Case Study : Danube Case Study Váh Sub-catchment Monika Supeková Water Research Institute

1. Case Study : Danube Case Study Váh Sub-catchment Monika Supeková Water Research Institute Bratislava, Slovak Republic Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

2. Introduction case study: Váh Sub-catchment • the biggest river catchment (RC) in the SR: • 18 769 km2 (38 %) • 2.5 million inhabitants (46 %) • curiosity - 2 springs (White Váh and Black Váh) • longest river - 406 km • diversified landscape (mountains, lowlands): • 52.2 % agricultural land • 40.7 % forests • 6.6 % artificial area • 0.5 % inland waters • main use - hydropower production (the “Váh cascade” of water reservoirs (WR) and derivation canals - 11 WR) • river system is recipient of highest input of pollution load (nutrients, other dangerous substances) Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

3. Introduction case study: Váh Sub-catchment • 1 Competent Authority – Ministry of Environment of the SR • responsible for all WFD implementation issues (national, international level) • DRBMP, ITRBMP, bilateral agreements • 1 Common RBMP, 10 RBMPs for Sub-catchments • the Váh RC - national planning unit • water bodies: • 633 SWBs (6 HMWB, 10 AWB, 204 OK, 255 still candidates on HMWB, 188 no data) • 8 SWBs with changed category (8 HMWB) • main pressures of chemical pollution: (according WFD - PSs – for CHS assessment, RSs – for ES assessment) • industry • agriculture • agglomerations • PAHs, DEHP, NP, Hg, Cd Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

4. 2 % of the DRB Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

5. Specific challenges • previous monitoring network: • old approaches / methodology • not monitored PSs / RSs • new monitoring network: • monitoring according WFD requirements • limited sites of surveillance monitoring • incomplete databases (e.g. WR sediments – missing data on resuspension coefficient, deposition rates,…) • problems in many WR – minimum flow below WR, unknown sediment quantity and quality (PSs), water and sediment balance • emission estimations • stakeholders (industry) willingness to cooperate / participate • weak inspection and control Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

6. Lessons learned from case study • Step 0: System definition • general characterization; possible stakeholders identified • Step 1: Problem definition • monitoring data 2007 provided in accordance with WFD requirements • Risk Analyses 2005 (actualisation in 2008) • info on industrial sources exists – data mostly from polluters and only for permitted parameters – need to strengthen instruments for mandatory monitoring / reporting on data and to strengthen inspection - control • Step 2: Inventory of sources • national databases – NRP and IISR (E-PRTR), IPPC, CWE, and others (UWWTP, WR) • to quantify emissions - challenge • to strengthen policy instruments • to revise permits • Step 3: Definition of a baseline scenario • assumption of socio-economic development in line with Draft RBMP • baseline scenario for socio-economic development uncertain – need for regular revise – economic crisis Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

7. Lessons learned from case study • environmental fate modelling • PAHs, DEHP, NP • calculation of emissions into 8 WRs • required emission reduction – with aim to achieve „good CHS“ in WBs • system recovery time periods • Step 4: Inventory of possible measures • WFD objectives should be reached – according basic measures in RBMP • exemptions – Directive 96/61/ECconcerning IPPC • exemptions – Directive 76/464/EEC on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment • supplementary measures in 2nd Planning Cycle • monitoring (investigative monitoring) • Step 5: Assessment of the effects of the measures • chemical status shall be improved - but uncertain, if the good status will be reached up to 2015 • assumption that additional measures will be needed • Step 6: Selection of the best solutions • stakeholders have to meet standards – apply measures • include findings into RBMP (stakeholder – water manager interlinkage) • dialog with stakeholders – consultation of the Draft RBMP is ongoing Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands

8. Lessons learned from case study Conclusions: • to strengthen Stakeholder willingness to follow rules: • open communication; problem / WFD objectives understanding • effective policy including penalties • effective controlling instruments • better competence distribution • although not all steps of DSS is possible to follow exactly, DSS provides a methodological approach which can be very useful for those who would like to deal with PSs General in circumstances of the SR: • to change the way of thinking – focus on young generations Final Conference June 24 - 25 Maastricht, The Netherlands