9th CMA plenary meeting. 5th and 6th May 2009, Ghent, Belgium

/ EUROPEAN COMMISSION
DIRECTORATE-GENERAL
ENVIRONMENT
Directorate D – Water, Chemicals and Cohesion
ENV.D2 – Protection of Water and Marine Environment /

12th May 2009

Eighth Meeting of the CHEMICAL MONITORING ACTIVITY (CMA)
for the WFD Common Implementation Strategy
5-6 may 2009 from 14h30 to 13h
NH GHENT Belfort HOTEL, belgium

Draft version

Minutes

The Commission, DG Environment D.2 (hereafter referred as COM) invited members of Chemical Monitoring Activity (CMA) to the 9th Plenary meeting of the CMA Group in Ghent, hosted by VMM (Flemish environmental agency).

The main objective was to discuss the progress of the draft Sediment & Biota guidance, to explore the need for additional guidance on implementation of QA/QC directives and to address the draft CMA mandate for the next period (2010-2012).

Chair: Mario Carere (MC), Italy

Co-Chair: European Commission - Madalina David (MD) and Bernd Gawlik (BG)

Participants: A full list of meeting participants is provided in Annex 1.

Agenda: The agenda for this meeting is attached in Annex 2

Access to presentations: All documents are available for downloading at CIRCA.

First day: 5 May 2009

Item 1: Welcome - Rudy Cautaerts (RC)

RC, head of department of Flemish Environment Agency gave a presentation on the overall activities for which the Agency is responsible. He welcomed all the participants.

Item 2: CMA overview – Mario Carere (MC)

MC gave a brief overview of the CMA activities since October 2008 onward (see slides on CIRCA).

The main points were:

CMA1: Exchange of best practice

  • Guidance on surface water monitoring is now in a published version and available on CIRCA.
  • The results of the trials on River Danube (near Budapest) organised last year will be ready very soon
  • The first version of the guidance on biota and sediment is ready and is one the main subjects of this meeting

CMA 2: QA/QC

  • The QA/QC directive should be agreed by council and parliament till the 3rd of June 2009, then, it will be ready for publication after a few weeks
  • The research project EAQC Wise ended last December and gave rise to “Blue Print” document and will be the basis for a guidance document on QA/QC directive implementation if it is considered as needed. This will be also one of the items for discussion during the meeting.

CMA3: Standardization and research

  • The mandate M424 is accepted and the project will start this year.

Then MC gave a short presentation on the sediment and biota data provided by the Member States as a support for monitoring based prioritisation process. A special attention should be given to the matrices and fractions analysed by the MS, highlighting that some fraction are predominant. This could be a good basis for the guidance on biota and sediment and the statistics presented will be provided to the drafting group in order to help for further development of the guidance.

Item 3: Guidance on Biota and Sediment – Stefano Polesello (SP)

SP presented the progress of the guidance produced by the Drafting group (see slides on CIRCA). As decided within the Drafting group, there are chapters for which some open issues had been identified and therefore are subject for discussion in the CMA.

Due to some comments in the assembly, it was decided to go through the document and to have at least a preliminary discussion on the guidance even though the document was sent very late and did not allowed the members to assess it in depth. It is also acknowledged that written comments will be accepted until the 5th of June in order to allow experts in member states to be consulted.

Chapter 3:

  • Is there agreement on the following list of substance relevant for sediment/biota monitoring?

Table 1

Priority substances of the Water Framework Directive priority substances that are suggested for trend monitoring in sediment and or biota.

P = preferred matrix over water phase, O= optional matrix.

Priority Substance / Sediment / Biota
Alachlor / O / ---_
Anthracene / P / O
Atrazine / --- / ---
Benzene / --- / ---
Brominated diphenyl ethers a / P / P
Cadmium and its compounds / O / O
C10-13-chloroalkanes / P / P
Chlorfenvinphos / O / ---
Chlorpyrifos (-ethyl, -methyl) / O / ---
1,2-Dichloroethane / --- / ---
Dichloromethane / --- / ---
Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) / O / O
Diuron / --- / ---
Endosulfan / O / ---
Fluoranthene / P / O
Hexachlorobenzene / P / P
Hexachlorobutadiene / O / O
Hexachlorocyclohexane b / O / P
Isoproturon / O / ---
Lead and its compounds / O / O
Mercury and its compounds / O / P
Naphthalene / O / O
Nickel and its compounds / O / O
Nonylphenols / O / O
Octylphenols / O / O
Pentachlorobenzene / P / O
Pentachlorophenol / O / ---
Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons c / P / O d
Simazine / --- / ---
Tributyltin compounds / P e / P e
Trichlorobenzenes / --- / ---
Trichloromethane / --- / ---
Trifluralin / O / ---
DDT (including DDE, DDD) / P / P
Aldrin / O / O
Endrin / O / O
Isodrin / O / O
Dieldrin / O / O
Tetrachloroethylene / --- / ---
Tetrachloromethane / --- / ---
Trichloroethylene / --- / ---

aIncluding Bis(pentabromophenyl)ether, octabromo derivate and pentabromo derivate;

b gamma-HCH (Lindane);

c Including Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(b)fluoroanthene, Benzo(g,h,i)perylene, Benzo(k)fluoroanthene, Indeno(1,2,3-cd)-pyrene;

d Preferable in mussels;

e marine environment

In any case, for compliance checking is recalled that MS have the choice of the matrix if they have established EQS’s.

Chapter 4 aims at giving statistical criteria for developing a sampling and monitoring strategy (how many samples, how many sites, how frequent) and need to be revised.

Chapter 5:

Open Technical issues:

  • There was a discussion whether the following Table (present in interim Draft 1) presented below should be skipped or not.

Type of water body / Sedimentation rate (mm/y) / Frequency (minimum requirements)
Large rivers / High sedimentation rate (mm/y) / 1 to 3 times /year
Lakes / Low sedimentation rate (mm/y) / once every 6 years
Coastal areas / Low sedimentation rate (mm/y) / once every 6 years
Estuaries / High sedimentation rate (mm/y) / several times/year

It was decided to be removed having in view that the sampling frequencies for each water body type is not representative for local/regional variability.

  • Sampling depth is dependent on desired time resolution and sediment accumulation rate and therefore the conventional top 5 cm layer should be changed to 1-5 cm according to local variability.
  • Additional attention should be paid to local conditions such as compaction, bioturbation and re-suspension events. More detailed guidance should be given here (“additional attention” is not sufficient in a guidance doc).

A discussion on sedimentation rate occurred as being probably the most important parameter when trends are established. It was suggested that sediments should better be used as “retrospective” and biota as “future descriptors”.

Sampling uncertainty is also of major importance when trying to establish trends. What is exactly uncertainty in sampling? In this case, it should be agreed that it concerns only the sampling process itself.

Some more “philosophic questions” were raised like:

  • Does sediment represent the real state of aquatic environment if for e.g. sediment has a “little” to do with the water above to it? As a more general point of view as regards the way of sediment and biota use, it is worthwhile to ensure comparability within a Member State and between Member States even” flexibility is a nice concept”.
  • Grain-size fractions:the sed/biota guidance suggests <63 µm for all PS, while in the Surface Water Monitoring Guidance it is written: “In general, organic contaminants should be analysed in the < 2 mm fraction of the sediment, metals in the less than 63 µm fraction”. pROPOSAL:
  • organics on < 2 mm and metal <63 µm
  • as alternative: analysis on total sediment fororganic contaminants
  • or metals and organics on <63 µm

On those points experts do not seem to agree on the size fraction and it is recalled that those discussion lasted for tens of years and this controversy will not be solved in few hours. An agreement has to be found in order to have a guidance as useful as possible in due time. A good way should be to analyse the European database presented by MC.

The question of normalisation that should compensate for sieving is also raised.

A possibility is to propose the different options in the document and to give “pro” and “cons” for each of them.

  • Sampling pre-treatment: Freeze-drying, air-drying or no treatment?
  • Can be useful to have a very short summary to be presented as a general sampling protocol?

Chapter 6

  • There was a discussion whether the following Table (present in interim Draft 1, not provided to the CMA participants) should be deleted. It is too prescriptive or useful information for the field operators?

Species / Number / Size[1] / Age / Sex[2] / Tissue
Shellfish
Mussel / -
Mytilus edulis or
M. galloprovincialis / 3 pools of 20 / Narrow length range / 1-2 years / Whole soft body
Pacific oyster
Crassostrea gigas / Narrow length range / 2 years / - / Whole soft body
Flatfish
Dab
Limanda limanda / At least 12 / Narrow length range / 2-3 years / Single sex, preferably females / Muscle for Hg.
Liver for all other determinands
Plaice
Pleuronectes platessa / At least 12 / Narrow length range / 2-3 years / Single sex, preferably females / Muscle for Hg.
Liver for all other determinands
Flounder
Platichthys flesus / At least 12 / Narrow length range / 2-3 years / Single sex, preferably females / Muscle for Hg.
Liver for all other determinands
Roundfish
Cod
Gadus morhua / At least 12 / Narrow length range / 2-3 years / Single sex, preferably females / Muscle for Hg.
Liver for all other determinands
Whiting
Merlangius merlangus / At least 12 / Narrow length range / 2-3 years / Single sex, preferably females / Muscle for Hg.
Liver for all other determinands
Hake
Merluccius merluccius / At least 12 / Narrow length range / 2-3 years / Single sex, preferably females / Muscle for Hg.
Liver for all other determinands
Herring
Clupea harengus / At least 12 / Narrow length range / 2-3 years / Single sex, preferably females / Muscle for organic contaminants and Hg.
Liver for other trace metals.
Eel pout
Zoarces viviparus / At least 12 / Narrow length range / 2-3 years / Single sex, preferably females / Muscle for Hg.
Liver for all other determinands

Table 1 was deleted because it was considered as too prescriptive.

  • Pre-treatment: Extraction of wet or air/freeze dried tissue?
  • Is there a need for a specific section on top predator monitoring?
  • Are there specific requirements for Monitoring of Mercury, Hexachlorobenzene and Hexachlorobutadiene in biota in relation with compiance checking? Is there a need for a dedicated section?

The discussions mainly address the difficulty to have comparability in biota within a MS. How to choose useable, reproducible and easy to find species?

Moreover, in some area, there are some intensive efforts to reintroduce species in the aquatic environment. It is reasonable to use biota for assessing” water quality in the context of WFD” which is a directive aiming at the good ecological status for all European water.

Could be “passive samplers” or “silica sieves” a possible way?

P. Roose (OSPAR) will provide to the drafting group the general approach that has been “adopted” by OSPAR for the use of this “artificial” biota. Anyway, biota represents a high trophic level, and this is not in favour of passive samplers.

Chapter 7

  • According to WFD, trend monitoring implies monitoring of sediment and/or biota. Might whole water analysis be used for trend monitoring, avoiding analysis of sediment and biota?

MD (DGEnv) recalled that both sediment and biota should be preferably used for long-term trend analysis according to Environmental Quality Standard Directive.

Chapter 9, 10 and 11 (case studies) have to be completed.

The timetable for future actions on the draft guidance is:

  • 5th of June for written comments
  • Revision of the text: June-September 2009
  • Case Studies collection: second complete draft to be sent to DGEnv: end of October 2009
  • Presentation of final Guidance at the next CMA Plenary meeting to be held in Rome (November).

Item 4: Standardization /Enhancement of WFD Relevant Analytical Method – Ulrich Borchers (UB)

UB presented the progress of the M424 mandate (see slides on CIRCA)

For future it is planned:

  • Finalisation of negotiations with DG ENTR (May-June 2009)
  • Signature of the contract: July 2009
  • Kick off meeting: August-September 2009.

Item 5: Climate Change Impacts on Water Quality - do we need research on chemical indicators in the light of on going policy? – Philippe Quevauviller (PQ)

PQ presented some general issues regarding climate changes and possible needs to anticipate the impacts of climate changes on River Basin Management Plans (see slides on CIRCA).

A basic question is raised to conclude the presentation: do we need research on climate change impacts on water quality?

  • Evaluation of CC impacts on chemical pathways? e.g. transformation of chemicals (speciation), degradation patterns, toxical impacts, bio-uptake etc.
  • Impacts on predictive assessments? e.g. influence of environmental co-stressors, additional inputs (change of physico-chemical conditions with subsequent release), synergies etc.
  • Consequences for “reference conditions” e.g. baseline shift with impacts on EQS, monitoring design, adaptation measures etc.
  • Can we identify specific ‘chemical indicators’ related to climate change?

Some indirect links are addressed like the increase of disease which would lead to increasement of chemical substances like pesticides and consequently to more impacts. This is more a political decision than an direct impact of CC.

The changes of environmental parameters such as temperature, pH, could lead to a change in fate of chemicals and this is a direct link with climate change like alsophoto-degradation or underground water decrease may have a direct impact on water.

Also, PQ announced the second conference on WDF linked to RBMP which will be organised next year in Lille. All the information are available on the website:

Item 6: The NORMAN Network - Anne Morin (AM)

AM presented the situation regarding the NORMAN network which aims at information on emerging substances for all stakeholders interested (see slides on CIRCA). Following the FP6 funded project, NORMAN is now implemented as a non profit association since last March and activities are funded by its members via annual membership fees.

8 founding members have signed the consortium agreement. The ordinary members are invited to join the network.

The activities for 2009 are summarized below:

  • Regular feeding of the NORMAN databases (EMPOMAP, EMPODAT and EMPOMASS) with results of recent monitoring campaigns;
  • Inter-lab exercise on “Perfluorinated Compounds in Water, Fish and Sludge” to be organised by IVM, NORMAN and QUASIMEME (March – Nov 2009);
  • Expert Group meeting on “Use of passive sampling for emerging substances” – publication of a NORMAN position paper (Prague, May 2009 - jointly with the 3rd Intern. Passive Sampling Workshop and Symposium - IPSW 2009);
  • Workshop on “Metabolites / degradation products of emerging substances”: Autumn 2009 (RIVM / IVM) – will be soon announced;
  • Working and Expert Group meetings on the use of biological assays and analytical methods within monitoring programmes as tools for better understanding of substances bioavailable within the sample and identification of the toxicants responsible for adverse effects;
  • WG on “Prioritisation of emerging substances”: the mandate of the WG has been approved and the operational work is in its starting phase.

More information available on

Second day: 6 May 2009

Item 7: Operation of the Laboratory – Peter Van Caeter (PC)

PC presented the activities of the analytical laboratory and the main techniques used in the analysis of contaminants in the environmental (see slides on CIRCA). This presentation was given in preparation of the visit to the analytical laboratory to be organised in the afternoon session.

Item 8: Implementation of QA/QC Directive – Andrea Held (AH)

AH presented the technical requirements to be fulfilled by the QA/QC directive implementation (see slides on CIRCA).

It was underlined that some of the issues addressed in this directive will require regular updates and therefore guidance on correct and comparable implementation will be needed:

  • What is the meaning of “Best available techniques not entailing excessive costs” when talking about analytical techniques?
  • What is a relevant proficiency testing schemes and what are appropriate Reference Materials within WFD?

The EAQC-WISE blueprint (from EAQC wise research program) addresses all these issues, in particular the proposal for a national expert group (NEG) in charge of QA/QC in the context of WDF monitoring activities and moreover an European network of NEG’s in order to:

  • Link actors
  • Exchange information and best practice
  • Take responsibility for processes
  • Initiate activities
  • Facilitate improved use of resources

Regarding all these new topics on QA/QC requirements, AH proposed to lead a drafting group for a guidance on “how to implement QA/QC” directive” which should address the system (EAQC Wise blue print) and the organisation. CMA experts can propose names and topics until the 5th of June. A first outline will then be prepared and discussed at the next CMA meeting in November. If the work programme will be agreed by the drafting group, a first draft document will be ready in early 2010.

All the documents may be downloaded on

Item 9: Use of Measurement Uncertainty in Compliance Assessment - Maria Belli (MB)

In addition to AH presentation, MB presented on behalf of Italy, some proposals on how to address the uncertainty and compliance checking (see slides on CIRCA). Establishment of a working group to elaborate such kind of guidance was suggested as a possible way forward.

Item 10: Open Issues on Reporting Obligations - Raphael Démouliere (RD)

In addition to AH presentation, RD gave a presentation on how the confidence will be calculated in France with a view of reporting obligations (see slides on CIRCA). RD highlighted the impacts of the 3 rules of assessment on the chemical status using the previsions of Article 5 of QA/QC Directive.

These 2 presentations tend to confirm the need to have guidance on this topic. Also, the issue was addressed to WGE members at the last WGE meeting in March 2009. It was concluded that a consultation at the national level is needed and the final decision will be take based on the comments received.

Item 11: Link with Marine Strategy – Georg Hanke (GH)

GH gave an general overview of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive requirements (see slides of CIRCA) and the points dealing with good environmental status (annex 1 of MSFD).

He explained that JRC leads the activity of the task groups (one per descriptors in the annex 1).

It seems that task group N°8, focussing on concentrations of contaminants at levels not giving rise to pollution effects, is probably the most appropriate group in relation with CMA activities. Taken into account that some experts are working for both WFD and MFSD implementation, this task will be a good opportunity to make and links between the 2 directives and to avoid inconsistencies.

The report for all descriptors should be ready early 2010 as agreed with DGEnv.