EQS values for dependent aquatic ecoystems COM(2006)397

36 APPENDIX 1. Summary sheets for all case studies (alphabetical order)

FP6 - Specific Targeted Research Project: Contract N° 006538 (SSPI)

BRIDGE WP4: Representative sites studies

SUMMARY SHEETS: SOUTHERN VIENNA BASIN, AUSTRIA

BaBacckkggrroouunndd ccRRiitteerriiaa ffoorr tthehe IIDDeennttiiffiiccaattiioonn ooff

GrGroouunnddwwaatteerr

th t hr rE Es sh ho ol ld ds s

Programme

FP6 - Specific Targeted Research Project: Contract N° 006538 (SSPI)

FACT SHEET: Südliches Wiener Becken GK100024

Work Package 4:

Representative sites / groundwater body studies and compliance testing

Country: ¹Ecoregion (annex XI of WFD): Site name / website:

Austria 11.Hungarian Lowlands Ist-Bestandsanalyse 2004/

(partly 4. Alps) www.lebensministerium.at WFD article 5 report available?²Common Implementation Strategy (CIS), FP5 or 6 projects:

yes (at website - see above) CIS WG 2.8

3Size of GW body: 1.228 km² (100 %) ⁴Land use: Agriculture (63%), urban (26%), woodland (10,3%), water areas (0,6%) ⁵Transboundary: No

6Longitude: MGI_E 16,30 Altitude: 133-494m⁷Geological age: ⁸Geology: Gravel, Sand

Latitude: MGI_N 48,01 Quarternary

9Depth interval: ¹⁰Type: ¹¹Receptorsrivers

0-220m below surface unconfined, porous Groundwater

12Residence time / modern water indicators: Nitrate, pesticides and several other parameters are regularly monitored 13Types of protected areas:

5 Natura 2000 areas (4 SPA and pSCI; 1 SPA) - only a little part of one of them is WFD relevant 12 drinking water protected areas

14Pollutant loading: WFD pollutants Priority substances Emerging / other Households and industry:

Agriculture:

Other: 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHAN

Comments: This GW Body has been selected not necessarily regarding pollution risk, but to reflect (together with the other selected bodies) a broad range of parameters of interest for testing purpose

15Human impacts: WFD pollutants Priority substances Emerging / other

Groundwater impacts: 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHAN

Comments: No information about aquatic Ecosystems available

Substances characterising the gw body as being at risk (in Article 5 report):

According to Art. 5 WFD the single groundwater body GK100024 Southern Vienna Basin has not been reported to be at risk.

17Monitoring networks:

Groundwater: yes (part of the national GW monitoring network)

Aquatic ecosystems: yes (part of national surface water monitoring network) Terrestrial ecosystems: no

18Economic analysis available:no

19Selected References:

Geol. Bundesanstalt (2004): GeoHint Endbericht 2004 (Final report on geological background levels in Austria 2004) Umweltbundesamt Vienna (Environment Agency) (2005): Provision of data from the Austrian Groundwater Body-Database BMLFUW (2005): EU WRR 2000/60/EG österr. Bericht über die IST-Bestandsaufnahme (Article 5/6 report of EU WFD) BMLFUW (2005): Wassergüte in Österreich Jahresbericht 2004 (waterquality in Austria, annual report 2004)

Background SW

FP6 - Specific Targeted Research Project: Contract N° 006538 (SSPI) Substances selected for derivation of natural background levels by different methods:

NBL-E: Cd, Cu, Pb, Cr, As, B, Cl, SO4, PO4, EC NBL90: Cd, Hg, Cu, Pb, Cr, As, B, Cl, SO4, PO4, EC NBL97.7: Cd, Hg, Cu, Pb, Cr, As, B, Cl, SO4, PO4, EC

Where NBL_E is existing national NBL (if available), NBL90 and NBL97.7 are the BRIDGE NBLs Type of reference value(s) applied (drinking water standards, EQS etc.):

REF1 = Drinking Water Standards

REF2 = National Environmental Quality Standards for Surface Water Substances selected for derivation of threshold values at different tiers:

Tier 1:

Chloride, Sulphate, Phosphate, Electr. Conductivity (20°C) Tier 2a: Cadmium, Copper, Lead, Chrome, Arsenic, Boron, Chloride, (option 1 &2)

Tier 2b:

Tier 3:

Tier 4:

Examples of NBLs and TVs for selected substances for the receptor groundwater itself *:

(use preselected if possible but remove and/or add if you got more important examples from your case) TVs derived based on national or regional NBLs (if existing):

Unit n NBL_E REF1 REF2 TV_E-1 TV_E-2

Cadmium mg/l 13 0.0002 0.005 0.001 0.0004 (2) 0.0012

Mercury mg/l 13 - - 0.001 - 0.001

Arsenic mg/l 13 0.0041 0.01 0.024 0.0071 (1) 0.0281

Copper mg/l 13 0.0041 2 0.0088 0.0082 (2) 0.0129

Chrome mg/l 13 0.0035 0.05 0.0085 0.007 (2) 0.012

Boron mg/l 13 0.037 1 - 0.074 (2)

-Chloride mg/l 13 32.1 200 - 64.2 (2)

-Sulphate mg/l 13 79.7 250 - 159.4 (2)

-PCE µg/l - - - 0.01 - 0.01

TCE µg/l - - - 0.01 - 0.01

TVs derived based on BRIDGE NBLs

Unit n NBL90 NBL97.7 REF1 REF2 TV90-1 TV90-2 TV97.7-1 TV97.7-2

Cadmium mg/l 13 0.00016 0.00019 0.005 0.001 0.00033 (2) 0.00116 0.0039 (2) 0.00119

Mercury mg/l 13 0.0001 0.0001 - 0.001 - 0.0011 - 0.0011

Arsenic mg/l 13 0.001 0.001 0.01 0.024 0.002 (2) 0.025 0.002 (2) 0.025

Copper mg/l 13 0.001 0.001 2 0.0088 0.002 (2) 0.0098 0.002 (2) 0.0098

Chrome mg/l 13 0.001 0.004 0.05 0.0085 0.002 (2) 0.0095 0.008 (2) 0.0125

Boron mg/l 13 0.04 0.05 1 - 0.08 (2) - 0.10 (2)

-Chloride mg/l 13 41 50 200 - 82 (2) - 100 (2)

-Sulphate mg/l 13 164 197 250 - 207 (1) - 224 (1)

-PCE µg/l - - - - 0.01 - 0.01 - 0.01

TCE µg/l - - - - 0.01 - 0.01 - 0.01

*Number in parenthesis indicate the relevant case as defined in methodology i.e.

Case 1: 1/3REF≤ NBL < REF => TV = (REF+NBL)/2, case 2: NBL < 1/3 REF => TV = 2 NBL, case 3: NBL ≥ REF => TV = NBL TV90-1, TV97.7-1: Calculations of TV for the receptor groundwater itself with option 1

TV90-2, TV97.7-3: Calculations of TV for the receptor groundwater itself with option 2

Unit n REF 2 Background

SW TV-1 _SW TV-2 _SW

Cadmium mg/l 2 0.001 - 0.001 0.0033

Mercury mg/l 2 0.001 - 0.001 0.0033

TVs derived based on BRIDGE NBLs for the receptor surface water (SW) Cadmium, Mercury, Copper, Lead, Chrome, Arsenic, Boron,

Sulphate, Electr. Conductivity. (20°C), Tetrachloroehtylene, Trichloroethylene

Cadmium, Copper, Lead, Chrome, Arsenic, Mercury, Trichloroethylene, Tetrachloroethylene Attenuation was not considered in the Austrian case study.

TV = QS at tier 2b

BaBacckgkgrroouunndd ccRRiitteerriaia ffoorr tthhee IIDDeennttifificicatatiioonn ooff

GrGroouunnddwwaatteerrththrrEEsshhoollddss Framework^Sixth Programme

FP6 - Specific Targeted Research Project: Contract N° 006538 (SSPI)

The selection of the time period of measurements considered for NBL calculation should be discussed. Long time series of monitoring data already may indicate reasonable trends for any pre-selection parameter. The choice of time periods may reasonably influence how many sampling sites are to be considered for NBLs

Nitrate is in general one of the most relevant parameters concerning groundwater pollution in Austria. Therefore only few monitoring stations show a median value for nitrate < 10 mg/l. As a consequence the calculation of NBLs based on an own national approach respectively NBLs derived based on statistically results of Bridge-WP2 will be

important. Furthermore it has to be recognised that for substances which are used as pre-selection parameters no sound calculation of NBLs is possible.

Besides nitrate the use of further pre-selection parameters indicating anthropogenic impacts seemed to provide the most reliable results.

The Austrian case study “Southern Vienna Basin” proofed the general applicability of the methodology.

Nevertheless further discussions to refine the pre-selection approach for deriving NBLs, to establish a clear understanding and approach regarding 'groundwater itself' as a receptor and to adopt the approach regarding 'surface water' as a receptor are of importance.

Comments and conclusion on BRIDGE data preselection and NBL estimation

Comments and conclusion on the selection of Reference (REF) values

Comments and conclusion on the derivation of threshold values (TVs)

Regarding Tier 3 for the receptor 'surface water' the use of a dilution factor derived only according to assumptions on quantity and an estimation of the quantitative contribution of a groundwater body to a surface water body stipulates that all the dilution capacity is assigned to be filled up by one groundwater body. The fact that multiple pollutant discharges by a variety of sources are possible is neglected so far.

GENERAL CONCLUSION

Understanding the receptor 'groundwater itself' as a resource for future uses drinking water standards would be an approriate reference value. Regarding environmental issues the use of any agreed environmental quality standard for aquatic ecosystems might be acceptable.

Specific guidance on how to replace measurements below LOD / LOQ is necessary.

As for 'groundwater itself' as receptor most of threshold values were calculated according to case 2 of option 1 (NBL<1/3 of Reference Value; TV= 2 x NBL). The resulting TVs are consequently rather low and much lower than drinking water standards. The practicability of establishing threshold values far below drinking water standards must be discussed. Measures triggered by such threshold values might be costly but environmentally inefficient.

The threshold values (cadmium and lead) for 'groundwater itself' calculated according to the MPA-approach with national Environmental Quality Standards (option 2) showed in general higher TVs as option 1.

BaBacckkggrroouunndd ccRRiitteerriiaa ffoorr tthhee IIDDeennttiifficicaattiioonn ooff

GrGroouunnddwwaatteerr

th t hr rE Es sh ho ol ld ds s

Programme

FP6 - Specific Targeted Research Project: Contract N° 006538 (SSPI)

BRIDGE WP4: Representative sites studies

SUMMARY SHEETS: CKS_0200_GWL_1, FLANDERS

BaBacckkggrroouunndd ccRRiitteerriiaa ffoorr tthehe IIDDeennttiiffiiccaattiioonn ooff

GrGroouunnddwwaatteerr

th t hr rE Es sh ho ol ld ds s

Programme

FP6 - Specific Targeted Research Project: Contract N° 006538 (SSPI)