Water.europa.eu Policy update with regard to Priority and Emerging Substances SOCOPSE Final...
-
Upload
arlene-singleton -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of Water.europa.eu Policy update with regard to Priority and Emerging Substances SOCOPSE Final...
water.europa.eu
Policy update with Policy update with regard to Priority and regard to Priority and Emerging SubstancesEmerging Substances
SOCOPSE Final ConferenceMaastricht, 24-25 June 2009
Jorge Rodriguez RomeroWFD Team CoordinatorDG Environment, European Commission
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
Contents Contents
• Priority substances: state of play
• Priority substances vs emerging substances
• Working with other related legislation (REACH, pesticides, biocides, …)
• Outlook
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
Legal framework Legal framework • Article 16 of WFD
• Article 8 of Directive 2008/105/EC (EQSD)
Within the framework of the review of Annex X to Directive 2000/60/EC, as provided for in Article 16(4) of that Directive, the Commission shall consider inter alia the substances set out in Annex III to this Directive for possible identification as priority substances or priority hazardous substances. The Commission shall report the outcome of its review to the European Parliament and to the Council by 13 January 2011. It shall accompany the report, if appropriate, with relevant proposals, in particular proposals to identify new priority substances or priority hazardous substances or to identify certain priority substances as priority hazardous substances and to set corresponding EQS for surface water, sediment or biota, as appropriate.
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
Prioritisation principles Prioritisation principles • Significant risk to or via aquatic environment,
including to surface waters used for drinking water
• Identification of risks through
1. Risk assessments under chemicals, pesticides or biocides legislation
2. Targeted risk assessment focusing only on toxicity to or via aquatic environment
3. Simplified risk-based assessment procedure based on scientific principles and taking into account
• intrinsic hazard
• monitoring data
• production volumes and/or use patterns.
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
Tier 1: risk assessments under Tier 1: risk assessments under chemicals, pesticides, biocides chemicals, pesticides, biocides • 97 finalised risk assessment reports under Existing
Substances Regulation 793/93 (+24 drafts)
• 334 pesticides active substances in Annex I Directive 91/414/EEC
• 14 substances included in Annex I of Directive 98/8/EC on biocides
• Subsidiarity: Priority substances should be an EU wide problem, otherwise should be regulated at national/RBD level (as part of ecological status)
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
Tier 3: Simplified risk Tier 3: Simplified risk assessment assessment
• 2001 priority list: COMMPS (Combined Monitoring-based and Modelling-based Priority Setting)
• New data collection 2008-2009
COMMPS 1999Monitoring risk ratio-based
approach 2009
Nb Countries 15 + Eureau 28 + Vewin
A priori non candidate substancesAl, Br, Fe, NH3, Cyanides,
DDT, phenols, etc.No
Nb candidate substances314 (water)221 (sediment)
1 147
Nb substances (manageable list)95 (water)60 (sediment)
317
Nb water analysis 752 043 13 581 264
Nb sediment analysis 68 880 918 839
Nb biota analysis 0 78 863
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
Tier 3: Simplified risk Tier 3: Simplified risk assessment assessment Monitoring-Monitoring-
based rankingbased rankingModelling-Modelling-
based rankingbased ranking
Establishment of the manageable
list
Establishment of the universe of
chemicals
Central database data collection
preparation and treatment
Assessment of exposure and
hazard
Scoring
Application of fugacity modelling
1st Expert review(de-selection
criteria)
List of substances
Consideration of risk ratio and other criteria
2nd Expert review(de-selection
criteria)
Evaluation of exposure and effects data
Application of prioritisation
algorithm
List of substances
1st Expert review(de-selection
criteria)
Final list of Final list of substancessubstances
Monitoring data provide an excellent basis, from direct observation, to get information on European environmental conditions. However, monitoring data cannot be used as the single scoring method because the available information is incomplete and only covers a set of substances which were considered "relevant" in the past. Thus, the current monitoring information is biased by previous decisions on which substances should be monitored. (…) Therefore, it is important to incorporate a second system, to allow inclusion in the final list, of substances with a high potential risk for aquatic organisms for which no monitoring information is available to date.
Opinion of CSTEE on COMMPS 28.09.99
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
Additional substances of concernAdditional substances of concern
• Directive 2008/105/EC Annex III substances (13)
• Existing substances regulation PBTs (27)
• REACH Substances of Very High Concern SVHC (16)
• ECHA recommended recently 7 of them for authorisation
• Persistent Organic Pollutants POPs
• Others: OSPAR priority, pharmaceuticals, etc
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
Historical pollutantsHistorical pollutants
• PCBs, dioxins
• Heavily regulated since years
• Still causing problems due to PBT properties
• There are arguments in favour of listing them as priority substances
• Trigger for action
• From a regulatory point of view, the reason for including these chemicals in the list is the need for assessing the effectiveness of existing measures and the evolution of water quality as a consequence of the measures. (CSTEE 1999)
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
EQS settingEQS setting
• EQS Technical Guidance in final draft stage
• Testing period over next months
• To be finalised by the end of 2009
• Water – sediment – biota
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
Priority vs emerging substancesPriority vs emerging substances
Not monitored
Not regulated
• WFD article 16: significant risk to or via aquatic environment
• There is no place for emerging pollutants if risk is not demonstrated – e.g. presence is not enough
RESEARCH (e.g. NORMAN network,
Modelkey)REACH
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
Scarcity of monitoring data Scarcity of monitoring data
Analysed Fraction Analysis
Fish - Fish Liver 15
Mussel - Mussel Whole 9
Sediment - Fraction <2mm (whole) 62
Water - Whole water with no separation of liquid and SPM phases
42
• Example: PFOS
• Annex III Directive 2008/105/EC
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
Quality of monitoring data Quality of monitoring data
• Example: Triphenyltin compounds
Matrix FractionNb of totalanalysis
Analysis for which LOD>2*PNEC
Nb Percentage
Water Whole water 16017 15666 97,8%
Number of analysis with both LoD and LoQ 611
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
Control measuresControl measures
• WFD Article 16(6)
• Commission proposal in 2006: existing measures at Community level should be sufficient to achieve the objectives – this needs to be looked at
• Revision of river basin management plans: pressures – status – measures
• Activity on emissions under WG E Priority Substances
• Research projects (like SOCOPSE)
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
Working with other legislationWorking with other legislation
• REACH
• Registration dossiers
• Annex XV dossiers (SVHC)
• Evaluations
• Pesticides & biocides
• Authorisations for use
• WFD as downstream safety net to ensure measures taken to mitigate the risk are efficient – and providing a feedback mechanism to those other policies in case further product controls are needed
Socopse Final Conference, 24.6.2009
OutlookOutlook
• Overall methodology for WFD article 16 Community action to be consolidated, to be used in future updates, including relationship with other legislation
• Progressively evolving in the future
• Improve information base
• Chemical monitoring in Member States (Commission Directive on QA/QC to be adopted in July 2009)
• REACH (ecotoxicological data, use patterns)
• Effectiveness of measures: RBMP cycle
• Emerging substances
• Research (Socopse, ScorePP, Modelkey, Neptune, …)