You are here: Home > Work Programme > Water Framework Directive
Water Framework Directive
LATEST NEWS:
AINA's consultants, Royal Haskoning, have delivered a project 'Management strategies and mitigation measures for the inland navigation sector in relation to ecological potential for inland waterways'. The report was prepared on behalf of AINA working in partnership with Waterways Ireland, UKTAG and the Environment Agency. Please read the covering letter issued with the report as it contains important information.
To view/download a copy of the AINA covering letter, or report, click below:
a) Covering letter dated 21st April 2008
b) Royal Haskoning Report, March 2008
c) Appendix A - Pressures and impacts
d) Appendix B - Mitigation measures and management strategies
OUTPUTS FROM AINA CONFERENCE 2007 AINA held its annual conference on 27.9.07 focusing on the water framework directive and what it means for inland waterways. To view or download a copy of the presentations given at the AINA Annual Conference click on the name of the speaker below. Martin Booth, Environment Agency Helen Dangerfield, Royal Haskoning Jan Brooke, Environmental Consultant |
This is the most far-reaching piece of European legislation to affect the water environment. It will benefit us by giving further protection to our waters, but we will have to play our part by modifying some of our practices, and this may increase costs and add to project planning times. We must be actively involved in implementation to ensure the social and economic value of our activities is recognised. |
Chapters (to jump to a chapter, click on its title)
2. Impact on navigation authorities
4. River basin management plans (RBMPs)
6. Article 5 reports and continuing preparatory work
10. The ports and navigation sector - information sharing and lobbying
1. Introduction
The purpose of this note is to brief members of AINA on the Water Framework Directive and its impact on their activities.
The Directive aims to protect and improve the quality and quantity of all water resources whilst allowing sustainable water use to continue. Integrated river catchment planning is at its core. The Environment Agency (EA) and SEPA are the competent authorities assigned to implement the Directive in England & Wales and in Scotland respectively.
All water bodies over certain size criteria are included – surface waters, (rivers, lakes, estuaries, coastal waters) and groundwater. Artificial water bodies like canals are also included – so all inland waterways and their water resources will be covered.
2. Impact on inland navigation authorities
The Directive will benefit us all by reinforcing and extending the controls on pollutants entering our waterways, especially from diffuse sources such as farmland.
However, it could also affect our own activities. Some of our work can affect the ecological and chemical quality of our waters, and relatively little of this is regulated (except for SSSIs and protected species). In future more may be regulated. We do not yet know the extent, but the following activities could be regulated:
- engineering operations: e.g. dredging, aquatic weed control, bank protection, channel relining or reprofiling, dewatering, new or altered structures (e.g. moorings, weirs, etc)
- water management: e.g. abstraction. impoundment, reservoir drawdown, transfer
- other activities: e.g. water movement resulting in spread of alien invasive species, fish stocking, or even the movement of boats themselves
This could affect all areas of work for a navigation authority, but particularly the following:
- waterway operation and maintenance
- selling water to and receiving wastewater from third parties
- regeneration and restoration projects
- leisure (especially boating and angling)
- freight
The Directive has the flexibility to allow the social and economic benefits of our work to be taken into account. It is therefore important that navigation authorities are involved in the implementation process. To date, some have been involved at a national level, but all will need to be involved at a more local level from 2006, when the EA and SEPA will start work on River Basin Management Plans (see Section 4).
3. Environmental objectives
The Directive requires that the following environmental 'status' objectives are to be set by 2009, and that they should be achieved by 2015:
Surface waters |
Ground waters |
||
Good chemical status Good ecological status |
|
Good chemical status Good quantitative status |
|
Good status 
Good status In addition, no deterioration in status is allowed.
Good chemical status is achieved when the concentrations of each hazardous substance is below its Environmental Quality Standard (EQS). EQSs are expected to be set in a Daughter Directive by the end of 2006 .
Good ecological status (GES) is defined by reference to three elements:
- hydro-morphological – channel width / depth, bank structure, nature of sediment, flow / level regime, etc
- physico-chemical – temperature, salinity, nutrients, oxygenation, acidification, turbidity, etc, and synthetic pollutants
- biological – fish, plants, invertebrates, algae
The ecological status of a water body is assessed by comparing it with the reference condition for that water body type. This is essentially the undisturbed condition, and is termed high ecological status. GES is then defined as a ‘slight’ deterioration from that. Ecological classification tools are being developed in each country to enable these assessments to be carried out, and there will be an intercalibration exercise to ensure they match.
In some cases alternative ecological objectives can be set – see 3.2.
Status definitions for groundwaters are to be set through a Daughter Directive.
3.1 Artificial Water Bodies (AWBs) and Heavily Modified Water Bodies (HMWBs)
Most water bodies managed by navigation authorities will probably fall into this category. AWBs are waters created by human activity, where no water existed before. They include most canals, some feeder reservoirs, and some feeder channels. HMWBs are natural water bodies that have been so modified that they cannot feasibly meet GES. They could include some river navigations, a few canals, and most reservoirs.
The ecological objective for these is to be set at a less stringent level, termed Good Ecological Potential (GEP). GEP is defined as a 'slight' deviation from the reference condition for the closest comparable natural water body type, and is termed Maximum Ecological Potential (MEP). MEP must take account of the impacts resulting from the artificial or heavily modified characteristics needed for specified uses. These uses include navigation, ports, recreation, and flood defence. However, mitigation measures must be applied where feasible.
Many navigation authorities are already doing much to mitigate teh ecological impacts but more will probably be needed.
British Waterways (BW) has argued that canals should have their own specific reference conditions, rather than one from the closest comparable natural water body. An ecological classification tool for canals is currently being developed (http://www.sniffer.org.uk/active_further_info.asp?id=300&location=research_areas)
A key consideration is how the impacts of boat traffic are to be dealt with.
AINA's position is that those impacts that are not feasible to mitigate should be built into reference conditions. If they are not, many well used canals will fail GEP, and navigation authorities will need argue the case for an alternative objective.
As with GES, alternative objectives can be set – see 3.2.
3.2 Alternative objectives
In certain defined cases lower objectives and/or longer deadlines can be set. Certain tests must be passed, as set out in Article 4 of the Directive. These provide special dispensation where measures would be disproportionately costly or technically infeasible, or where they would have a disproportionately adverse effect on the social or economic value of water uses.
Where the activities of navigation authorities are causing a failure of an ecological objective, and preventative measures are not feasible, the authority will need to argue the case and provide supporting information.
3.3 Classification schemes and standards
These are being developed on a UK wide basis by UKTAG (UK Technical Advisory Group), based on European Guidance provided by the Common Implementation Strategy.
4. River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs)
The objectives, and the measures required to meet them, must be set out in River Basin Management Plans by December 2009. These will have a statutory footing and will need to link with the land use planning system and other relevant plans. Public bodies must have regard to the RBMPs when carrying out their functions, and must deal with reasonable requests for information from the EA and SEPA.
Each Plan will cover a River Basin District (RBD), which must comprise one of more river basins. The RBDs for Britain are shown in the map below. http://www.wfduk.org/implementation/4-6/view
The government has designated the EA and SEPA as the ‘competent authorities’ responsible for producing the Plans in England & Wales and Scotland respectively. The Plans are eventually signed off by the Minister.
Public participation must be encouraged and certain statutory bodies (including navigation authorities) must be consulted.
AINA members will need to be actively involved in the planning process to ensure that their business needs are fully recognised.
The EA and SEPA have published their strategies for producing RBMPs (http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/business/444217/444663/955573/1321809/1255662/?version=1&lang=_e, http://www.sepa.org.uk/wfd/rbmp/strategy.htm).
Each RBMP will be overseen by a Liaison Panel (8 Area Advisory Groups in Scotland), made up of representatives of each stakeholder sector. There will also be a National Liaison Panel (National Liaison Group in Scotland) to which issues that con only be dealt with at national level can be referred.
Navigation authorities should ensure they are properly represented on these groups.
Nominations for each RBMP Liaison Group should be submitted to the EA by 5 May 2006 (click here for EA contacts). The process for setting up the National Liaison Panel has not yet been established, but AINA will push for a navigation authorities to be represented. The process for setting up the Advisory Groups in Scotland has yet to be agreed.
There will be three formal consultation stages before the final RBMPs are signed off by the Minister:
- Statement of Steps – December 2006
- Summary of Significant Water Management Issues Report - July 2007
- Draft RBMP – December 2008.
The RBMPs will draw on information from existing EA or SEPA plans covering smaller areas (usually individual river catchments). Examples are the EA’s CAMS (Catchment Abstraction Management Plans), CFMPs (Catchment Flood Management Plans), and FAPs (Fishery Action Plans).
Navigation authorities should already be engaged in the production of these plans.
5. Transposition into UK law
The Directive has now been transposed into English and Welsh law through the Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) Regulations (England and Wales) 2003. These Regulations set out the powers and duties needed for River Basin Management Plans, and related matters. The following duties and rights of public bodies are defined by the Act:
- to “have regard to” relevant RBMPs and associated plans when exercising their functions
- to respond to reasonable requests from the EA for information
- to be consulted by the EA (navigation authorities, harbours authorities, and National Park authorities are specifically listed).
It is likely that all activities that may affect the WFD objectives will need to be regulated. In England & Wales, the government views that existing regulatory powers are largely sufficient, although there are important gaps that may need to be filled, including physical impacts such as dredging and back protection, and controls on diffuse pollution. The Water Act 2003 has strengthened regulation of water abstraction and impoundment. This Act removed the exemption from licensing for surface water transfers for navigation, although its applicability is still being clarified by Defra and the EA.
In Scotland transposition was through the Water Environment and Water Services Act (Scotland) 2003. This conferred similar duties and rights on public bodies to those conferred by the England & Wales legislation set out above. In addition, it gave powers to Scottish Ministers to identify ‘Responsible Authorities’, who have a duty to ‘exercise their designated functions so as to secure compliance with the requirements of the Directive’. British Waterways is likely to be so designated.
Until now relatively few activities affecting the water environment have been regulated in Scotland. The transposing legislation therefore sets out a framework for a new tiered regulatory regime, with the type of authorisation being proportionate to the risk of harm. This has now been implemented through the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2005.
6. Article 5 Reports and continuing preparatory work
These are reports which each Member States had to submit to the EC by April 2005. They are essentially preparatory work needed for the RBMPs. Two types of work were carried out – economic and environmental. They are described below.
6.1 Economic analysis of water use
This exercise was carried out by Defra (England and Wales) and SEPA (Scotland). Its purpose was to provide information so that:
- the cost of water services is sufficiently passed on to consumers
- the environmental objectives are set with an understanding of the costs involved
The first item is only relevant to any water sales business that a navigation authority may carry out. The second item is relevant to all activities carried out by navigation authorities that affect the water environment.
BW provided information through a Case Study (http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/water/wfd/economics/pdf/useannexes.pdf
Annex F, pages F28 to F66).
Economics work continues through Defra’s Collaborative Research Programme (http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/water/wfd/economics/research.htm). This will provide information that the EA and SEPA can use to produce guidance on how economics issues are to be dealt with in the implementation of the WFD (most cost effective combination of measures, use of alternative objectives, etc).
6.2 Characterisation and Review of Human Activity
Characterisation involves the identifying water bodies and categorising them into types based on these natural features that will affect what animals and plants live in them..
By 2009 water bodies failing their objectives must be identified, and remedial measures defined. The first step in this process is a Review of Human Activity by the EA and SEPA. This is a risk assessment based on existing data, and an assumption of what the objectives will be. For each water body, an assessment is made of the probability that each of a number of pressures will cause it to fail its objective of GES.
The methods and results of the characterisation and risk assessments are shown at: http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/business/444217/444663/955573/1001324/?version=1&lang=_e, and http://www.sepa.org.uk/wfd/character/index.htm.
Characterisation and risk assessment work is continuing, especially for HMWBs and AWBs, which were identified in the Article 5 report, but not risk assessed.
7. Monitoring
There are several types of monitoring required by the Directive: operational, surveillance, and investigative. Monitoring must be started by December 2006 and must have produced enough information for the first River Basin Management Plans required by December 2009.
7.1 Operational monitoring
The purpose of operational monitoring is to confirm the risk assessment so that there is the required confidence in setting remedial measures. It is risk-based, so is only required to assess those pressures shown by the risk assessment as being likely to cause a failure of the waterbody’s ecological objective.
7.2 Surveillance Monitoring
This is required at a smaller number of sites and all parameters must be monitored. Its purpose is to check that the risk assessments and operational monitoring are producing the right results.
7.3 Investigative Monitoring
to be completed
8. Implementation timetable
The table below summarises the dates by which each stage of the implementation process must be completed.
Dec 2003 |
Directive transposed into national law |
Dec 2004 |
Article 5 Reports:-
|
Dec 2006 |
Monitoring programmes made operational |
Dec 2006 |
Statement Of Steps And Consultation Measures for each River Basin Management Plan (public consultation) |
Dec 2007 |
Summary Of Significant Water Management Matters for each River Basin Management Plan (public consultation) |
Dec 2008 |
Draft River Basin Management Plans (public consultation) |
Dec 2009 |
River Basin Management Plans published Programme of Measures established |
Dec 2012 |
Programme of measures fully operational |
Dec 2013 |
Main date for repeal of older Directives |
Dec 2015 |
Main objectives achieved Review of River Basin Management Plans (and then every 6 years) |
Dec 2019 |
EC review the Directive |
9. European guidance
The EC has established the Strategic Coordination Group (SCG) to coordinate implementation across Europe. Through the SCG’s Common Implementation Strategy, a range of guidance documents haven been produced. LINK.
In 2006 the SCG stated a project on hydromorphology to enable Member Sates to share experiences in relation to hydromorphological pressures was being dealt with. This is particularly relevant to navigation groups. Further information can be found at http://www.ecologic-events.de/hydromorphology/presentations.htm
10. The ports and navigation sector - Information sharing and lobbying
A Ports, Navigation and Dredging Sector Group has been set up in England and Wales to share information about the impact of the Directive, and to provide a forum for discussions with Defra and the EA. Click here for minutes of meetings.
A briefing note on the impact of the Directive on the navigation sector has been produced by the EA with the help of the Group. The link ishttp://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/business/444217/444663/955573/525224/564178/?version=1&lang=_e
A European Task Group has also been established to share information and lobby at a European level.
11. Useful links
- EC:
- http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/water/water-framework/index_en.html
- Environment Agency:
- www.environment-agency.gov.uk/wfd
- SEPA:
- http://www.sepa.org.uk/wfd/
- Defra:
- http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/water/wfd/index.htm
- Scottish Executive:
- http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Environment/Water/17316/8084
- UK Technical Advisory Group:
- http://www.wfduk.org/
- Foundation for Water Research:
- http://www.euwfd.com
- British Marine Federation:
- http://www.britishmarine.co.uk/DocImages/1404.pdf