Hazardous substance assessment Lena Avellan HOLAS II 4-2015 24-25 November 2015 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 1
This presentation: • Setting the stage for a hazardous substance assessment discussion • Summarize legal requirements – reflecting recent discussions • Provide overview of indicators • Reflect relevant State and Conservation 3-2015 outcome • Summarize national comments received • Present planned work through BalticBOOST WP 2.1 and WP 2.2 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 2
Hazardous substance assessment • Aims to provide an assessment of the status of hazardous substance in the Baltic Sea for the purposes following up on the progress towards the GES goals of BSAP and EU MSFD • Builds on core indicators and associated GES-boundaries • In HOLAS I – integrated thematic assessment for open sea and coastal areas, not including all listed substances as targets were lacking In HOLAS II – now up for discussion! Aggregation and Integration criteriat/compartments/protection goals Substances and assessment units 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 3
Effects Ecosystem health Activities & Status and pressure descriptors ( BSII ) (HOLAS tool) Inputs/emissions ( BSPI ) Main outputs ”nice to have” Socio-economic analysis Thematic outputs D1, D3 part, D3 part D7 D9 D6 part D2 NIS D11 D8 D10 D5 4, D6 part descriptive descriptive descriptive (one pre- (1 core (one pre- (one pre- (HEAT 3) (CHASE) ICES no no (biodiversity core) indicator) core) core) indicators indicators indicators ass.) Elements Birds Fish Mammal Benthic Pelagic and pressure data layers Core indicator reports 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 4
2 nd holistic assessment: HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) follow-up • BSAP goal to reach Good Environmental Status (GES) by 2021 • All segments and objectives to be evaluated using the indicators • Defining GES-boundaries thorugh core indictors in spatially explicit assessment units allows for more quantitative progress evaluation Baltic Sea unaffected by Favourable status of Baltic Sea EUTROPHICATION BIODIVERSITY MARITIME ACTIVITIES in the Baltic Baltic Sea undisturbed by Sea carried out in an environmentally HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES friendly way 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 5
2 nd holistic assessment: HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) follow-up Ecological objectives to be assessed: • Concentrations of hazardous substances close to natural levels • All fish safe to eat • Healthy wildlife • Radioactivity at pre-Chernobyl level Baltic Sea undisturbed by HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 6
2 nd holistic assessment: Roof Report for EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive • Goal to reach Good Environmental Status (GES) by 2020 • All elements to be assessed • Structured to be aligned with the 11 Descriptors 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 7
2 nd holistic assessment: Roof Report for EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive Descriptor 8 Concentrations of contaminants are at levels not giving rise to pollution effects Descriptor 9 Contaminants in fish and other seafood for human consumption does not exceed levels established by European Union legislation or other relevant standards 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 8
Recent MSFD discussions MSCG November 2015 (ppt presentations) Criteria Pressure Primary 8.1.1 Concentration of contaminants and their trends, measured in the relevant matrix (such as biota, sediment and water) in a way that ensures comparability with the assessments under Directive 2000/60/EC 8.1.2 Occurrence, source (where possible), spatial/geographical extent of significant acute pollution events caused by crude oil and similar compounds 9.1.1 Actual levels of contaminants that have been detected Impact Primary 8.2.1 Contaminant‐related adverse effects on biological responses at or below individual level in the target species in the region, sub‐region or subdivision concerned 8.2.2 Significance of the impact on biota affected by acute pollution events caused by crude oil and similar compounds 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 9
Recent MSFD discussions WG GES October 2015 (draft minutes) The Commission presented draft example text and main approaches for a revised Commission Decision for descriptors D8 and D9 D8: • One participants proposal to follow the WFD sampling requirements until 12 nautical miles , after which MS can choose substance and matrix • Commission clarification that it is most important to ensure that no gaps occur for spatial coverage and substances which are a risk • Consistency needed between the RSC lists and the River Basin Specific Pollutants of WFD, with Commission clarification that MS can add substances beyond the WFD list of Priority Substances • The Commission clarified that bio-effects should remain D9: • One participants point that integrating microbiological contamination under D9 was an important conclusion of the consultation. • Clarified that ensuring traceability of seafood is a requirement, and this already assured through information to consumers on the location where the fish was caught that is also used in fish stock assessments • Proposal does not entail additional obligations or other requirements beyond regulation 1881/2006, only linking of data and ensuring that it is fed into the MSFD 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 10
Recent MSFD discussions MSCG November 2015 (ppt presentations) Contaminants at 3 levels ; i. Environment ii. Seafood iii. Acute pollution events (monitoring should be directed by occurring incidents) Draft examples of possible GES Decision criteria – Descriptor 8 Area 0-12 nautical miles 12-> nautical miles Substance i. Priority Substance list i. As for 0-12 nm ii. River Basin Specific Pollutants ii. additional substances for (sub)region (e.g. RBSP and/or RSC listed) matrix as in WFD as in WFD or as assessed in sub-region (option if change matrix => (option if matrix changed => equivalent to EQS value) apply the same EQS as in territorial waters) Reference a) EQS of Dir. 2008/105 EC for priority a) As for 0-12 nm level substances as amended by Dir b) Values agreed for (sub)region for 2013/39/EU. If matrix changed => additional substance modified EQS agreed at (sub)regional level 11/25/2015 b) RBSP values agreed in (sub)region Lena Avellan 11
Recent MSFD discussions MSCG November 2015 (ppt presentations) 12 nautical miles vs. Coastal assessment units 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 12
What’s what? Core indicator: Baltic Sea Environment Fact Sheet (BSEFS) • Commonly agreed indicator • Commonly agreed parameter evaluating progres towars target describing a trend • Updated by institutes Pre-core indicator: • Not fully developed core indicator, principle-level agreement by CPs to include in the assessement structure and monitoitor Candidate core indicator: • Proposed indicator, no agreement 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 13
Hazardous substance core indicators -the issue of EQS -GES • GEAR 8-2014: GES-boundaries to be aligned with EQSD • S&C 1-2014: Not straight forward in all cases • WFD Guidance Document No. 23 on biota monitoring published January 2015 • CORESET II Feb-2015 h.z. themathic meeting: EQS relevant as GES- boundary when derived for secondary poisoning, when derived for human health not suitable as environmental assessment target (but as D9) • EU WG GES Apr-2015: EQS relevant no matter which protection goal • S&C 2-2015 EQS to be used when they exist > propose as GES-boundaries for agreement • HOD 48 -2015 agree on proposed boundaries (DE, DK study reservations) 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 14
Guidance document No 32. on biota monitoring • Extremely low boundaries Table 1.1 > sub-GES maps even if EQS (µg/kg food authorities have not Substance matrix Protection goal ww) issued warnings and Human health detrimental effects are not PBDE 0.0085 Fish (fillet) via consumption of seen in the Baltic Sea fishery products Human health • Current monitoing Fluoranthene Crustaceans 30 via consumption of programmes sample other (PAH) and molluscs fishery products matrixes (e.g. whole fish) Human health Benzo[a]pyrene Crustanceans and no conversion factors 5 via consumption of (PAH) and molluscs available (potentially lipid fishery products content?) Mercury and its 20 Fish Secondary poisoning compounds • Analytical methods of Human health environmental laboratories PFOS 9.1 Fish (fillet) via consumption of may not be sufficiently fishery products sensitive Fish (fillet), Human health Dioxin an dioxin- 0.0065 • crustaceans via consumption of Molluscs are not used like compounds TEQ 2005 and molluscs fishery procudts extensively as human food HBCDD 167 fish Secondary poisoning in the Baltic Sea 11/25/2015 Lena Avellan 15
Recommend
More recommend
