Topic Centre Services


Latest ETC/ICM Announcements

Friday, 17 June 2011

Preparation of the WISE SoE data request 2011

Friday, 17 June 2011

To: Eionet National Focal Points

Cc: Eionet PCPs and NRCs for Rivers and Lakes
Cc: Eionet PCPs and NRCs for Groundwater
Cc: Eionet PCPs and NRCs for Marine and Coastal Environment
Cc: Eionet PCPs and NRCs for Water Emissions
Cc: Eionet PCPs and NRCs Water Quantity and Use

 

From: Beate Werner, EEA

 

Dear Colleague,

The 2011 WISE SoE annual data request will be launched on the 1st August 2011. It has been agreed with NFPs that in the preparation phase for this data request changes to Data Dictionaries and Scoring criteria will be consulted with you to allow for comments to be made.

·        Annex 1 provides the overview of changes to the Data Dictionaries.

·        Annex 2 provides the overview of changes to the scoring criteria (smileys).

You are welcome to comment on the suggested updates to the Data Dictionaries and scoring criteria by the 30th June to Miroslav Fanta (Miroslav.Fanta@cenia.cz).

 

Beate Werner
Head of Group - Water
European Environment Agency

 

 

 

 


Annex 1: Important Data Dictionary Updates

 

Significant changes only are described.

 

1.    All reporting categories

 

Since most of the "post-reporting" communication with countries concerns confirmation of high values, it is suggested that the field ‚Remarks‘ is added to all concentration data tables (if not available yet) for the following reason:

All concentration values are checked against the High Value ‘Threshold‘ to avoid typing errors, use of wrong units etc. In the case where a reported value is higher than the threshold, the Data Manager asks the country for confirmation. In order to minimise such communication, the country can confirm the correctness of the value in this field by the following procedure:

Methodology of the field ‚Remarks‘:

Voluntary field.

Remarks, comments or explanatory notes (free text).

Enter the text "value confirmed" in the case you are sure the value exceeding the High Value Threshold is correct. Lists of threshold values for individual substances and reporting categories are available at the following public Circa/Eionet Forum folder: ……..

 

 

2.    Rivers, Lakes, TCM Data Dictionaries

 

Disaggregated data tables:

Based on content experts' judgement and in order to simplify the table structure and reduce potential errors, the following changes in structure of the tables were agreed by Data Managers and Content Experts:

Fields Limit of Detection and Limit of Quantification will be removed (if present in the table).

Fields Limit of Detection or Quantification Flag and Concentration remain with updated methodology, as described below.

The name of the filed Limit of Detection or Quantification Flag will be shortened to LOD_LOQ_Flag.

LOD_LOQ_Flag field methodology:

Mandatory field for hazardous substances reporting if the sample concentration value is below the limit of detection or quantification.

Enter the value "[" if the sample concentration value is below the limit of detection.
Enter the value "<" if the sample concentration value is below the limit of quantification.
Keep blank in other cases.

Concentration field methodology:

Mandatory field.

If the sample concentration value is below the limit of detection or quantification, enter the limit of detection or quantification value into the Concentration field and fill the field Limit of Detection or Quantification Flag with the appropriate character ("[" or "<").

For data aggregated from sub-sites enter the mean concentration of the samples.

 

 

3.    Biological Data Dictionaries

 

From 2011, biological quality elements‘ in rivers, lakes and transitional/coastal waters will be included in the regular reporting.

The most important Data Dictionary changes are as follows:

Link to the figure below available on a public Circa / Eionet Forum folder is added (http://eea.eionet.europa.eu/Members/irc/eionet-circle/water/library?l=/wise_reporting_2011/biological_reporting ). The figure explains the different metric scales for biological data and classification systems:

 

 

 

The field WaterbodyTypeOther is replaced by WaterbodyTypeCS (= Waterbody type used in national Classification System) in all tables where available.

 

Fields MetricScale and WaterbodyTypeIC are removed from both ClassificationSystem tables (but remain in the Biology tables).

 


4.    Water Quantity Data Manual

 

An addition of one hydro-meteorological parameter will be made in Table 1, Part A:

Variable: Water Requirements
Definition: The volume of water which must be retained in the catchment (thus not actually available for abstraction) in order to meet environmental requirements and other legal obligations e.g. transboundary treaties.
Temporal Scale: Monthly, Seasonal, Annual, LTAA
Spatial Scale: RBD, RB, Sub-units, Administrative Region, Country
unit: Million cubic meters (Mio m3)

 

5.    Emissions to water Data Dictionary

 

The relation of SoE emission reporting in relation to E-PRTR emission reporting is specified:

 

1.       The introductory part of the Data Dictionary called ’Methodology for obtaining data‘ will be amended by the following sentence:

‚Especially in the case of comparison with E-PRTR reporting, we request that aggregated emissions data per spatial unit (preferably RBD) should include those emissions from the smaller facilities that are below the required E-PRTR threshold for reporting. If this information is not available and data reporting under E-PRTR emissions is indicated (via a flag), the ETC will aggregate those E-PRTR data.

 

2.       In all four emission tables, the definition of the field ‚Emissions‘ will be updated in similar way. As an example, the update for the table Hazardous substances emissions from point sources is given:

Emission of hazardous substances in kg/year per source of point emissions as specified in the field 3.4.8, aggregated by spatial unit.


Annex 2: Important Scoring Criteria Updates

 

The Member Country shall reply to critical QA issues on previously reported data as specified in „Validation questions“ is added as a new criterion for 3 positive smileys evaluation in all reporting categories (text in red).

Moreover, a few other changes are planned in the scoring criteria for Emissions to Water and Water Quantity following suggestions for improvements by member countries (text in red).

 

EWN1: River quality

Scoring criteria are based on data deliveries for the current year and focus on the provision of quality data for preferred SoE nutrients and physical characteristics of monitoring stations.
Further criteria, important for achieving the maximum score, are the time-lines of the delivery, the provision of hazardous substances data, long time series of quality data for preferred SoE nutrients - BOD5/BOD7/Dissolved Organic Carbon, Total Ammonium/Ammonium, Total Phosphorus, Orthophosphate, Nitrate/Total Oxidised Nitrogen - and data on proxy pressures and the response of a country to data validation questions.

 

GoodGoodGood

1. Reply to critical QA issues on previously reported data as specified in „Validation questions“; and

2. Timely data delivery to national repository and country feedback to reported data issues; and
3. Delivery of river monitoring stations with coordinates (if not delivered in the past years); and
4. Delivery of data for all 5 preferred SoE nutrients; and
5a. Delivery of hazardous substances data and especially from Preferred SoE Hazardous Substances list; or
5b. Delivery of proxy pressures data for all reported monitoring stations (if not delivered in past years) and available time series for preferred SoE nutrients data are long at least 5 years if continuous, or 10 years if broken.

 

GoodGood

1. Timely data delivery to national repository and country feedback to reported data issues; and
2. Delivery of river monitoring stations with coordinates (if not delivered in past years); and
3. Delivery of data for at least 3 of the 5 preferred SoE nutrients.

 

Good

1a. Delayed delivery under WISE-SoE data collection 2011 but data provided in requested format; or
1b. Timely data delivery, but provided data do not meet the above mentioned requirements for obtaining a higher score.

 

Poor

No data delivery under WISE-SoE data collection 2011, no communication, or
data could not be processed because it was not delivered in a requested format or did not follow the basic quality criteria or was delivered after the data processing period.

 

 

 


EWN2: Lake quality

 

Scoring criteria are based on data deliveries for the current year and focus on the provision of quality data for preferred SoE nutrients and physical characteristics of monitoring stations.
Further criteria, important for achieving the maximum score, are the time-lines of the delivery, the provision of hazardous substances data, long time series of quality data for preferred SoE nutrients - BOD5/BOD7/Dissolved Organic Carbon, Total Ammonium/Ammonium, Total Phosphorus, Orthophosphate, Nitrate/Total Oxidised Nitrogen - and data on proxy pressures and the response of a country to data validation questions.

 

GoodGoodGood

1. Reply to critical QA issues on previously reported data as specified in „Validation questions“; and

2. Timely data delivery to national repository and country feedback to reported data issues; and
3. Delivery of lake monitoring stations (sampling sites) with coordinates (if not delivered in past years); and
4. Delivery of data for all 5 preferred SoE; and
5a. Delivery of hazardous substances data and especially from the Preferred SoE Hazardous Substances list; or
5b. Delivery of proxy pressures data for all reported monitoring stations (if not delivered in past years) and available time series for the preferred SoE nutrients data are long at least 5 years if continuous, or 10 years if broken.

 

GoodGood

1. Timely data delivery to national repository and country feedback to reported data issues; and
2. Delivery of lake monitoring stations (sampling sites) with coordinates (if not delivered in past years); and
3. Delivery of data for at least 3 of the 5 preferred SoE.

 

Good

1a. Delayed delivery under WISE-SoE data collection 2011 but data provided in requested format; or
1b. Timely data delivery, but provided data do not meet the above mentioned requirements for obtaining a higher score.

 

Poor

No data delivery under WISE-SoE data collection 2011, no communication, or
data could not be processed because it was not delivered in a requested format or did not follow the basic quality criteria or was delivered after the data processing period.

 

 

 


EWN3: Groundwater quality

Scoring criteria are based on data deliveries for the current year and the provision of quality data for a variety of determinands. A further criterion is the identification of groundwater bodies according to the Document No.3: WFD reporting on River Basin Management Plans: Guidance on reporting spatial data v3.0 and Guidance No 22 - Updated WISE GIS guidance (Nov’2008). Important for achieving the maximum score are the provision of preferably disaggregated data of the 5 requested chemical substances - Ammonium, Nitrates, Nitrites, Dissolved Oxygen and priority pesticides from Preferred SoE Hazardous Substances (Lindane, Simazine, Atrazine) -  and provision of GIS polygon data of groundwater bodies, provision of monitoring stations with coordinates and their link to WFD Art. 5 groundwater bodies (if not delivered in past years).

GoodGoodGood

1. Reply to critical QA issues on previously reported data as specified in „Validation questions“; and

2. Timely data delivery to national repository and country feedback to reported data issues; and

3. At least 3 of the 5 requested chemical substances data reported in disaggregated structure; and
4. Monitoring stations with coordinates and their link to groundwater bodies (if not delivered in past years); and
5. GIS polygon data of groundwater bodies including the most important attribute fields mentioned in the methodology for GW body characteristics and the pressure table in the Data Dictionary (if not delivered up to now within WISE SoE reporting or WFD reporting).

 

GoodGood

1. Timely data delivery to the national repository and country feedback to reported data issues; and
2. At least 2 of the 5 requested chemical substances data; and
3a. If disaggregated data are reported, monitoring stations with coordinates and groundwater bodies including the most important attribute fields mentioned in the methodology for GW bodies table (if not delivered in the past years); or
3b. If aggregated data are reported, groundwater bodies including the most important attribute fields mentioned in the methodology for the GW bodies table (aggregated data), (if not delivered in past years).

 

Good

1a. Quality data for at least 1 out of the 5 requested chemical substances:; or
1b. GIS polygon data of groundwater bodies (if not delivered in past years), or
1c. Groundwater monitoring stations (sampling sites) with coordinates (if not delivered in past years).

 

Poor

No data delivery under WISE-SoE data collection 2011, no communication, or
data could not be processed because it was not delivered in a requested format or did not follow the basic quality criteria or was delivered after the data processing period.

 

 


Water Quantity

The difference with the previous scoring criteria is that criterion 1 includes the assessment of whether both regional and point data have been reported regardless of their spatial and temporal scale. If a country has sent both data and has fulfilled one of the two other criteria then it receives the smiley level. In addition, for receiving two smileys criterion 2 includes the assessment for country level reporting. Until now country level reporting was not encouraged and still is not. However, since the majority of the countries have reported on a country wide scale it was regarded as “unfair” to ignore this effort. Nevertheless, reporting at the RBD or SU level is still important and for that reason in order to acquire three smileys only data reported at the RBD or SU level is assessed.

 

EWN4: Water quantity

 

Scoring criteria are based on data deliveries for the current year.

In order to receive a positive score (three, two, and one point) countries need to fulfil at least 2 of the 4 requested criteria: the first one plus one of the other criteria regarding the assessment of the reporting of regional parameters and point data.

Regional parameters are the parameters for the regional requested data (water balance, water abstraction, water use). For the regional parameters, there is only one criterion per smiley level.

Point data are the individual measurements requested for stream flow, reservoir inflow / outflow, and groundwater level. For point data, there are 3 criteria per smiley level and all of them need to be fulfilled.

GoodGoodGood

1. Timely data delivery to the national repository in the requested format, reported both regional and point parameters, country feedback to reported data issues; and

2a. 65 regional parameters reported at RBD or SU scale for 75% of the RBDs or SUs of the country, 50% in monthly scale; or

2b. Point data* for 75% of the RBDs or SUs reported as follows:

- 20 stream flow stations per RBD (or SU), 50% of the time series in daily scale, the remaining in monthly scale

- 20 groundwater wells per RBD (or SU), 50% of the time series in monthly scale, remaining in seasonal or annual scale

- 5 reservoirs per RBD (or SU), 50% of the time series in monthly scale, remaining in seasonal or annual scale

*It is understood that some of the point data may not be available for reporting due to force-majeure (i.e. security purposes for reservoirs) and in such cases (when stated) this will be considered accordingly.

GoodGood

1. Timely data delivery to the national repository in the requested format, reported both regional and point parameters, country feedback to reported data issues; and

2a. 20 regional parameters reported at RBD or SU scale for 40% of the RBDs or SUs of the country in monthly (preferable) or annual scale; or

2b. 65 regional parameters reported at country level in monthly (preferable) or annual scale; or

2c. Point data* for 40% of the RBDs or SUs reported as follows:

- 10 stream flow stations per RBD (or SU), 50% of the time series in daily scale, the remaining in monthly scale

- 10 groundwater wells per RBD (or SU), 50% of the time series in monthly scale, remaining in seasonal or annual scale.

- 2 reservoirs per RBD (or SU), 50% of the time series in monthly scale, remaining in seasonal or annual scale.

*It is understood that some of the point data may not be available for reporting due to force-majeure (i.e. security purposes for reservoirs) and in such cases (when stated) this will be considered accordingly.

Good

 1a. Delayed data delivery under WISE-SoE data collection 2010; or

1b. Timely delivery, but the delivered data are not meeting the above mentioned requirements for obtaining a higher score; or

1c. Reported data, relevant to Water Quantity, in EUROSTAT/OECD Joint Questionnaire on Inland Waters (Tables 1, 1aIF, 1aOF, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 3.2, Summary Table and 7) 

Poor

No data delivery under WISE-SoE data collection 2010, no communication.

 

 

 


ME1: Marine data

Scores based on the evaluation of the data delivered by countries. It is not the intention that this data flow should require countries to make duplicate supplies of data. Any data already submitted to the Marine Conventions need not be re-supplied through the WISE SoE data collection process. These data will be requested directly from the Marine Conventions. Countries are asked to submit only missing or additional data.

 

GoodGoodGood

1. Reply to critical QA issues on previously reported data as specified in „Validation questions“; and

2. Timely data delivery under WISE SoE collection or to Marine Conventions in 2010; and

3. At least three items out of the following list have been provided and including the 2 items that support the marine CSI (hazardous substances in biota and nutrients/chlorophyll in seawater):

  • Hazardous substances in biota
  • Hazardous substances in sediment
  • Hazardous substances in seawater
  • Nutrients in sea water
  • Riverine inputs and pressure data
  • Direct discharges
  • Station characteristics

GoodGood

1. Timely data delivery under WISE SoE collection or to Marine Conventions in 2010; and

2. Data provided in the requested format and including 1 item that supports the marine CSI (hazardous substances in biota or nutrients/chlorophyll in seawater).

 

Good

1a. Delayed data delivery under WISE SoE collection or to Marine Conventions in 2011, but data provided in the requested format; or
1b. Timely data delivery that could not be processed before the data processing deadline (20/12/2011) because it was not delivered in a requested format or data do not follow the basic quality criteria (even after potential corrections from the data provider).

 

Poor

1a. No data delivery under WISE SoE collection or to Marine Conventions in 2011, no communication; or
1b. Delayed data delivery that could not be processed because data was not delivered in a requested format or data do not follow the basic quality criteria (even after potential corrections from the data provider).

 

 

 


Emission to water

The relation between Emission to water reporting and other reporting obligations (E-PRTR, UWWTD, WISE SoE Quantity or WFD) is described more clearly, to avoid misunderstandings in country evaluations.

 

WISE1: Emissions to Water

Scoring criteria are based on data deliveries for the current year and the provision of data for a variety of sources and determinands. Important for achieving the maximum score is the provision of a more detailed source of emission data (if not delivered in past years).

If emission data have already been provided under E-PRTR, UWWTD, WFD or SoE Quantity reporting obligations and are flagged as such in the SoE emission reporting, then 1 or two smileys will be scored (1 if point source emissions data are provided via another reporting source, and flagged, 2 if point and diffuse are provided, and flagged.) It is not possible to attain 3 smileys simply through flagging other reporting streams alone. However, the flagging of data under other reporting streams will ensure at least one smiley is scored.

GoodGoodGood

1. Reply to critical QA issues on previously reported data as specified in „Validation questions“; and

2. Timely data delivery to the national repository and country responsiveness for eventual errors in data; and

3. At least two determinands for Nutrients and Organic Matter Emission Discharges from Point Sources; and

4. At least two determinands for Nutrients and Organic Matter Emission Discharges from Diffuse Sources (if not delivered in past years); and

5. At least one determinand for Hazardous substances Emission Discharges from Point Sources; and

6a. Emission values for Nutrients and Organic Matter Emission Discharges from Point Sources split at least for Urban and Industrial discharges; or

6b. Emission values for Hazardous Substances Emission Discharges from Point Sources split at least for E-PRTR facilities and non E-PRTR facilities (for EU members only).

 

GoodGood

1. Timely data delivery to national repository and country responsiveness for eventual errors in data; and

2. At least two determinands for Nutrients and Organic Matter Emission Discharges from Point Sources; and

3. At least two determinands for Nutrients and Organic Matter Emission Discharges from Diffuse Sources (if not delivered in past years); and

 4. At least one determinand for Hazardous substances Emission Discharges from Point Sources.

 

Good

 1a. One determinand for Nutrients and Organic Matter Emission Discharges from Point Sources; or

1b. One determinand for Hazardous substances Emission Discharges from Point Sources; or

1c. One determinands for Nutrients and Organic Matter Emission Discharges from Diffuse Sources (if not delivered in past years).

Poor

No data delivery under WISE-SoE data collection 2011, no communication or unusable data delivery.