Integrated Testing for Water Framework Directive Implementation

1. Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) Integrated Testing in the Pilot River Basins Belgirate 27-28 November 2003 Quantitative GW/SW Interaction and River Basin Management Plan Alfredo Di Domenicantonio

2. • Groundwater identification STEP 1 Testing: Horizontal WB Why we start from here? • In the Tevere River Basin, the main problems related to water and to aquatic systems occur in the dry season • In the dry season, surface water circulation is fed mainly by groundwater. • Knowledge of hydrogeological systems is a fundamental starting point.

3. • Groundwater identification STEP 1 Testing: Horizontal WB Classification criteria • Type of hydrogeological structure • Total surfacing base flow • Specific productivity

4. • Interface GWB- SWB STEP 2 Testing: Horizontal WB • Groundwater identification The second question is: How does groundwater reach the surface? • Identification of the interaction between surface water and groundwater

5. • Perennial SW Identification Drainage Reticulate Perennial Reticulate Linear spring STEP 3 Testing: Horizontal WB Identification of the perennial hydrographic network • Groundwater identification • Interface GWB- SWB

6. • Types of surface WB STEP 4 Testing: Horizontal WB • Groundwater identification • Watercourses • Type identification = System B • The following main parameters have been used: • base flow, indicates the flow in dry seasons • slope, differentiates stretches of watercoursescharacterised by erosion (high energy) from stretches wheresedimentation prevails (low energy)  • lithology and geomorphology characterise the nature of the subsoil and the shape of the bed of the channel • Interface GWB- SWB • Perennial SW Identification

7. • Types of surface WB STEP 4 Testing: Horizontal WB • Groundwater identification • Interface GWB- SWB • Perennial SW Identification

8. • Preliminary characterization of surface WB STEP 5 Testing: IMPRESS • Groundwater identification • First Surface WB characterization based on : • chemico-physical monitoring • monitoring of macrobenthos • Interface GWB- SWB • Perennial SW Identification • Types of surface WB

9. • Preliminary Identification of Reference Condition STEP 6 Testing: REFCOND • Groundwater identification Preliminary Identification of Reference Conditions (ongoing activity) • Interface GWB- SWB • Perennial SW Identification • In the peripheral areas it is possible to refer to the basin • Types of surface WB • Preliminary characterization of surface WB • Regarding the main course of the river, it is necessary to use simulations and references external to the river basin

10. • Identification of balance unit (management unit) STEP 7 Testing: Horizontal WB • Groundwater identification • Identification of balance unit (management unit) • We subdivided the river basin into balance units, using two criteria: • Sub-basin aggregation • Aquifers • Interface GWB- SWB • Perennial SW Identification • Types of surface WB • Preliminary characterization of surface WB • Preliminary Identification of Reference Condition

11. • Pressures and impacts analysis in MU STEP 8 Testing: IMPRESS • Groundwater identification more detailed pressures and impacts analysis (ongoing activity) • Interface GWB- SWB • Perennial SW Identification • Types of surface WB • Preliminary characterization of surface WB • Preliminary Identification of Reference Condition • Identification of balance unit (management unit)

12. • Preliminary identification of HMWB in UB STEP 9 Testing: HMWB • Groundwater identification Management Unit Identification of water bodies for HMWB designation • Interface GWB- SWB • Perennial SW Identification • Types of surface WB • Preliminary characterization of surface WB • Preliminary Identification of Reference Condition • Identification of balance unit (management unit) • Pressures and impacts analysis in MU

13. • Economic analysis in the MU STEP 10 Testing: WATECO • Groundwater identification Management units Economic analysis (ongoing activity) • Interface GWB- SWB • Perennial SW Identification • Types of surface WB • Preliminary characterization of surface WB • Preliminary Identification of Reference Condition • Identification of balance unit (management unit) • the studies will be carried out in the management units, in order to connect the economic analysis with different critical state surveyed in different management units. • Pressures and impacts analysis in MU • Preliminary identification of HMWB in UB

14. STEP 11 • Groundwater identification • Analysis of existing networks • Review of the existing networks and network extensions • Interface GWB- surface WB • Perennial SW Identification • Types of surface WB • Preliminary characterization of surface WB • Preliminary Identification of Reference Condition • Identification of balance unit (management unit) • Pressure and impact analysis in the UB • Preliminary identification of HMWB in the UB • Economic analysis in UB • Monitoring

15. Local participation Global participation STEP 12 • Groundwater identification Management units Identification of the issues relevant to each MU • Interface GWB- surface WB • Perennial SW Identification • Types of surface WB • Preliminary characterization of surface WB MU Internal conflicts • Preliminary Identification of Reference Condition involving stakeholders within the management units • Identification of balance unit (management unit) • Pressure and impact analysis in the UB • Preliminary identification of HMWB in the UB MU MU • Economic analysis in the UB All stakeholders have a general vision about MU status and their interaction • Monitoring • Public Participation MU

16. FOCUS Quantitative GW/SW Interaction and RB Management Plan

17. Quantitative GW/SW Interaction and RB Management Plan The natural base flow at the mouth of the Tevere River is about 120 m3/sec. This is the value in the dry season with a 2 year period of return. It was possible to reconstruct this value on the basis of historic series of monitoring data from over 100 years

18. Quantitative GW/SW Interaction and RB Management Plan The current base flow is about 80-90 m3/s The difference is about 30-40 m3/sec What does this difference mean? Considering the uncertainties of the statistical elaborations, we believe that the difference is due to dissipative water uses from 1900 on Mainly agriculture Drinkwater uses Industrial water uses • es. the population of the city of Rome • in 1870 it had 300.000 inhabitants • in 1950 1.000.000 • and 3500000 currently, • in the same way, the % of irrigated territory increased

19. Quantitative GW/SW Interaction and RB Management Plan What does this mean to ecosystems depending on water? • more dissipative uses • less available water for surface and groundwater circulation • variation of the structure of ecosystems • more water bodies vulnerable to pollution

20. Quantitative GW/SW Interaction and RB Management Plan What is the main objective for river basin planning? • To stop or reverse the growing trend of dissipative uses • (This objective is as important as pollution reduction in order to reach GES) • To asses and allocate water resources among the various water uses in an optimal way • To manage and solve local conflicts (generated by non-dissipative uses)

21. natural BF – sustainable BF = dissipative uses natural BF sustainable BF Minimum base flow to sustain life depending on the ecosystems Quantitative GW/SW Interaction and RB Management Plan Natural BF = sum of linear and point sources

22. 1 we defined a sustainable value of the base flow at the mouth of the Tevere River (dry season value) Quantitative GW/SW Interaction and RB Management Plan We used the following procedure:

23. 2 we identified balance units Quantitative GW/SW Interaction and RB Management Plan We used the following procedure: 1 we defined a sustainable value of the base flow at the mouth of the Tevere River (dry season value)

24. 3 in each balance unit we identified the dissipative and non-dissipative uses (the latter may generate local conflicts) Quantitative GW/SW Interaction and RB Management Plan We used the following procedure: 1 we defined a sustainable value of the base flow at the mouth of the Tevere River (dry season value) 2 we identified balance units

25. CASE STUDY ONE

26. Aniene River Basin RB Management Plan - Case Study n.1

27. 3 Management Units RB Management Plan - Case Study n.1

28. RB Management Plan - Case Study n.1

29. 17 15 RB Management Plan - Case Study n.1 25 20

30. RB Management Plan - Case Study n.1 Volcanic Aquifer

31. mm/year Km2 l/s % P Comparison between natural recharge and estimated withdrawals Effective infiltration (Ie) 246 409 3.189 34 total estimated withdrawals % Ie - Irrigation 140 145 647 20 - Drinking water supply 1.181 37 - Industrial use 1.712 54 optimal values Total withdrawal 3540 111 Type of use l/s Mm3/ year Water to maintain natural base flow (75% of IE) 2390 75 Total volume granted and authorized for abstraction for drinking water supply, household use, agriculture, industry 797 25 RB Management Plan - Case Study n.1 Abstractions m3/ha per year in critical areas

32. RB Management Plan - Case Study n.1 Volcanic Aquifer

33. RB Management Plan - Case Study n.1 • Currently 111% • In the next 3 years 75% • Objective 2015 25%

34. CASE STUDY TWO

35. RB Management Plan - Case Study n.2

36. RB Management Plan - Case Study n.2

37. 6140 l/s 1900 l/s RB Management Plan - Case Study n.2

38. RB Management Plan - Case Study n.2

39. RB Management Plan - Case Study n.1 CONCLUSIONS If we consider the interaction SWB/GWB the situation is very complex but realistic Thanks for your attention