DIRECTORATE-GENERAL
ENVIRONMENT
Directorate C - Quality of Life, Water & Air
ENV.C.1 - Water
CIS Working group on Programmes of Measures
Meeting 12-13/11 2013. Brussels
Minutes. Note: Action Points are marked underlined in the text
10:30-11:00 1. Opening and Introduction (Com and Co-chairs)
Chair and co-chairs present themselves, and the signature of a support contract is communicated to the WG. This meeting focuses on the Mandate’s topics that were prioritised at the last meeting.
11:00-13:00 2. Making Water Reuse and Recycling happen
This topic was decided to be a priority at the last meeting, COM is working on a Communication, and exchange of experience was requested and offered by MS.
a) Preparation of The Impact Assessment for a possible WR&R Regulation (COM & BIO Intelligence Services) - Lise VANLONG
The study (by BioIS, ICF and Cranfield University) focuses on urban wastewater, treated in order to fit to the required levels at the intended use. 4 main tasks have been developed. Task 1 is a compilation of previous work to be finished by end 2013. Task 2 analyses policy options and their impacts, to start in 2014. Task 3 deals with consultation in mid-2014, and Task 4 is the support to the IA report drafting. Some information gaps are shown, in particular regarding the baseline assessment, and suggestions to overcome them are warmly welcome. A draft outline of the problem definition is presented, requesting input. The presentation and a questionnaire, including the current situation on water reuse practice in MS are uploaded at CIRCABC.
On request of DE and DK, it is clarified that the focus of the study is on “treated urban wastewater” from utilities and its potential applications; and the analysis and policy options are still quite open. DE mentioned that within this context a widened scope to include greywater recycling should be considered. It might be relevant to look at industrial processes from the food industry, which might have similar uses. An example from Dow Chemicals is recommended by WssTP. In-house or in-company should not be considered (MT) – costs and availability of water are key elements. On request of UK, COM clarifies that the Blueprint showed that the field of water re-use was the only field where a potential EU-level instrument concerning harmonised standards on safety/health might be useful – this is the background for the study, though the study also addresses possible ways of promotion. The need for harmonised standards should be justified/clarified (FR). RO suggests considering also the synergies or conflicts with the impact of sludge from the UWWTPs and manure from vulnerable areas..
COM request feedback in two weeks directly to COM (Dagmar Behrendt Kaljarikova and Henriette Faergemann), on the questions outlined and the state of play in MS, available at CIRCABC. Afterwards, the inception report of the study will also be shared. A follow-up on the study will be provided at the next meeting.
b) MS examples
· b1) The Masterplan for the Re-use of Highly Polished Treated Sewage Effluents in Malta - Paul Micallef MT
MT explains the history of water supply, and its changes over time, including desalinisation plants and water conservation measures; and an overall water balance showing problems of groundwater overabstraction. Polished treated effluents are one of the key measures being initiated in MT, with an overall potential estimated at 20Mm3/yr, and a modular approach to respond to water demand changes and avoid over-supply. A mobile solar-energy-run modular plant is available to deal with local requests for higher quality. Main problems refer to network infrastructure shortcomings in the coastline, and the seawater intrusion in sewerage networks. Treated effluents are either directly served or recharged to aquifers, in order to manage the annual water cycle.
· b2) Establishing Partnerships on Water Re-use in Denmark - Karen Sanning DK
The focus of water reuse is different than in MT, but groundwater is also strongly under pressure, in particular in Eastern Denmark. A guidance on reuse in the frame of regulations is being developed, based on the current status, and the collaboration of different interest groups, by application for a specific call. Quality standards (incl. for export) of the food industry are very high and are driving the process. More information available at ecoinnovation.dk (only in Danish). An update will be provided at the next meeting.
· b3) The Real Time Operational Control Tool of Combined Sewerage Overflows (CSO) at Coastal Cities, Thessaloniki - Marios Vafeidis EL
Several steps have been taken in history in the surroundings of Thessaloniki to promote water reuse, e.g. on mixing with clean water, use for industrial crops, the desalinisation plant and a recharge to aquifer. Intrusion of seawater is a major problem; and in order to avoid re-building of the sewerage networks, a control tool has been developed. Network infrastructure is installed and data collection has started in the frame of this Pilot System, in order to manage the gates. Replication to other cities is planned when the pilot provides all relevant information.
· b4) An Italian challenge for unconventional water supply – Laura Achene IT
Specific regulation is in place in IT since 2003, revised in 2006, and a further review pending. The main user of treated wastewater (TWW, secondary treatment) is agriculture, and some specific urban and industrial uses do exist. Though they are based on scientific studies, some of the used parameters are either outdated or established due to drinking water or environmental requirements, and are not necessarily appropriate for agricultural uses. Irrigation infrastructure is being promoted by the regions, and a National irrigation plan, which includes also funding for infrastructure on water reuse has also been established (signed between the Ministry of Agriculture and Regions). Some plants in different IT regions are presented. Key topics in IT are the fixing of standards, the costs of technologies, monitoring protocols, site-specific management plans, impact assessment, dissemination and contingency plans. EU regulation should address common standard values and monitoring programmes. On request of COM, IT will provide information on economic instruments for promotion. IT informs that the health sector is also assessing the impacts. IT experience on monitoring will also be provided for the COM study.
· b5) Innovative solutions for water reuse – Durk Krol WssTP
WssTP has recently released a report on water reuse (summary available at the WssTP website http://wsstp.eu/files/2013/11/ExS-Water-Reuse.pdf), and this topic is covered by different initiatives around innovation, including EIP Water, JPI Water and SPIRE. This plan includes a number of activities to be developed for stimulating innovation in water reuse. An EIP Water Action Group has started a month ago. SPIRE is also briefly introduced.
c) Discussion and Next steps
The following actions were agreed on:
· A follow-up with WHO activities, e.g. participation at the next WG meeting, will be made, in order to better understand this global frame.
· Establish clear links and involvement of other units inside the COM, i.e. DG SANCO in the frame of the overall regulation development and its IA. This WG can be considered to be the gatekeeping one for the topic. COM informed about an Inter-service group on water reuse that was established and met on 12 Nov 13 for the first time. The objective of the group is to involve the relevant services in the work on a potential EU-level instrument on water reuse.
· Discussion on greywater recycling in the contexts of reuse-recycle-efficiency, and a presentation by DE, to bear in mind different aspects (e.g. hygiene) currently being assessed by the DE administration. A German LIFE+ project (http://www.hamburgwatercycle.de/index.php/english.html) on this subject could be presented by DE.
· FR asked if there will be another group to consult MS on the COM work on water reuse or only the CIS WG PoM? COM responded that for the time being this group is the main channel to MS, however, a possibility of establishing another group is not excluded.
· Presentation at the next meeting by ES on its experience. At the next session, the WG will also assess the usefulness of presentations from research projects.
13:00-14:00 Lunch break
14:00-17:00 3. Better PoM s in the 2nd cycle
At the next WD meeting, a study on the PoM reporting will be presented, developing further the first draft results that will be presented here. In many bilateral MS-COM meetings, the absence of links between pressures and measures is a relevant topic that will also be addressed in this session. Furthermore, some practical examples will be presented, on how to design PoM in a cost-effective way by modelling, and on funding.
a) Assessment of the 2012 reporting of the PoM implementation (Steve Nixon, WRc) and discussion
Information is provided regarding the assessment of the PoM implementation, based on the assessment currently being carried out by WRc. A review of the implementation of basic measures is provided. The risk of not implementing all other basic measures is considered relevant. Other topics of the presentation refer to supplementary measures, to funding, links with pressures, etc. The presentation is available at CIRCABC.
In the discussion, DE asks for a certain rating of “success stories” made by the COM in order to feedback valuable information to MS (effective and widely applicable measures, checked under the peer-review process), and eventually these measures can be published by the COM. This might be partly addressed by work on NWRM. No particular MS reports are foreseen to be developed, but if MS are interested, MS can ask COM for the “MS Summaries” on the PoM assessment. Feedback from MS on the assessment is useful to focus the further in-depth assessment. Further reporting by MS will be taken into account in the in-depth assessment.
The upcoming in-depth study on PoM should consider the following topics: a) develop a framework and refer to the different water types in the assessment, in particular regarding TC water bodies; b) what has been the process for prioritisation of measures in the first RBMPs, and which criteria have been applied?; c) a stronger link should be made also to the achievement of objectives, in order to ensure that the assessment refers also to the efficiency of measures; d) go beyond a simplistic assessment of basic vs. supplementary measures, bearing in mind that the type of measures is different in both (basic often referring to legislative and planning initiative; and supplementary often being construction projects) and to analyse also the complexity of measures reported/grouped under the KTM. Further aspects have been raised in other agenda points (e.g. PoM assessments by MS, WG DIS discussions on how to represent progress). Follow-up will be made after the Workshop on 21 Jan 2014.
b) Linking Pressures and Measures
· b1. Expectations for the 2nd Cycle (Henriette Faergemann, COM)
COM informs on a Workshop to be developed on 21 January 2014, on Art.5 and successful WFD implementation. A paper has been uploaded at the WG folder in CIRCABC (discussed recently in the SCG, and currently under discussion) regarding the understanding of Art.11. Input into the paper via SCG members is welcome before the WD meeting (deadline 13 November 2013).
· b2. Presentation of the P&M study (Steve Nixon, WRc) – discussions of lessons to be learned
A number of topics were analysed under a specific contract, and are now published at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-framework/implrep2007/background.htm. This study is based on a storyline relating Pressures, Impacts, Status and Responses/Measures, using different information from WISE and RBMPs. The analysis was focuses on pressures reduction, without direct links to status changes, due to the reporting of data mainly. The main learned lessons regarding the first reporting are: linking status and measures, ensure that measures are WFD-compliant, basing decision on measures on expert judgment vs. pressures analysis. A common understanding is required for “significant pressures”; no deterioration has to be ensured; list of pressures might be rationalised and reporting should include the second level. From the current reporting, it is difficult to understand if measures are adequately targeted to the relevant sources, e.g. softer measures are often applied to farmers. Mechanisms and measures should be clearly defined and distinguished. A further list of topics is included in the presentation, available at CIRCABC.
In the discussion, it was explained that according to the WG DIS discussions it is still unclear at which level measures will be reported. It seems extraordinarily difficult to understand from some RBMPs, which measures are being applied to which water bodies. This is necessary, for example, to apply the tests under WFD Article 4(7).
· b3. Using modelling and optimisation to decide on the selection of measures - Maggie Kossida, NTUA
The ABOT project (finalised in April 2013) assesses measures, based on pre-existing datasets in 4 pilot RBs to bridge the gap between water availability and demand. Options were assessed and a sensitivity analysis was carried out. The different case studies and proposed options for the combination of measures are presented, including the issue on who burdens the costs. The presentation is available at CIRCABC. Feedback on the RBMPs was provided within the project, for the second planning cycle.
· b4. Use of models to define cost effective measures in PoM – Olli Malve, Finnish Environment Institute
The presentation is based on the LIFE GisBloom project. The project analyses the development of nutrient loads, in relation to the thresholds for the different status classes; in order to identify cost-effective measures or combination of measures, dealing the project with 19 different measures. Another VIRVA model has been developed to estimate economic benefits from improved water status. The final remarks include that there is a huge demand for this DSS tools, though they are very difficult to be managed.
· b5. Progress on the implementation of the Programs of Measures in Norway - Hilde Keilen, Norwegian Environment Agency
NO provides some relevant information on its PoMs, with similar data to those reported by MS (see Agenda point 3b2), including an analysis of data gaps or obstacles. An interim report on the status has been prepared, and the different chapters address the WFD requirements, and are presented.
A National library of measures has been developed, and this would be useful to be considered to support any EU-wide development, e.g. on NWRM.