Water Services National Training Group

1
Water Services National Training Group

• 11th Annual Conference
• 6th September 2007

2
Water Framework Directive Monitoring
Implications for Local Authorities
river basin district

• Seán Ó Breasail
• Project Co-ordinator
• South Western River Basin District

3
Water Framework Directive
Maintain high status of waters where it exists,
preventing any deterioration in the existing
status of waters and achieving at least good
status in all waters by 2015. Manage water
bodies in a way that protects ecosystems and
habitats. Involve stakeholders community
groups, public representatives, state agencies,
trade organisations, and the general public.  
4
Water Framework Directive

• For surface waters
• high ecological status means that quality
  elements show little or no effects of human
  activity compared to undisturbed conditions
• good ecological status means quality elements
  show only slight changes caused by human activity
  compared to undisturbed conditions.

5
Water Framework Directive

• For groundwater good status must be achieved for
  quantity and water chemistry.

6
Good surface water status equals good ecological
status and good chemical status
HUMAN IMPACT
Any WFD Monitoring site with Q lt 4 requires
investigative monitoring
7
(No Transcript)
8
Ecological Status
Biology (Annex V)
algae plants invertebrates
fish
General conditions (Annex VIII)
high good moderate
high good moderate poor bad
D.O. Phosphate etc
pass fail
Specific pollutants (Annex VIII)
Organo- Organo-
etc halogens phosphate
Hydromorphology elements (Annex VIII)
high good
hydrology continuity morphology
Chemical Status
pass fail
compliance with standards for Annex X substances
and other EC Directives listed in Annex IX
Arachlor Atrazine
etc
one out all out rule
WFD Surface Water Classification Systems
9
Water Framework Directive Article 8

• Monitoring of surface water status, groundwater
  status and protected areas
• Member States shall ensure the establishment of
  programmes for the monitoring of water status in
  order to establish a coherent and comprehensive
  overview of water status within each river basin
  district

10
Water Framework Directive Article 8

• - for surface waters such programmes shall cover
• the volume and level or rate of flow to the
  extent relevant for ecological and chemical
  status - -
• the ecological and chemical status

11
Water Framework Directive Article 8

• - for groundwaters such programmes shall cover
  monitoring of the chemical and quantitative
  status,
  

12
Water Framework Directive Article 8

• - for protected areas the above programmes shall
  be supplemented by those specifications contained
  in Community legislation under which the
  individual protected areas have been established.

13
Water Framework Directive Article 8

• Protected areas include areas designated for
• abstraction of water human consumption,
• (ii) protection of economically significant
  aquatic species, e.g. shellfish,
• (iii) recreational waters, bathing waters,
• (iv) nutrient-sensitive areas,
• (v) protection of habitats or species

14
Water Framework Directive Article 8

• Monitoring of surface water status, groundwater
  status and protected areas
• Monitoring programme started on 22nd December 2006

15
WFD Monitoring
EPA, MI, CFB
LA, EPA
LA, EPA, NPWS
EPA
LA, EPA
EPA
LA
16
Monitoring

• Surveillance
• Operational
• Investigative

• - overall trend

17
Monitoring

• Surveillance
• Operational
• Investigative

• - performance of measures

18
Monitoring

• Surveillance
• Operational
• Investigative

• - address problems and uncertainties

19
Surveillance monitoring

• 180 River monitoring sites and 76 Lake monitoring
  sites

20
Surveillance monitoring

• Selection of sites and the wide range of
  parameters were determined by the text of the
  WFD.
• Biological quality elements
• General physico-chemical (12 times / year)
• Priority substances (12 times / year for one year
  in the cycle)
• EPA undertaking surveillance monitoring

21
Operational monitoring

• Monitoring to check effectiveness of Programmes
  of Measures (PoMs)
• Point Source Measures
• Diffuse Source Measures
• Measures to protect High and Good Status
• Measures to bring rivers back to Good Status

22
Operational monitoring

• Rivers
• 2,500 sites
• 1,300 biology only sites
• 300 physico-chemical only
• 900 physico-chemical and biological
• Lakes
• 226 sites

23
Operational monitoring

• Frequency
• General Chemistry - minimum of 4 times / year
• Reduce frequency to free resources for
  Investigative Monitoring
• Biology once in three years but bad status
  sites to be done annually

24
Operational monitoring
25
WFD monitoring v previous monitoring SWRBD
No. of samples analysed per annum
No. of sampling sites
3,380
503
26
WFD monitoring v previous monitoring SWRBD
WFD
No. of samples analysed per annum
No. of sampling sites
No. of samples to be analysed per annum
No. of sampling sites
3,380
503
2,000
124
27
WFD monitoring v previous monitoring SWRBD
WFD
No. of samples analysed per annum
No. of sampling sites
No. of samples to be analysed per annum
No. of sampling sites
Total no. of samples to be analysed per annum
Investigative monitoring samples
3,380
503
2,000
124
6,000
4,000
28

• Operational monitoring sites
• Surveillance monitoring sites
• Pre WFD physico-chemical sites

29
Investigative monitoring

• Pollution Incidents
• Rolling catchment programmes
• Biological risk assessment (SSRS)
• Physico-chemical sampling
• EPA advises that one quarter of physico-chemical
  resources should be assigned to this programme

30
Investigative monitoring

• Electronic networks to look at temporal
  variations in e.g. conductivity, turbidity,
  dissolved oxygen
• Remote sensing using aerial photography or
  satellite images

31
Investigative monitoring

• Likely level of investigative monitoring required
• There are approximately 2,700 WFD monitoring
  sites nationally located on main-stem rivers
• 1,015 sites designated lt good status
• 230 impacted by diffuse pollution,
• 260 impacted by point sources
• remainder no definite cause identified.

32
Investigative monitoring

• Case Study Cork County Council rivers and
  lakes
• 76 sites were identified as being lt good status
• 28 impacted by point sources
• 26 impacted by diffuse pollution
• 22 had mixed sources of pollution.

33
Investigative monitoring

• Investigative monitoring required upstream of
  diffuse and mixed sources of pollution
• Investigative monitoring also required upstream
  of sites impacted by multiple point sources

34
Investigative monitoring

• Next steps following identification of areas
  requiring investigative monitoring
• Undertake detailed desk study gather data on
  water quality, farm surveys, IPPCs, Section 4s,
  planning files, etc.
• Using GIS, identify the probable source(s) of
  pollution.
• Develop micro-projects for each site, i.e.
  identify locations to be sampled
  (physico-chemical / biological) upstream of the
  problematic site.

35
Investigative monitoring

• It was estimated, that for each problematic site,
  there would be a need to locate 10 I.M. sites
  upstream.
• IM sites for diffuse pressures require biological
  monitoring (one visit to each of 10 sites
  required)
• IM sites for point sources and mixed pressures
  require physico-chemical monitoring, up to 8 site
  visits to get meaningful data.

36
Investigative monitoring

• It was calculated that approximately 4,200 (some
  biological and some physico-chemical) samples
  would be required as part of the investigative
  monitoring programme. These are to be spread out
  over the 3 year RBMP period.

37
Small Streams Risk Score

• SSRS was developed by EPA and WRBD as a quick
  biological tool.
• It uses invertebrates to make a rapid assessment
  in the field. It is not a method of determining
  water status.

38
Investigative monitoring

• 1,400 samples or SSRS tests / year
• Sampling time 580 hours
• Analytical time 1,300 hours
• Management reporting time 680 hours
• Staff costs 73,200
• Mileage 10,000 miles 12,100
• Consumables 17,700
• Total Annual Cost 103,000

39
Investigative monitoring

• Issues
• Staff time
• Laboratory capacity
• Cost
• Lifetime of programme

40
Investigative monitoring

• Suggested approach
• Desktop study brief for fieldwork
• Fieldwork presentation of results
• Interpretation of results recommendation on
  measures

in house
contract
in house
41
Summary

• Monitoring will be more effective.
• Significant demand on local resources
• RBD projects can assist investigative monitoring
  programmes.

42
Thanks

• Rita McEvoy Mott McDonald
• Dr Bernadette Ní Chatháin RPS

river basin district