WG DIKE_11_minutes of meeting_DRAFT



|[pic] |

| |Marine Strategy Framework Directive |GES |

| |Common Implementation Strategy |Brussels |

| |Minutes of 15th meeting of the Working Group on Good Environmental Status (WG GES) |21 June 2016 |

|Document: |GES_15-2016-Minutes_Draft |

|Title |Minutes of the 15th WG GES meeting (draft) |

|Date prepared: |22-08-2016 V1 |

| |23-09-2016 V2 |

|Prepared by: |DG Environment and Milieu |

DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES

Welcome and introduction

The meeting was co-chaired by Anna Cheilari and David Connor from DG Environment's Marine Environment and Water Industries Unit and Uli Claussen from Germany. A list of participants is given in Annex 1. The documents and presentations of the meeting are listed in Annex 2, and are all available on CIRCABC. The Commission opened the meeting, thanking all participants for coming to Brussels.

Approval of minutes of 14th meeting of WG GES

No additional comments were raised from participants and the minutes were approved.

Update on CIS activities of relevance to WG GES

1 Follow-up report on the Marine Directors' meeting (9-10June 2016)

The Marine Directors welcomed the approach of the MSCG to oversee and manage the overall progress of the Common Implementation Strategy (CIS) and endorsed the general headlines of the draft work programme. The Marine Directors also pointed out that the work programme may need to be amended to reflect the outcomes of the GES Decision review. Joint meetings will be set up for Marine and Fisheries Directors. Priority topics are the management of MPAs, increasing synergies between the CFP and the MSFD and joint monitoring and measures.

2 Report on the MSCG meetings (07 April 2016)

The MSCG discussed the Work Programme 2016-2018. According to the Work Programme, WG GES is responsible for agreeing on common approaches in relation to the implementation of the MSFD between Member States, the application of Decision 2010/477/EU, the definition of GES and its links to other frameworks, on assessment of environmental status and associated monitoring programmes. The WG GES will also provide advice on the Programme of Measures (PoM), together with WG ESA (which will be renamed to POMESA to also cover the PoMs). The Work Programme also calls for better cooperation between the Working Groups and the Technical Groups.

3 Report on TG Litter meeting (6-7 April 2016)

The mandate for the TG Litter 2016-2018 is approved. New requests in the mandate are to provide input on the GES Decision review and the amendments to MSFD Annex III. The core of TG Litter work remains the harmonisation of monitoring methodologies and protocols for marine litter. Except for the Black Sea Convention, all Regional Sea Conventions now have a Regional Action Plan on Marine Litter. Also presented were ongoing projects and the publication of three thematic reports. The EU external dimension of marine litter is an emerging aspect to consider, with activities under G7, the UN Environmental Assembly and SDG14 (Sustainable Development Goal on life below water) and Rio+20. The TG Litter will develop baselines on marine litter in 2016-2017. The baseline aims to assess what the current state of marine litter is in the EU. A common approach will be developed and discussed in a dedicated workshop by the end of 2016. Thresholds for marine litter will be discussed later, in accordance with the review of the GES Decision.

4 Report on TG Noise workshop (7-8 June 2016)

The extent to which the current indicators on underwater noise need to be revised was discussed. The two current indicators (impulsive and continuous noise) remain important. The impulsive noise register (linked to Indicator 11.1.1), developed by ICES, funded by HELCOM and OSPAR, is ready to use. Noise maps are still a tool to implement indicator 11.2.1 (continuous noise). Aspects that are missing are related to the cumulative impacts of displacement of marine species at the population level. In the long term, it is expected that the impact of noise on other marine species also needs to be considered. The meeting was informed on outcome from the BIAS project, to include in the monitoring programme the third frequency – 2kHz.

5 Report on WG ESA meeting (29 February 2016)

The mandate of WG ESA will be extended to cover the Programme of Measures. It is proposed to rename WG ESA to WG POMESA to reflect this. It aims to enhance the socio-economic input to the expected 2018 Member State initial assessments updates and to strengthen the link between the WFD and MSFD.

Article 12 assessments

a. For Articles 8, 9 and 10, follow-up on Commission recommendations

Based on the Article 12 technical assessment of the GES and targets, the European Commission recommended a number of Member States review and improve their GES determinations and environmental targets. Fourteen Member States have formally replied to the European Commission recommendations. Out of these, six Member States have updated their GES determinations and/or targets, based on those recommendations.

b. For Article 11 Monitoring Programmes

The Commission is preparing two reports on the outcomes of the assessment of the monitoring programmes. The first document is the Article 12 report containing the general findings of the analysis of the monitoring programmes. The second document is a Commission Staff Working Paper which describes the individual findings for each Member State. The outlines of both reports were presented at the meeting, in addition to the initial results of the technical assessment. Both documents will become publicly available.

Improving assessment of GES

1 Review of GES Decision & MSFD Annex III – state of play

The state-of-play of the GES Decision review was presented. A substantial number of comments have been received from Member States and other stakeholders on the proposed text of the revised GES Decision. In total, about 2500 comments have been received spread over three versions of the revised GES Decision.

The main purpose of the GES Decision review is to have a more consistent approach to defining GES, to better assess progress towards achieving GES and to strengthen links to other EU legislation. Adoption of a revised GES Decision is currently scheduled for early 2017.

2 Guidance for assessments under Article 8

The Guidance for assessments under Article 8 is still in development and needs to be aligned with the revised GES Decision, which is still being considered by the MSFD Committee; in view of this, a latest version of the draft Guidance was not presented to the meeting, but will be presented to the next WG GES meeting, taking into account the latest text of the revised GES Decision.

Instead, the meeting focused on the sections on “levels and methods of integration” from the draft Guidance (GES_15-2016-02). Outstanding issues from the WG GES workshop on 20/21 April 2016 (GES-15-2016-03) were discussed for descriptors 1, 5, 6 and 8, whereas for the other descriptors, a first discussion took place. The document presented the proposed levels and methods of integration, providing schemes for each descriptor, first elaborating on the pressure-based indicators (D2, D3, D5, D6, D7, D8, D9, D10 and D11) and then on the state-based descriptors (D1, D4 and D6).

A number of Member States expressed concern about discussing the guidance before the revised GES Decision is finalised. It was recognised that the guidance will need to be updated to reflect further revisions to the Commission Decision, but that progress could still be made by WG GES on discussing aspects of integration for the assessment that are not explicit in the Commission Decision. One mMember sState expressed a formal reservation towards discussing the document, and was therefore not in a position to participate in the discussion at the meeting.

Discussion on pressure descriptors:

• D2 (non-indigenous species): The way in which assessments for D2C2 and C3 can feed into those for the biodiversity descriptors needs to be clarified.

• D3 (commercially-exploited fish and shellfish): ICES proposed in their special request advice[1] to not include GES criterion D3C3 in D3 assessments until usable reference points have been developed. There is a need to determine the integration method for D3, taking into account the lack of data on criterion D3C3. Criteria D3C1 and D3C2 are important to keep. Under D3, Member States need to report on the stocks that are assessed, and need a consistent approach to defining which stocks to include. Further consideration is to be made on whether and how to include non-assessed stocks.

• D5 (eutrophication): The proposed aggregation rules are well advanced. The rules seem to accommodate both the OSPAR and HELCOM systems. Integration of WFD coastal areas with MSFD offshore water is also needed. There were different opinions on whether the integration rules for coastal waters should be consistent with those for offshore waters, or with the WFD assessment schemes for coastal waters.

• D7 (hydrographical conditions): The assessment for Descriptor 7 should contribute to the assessment of Descriptor 1 (habitats). Criterion D7C1 is a stepping stone towards assessment of criterion D7C2; its assessment of the 'total pressure' should therefore not lose the detail needed to assess D7C2, which is particularly relevant in coastal areas. A concern was raised that too many criteria are already merged in D1, which risks blurring some aspects, particularly for D7. The scheme needs updating to reflect inclusion of pelagic habitats in D7C1.

• D8 (contaminants): Two options were presented, one which integrates the contaminants to an overall assessment, and one which presents the contaminants individually. There were differences in opinion on the approach to integration in coastal waters (whether the MSFD integration rules are applied in offshore and coastal waters, or whether the WFD assessment applies directly in coastal waters). It is proposed to keep separate the assessments of contaminants in each matrix (sediment, water column, biota). There was support to keep assessments per substance separate, with a need to agree which substances should be grouped (e.g. PAHs) so as to ensure consistency in presentation of results. There was general agreement to keep Criteria D8C1 and D8C2 separate, and for separate presentation of results for persistent 'legacy' contaminants. More discussion is needed on D8C3 and D8C4.

• D9 (contamination in seafood): D9 is composed of one indicator which can be quantified by means of ’one-out-all-out’. It is to be specified more explicitly that D9 refers to seafood for human consumption.

• D10 (marine litter): Criteria and matrices are probably best kept separate and not integrated. Further input is required from TG Litter.

• D11 (underwater noise): General agreement on the integration scheme and methods proposed. Further input is required from TG Noise. It is proposed to also include harm to species into the scheme, if that is included in the final GES Decision.

Discussion on state descriptors:

• D1 (species): There is no clear single approach that is acceptable for Member States and RSC for all ecosystem components. ICES[2] recommends the 'species approach' to integration for reptiles and mammals, and the 'criterion approach' for fish and birds. Alignment with the reporting under the Nature Directives was named as an argument to assess species individually (species approach), while resource efficiency is an argument in favour of a group assessment (criterion approach). OSPAR and HELCOM are not in favour of starting a new system for birds and fish that would conflict with their existing assessment systems. Given the current draft GES Decision proposed use of the 'species approach' for all ecosystem components, there was a need for further discussion.

• D1 (benthic habitats): The scheme needs to be simplified further, and updated in line with the latest revisions on the GES Decision. The link between D1 (benthic habitats) and D6 (physical loss and disturbance) also needs to be further clarified, as the overall approach to assessment of benthic habitats is still not well established.

• D1 (pelagic habitats): Pelagic habitats are to be assessed separately. Agreement is needed on the types of pelagic habitats. It is to be clarified whether physical/chemical properties of the water mass should be included and how the assessment links to pressures on pelagic habitats (e.g. eutrophication, acute pollution events) without double-counting.

• D4 (ecosystems): Foods webs need to be further considered; rather than focussing on integration of criteria at trophic guild level, a more holistic approach should be considered (use of trophic guilds was proposed by ICES as an interim solution until more holistic food web indicators are developed). The scheme should become more holistic, incorporating outputs from other descriptors, such as from D1. It was noted that this may be an issue that needs to be addressed through the GES Decision.

• D6 (physical loss and physical damage): The assessment under Descriptor 6 will feed into the assessment on seabed habitats under descriptor 1.

Further follow-up work (e.g. by expert groups at JRC, ICES etc) may be required to explore: D1 species - the approach to integration of criteria for the various ecosystem components; D1 habitats - pelagic and benthic; D4 food webs; D8 - grouping of substances, RSC and WFD integration methods; D10 marine litter (define precise questions in relation to level 2 of the integration scheme for TG Litter) and on D11.

Member States were invited to submit further comments on the document by 15th July, to allow further development of the draft guidance before the next WG GES meeting.

3 Developments on the Common Understanding document

Germany presented an updated proposal on how to progress the Common Understanding document on Art. 8, 9 and 10 (GES-15-2016-04). The meeting agreed that the Common Understanding document from 2011 should be kept as it is. The document, however, will be extended with a section on the progress made since then. The document will also be tailored to be consistent with the Guidance on Article 8 and the revised GES Decision.

Information exchange

The WG GES was informed on the following points (GES-15-2016-05):

• Common Staff Working Document on the application of the WFD and MSFD in relation to Aquaculture, consisting of best practices and recommendations (Link to document)

• Call of proposals to support the implementation of 2nd cycle of the MSFD. Deadline for application is extended to 26 September 2016 (Link to call)

• Bathing water report 2016 presenting the bathing water quality in Europe (Link to report)

Any other business

None discussed

Closure of the meeting

The chairs thanked all participants for their presence and contributions and closed the meeting.

Annex 1 – List of participants

|  |  |Organisation / Ministry |Last name |First name |

|Member States |  |  |

|AT |Austria |  |  |  |

|BE |Belgium |Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences (RBINS) |De Cauwer |Karien |

|BG |Bulgaria |Marine Environmental Protection  and Monitoring department” |Milkova |Tanya |

|HR |Croatia | | | |

|CY |Cyprus | | | |

|CZ |Czech Republic |  | | |

|DK |Denmark |The Danish Nature Agency |Jung Madsen |Signe |

|EE |Estonia | | | |

|FI |Finland |Finnish Environment Institute |Korpinen |Samuli |

|FR |France |IFREMER |Miossec |Laurence |

| | |IFREMER |Buchet |Remi |

|DE |Germany |German Environment Agency |Weiss |Andrea |

| | |German Environment Agency |Claussen |Uli |

| | |German Environment Agency |Leujak |Wera |

|EL |Greece | | | |

|IE |Ireland | | | |

|IT |Italy |Italian Ministry for the Environment, Land and Sea  |Braida |Matteo |

|LV |Latvia |Latvian Institute of Aquatic Ecology |Strake |Solvita |

|LT |Lithuania |Environmental Protection Agency of Lithuania |Stoncaitiene |Neringa |

|MT |Malta |Environment and Resources Authority |Camilleri |Sarah |

|NL |The Netherlands |Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment |Enserink |Lisette |

|PL |Poland |Chief Inspectorate of Environmental Protection |RamiskaKaminska |Magdalena |

|PT |Portugal |Direcção-Geral de Recursos Naturais, Segurança e Serviços Marítimos (DGRM) |Lopes |Vera |

|RO |Romania |Ministry of Environment and Climate Changes | | |

|SK |Slovak Republic |  | | |

|SI |Slovenia | | | |

|ES |Spain |Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment |Diaz |Laura |

|SE |Sweden | Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management (SwAM) |Ytreberg |Agnes |

|UK |United Kingdom |Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) |Scarsbrook |Andrew |

|Regional Sea Conventions | | |

|  |RSC |Helsinki Commission Secretariat |Zweifel |Ulla Li |

|Stakeholders & International organisations | | |

|  |INT ORG |International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) |Dickey-Collas |Mark |

|  |STH |European Mollusc Producers Association (EMPA) |Ducloy |Perrine |

|  |STH |Europêche |Batsleer |Jurgen |

| |STH |Scottish Fishermen’s Federation |Coull |Kenny |

|EU Commission / European Environment Agency / Consultants |  |  |

|  |EEA |European Environment Agency | | |

| | |European Topic Centre on inland, coastal and marine waters (ETC/ICM) |Peterlin |Monika |

|  |Consultant |Milieu Ltd |Cools |Jan |

| | |ABPmer |Walmsley |Suzannah |

|  |ENV.C.2 |European Commission, DG Environment, Unit C.2 "Marine Environment and Water Industry" |Cheilari |Anna |

|  |  |  |Connor |David |

|  |  |  |Pirotta |Fabio |

|  |  |  |O’Boyle |Shane |

|  |  |  |Martin-Roumegas |Lydia |

|  |JRC |Joint research Centre |Hanke |Georg |

Annex 2 – Documents and presentations

List of documents (from CIRCABC)

|[pic] GES_14-2015_DraftMinutes |

|[pic] GES_15-2016-00_List of documents |

|[pic] GES_15-2016-01_draft Agenda |

|[pic] GES_15-2016-02_Progress_Art 8_guidance |

|[pic] GES_15-2016-03_Art 8 Workshop_SummaryNote |

|[pic] GES_15-2016-04_CU_Progress_report |

|[pic] GES_15-2016-05_Information exchange |

|[pic] Link to Final synthesis WMD Amsterdam.docx |

|[pic] Link to MD2016-1-3-draft CIS WP 2016-18.pdf |

|[pic] MSFD_TG ML_Harm caused by Marine Litter_Final draft |

|[pic] MSFD_TG ML_Identifying Sources of Marine Litter_Final draft |

|[pic] MSFD_TG ML_Riverine Litter Monitoring_Advanced draft |

List of presentations (from CIRCABC)

|[pic] GES_15_2016_3b_Work programme |

|[pic] GES_15_2016_3c_TG Litter |

|[pic] GES_15_2016_3d_TG Noise workshop |

|[pic] GES_15_2016_4a_Modified GES & targets |

|[pic] GES_15_2016_4b_Art.12 assessment_monitoring prog |

|[pic] GES_15_2016_5a_GES review state of play |

|[pic] GES_15_2016_5b_Art8-Guidance |

-----------------------

[1] and

[2]

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download