Groundwater” : First paragraph following figure 5 elimination of the repeated sentence.3 Number and title relates to the draft agenda of the SCG meeting, 27/28 October 2003. It will
be modified after the SCG meeting in order to align it with the final agenda of the Water Directors Meeting.
17
2) Section 3.3 “Wetlands and Groundwater” : Second paragraph following figure 5 change the word “severely” into “significantly”.
3) Section 3.3 “Wetlands and Groundwater” : Second paragraph following figure 5 change to “groundwater anthropogenic alterations”
4) Correct figure 4 to be consistent with text in figure 6 (step 1 letters a and b)
5) Modify Table 9 as detailed in the annex attached.
The SCG (including those delegations that raised comments before the meeting) approved the GD with the modifications listed above.
The SCG agrees to forward the final draft guidance document to the next Water Directors Meeting for final examination and agreement.
The SCG recommends to the Water Directors that they agree to the final guidance document being made available to a wider public and that the document is tested in the pilot river basins.
The final draft guidance document will be available on the WFD CIRCA (folder: deliverables 20034 under “Wetlands/Deliverables 2003 Final Guidance Document” for final examination and endorsement at the Water Directors on 7th November 2003 at the latest.
13. 6. WETLANDS AND THE IMPACTS AND PRESSURES ANALYSIS
The impacts and pressures analysis required by the WFD is a key part of the River Basin Planning Cycle. The CIS Guidance on the Analysis of Impacts and Pressures reviews the action Member States will need to take to identify water bodies at risk of failing their WFD objectives. This section of the Wetlands Guidance builds on the IMPRESS guidance to establish the relevance of wetlands in assessing risks to the environmental objectives of the Directive.13.1. 6.1 Relevant Objectives in the Impacts and Pressures Analysis
The following objectives, relevant to wetlands, will be considered during the impacts and pressures analysis:
Prevent deterioration in the status of all bodies of surface water,
This will include preventing deterioration in the hydro-morphological condition of water bodies at high status (including the condition of any wetlands in the riparian, lakeshore or intertidal zones).
Preventing deterioration in the hydro-morphological condition of water bodies at good status and below, in so far as it is necessary to support the achievement of the relevant standards for biological quality elements.
Prevent deterioration in the status of all bodies of ground water, including preventing significant damage to any terrestrial ecosystem (including wetlands) directly dependent on the groundwater body.
Protect, enhance and restore all bodies of surface water, , with the aim of achieving good ecological status by 2015.
This will include protecting, enhancing or restoring the hydro-morphological conditions of water bodies to the extent necessary to support the achievement of the relevant standards for the biological quality elements The hydrological conditions include the structure and condition of the riparian, shore and intertidal zones. These zones may include wetlands.
Protect, enhance and restore all bodies of ground water including the reversal of significant damage to any terrestrial ecosystem (including wetlands) directly dependent on the groundwater bodies, by 2015.Protect, enhance and restore all artificial and heavily modified bodies of surface water with the aim of achieving good ecological potential and good surface water chemical status by 2015.
This will include protecting, enhancing or restoring the hydro-morphological conditions of artificial and heavily modified water bodies to the extent necessary to support the achievement of the relevant standards for the biological quality elements required at good ecological potential. The hydromorphological conditions include the structure and condition of the riparian, shore and intertidal zones. These zones may include wetlands.
NOTE: CIS HMWB Guidance states that Member States would not be expected to asses risks to the achievement of Good Ecological Potential in heavily modified water bodies before the end of 2004.
Compliance with the standards and objectives for Protected Areas by 2015 at the latest, including the objectives for areas designated for the abstraction of drinking water under Article 7.
This will include standards and objectives for wetlands included within the Natura 2000 network, identified in order to implement the Habitats and Birds Directive; similarly consider regulations prescribed by the Drinking Water Directive (see Chapter 5).
19
ANNEX 5
The Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive
Final conclusions of the Strategic Co-ordination GroupVersion: 2.0Status: 28/10/2003Note for the SCG: The final conclusions are the outcome of the discussions
during the meeting of 27/28 October 2003 and will be sent to the Water Directors Meeting to be held on the 24/25 November 2003 in Rome.
AGENDA ITEM 6.2: PILOT RIVER BASIN TESTING EXERCISE IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF WATER
FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE
The SCG welcomed the progress made by the pilot river basin testing up to now and agrees to extend the deadline of presenting the final Article 5 PRB Report, inviting the PRB Steering group to present a final draft at the next SCG meeting.
The SCG agreed that the following documents will be presented to the next Water Directors meeting:
State of play and way forward of the PRB exercise, including a request on extension of the deadline for delivering the outcome report on the Article 5 PRB Report (including timetable and next steps).
Outline of the Article 5 PRB Report within the PRB exercise containing: Table of Contents, Chapters 1 and 2. This report is supposed to be finalised early 2004 and be presented to the next SCG meeting.
The SCG invites the Water Directors to endorse the outline of the Article 5 PRB Report and to revise the timetable for delivering this first report. Moreover, the SCG asks to the Water Directors to encourage and reinforce the PRB testing, stressing the importance of such exercise for the CIS.
The SCG agrees that the final outcome of the PRB exercise needs to be defined in more detail and invites the Commission to prepare a short discussion paper on what should be the concrete deliverable/outcome of the PRB exercise. The PRB outcome will not lead onto an automatic amendment of the GDs but rather an independent report on the results of the PRB testing taking into account the following points:
The PRBs are supposed to be a front runner/guide for the management of river basin districts at national level and serve also as an international platform for exchange of information, experiences and views.
The fact that the PRB testing is an independent voluntary exercise with the objective of delivering some “best practices” through learning process.
20
The final outcome of the exercise should promote learning from experience, analyses of the interlinks between guidance documents, their applicability in practice and particularities to be considered when implementing the WFD.
Give feedback on how the results of the PRB testing could influence the guidance documents and the CIS itself.
21
ANNEX 6
The Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive
Final conclusions of the Strategic Co-ordination GroupVersion: 2.0Status: 28/10/2003Note for the SCG: The draft conclusions will be discussed on the meeting of
27/28 October 2003 and the final agreed version will be sent to the meeting of the Water Directors on 24/25 November 2003 in Rome.
AGENDA ITEM 8.1: FINALISATION OF REPORTING CONCEPT PAPER5
The final draft of the document “Reporting for Water – concept report – towards a shared information system for water ” was presented by the Commission, leaders of the the Reporting Working Group 2.A.
The document was finally discussed on the meeting of the Reporting Working Group on 15 October 2003 and was presented on 20 October to the Strategic Coordination Group.
The Strategic Co-ordination Group (hereafter referred as SCG) has examined and discussed the guidance document on its meeting of 27/28 October 2003.
Further to the discussions, the Strategic Co-ordination Group draws the following conclusions:
The SCG takes note of the final draft and agrees the following amendments:
Table 4.1 is checked for consistency because the changes in comparison to the older version do not seem to be done correctly;
The section on the Danube Commission (page 6) is modified on the basis of the following text proposal provided by Austria on the meeting: “The International Commission for the Protection of the River Danube (ICPDR) has set up a Joint Action Programme which includes regular reporting. In this frame, the results of the trans-national monitoring network covering the Danube and its main tributaries are reported on an annual basis.”
An additional paragraph on the Barcelona Convention is introduced in section 1.2.3 “International Commissions” on the basis of a text proposal provided by France (by 31 October).
5 Number and title relates to draft agenda of SCG meeting of 27/28 October 2003. It will be modified after the SCG meeting in order to align it with the final agenda of the Water Directors meeting.
22
The SCG takes note of the following proposed changes and invites the Commission and all countries to take a position in order to agree on the Water Directors on how these issues can be covered in the concept paper. These three open points are as follows:
1. An addition is introduced in the conclusions Chapter 6, conclusions on page 29, fore last sentence and consequently also in the box in section 3 (addition in bold):
“The Commission and the EEA are committed to continue the development of such a system, following a subsidiary and participatory approach towards the MS, in order to have it operational as soon as possible and to implement it, including all the various elements set out in this document, by 2010.”
2. Chapter 2; purposes for reporting, add in the introduction on page 9:
"It should be acknowledged that MS have an official and legally binding responsibility towards the EC only for reporting their data. Once third parties use the reported data for own purposes the MS have no obligations towards these parties. In case the EC outsources (part of their) work to third parties (e.g. for checking compliance) a mechanism should be put in place to guarantee communication with the MS to hear both sides on the conclusions or results."
Please note the wording is to guarantee communication, not consultation.
3. A clarification on the difference between mandatory and voluntary reporting. A concrete wording is being prepared by France by 31 October 2003.
The SCG invites the WG leaders to revise editorially and finalise the document, where necessary, taking also into account the outcome of the discussion on the SCG.
The SCG agrees to forward the final draft document to the next Water Directors meeting for final examination and agreement.
The SCG recommends to the Water Directors to agree that the final document is being made available to a wider public and that the document should be used in the further as a background document in the Common Implementation Strategy, in particular when developing the reporting guidance.
The final draft guidance document will be available on the WFD CIRCA (folder: “C-Water Directors/f – Italian WD – 24/25 November 2003 (Rome)/Meeting documents”6) for final examination and endorsement of the Water Directors on 7th November 2003 at the latest. Any changes in comparison to the version of 21 October 2003 should be highlighted in track changes.
