Implementation of WFD in Austria V. Koller-Kreimel

1. Implementation of WFD in Austria V. Koller-Kreimel

2. Water status assessment • Approach • Methodologies on quality elements • Overall ecological assessment • Values for characterisation of water status

3. Water status assessment –Approach • development of quality standards/classification systems (WFD compliant -> intercalibration process) • Methodology for the selection of representative monitoring sites • Performance of surveillance and operational monitoring based on the results of risk assessment • Application of standards/classification systems at sites • Use of grouping for water bodies which are not monitored (development of methodology) • Indication of confidence of status classification

4. Water status assessment – riversMethodologies for quality elements • ecological status:development of quality standards/classification systems • classification systems for all biological quality elements (based of the deviation from typespecific reference conditions) • Limit values for specific pollutants (except priority substances) • Limit/guide values for general physico-chemical parameters • Limit/guides values for hydromorphological parameters • chemical status: priority substances

5. Assessment methods /classification systems for biological elements • Development of biological assessment methods is finalised (indices for benthic invertebrates, fish, phyto-benthos, macrophytes, phytoplancton (lakes) – 5 classes • Introduced in EU-Intercalibration process • Intercalibration already finalised for benthic invertebrates, phytobenthos • Publication of biological methods on Ministry-website (Leitfäden) • Proposal for hydromorphological und general physico- chemical elements for high status (limit values) and indicating good status (guide values)

6. Fish: Fish Index Austria (FIA) 9 Metrics: • Additional information: Age structure - expert judgement

7. Benthic invertebrates (Makrozoobenthos) Metrics reacting on specific stressors – 3 Moduls • Organic pollution – Saprobic index • General degradation – Multimetric index • A) eutrophication / backwater effects/ reduction of flow velocity (changing a „rhitral“ character to a „potamal“ character) • B) Chanellisation, reduction of structures and habitats, species/diversity deficit • acidification – Acidification index Assessment: worst case of the 3 moduls

8. Modul organic pollurtion Saprobic index (Zelinka & Marvan) Modul General degradation Focus „habitat &species diversity, channellisation“ • total number of taxal • EPT Taxa • Diversitäty index (Margalef) • Structur-degradation-index Multimetric Index (a) „worst case“ Ecological status class bethic invertebrates Focus „eutrophication / potamal effects“ • total number of taxal • EPT Taxa • Diversity index (Margalef) • Structure-degradation-index • % Oligochaeta&Diptera Taxa • RETI • % share of Litoral species Multimetric Index (b) Modul Acidification Acidificationindex

9. Aquatic Flora – Phytobenthos • Trophie-Index (based on trophic reference condtions): reacting on nutrient pollution • Saprobic-Index (based on “saprobic reference conditions): reacting on organic pollution • Index of species composition („Referenzarten“): • reacting on all effects including morphological changes • Phytobenthos classification: „worst-case of the 3 indices

10. Makrophyten • Classification: Complex analyses of species composition (deviation from typespecific reference conditions)

11. Legal implementation of biological classification Ordinance on Surface Water - Ecology (Draft version available – part of 1st River basin management plan ) Overall biological assessment (part of ecological status assessment): - worst classification of all biological elements

12. Water status assessment – riversApproach • ecological status:development of quality standards/classification systems • classification systems for all biological quality elements (based of the deviation from typespecific reference conditions) • Limit values for specific pollutants (except priority substances) • Limit/guide values for general physico-chemical parameters • Limit/guides values for hydromorphological parameters • chemical status:

13. Classification • general physico –chemical parameters • values for „high status“ (limit value) • values for „good status“ (guide value – supporting ecological funtioning of a „good status“ biology) 90-percentiles derived from typespecific reference conditions • Hydromorphological status • 5 class (typespecific) assessment system of the hydromorphological situation (see „Leitfaden für die hydromorphologische Zustandserhebung“) • Limit values / description for high status • Guide values/ description of „good hydromorphological situations - supporting ecological funtioning of a „good status“ biology

14. Specific pollutants: Quality standards based on ecotoxicology (precautionary principle): • Leagal implementation (already done): • Ordinance on Surface water – chemical standards for dangerous substances (2006)

15. Overall ecological status assessment Decision tree – worst case approach • High status (very good): all elements (all biological elements, hydromorphology, all general physico-chemical parameters, all specific pollutants (except priority substances) have to meet the values set for high status (class I) • Good status: • Worst case of biological elements: good status class and • worst case of specific pollutants: limit values for good status not exceed • classification of general physico-chemical paramters or hydromorphological parameters only give supplementory information (relevant for plausibility check) • Moderate/ poor / bad status: limit values for specific pollution are exceeded and/or worst case of biological elements (most sensitive biological element relevant for the specific pressure) classifies as moderate/poor/bad

16. Entsprechen die Werte für die biologischen Qualitätskomponenten dem sehr guten Zustand? Entsprechen die physikalisch-chemischen Bedingungen dem sehr guten Zustand Entsprechen die hydromorphologischen Bedingungen dem sehr guten Zustand Sehr guter Zustand Ja Ja Ja Nein Nein Nein Gewährleisten (a) die allgemeinen physikalisch-chemi-schen Bedingungen die Funktionsfähig-keit des Ökosystems und die Einhaltung der Werte der biologischen Qualitäts-elemente und werden b) die UQN für die spezifischen Schad-stoffe eingehalten? Weichen die Werte für die biologischen Qualitätskomponenten nur leicht vom sehr guten Zustand ab? Ja Ja Guter Zustand Nein Nein Mäßiger Zustand Ja Einstufung aufgrund der Abweichung der biologischen Werte vom sehr guten Zustand Ist die Abweichung mäßig? Größer Ja unbefriedigender Zustand Ist die Abweichung deutlich? Größer Schlechter Zustand Decision tree for Overall Ecological Status Assessment

17. Water status assessment – riversApproach • ecological status: development of quality standards/classification systems • classification systems for all biological quality elements (based of the deviation from typespecific reference conditions) • Limit values for specific pollutants (except priority substances) • Limit/guide values for general physico-chemical parameters • Limit/guides values for hydromorphological parameters • chemical status: EU standards for priority substances (limit values)

18. Legal implementation of quality standards via Ordinances • Surface waters - Specific pollutants (dangerous substances) implemented in 2006 • Surface waters -Ecology draft version • Groundwater Qualityimplemented, but has to be adapted (trend!) • Groundwater-Quantityunder development Class limits and method how to assess status of water bodies

19. Water status assessment –Approach • development of quality standards/classification systems (WFD compliant -> intercalibration process) • Methodology for the selection of representative monitoring sites • Performance of surveillance and operational monitoring based on the results of risk assessment • Application of standards/classification systems at sites • Use of grouping for water bodies which are not monitored (development of methodology) • Indication of confidence of status classification

20. Monitoring Up to 2006: Surface waters - ca. 285 monitoring sites (fixed)  Focus on the assessment of organic and chemical pollution Since 2007: Based on the results of risk analyses 2004 (water bodies „possibly at risk“ or „at risk“) • surveillance monitoring (fixed permanent sites, all elements) • operative Monitoring – non permanent: Main focus: hydromorphological pressures ( as pollution problems are already known)

21. Operational Monitoring rivers > 10 km2 • 2007-2009 • Focus on rivers > 100 km2 • 2010 – • Further clarification rivers > 100 km2 • Focus on rivers 10-100 km2

22. Operative Monitoring • monitoring 2007 – 2009 Water bodies > 100 km² : ca. 940 • ca. 200 water bodies due to pollution  ca.75 water bodies (point sources)  ca. 125 water bodies (nutrients, diffuse organic pollution) • ca. 800 water bodies due to hydromorphology • Grouping is only used for diffuse pollution or hydromorphological alterations!

23. Operative Monitoring – Methodology for the selection of representative monitoring sites

24. Operative Monitoring – Methodology for the selection of representative monitoring sites

25. Operative Monitoring usually not all biological elements are monitored – but only those which are most sensitive for the specific pressure Example (relevant for Austrian water types): • morphol.– bank fixation: fish • morphol. - soil fixation: benthic invertebr. • morphol. - general: fish • river regulation: fish • impoundment: fish, benthic invertebr. • water abstraction: fish, benthic invertebr. • hydropeaking: fish, benthic invertebr. • migration barriers: fish • nutrient pollution: phytobenthos, macrophytes • organic pollution: benthic invertebr. • thermal pollution: fish, benthic invert.

26. Ministry level Surveillance Monitoring: Operative Monitoring: Sites of high importance (>2500 km2) WB „possibly at risk“ or „at risk (pollution, hydromorphology) Reference sites (change of natural situation) Evaluation of effectiveness of measures Additional sites for intensified inform. International/bilateral monitororing obligations Also used for International Networks (i.e. TNMN) Overlapping Provincial level Investigative Monitoring Legal Basis

27. Reporting on status assessment Maps (basis for management plans) • Biological Class (worst case of biological elements) • Ecological status (indication) – general physico-chemical elements • Ecological status – specific pollutants (except priority substances) • Overall Ecological status (worst case biology and specific pollutants) • Chemical status – priority substances Status assessment is done for all water bodies based on • monitoring results (WFD compliant – intercalibrated - assessment methods) • or grouping (tranfer of monitoring results to water bodies of same type and impacts) Status assessment - Indication of confidence ____„Status – very high confidence: directly monitored ____„Status – high confidence: grouping _ _ _ „Status – low confidence“: no monitoring results available or no grouping possible then of Risk-results will be transposed

28. Programme of measures for hydromorphological alterations

29. POM - Hydromorphology No EU-„basic“ measures existing as there is no specific EU- regulation dealing with hydromorphology Austrian situation: • subsidy for restoring continuity (fish migration aid) and restauration of morphology (starting Jan 2009) Planned: • general standard for the definition of ecological minimum flow (based on low flow conditions NQt and MJNQt) • Standard for how to design a fish migration aid • Selected Water bodies with high morphological status to be protected from (hydropower) use

30. Existing Regulations (2) Since 1990 – Ecological focus • Hydropower • New plants or renewal of licence • water abstraction – minimum ecological flows: determined individually on project level • fish passes for longitudinal continuity • Old plants • restore ecological minimum flow (difficult to enforce) • Flood defense: Mesasures have to be done in an ecologically sound way • January 2009: subsidies for fish migration aids and restauration of river morphology/ habitats

31. Additional new regulations planned to achieve the objectives of the WFD • Old Plants • National standard for ecological minimum flow • National standard for fish migration aids • Decommission of hydropower plantsonly in case • No interest of hydropower production • where a new HP plant is a better „sustainable“ solution

32. Catalogue for measures to improve ecological situation impacted by hydromorphological alterations • Basis for the selection of cost-efficient measures • Basis for HMWB designation- Art. 4 (3 ) test Which measures are needed to achieve good ecological status and which of them would have a significant impact on use?

33. Catalogue of measures - Hydromorphology • consist of tables and explanatory text • Tables include information on • - pressures + drivers + effect of pressure on biological elements • - types of measures + their effect on biology + additional effects for • example on uses, • - time frame of expected biological reaction, lifetime of measure • - impact/effect of measure on „causer“ an on other sectors/uses • - specific costs (Investitment cost, runninig costs)

34. Hydropower in Austria

35. Electricity generation in Austria About 2/3 is generated by hydropower. Since 2002 the proportion of hp generation decreased due to higher consumption higher use of caloric generation total electricity generation: 64 TWh others* 39,0% large hp 54,5% hydropower generation 6,5% small hp *caloric, wind, solar, etc. hp……….. hydropower source: E-control

36. Structure of hydropower generation in Austria Additional > 2000 very small plants (only for private supply) storage power plants run-off-river power stations

37. Results of Impact-Pressure Analysis (2007)

38. Hydropower and WFD Study on the possible effects of WFD implementation on Hydropower in Austria (Stigler-Studie, 2005): - Estimation of costs to restore continuity (fish migration aids) • Large Hydropower > 10 MW: 60 - 144 Mio € • Small hydropower < 10 MW: 90 Mio € - Costs/production losses for restoring ecological minimum flow

39. WFD implications on Austrian hydropower *total hp generation: 38 TWh loss of power generationfinancial loss Providing ecological minimum flowTWh % hp sector % total hp* Mio €/a ´ generation small HP < 10 MW 0,4 - 1,2(0,8) 10 - 32 1,0 - 3,0 15-50 large HP > 10 MW 0,15 - 0,6(0,4) 5 - 20 0,4 - 1,5 4-16 total 0,55 - 1,8 (1,2) (3,0) 19 - 66

40. Other supplementory measures for reduction of pollution • point source pollution: site specific measures • advisory boards for farmers • Pilot projects …see catalogues of measures (i.e. public water managment, agriculture)