Presentation by Jan Brooke 28 th September 2005

1. The Water Framework Directive was transposed into law in EU Member States at the end of 2003. Nearly two years on, do we understand the implications for sediment management? Presentation by Jan Brooke 28th September 2005

2. Scope of presentation • WFD objectives • Natural role of sediments in coastal and estuarine waters • Sediments and characterisation • Sediments in River Basin Management Plans • Article 16 (priority substances and priority hazardous substances) • Practical implications

3. Introduction to the WFD • Important, far-reaching legislation: ambitious in scope and programme • New integrated approach to water protection, improvement and sustainable use • Applies to all water bodies, including rivers, lakes, estuaries, coastal waters, and man-made water bodies (eg. docks, canals) • Various potential implications for sediment management

4. WFD environmental objectives • Sustainable water management • Prevent deterioration in status* • Restore to good status* by 2015 • Reduce pollution from priority substances and phase out emissions, discharges, etc. of priority hazardous substances • Achieve objectives for EU protected areas * a measure of chemical and ecological quality

5. Environmental targets WFD introduces status classes: high, good, moderate, poor and bad Surface water bodies must achieve • good ecologicalstatus (GES) or • if designated as a Heavily Modified or Artificial Water Body, good ecological potential (GEP) and • good chemicalstatus

6. ECOLOGICAL STATUS { No or very minor HIGH { GOOD Slight { MODERATE Moderate Prevent deterioration { POOR Major Restore { BAD Severe Ecological Status Explained

7. WFD timetable • By end 2004: characterisation and risk assessment • By end 2006: monitoring in place • By end 2007: significant water management issues • By end 2008: draft River Basin Management Plans (RBMP) • By end 2009: final RBMPs • By end 2012: measures in place • By end 2015: good status achieved

8. WFD coastal and estuarine waters

9. Natural role of sediment in coastal and estuarine waters • Important part of natural ecosystem • Diversity of habitats • Variation in suspended sediment levels (background; in storm conditions) • Supply to intertidal areas • Problem of ‘coastal squeeze’ • Protected sites under EU Birds and Habitats Directives • Sediment management as mitigation and compensation requirement

10. Sediments and characterisation • Lack of reference to sediments in WFD • Materials in suspension listed as contaminant • England and Wales: sediment in run off from agricultural land • No consideration of sediment in coastal and estuarine waters • Hydromorphological pressures include navigation dredging and disposal of dredged material

11. England and Wales: initial risk assessment At risk or ‘probably at risk’ of failing to meet good status due to physical modification • 87% estuarine area • 91% coastal water area At risk or ‘probably at risk’ of failing to meet good status due to TBT contamination • 31% estuarine area • 15% coastal water area

12. ‘At risk’ water bodies • Subject to ‘refinement’ exercise • May meet criteria for heavily modified or artificial water body designation • Subject to monitoring requirements • ‘Programmes of measures’ required to protect and/or improve water status • Implications for management of water body and activities affecting it

13. Sediments in River Basin Management Plans • Statutory plans • Will cover all water bodies, including coastal waters out to a minimum of one nautical mile • Will define the ‘measures’ required to meet WFD objectives • Will provide the mechanism whereby future water use and activities affecting water will be managed

14. WFD programmes of measures • Protection and restoration measures • Informed by characterisation and monitoring results • May be national, regional or local • May be statutory or non-statutory • Potential to affect sediment management • To be in place by 2012 • Ecological and chemical objectives to be achieved by 2015

15. Exemptions • Economics has an important role in WFD • Not intended to achieve objectives ‘at any cost’ • Programmes of measures must be cost-effective • Less stringent targets or extended deadlines may be set for specific bodies of water where the achievement of the required quality is otherwise not feasible or is disproportionately expensive

16. Article 16 • Article 16 requires measures to reduce discharges, emissions and losses of priority substances and to phase out same for priority hazardous substances • To be implemented via proposed daughter Directive • Mandatory environmental quality standards (EQS) to be considered for water, sediments and biota

17. Current situation • Daughter Directive not expected before October or November 2005 • Sediment EQSs unlikely • Concerns about science used to derive water column standards (eg. suspended solids concentration assumed low; bioavailability of adsorbed contaminants not taken into account) • If daughter Directive not agreed by end 2006, Member States to develop own standards

18. Sediment management issues • Contamination may be historic rather than current source • Particular concern over standards for TBT as proposed in 2004 • Possibility of failure of whole water sample (but often no significant environmental effects) • Other important questions (eg. definition of ‘loss to system’) • Implications for dredging and disposal?

19. Practical implications • Possibility of constraints on sediment management activities such as dredging and disposal (eg. dredging technique, overflow mechanisms, aquatic disposal) • Likelihood of increased costs (participation, enforcement, data collection, investigations, mitigation measures, etc.) • Delays and uncertainties • Potential for conflict with EU Birds and Habitats Directives

20. Conclusions (1) Q: Two years into WFD implementation, are we any the wiser about its possible implications for sediment management? A: Probably not! But ………

21. Conclusions (2) • WFD has potentially significant implications for sediments and sediment management • Need to ensure sediment issues are properly considered in both characterisation process and River Basin Management Planning • Article 16 draft daughter Directive still under discussion • Vital to ensure that decisions are well-informed and scientifically robust

22. What can we do? • Actively participate in WFD implementation • Engage with those responsible for WFD implementation • Ensure that there are no misunderstandings • Highlight the rigorous investigations already required as prerequisite to most sediment management initiatives • Provide data to inform WFD decision making • Demonstrate that sediment management can have environmental as well as economic benefits