Post a comment on the text below

River Basin Specific Pollutants

Ecological status includes the assessment of RBSPs[2].   The status of RBSPs was not reported for a large proportion of surface water bodies (around 50 %).  At EU level, 88 % of water bodies with known RBSP status were in good ecological status[3]. The proportion of water bodies where RBSPs did not compromise good or high status ranged from [7% (NL) to 100% (FI)].

About 150 RBSPs were reported as causing failure to achieve good ecological status in at least one waterbody. Those most frequently reported as causing failure were the metals zinc, with 798 waterbodies failing to achieve good ecological status, and copper (522 such waterbodies). Other types of substances causing most failures were pesticides, such as glyphosate and its breakdown product AMPA. As individual substances, most RBSPs caused fewer than 100 waterbodies to fail good ecological status.

There are differences in the numbers of substances defined by countries as RBSPs (between 4 and 300) and differences in environmental quality standards applied. This means comparison between countries should be undertaken with care.

Of the thousands of chemicals in use and potentially present in surface waters, relatively few have been identified as causing failure. From the information reported, it is not known how many other chemical pollutants are present in surface waters, and whether their concentrations should be of concern. Further discussion on chemicals is provided in chapter 3 link and chapter 6 link.

Further and detailed information on RBSPs/quality elements results is available in WISE

·         Ecological status by RBSPs see Table and RBSPs status including water bodies with unknown status Tablegraph*graph2*

·         RBSPs causing failure to achieve good ecological status Table - TableEUgraph

·         table*, table_category*table_Member_States* and specific RBSPs*

* draft dashboards;

Previous comments

  • mohauvol (Volker Mohaupt) 23 Feb 2018 16:14:27

    on page 27 is a footnote - 18:

    the footnote goes over two pages - may be is is better to limit the footnote to one page? - please change only if possible

  • mohauvol (Volker Mohaupt) 23 Feb 2018 16:16:28

    "Other types of substances causing most failures were pesticides, such as glyphosate and its breakdown product AMPA."

    Please change: "metabolite" instead of "breakdown product"

  • mohauvol (Volker Mohaupt) 23 Feb 2018 16:19:49

    "There are differences in the numbers of substances defined by countries as RBSPs (between 4 and 300) and differences in environmental quality standards applied. This means comparison between countries should be undertaken with care."

    By our knowledge 6 is the lowest number of RBSP in a MS (Cyp) and the maximum number of RBSP is 167 in CZ.

    Please check the numbers and / or cite a reference.

  • reckinann (Anne-Marie Reckinger) 26 Feb 2018 11:05:19

    We suggest to delete the following sentence "From the information reported, it is not known how many other chemical pollutants are present in surface waters, and whether their concentrations should be of concern."

  • voet (Jan Hendrik Voet) 26 Feb 2018 14:04:22

    BE-FLA (KB): p. 27-28 The status of RBSPs was not reported for a large proportion of surface water bodies (around 50 %). About 150 RBSPs were reported as causing failure to achieve good ecological status in at least one waterbody. Those most frequently reported as causing failure were the metals zinc and copper. As individual substances, most RBSPs caused fewer than 100 waterbodies to fail good ecological status.

     There are differences in the numbers of substances defined by countries as RBSPs (between 4 and 300) and differences in environmental quality standards applied. This means comparison between countries should be undertaken with care

    Even with a warning included, it should be reflected whether producing percentages is meaningful, considering the differences.

  • mitiksar (Sari Mitikka) 26 Feb 2018 18:59:24

    "The proportion of water bodies where RBSPs did not compromise good or high status ranged from [7% (NL) to 100% (FI)]."

    Suggest to remove country names, because the evaluation is based on different substances in each country or river basin.

  • voet (Jan Hendrik Voet) 28 Feb 2018 10:15:08

    BE-WAL (EC): p. 28 § blue

    “table” : Zn in 20 water bodies for Belgium and 0 in the table "Member states*". Why ?

  • Annalisa Bortoluzzi (invited by Caroline Whalley) 28 Feb 2018 12:30:48

    "Those most frequently reported as causing failure were the metals zinc, with 798 waterbodies failing to achieve good ecological status, and copper (522 such waterbodies)."

    It should be indicated what the percentage of exceedances is, based on the total and reported number of water bodies. These numbers reported for Cu and Zn cannot be reconciled with the data shown in the tables behind the links below. The indication of the reference total numbers and of the related percentages, both in the report and in the underlying tables, would be therefore mostly helpful.

    [E.g. for zinc the percentage in the WISE table is shown as ‘34%’. This means that from all of the RBSP failures for all countries, zinc contributed towards 34% of these (Zn failures = 1502). However, looking at the total no. of waterbodies (110950) and working out the percentage of zinc failures (1502), the actual percentage is 1.4%. The same remark applies also to copper, the actual percentage of failure is 1.01%].

    Further, it is assumed that in the present analysis, these metals are assessed against a national EQS. In fact, the values (and methods of implementation) of EQS for specific pollutants can be hugely variable across MS (Vorkamp and Sanderson 2016): we believe this should be a point outlined in Section 1.3, rather than only indicated in the footnote. In fact, this is a tenuous comparison to report across EU waters when the metric by which the status is assessed varies significantly between countries.

    Moreover, it is emphasised again that, in checking compliance of the metals like Zn and Cu, their bioavailability should be taken into account. It is unclear to what extent this has been done in the present assessment. For copper, it is clear that bioavailability has not always been considered, as many previous implementation studies in the UK, Germany, France and Sweden which do consider bioavailability have shown exceptionally low levels (<1%) of compliance failure. We suggest this should be stated.

    An EU expert group is currently developing guidance for assessing metals like Zn and Cu, considering e.g. bioavailability. A second remark related to observed metal (e.g. Zn, Cu) levels in EU waters is related to their natural background (BG). Metals are naturally occurring in the environment, and their natural BG varies with geological conditions. In most EU countries, metalliferous geology is present at the local scale that may significantly influence the local natural BG of metals. Also to account for this phenomenon in compliance checking, guidance is being developed. It is anticipated that the non-compliance rates of the metals will significantly decrease when these factors are being taken into account. This should be mentioned in the report.

    Reference:

    Vorkamp K, Sanderson H. 2016. EQS variation study: European Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) Variability Study. Analysis of the variability between national EQS values across Europe for selected Water Framework Directive River Basin- Specific Pollutants. Aarhus University, DCE – Danish Centre for Environment and Energy, 96 pp. Scientific Report from DCE – Danish Centre for Environment and Energy No. 198. http://dce2.au.dk/pub/SR198.pdf

  • Annalisa Bortoluzzi (invited by Caroline Whalley) 28 Feb 2018 12:32:46

    "Further and detailed information on RBSPs/quality elements results is available in WISE"

    RBSP should not be listed by the CAS number of the metal. Instead the name of the element should be applied.

  • Annalisa Bortoluzzi (invited by Caroline Whalley) 28 Feb 2018 12:33:20

    "RBSPs causing failure to achieve good ecological status Table"

    This table shows that 1502 surface water bodies fail because of zinc and its compounds.

    Below, "table_category* "

    This table shows that the combined total of water bodies that fail because of zinc and its compounds is 798 (combined).

  • farrereg (Regis Farret) 07 Mar 2018 20:32:30

    "There are differences ... defined by countries..." : Please add details on the chemical parameters that are taken into account in the different countries (especially because this number of parameters vary widely), e.g. a Table or a Figure.

You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.