Roof Report - 2004

Danube River Basin District

Part A - Roof report

Information required according to Art. 3 (8) and Annex I of the EU Water Framework Directive
Reporting deadline: June 22, 2004



Content:

Introduction

Structure of the report

Information given in the roof report

List of acronyms

Annexes

Introduction

Situation in the Danube River Basin District

The Danube River Basin is the second largest river basin of Europe1 covering 801 463 km2 and territories of 18 states including EU-Member States, accession states and non accession states. Where a river basin district extends beyond the territory of the Community, the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC (WFD) requests the Member State or Member States concerned to "endeavour to establish appropriate coordination with the relevant non-Member States, with the aim of achieving the objectives of this Directive throughout the river basin district." (Art. 3.5 WFD).

The International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) serves as the platform for coordination to develop and establish the Danube River Basin Management Plan (DRBMP). In November 2000 all Contracting Parties of the "Convention on Cooperation for the Protection and Sustainable Use of the Danube River" (Danube River Protection Convention, DRPC) stated their commitment to implement the WFD within their jurisdiction and to cooperate in the framework of the ICPDR to achieve a single, basin-wide coordinated Danube River Basin Management Plan. For states with territories of less than 2 000 km2 in the Danube River Basin (DRB) the ICPDR has attempted to establish appropriate bilateral coordination

At the time of reporting eight states in the Danube River Basin are EU-Members, two are in the accession process and one has applied for EU-Membership (see Table 1). By the time the deadline for the completion of the River Basin Management Plan is reached in December 2009 probably two more Danube states will have become EU Members.

Table 1 States in the Danube River Basin District
StateISO-CodeStatus in the European Union2
AlbaniaAL -
AustriaAT Member State
Bosnia-HerzegovinaBA -
BulgariaBG Accession State
CroatiaHR Accession Applicant (February 2003)
Czech RepublicCZMember State
GermanyDE Member State
HungaryHU Member State
ItalyIT Member State
MacedoniaMK -
MoldovaMD -
PolandPL Member State
RomaniaRO Accession State
Serbia-MontenegroCS -
Slovak RepublicSK Member State
SloveniaSI Member State
SwitzerlandCH-
UkraineUA-

The EU candidate countries in the Danube River Basin, which are scheduled to join on May 1, 2004, have committed themselves to transpose and implement the WFD without any specific transposition provisions, i.e. in the same deadlines as for Members States. Only when the WFD refers to another piece of Community legislation where a transitional period has been granted, e.g. the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (91/271/EEC), this period applies. Legal transposition is currently taking place in all candidate countries at different paces, similar to the EU Member States. All of the accession states are committed to completing transposition by the date of accession. For the candidates, which may join in 2007, the WFD is part of the ‘acquis communautaire’. So far, no transitional periods have been requested by these states. Croatia has applied for accession to the European Union in February 2003. They have no reporting obligations but they are following the process.

Status of this report

This report was agreed by all Contracting Parties under the Danube River Protection Convention and Bosnia-Herzegovina at the 6th Ordinary Meeting of the ICPDR on December 1-2, 2003 in Vienna.

Structure of the report

Due to the large number of states and the coordination requirements in the Danube River Basin District (DRBD) it is necessary to divide the Danube River Basin Management Plan into two parts. Part A (roof of the DRBMP) gives relevant information of multilateral or basin-wide importance, whereas Part B (national input to DRBMP) gives all relevant further information on the national level as well as information coordinated on the bilateral level.

The ICPDR has a coordinating and supporting function, but does not report on its own. Each state will deliver the roof report (Part A) and its own national report (Part B). This approach is also undertaken for the delivery of information required according to Art. 3 (8) and Annex I WFD. In addition, the ICPDR will informally send a copy of the roof report and a copy of the national reports (Part B) of those countries not obligated to report to the European Commission.

  1. Roof report

    The roof report contains information on issues of multilateral or basin-wide importance and demonstrates the basin-wide coordination arrangements. This report will be sent by the states tothe European Commission with the national reports.

    It is identical for all states. The ICPDR serves as the platform for coordination. The content of the management plan results from the work of the ICPDR expert groups and is approved by the ICPDR Ordinary Meetings.

    The roof report addresses those issues of Annex I WFD relevant on the basin-wide scale, i.e. information concerning the

    • Name and address of the competent authorities
    • Geographical coverage of the Danube River Basin District, and
    • International relationships.

  2. National report

    The national report gives all relevant further information on the national level as well as information coordinated on the bilateral level. It addresses all issues listed in Annex I WFD. Regarding points 1., 2. and 6. the national information is given in addition to the information in Part A.

The information needed to fulfill the requirements of Art. 3 (8) and Annex I WFD will be covered in Part A (roof report) and Part B (national reports) as follows:

  Part A
Roof report
Part B
Roof report
1. Name and address of the competent authorities
X
X
2. Geographical coverage of the river basin district
X
X
3. Legal status of competent authority
X
4. Responsibilities
X
5. Membership
X
6. International relationships
X
X

Regarding 1. Name and address of the competent authorities the information given in Part A will be for information purposes, in Part B for reporting purposes.

Regarding 2. Geographical coverage of the river basin district an overview of the Danube River Basin District will be given in Part A. Part B will add further information on the national level.

Regarding 6. International relationships Part A will describe the international relationships to ensure basin-wide coordination and will include an overview on existing bi- or multilateral agreements of the Danube states. Part B will contain further information on bi-/multilateral agreements and other forms of cooperation.

Information given in the roof report

  1. Competent authorities

    The competent authorities are designated by the states. The link between these on the international level is ensured through the ICPDR and its Contracting Parties. The ICPDR serves as the platform for coordination for the implementation of the WFD in the Danube River Basin District on issues of basin-wide importance (see chapter 3.2). A list of the (national) competent authorities is attached in Annex 1 (overview).

    1. Geographical coverage of the Danube River Basin District

      The Danube River Basin District covers 1) the Danube River Basin, 2) the Black Sea coastal catchments on Romanian territory, and 3) the Black Sea coastal waters along the Romanian and partly the Ukrainian coast (see Table 2).

      Table 2 Area of the Danube River Basin District

        Territory Official area
      [km2]
      Digitally determined
      Danube River Basin (DRB) 18 countries (see Table 3)
      5 198
      801 463
      Black Sea coastal river basins Romania
      5 122
      Black Sea coastal waters Romania and Ukraine
      1 242
      Danube River Basin District (DRBD)
      807 827

      For the purpose of comparison the areas were calculated using GIS on the basis of the DRBD overview map. The value for the Black Sea coastal river basins differs slightly from the official data, since other methods of calculation have been used.

      Figure 2 shows the geographical coverage of the Danube River Basin District. The outer boundary of the Danube River Basin District was defined taking into consideration the hydrological boundaries of the surface waters and groundwater. In a few small places the district boundaries of groundwater and surface waters are not aligned (Germany, Slovenia and Bulgaria). Details can be found in the respective national reports.

      In addition to the Danube River Basin, the small coastal basins of the Black Sea tributaries lying on Romanian territory between the Eastern boundary of the DRB and the coastal waters of the Black Sea have been included in the Danube River Basin District. Here also lies the Danube-Black Sea Canal (Canal Dunarea-Marea Neagra), which diverts part of the water of the Danube River directly to the Black Sea. These coastal catchments were included in the DRBD, because they influence the coastal waters along the Romanian coastline. The other Danube states agreed with including the Black Sea tributaries on Romanian territory into the DRBD.

      The coastal waters of the DRBD extend along the full length of the Romanian coastline and along part of the Ukrainian coast up to the hydrological boundaries of the Danube River Basin. The Romanian coastal waters were included in the DRBD, because the water quality and the morphology of the seashore are substantially influenced by the Danube River. The Romanian coastal waters are delineated at 1 nautical mile from the baseline, which is defined along 9 points within the territorial sea of Romania as laid down in the Romanian Law No. 17/1990, modified by Romanian Law No. 36/2002. A detailed description of the coastal waters is contained in the Romanian national report (Part B). The Ukrainian coastal waters are not defined by Ukrainian law. For WFD implementation the coastal waters are defined in line with Art. 2.7 WFD at 1 nautical mile from the baseline.




      State Code Official coverage in DRB [km?] Digitally determined coverage in DRB [km?] Percentage of DRB [%] Percentage of DRB in state [%] Population in DRB [Mio.] Percent of population in DRB [%]
      Albania AL
      126
      <0.1
      0.01
      <0.01
      <0.01
      Austria AT
      80423
      10.0
      96.1
      7.7
      9.51
      Bosnia-Herzegovina BA
      36636
      4.6
      74.9
      2.9
      3.58
      Bulgaria BG
      47413
      5.9
      43.0
      3.5
      4.32
      Croatia HR
      34965
      4.4
      62.5
      3.0
      3.71
      Czech Republic CZ
      22870
      2.9
      31.1
      2.8
      3.46
      Germany DE
      56184
      7.0
      16.8
      9.3
      11.49
      Hungary HU
      93030
      11.6
      100.0
      10.2
      12.60
      Italy IT
      565
      <0.1
      0.2
      0.02
      0.02
      Macedonia MK
      109
      <0.1
      0.2
      <0.01
      <0.01
      Moldova MD
      12834
      1.6
      35.6
      1.1
      1.36
      Poland PL
      430
      <0.1
      0.1
      0.04
      0.05
      Romania RO
      232193
      29.0
      97.4
      21.0
      25.94
      Serbia-Montenegro CS
      88635
      11.1
      90.0
      9.8
      12.11
      Slovak Republic SK
      47084
      5.9
      96.0
      5.2
      6.42
      Slovenia SI
      16422
      2.0
      81.0
      1.7
      2.10
      Switzerland CH
      1809
      0.2
      4.3
      0.02
      0.02
      Ukraine UA
      30520
      3.8
      5.4
      2.65
      3.27
      Total          
      80.95
      100
      1. For the purpose of comparison the coverage of the states was calculated using GIS based on the DRBD overview map. These values differ slightly from the official data of some countries, since other methods of calculation have been used.
      2 Data source: Autonomous Province of Bozen - South Tyrol.

      The coastal waters of Bulgaria are not included in the DRBD, since their characteristics are substantially influenced by rivers on Bulgarian territory flowing into the Black Sea and by processes in the Black Sea itself. The Bulgarian Water Law of 1999 designates 4 river basin districts in the country. Their boundaries are based on the hydrological boundaries of the watersheds (surface water and groundwater) between the river basins. Following these hydrological considerations, and the provisions of Article 3 (1) of the WFD, Bulgarian coastal waters are assigned to the Black Sea River Basin. The latter covers 25.2 % of the country’s surface area and includes all rivers on Bulgarian territory flowing into the Black Sea, coastal waters and territorial waters (Article 152 (1) 2 of the Water Law). The other Danube States agreed with the inclusion of the coastal waters of Ukraine and Romania into the DRBD and the exclusion of Bulgarian coastal waters.

      The Danube River Basin District overview map depicts:

      • the outer boundary of the Danube river basin district,
      • the boundaries of the Danube River Basin and of the Black Sea coastal catchments,
      • the boundaries of the coastal waters belonging to the DRBD,
      • all rivers with catchments larger than 4000 km2,
      • all lakes, lagoons and reservoirs with a surface area of at least 100 km2,
      • the main canals used for navigation,
      • the main cities including the capitals of the countries, and
      • the locations of the competent authorities.
    2. Characteristics of the Danube River and its main tributaries

      The Danube River Basin is the second largest river basin of Europe, covering 801 463 km2 and territories of 18 countries (see Table 3). The Danube is 2870 km long and has an average discharge of 6460 m3/sec at its mouth in the Danube Delta. Some of its largest tributaries are characterised below. Their key hydrologic characteristics are listed in Table 4.

      The Inn is the third largest by discharge and the seventh longest Danube tributary. At its mouth in Passau, it brings more water into the Danube than the latter itself. However, its catchment area of 26 130 km2 is only nearly half as big as the Danube at this point. The main tributary of the Inn is the Salzach River.

      The Morava/March River is a left hand tributary of the Danube. Its catchment area of 26 658 km2 covers parts of the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Austria. In terms of geological structure, this basin forms a boundary between the Bohemian Highlands, the Carpathians and the Pannonian Province. It is an ecologically valuable area with high diversity of species and landscape types.

      The Drau/Drava is the fourth largest and fourth longest Danube tributary. It rises in the southern Alps in Italy but is the dominant river of southern Austria, eastern Slovenia, southern Hungary and Croatia. Main Austrian sub-tributaries are Isel, Möll, Lieser and Gurk, and the Mur/Mura with its mouth at the Croatian-Hungarian border.

      The Tysa/Tisza/Tisa River basin is the largest sub-basin in the Danube River Basin (157 186 km2). It can be divided into three main parts:

      • the mountainous Upper Tysa in Ukraine (upstream of the Ukrainian-Hungarian border),
      • the Middle Tisza in Hungary (receiving the largest tributaries: Bodrog River and Slaná/Sajó River collecting water from the Carpathian Mountains in Slovakia and Ukraine as well as the Somes/Szamos River, the Crisul/Körös River System and Mures/Maros River draining Transylvania in Romania), and
      • the Lower Tisa (downstream of the Hungarian-Serbian border, where it receives the Bega/Begej directly, and other tributaries indirectly through the Danube - Tisza - Danube Canal System).

      The Tysa/Tisza/Tisa River is also the longest tributary (966 km). By flow volume it is second largest after the Sava River.

      The Sava River is the largest Danube tributary by discharge (average 1564 m3/sec) and the second largest by catchment area (95 419 km2). It rises in the western Slovenian mountains and passes through Croatian lowland before forming the border between Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. Continuing through Serbia-Montenegro it reaches its confluence with the Danube in Belgrade. Its main sub-tributaries are Krka, Kupa, Una, Vrbas, Bosna, Drina and Kolubara.

      The Iskar is the largest Danube tributary on Bulgarian territory. It springs from the Rila mountain passes, flows through the outskirts of Sofia, crosses the Balkan mountains and continues its 368 km long way to the Danube. Its catchment area is 8 684 km2.

      The Siret River Basin has the third-largest catchment area and is situated to the east of the Carpathians. Its source lies in Ukraine and it flows through the territory of Ukraine and Romania. Its main sub-tributaries are Suceava, Moldova, Bistrita, Trotus, Barlad and Buzau.

      The Prut River is the second longest (950 km) and the last tributary of the Danube, with its mouth just upstream of the Danube Delta. Its source is in the Ukrainian Wood Carpathians. Later it forms the border between Romania and Moldova. Main sub-tributaries are Ceremosh, Derelui, Volovat, Baseu, Corogea, Jijia, Chineja, Ciugur and Lapusna.

      The Danube Delta is largely situated in Romania and partly in Ukraine. The entire protected area covers 679 000 ha including floodplains and marine areas. The core of the reserve (312 400 ha) has been established as a "World Nature Heritage" in 1991. There are 668 natural lakes larger than one hectare covering 9.28 % of the Delta’s surface. The Delta is an environmental buffer between the Danube River and the Black Sea, filtering out pollutants and enabling both water quality conditions and natural habitats for fish in the Delta and in the environmentally vulnerable shallow waters of the north-western Black Sea. Moreover, it is Europe’s largest remaining natural wetland - a unique ecosystem.

      Table 4 The Danube and its main tributaries (catchments > 4 000 km2) in the order of their confluence with the Danu be from the source to the mouth (data source: Competent authorities in the DRB unless marked otherwise)

      River Mouth at Danube km Length [km] Size of catchment [km2] Average discharge [m3/sec] Time series for discharge values
      Danube
      0
      2780
      801463
      6460
      (1914-2003)
      Lech
      2497
      254
      4125
      115
      (1982-2000)
      Naab
      2385
      191
      5530
      49
      (1921-1998)
      Isar
      2282
      283
      8964
      174
      (1926-1998)
      Inn
      2225
      515
      26130
      735
      (1921-1998)
      Traun
      2125
      153
      4257
      150
      (1961-1999)
      Enns
      2112
      254
      6185
      200
      (1961-1999)
      Morava/March
      1880
      352
      26658
      110
      (1961-1999)
      Raab/Rába
      1794
      240
      14349
      63
      (1901-2000)
      Vah
      1766
      398
      18296
      161
      (1931-1980)
      Hron
      1716
      278
      5463
      55
      (1931-1980)
      Ipel/Ipoly
      1708
      197
      5108
      22
      (1931-1980)
      Sió
      1498
      124
      14693
      39
      (1931-1970)
      Drau/Drava
      1382
      893
      41238
      577
      (1946-1991)
      Tysa/Tisza/Tisa
      1214
      966
      157186
      794
      (1946-1991)
      Sava
      1170
      861
      95419
      1564
      (1946-1991)
      Tamis/Timis
      1154
      359
      10280
      47
      (1946-1991)
      Morava (CS)
      1103
      430
      37444
      232
      (1946-1991)
      Timok
      846
      180
      4630
      31
      (1946-1991)
      Jiu
      694
      339
      10080
      86
      (1921-2003)
      Iskar
      636
      368
      8684
      54
      (1936-1998)
      Olt
      604
      615
      24050
      174
      (1921-1995)
      Yantra
      537
      285
      7879
      47
      (1936-1998)
      Arges
      432
      350
      12550
      71
      (1914-2003)
      Ialomita
      244
      417
      10350
      45
      (1915-2003)
      Siret
      155
      559
      47610
      240
      (1921-2003)
      Prut
      132
      950
      27540
      110
      (1928-2003)

      1 For the purpose of comparison the size of the catchments was calculated using GIS on the basis of the DRBD overview map. These values may differ slightly from the official data, because other methods of calculation have been used.

      Figure 3 is based on data calculated with the "Danube Water Quality Model", which was developed during the Danube River Pollution Reduction Programme in 1999. It shows the relative contribution of run-off into the Danube divided by the states where the run-off originates from. Austria shows by far the largest contribution (22.1 %) followed by Romania (17.6 %). This reflects the high precipitation in the Alps and in the Carpathian mountains. In the upper part of the Danube the Inn contributes the main water volume adding more water than the Danube has at the point of confluence with the Inn. In the middle reach it is the Drava, Tisza and Sava, which together contribute almost half of the total discharge that finally reaches the Black Sea.

      Figure 3 Contribution of the water from each state (in %) to the cumulative discharge of the Danube (in Mio m3/year), based on data for 1994-1997 using the .Danube Water Quality Model.
  2. International relationships in order to ensure coordination

    1. General overview

      BG -RO border In view of the size and number of states that have territories in the Danube basin coordination is required on different levels in order to fulfil "the environmental objectives established under Article 4, and in particular all programmes of measures" (Art. 3.4 WFD). "In the case of an international river basin district extending beyond the boundaries of the Community, Member States shall endeavour to produce a single river basin management plan, and, where this is not possible, the plan shall at least cover the portion of the international river basin district lying within the territory of the Member State concerned." (Art. 13.3 WFD).

      The roof report covers transboundary issues of basin-wide relevance. Other transboundary issues will be dealt with in the national reports (i.e. issues with limited transboundary impacts).

      For the development of the Danube River Basin Management Plan different international coordination mechanisms are in place:

      Framework for cooperation Area of cooperation
      International Commission for the Protection of
      the Danube River (ICPDR)
      Danube River Basin
      Bilateral/multilateral cooperation All other transboundary issues
      not covered by the ICPDR

      The ICPDR serves as the platform for coordination in the implementation of the WFD in the Danube River Basin District on issues of basin-wide importance. Transboundary issues not covered by the ICPDR are solved at the appropriate level of cooperation e.g. in the frame of bilateral/multilateral river commissions. Local issues remain a national task. Generally, coordination will take place at the lowest level possible so that the coordination via the ICPDR can be limited to those issues necessary on the basin-wide level.

    2. Coordination of WFD implementation at the basin-wide level

      The Danube River Protection Convention forms the overall legal instrument for cooperation and transboundary water management in the Danube River Basin (see Annex 2). The main objective of the convention is the sustainable and equitable use of surface waters and groundwater and includes the conservation and restoration of ecosystems. The Contracting Parties cooperate on fundamental water management issues and take all appropriate legal, administrative and technical measures, to maintain and improve the quality of the Danube River and its environment. Presently, Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Romania, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Serbia and Montenegro, Ukraine and the European Community are Contracting Parties to the DRPC. Bosnia and Herzegovina has an observer status.

      To facilitate the implementation of the DRPC, the Danubian states agreed that with its entry into force the ICPDR is established. The ICPDR is therefore the framework for basin-wide cooperation (see Figure 4).


      Figure 4: Organisational structure under the Danube River Protection Convention

      At its 3rd Ordinary Meeting on November 27-28, 2000 in Sofia the ICPDR made the following resolutions:

      • The ICPDR will provide the platform for the coordination necessary to develop and establish the River Basin Management Plan for the Danube River Basin.
      • The Contracting Parties ensure to make all efforts to arrive at a coordinated international River Basin Management Plan for the Danube River Basin.

      In the ICPDR all Contracting Parties and Bosnia-Herzegovina as an observer support the implementation of the WFD in their territories and cooperate in the framework of the ICPDR to achieve a single, basin-wide coordinated Danube River Basin Management Plan. The ICPDR President has addressed the other DRB countries not cooperating under the DRPC to commit themselves to cooperate with the ICPDR to achieve a basin-wide coordinated DRBMP. Poland, Switzerland, Macedonia and Albania have offered their support (see Annex 3). From Italy no response was received. On the operational level, it is the obligation of the Contracting Parties to ensure the necessary coordination with their DRB neighbours not cooperating under the DRPC.

      The River Basin Management Expert Group was created to prepare and coordinate the necessary activities for the implementation of the WFD. All states cooperating under the DRPC are represented in the River Basin Management Expert Group. The group jointly agrees on the necessary actions for the development of the Danube River Basin Management Plan, e.g. the development of a strategy for establishing the RBM Plan, development of the roof report to the European Commission or identifying needs for harmonisation of methods and mechanisms (see Figure 5).

      The Danubian states cooperating under the DRPC report regularly to the ICPDR on the progress of WFD implementation in their own states. These national reports serve as a means for exchanging information between the states and for streamlining the implementation activities on the national level. At each of its Ordinary Meetings and Standing Working Group Meetings the ICPDR deals with the step-wise implementation of the WFD in the Danube River Basin and takes the necessary decisions.


      Figure 5 Coordination mechanisms for WFD implementation in the Danube River Basin (for an overview of existing bilateral agreements see Table 5)

    3. Bilateral and multilateral cooperation

      Bilateral agreements are in place between almost all states in the Danube River Basin District, but it is important to note that these agreements were not "established in order to ensure coordination" as stated in WFD Annex I, 6. These are generally older treaties that deal with specific issues of transboundary cooperation, which in many cases includes water management issues. Some of these agreements have been adapted to cover issues related to WFD implementation, but generally they are only used as the platform for coordination needed to fulfil the requirements of the WFD.

      Bilateral agreements are in place between almost all the States that participate in the implementation of the WFD in the Danube River Basin District. A very recent multilateral agreement is the "Framework Agreement on the Sava River Basin" (entry into force at present pending). On the Tisza River a multilateral cooperation has been initiated in the frame of the "Environmental Programme for the Tisza River Basin" and the "Budapest Declaration" (Tisza Water Forum).

      Like the DRPC the bilateral and multilateral agreements at present do not - with the exception of the Sava River Basin Agreement and the Environmental Programme for the Tisza River Basin - make reference to the WFD. Nevertheless, the fora based on these agreements are utilised for the implementation of the WFD just as in the case of the ICPDR. They therefore serve as a platform for cooperation for those issues that are best dealt with at the sub-basin level.

      Table 5 gives an overview of the existing agreements and on the commissions based on them that are being used for WFD implementation. There are cases where no formally approved bilateral agreements and commissions implementing them exist, but regular meetings serve to facilitate cooperation. Detailed information on the modes of cooperation at the bilateral and multilateral level will be given in the national reports. The reports of Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia-Montenegro and Bosnia- Herzegovina will include a short summary of the "Framework Agreement on the Sava River Basin".

      Table 5 Overview of bilateral agreements and bilateral cooperations for WFD implementation in the Danube River Basin District
    4. Cooperation of the ICPDR with the Black Sea Commission (ICPBS)

      Eutrophication is one of the principle causes for the degradation of the Black Sea. The land-based input of nutrients via the Danube River into the Black Sea is claimed to be the most important driving force for its eutrophication. In view of these cause-effect relationships a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed by the ICPDR and the International Commission for the Protection of the Black Sea (ICPBS) on November 26, 2001 in Brussels (see Annex 4) .

      For its implementation the Danube-Black Sea Joint Technical Working Group was charged with the task, to assure the implementation of all technical measures of the MoU with particular attention to the assessment of nutrient inputs into the Black Sea and the ecological status of the Black Sea.

      Relevant information will be utilised in this context as much as possible. However, the ICPDR does not cooperate with the ICPBS in a legal context relating to the implementation of the WFD within the Danube River Basin District. The MoU is used as a basis to join the efforts of the states participating in the commissions’ activities to implement the WFD.

List of acronyms

DRBDanube River Basin
DRBDDanube River Basin District
DRBMPDanube River Basin Management Plan
DRPCDanube River Protection Convention
EUEuropean Union
GEFGlobal Environment Facility
ICPBSInternational Commission for the Protection of the Black Sea
ICPDRInternational Commission for the Protection of the Danube River
MoUMemorandum of Understanding
UNDPUnited Nations Development Programme
WFDWater Framework Directive

Annexes

Annex 1: List of competent authorities on the national level (overview)

Annex 2: Convention on Cooperation for the Protection and Sustainable use of the Danube River (Danube River Protection Convention)

Annex 3: Letters of commitment of Danube River Basin states, that have not signed the Danube River Protection Convention, to cooperate with the ICPDR to implement the WFD

Annex 4: Memorandum of Understanding between the International Commission for the Protection of the Black Sea (ICPBS) and the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) on common strategic goals