ANNUAL REPORT
on the Activities of the
ICPDR in 2002
Information
ICPDR ­ International Commission for the Protection
of the Danube River / Permanent Secretariat
Vienna International Centre, D0412
P. O. Box 500, 1400 Vienna / Austria
Tel: 0043-1-260 60-5738, Fax: 0043-1-260 60-5895
e-mail: icpdr@unvienna.org, www.icpdr.org

---

Imprint
Owner: ICPDR ­ International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River/Permanent
Secretariat; Design and Production: p:matter Vienna; Photos: ICPDR, Ungarisches Tourismus-
amt Wien, National Park Thayatal, Martin Schneider-Jacoby (EURONATUR); Editing and
Proofreading: Parole Language Services, Croatia; Print: Print Tech Ltd., Hungary

---

Contents
1.
OPERATIONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
6
2.
FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND BUDGETARY SITUATION
10
3.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE IN THE DANUBE
12
RIVER BASIN
4.
WATER QUALITY AND HYDROLOGICAL SITUATION IN THE DANUBE RIVER BASIN
16
5.
POLLUTION CONTROL STRATEGY IN LINE WITH THE WATER FRAMEWORK
19
DIRECTIVE
6.
OPERATION OF THE DANUBE ACCIDENT AND EMERGENCY WARNING SYSTEM
22
7.
FLOOD PROTECTION IN THE DANUBE RIVER BASIN
24
8.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE JAP - INVESTMENT PROJECTS
25
9.
CONCERTED ACTIONS AIMED AT ACCIDENT PREVENTION IN THE DANUBE
28
RIVER BASIN
10. ICPDR INFORMATION SYSTEM
30
11.
INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL COOPERATION
32
12. ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
38
ANNEX 1: COMPOSITION OF THE ICPDR IN 2002
39
ANNEX 2: OBSERVER STATUS AS OF 31.12.2002
41
ANNEX 3: FINANCIAL SITUATION
42
- 3 -

---

Foreword
2002 was for the ICPDR a year of events,
challenges and achievements.
The August flood in central Europe captured a lot of public attention and triggered
massive institutional effort in the Danube countries. In response to the flood, the
first Flood Conference was held in Berlin on September 15, ending with the German
Federal Government's Five-Point-Programme to improve flood defense. Another
international conference, held in Budapest on December 1, resulted in a joint statement expressing
the participants' determination to strengthen international cooperation on sustainable flood manage-
ment. The ICPDR responded by establishing a new Expert Group on Flood Protection and charged it
with developing an Action Programme for Sustainable Flood Protection in the Danube River Basin by
October 2004.
Under the guidance of the ICPDR River Basin Management Expert Group, all Danube countries made
important progress in developing mechanisms for the implementation of the EU Water Framework
Directive.
The main achievements include the development of guidelines for the assessment of surface and gro-
undwater bodies, the preparation of a GIS system including the development of an overview map for
the Danube River Basin, and the development of guidelines for economic analysis, transboundary
issues and public participation in the planning process.
The MLIM Expert Group produced the 1998 and the 1999 Yearbooks of the Transnational Monitor-
ing Network. Yearbook 2000 will be available early in 2003. Preparations are under way for the first
comparative analysis of water quality in the five-year period of 1996­2000. It will show changes over
time in water quality and ecosystems in the Danube River and its tributaries.
Results of the Danube and the Tizsa survey were published; summary reports in English and German
languages, the main report containing a complete scientific analysis of the data, and a special report
on the Tizsa survey are all available in the printed form and can also be downloaded from the ICPDR
website.
The EMIS Expert Group has prepared an updated list of municipal and industrial point sources in the
Danube catchment with reference year 2000. The list has been available on the ICPDR website since
April 2002.
On December 3, the Sava Basin Agreement was signed in Kranjska Gora (Slovenia), establishing the
modalities of cooperation between Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Slovenia and Serbia and Montenegro
to restore navigation on the Sava and to assure environmental protection of its waters and ecosy-
- 4 -

---

Foreword
stems. The ICPDR, with the assistance of the UNDP/GEF Danube Regional Project will cooperate with
the Sava Initiative in preparing a pilot project for the development of a river basin management plan
that would implement the EU Water Framework Directive.
Of particular importance in 2002 was the development of the DABLAS database for investment pro-
jects (under the Danube-Black Sea Task Force) and the preparation of over 150 project fact sheets.
These projects will be prioritized and submitted for donor support. The DABLAS Task Force expects
that the first donor meeting scheduled for early 2003 will pledge funds to co-finance municipal waste
water treatment plants in the Danube and the Black Sea countries.
In 2002 the UNDP GEF Danube Regional Project within its first phase significantly contributed to the
activities of the ICPDR and its Expert Groups. To complement and reinforce the work of the Expert
Groups, 16 project components (out from 20) were prepared in consultation with the ICPDR experts,
and most of them are under implementation. The first phase of the project will be finalized by the
end of 2003 as an important step towards implementing the ICPDR Joint Action Programme
In order to respond to all tasks related to the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive
and to cooperation with the UNDP/GEF Danube Regional Project, additional capacities had to be
mobilized. Therefore, three new expert bodies were created in 2002: for GIS, for economics, and for
flood protection. Since they all rely on technical and organizational support provided by the
Secretariat, the Secretariat will in 2003 have to draw additional support from consultants, who will
work under its guidance.
The challenge facing the ICPDR in 2003 lies in implementing the numerous activities launched in
2002. This will only be possible with the commitment, cooperation, and support from governments,
scientific institutions and NGOs. All Danube countries, contracting parties, NGOs and cooperating
agencies, all those committed to and engaged in protecting waters and ecosystems in the Danube
River Basin will have to make a concerted effort in order to build a sustainable and healthy envi-
ronment in the Danube River Basin.
Martina Motlova
President of the ICPDR
- 5 -

---

1. Operational and
Institutional Framework
The ICPDR in its 3rd Plenary Meeting held in
waiting for its entry into force after 90 days of the
Sofia from November 27-28, 2000 welcomed the
deposition (March 13, 2003).
request of Serbia and Montenegro (former Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia) to accede to the Danube
In 2002 - the third year of the full operation of the
River Protection Convention with all the rights
ICPDR Permanent Secretariat ­ special efforts
and duties of a contracting party. Serbia and
were made towards the implementation of the EU
Montenegro is currently a participant with con-
Water Framework Directive (WFD) in the Danube
sultative status in the ICPDR and has applied for
River Basin, which required the expert body struc-
its full membership. Ukraine ratified the DRPC,
ture to be further developed. The organisational
deposited the document of ratification at the De-
structure of the ICPDR and its Secretariat in 2002
pository on December 13, 2002, and is currently
are shown below:
Organisational Structure under the Danube River Protection Convention
CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES
International Commission for the
Protection of the Danube River - ICPDR
- Implementation of the Danube River
Protection Convention (DPRC)
-
UNESCO-IHP
Decision making, management and
Water Balance WG
coordination of regional cooperation
- Approval of the budget and annual work
programme
- Preparation of Water
- Follow up on activities and evaluation of
Balance
results of expert groups
UNDP/GEF
- Joint Action Programme
Danube Regional Project
- Creation of sustainable ecological
Ad-hoc
Permanent Secretariat (PS)
conditions for land use and water mgmt
-
Legal and Strategic
Capacity building and reinforcement of
issues (S EG)
- Supporting the ICPDR sessions
trans-boundary cooperation
-
-
Supporting Expert Groups
Strengthening public involvement in
- Strategic issues
- Coordinating the work programme
environmental decision making
-
- Legal issues
- Supporting project development and
Reinforcement of monitoring, evaluation
- Administrative and
implementation
and information systems
financial issues
- Maintenance of the information
system
River Basin Management
Ecology
Emission
Monitoring, Laboratory
Accident Prevention
Flood Protection
(RBM EG)
(ECO EG)
(EMIS EG)
and Information
and Control (APC EG)
(FLOOD EG)
Management
- Integrated river basin
- Habitats and species
- Emissions from
(MLIM EG)
- Accidental pollution
- Preparation and
management
protection areas
point sources
incidents
implementation of
- Implementation of
- Management of wet-
- Emissions from
- Trans-National
- AEWS operation
Action Plan for
EU Water Framework
lands and floodplains
diffuse sources
Monitoring Network
- Accident prevention
sustainable flood
Directive
- Guidelines on BAT
- Laboratory Quality
protection
Assurance
Cartography
and GIS
(GIS ESG)
Danube - Black Sea
EMIS - MLIM
Sava RBM Plan
Joint Technical
Joint
Working Group on
(Working Group)
Working Group
Working Group
Inventories
Economic
Analysis
(ECON ESG)
- 6 -

---

1. Operational and
Institutional Framework
Organisational Structure of the ICPDR Permanent Secretariat
Executive Secretary
DANUBIS
Administration and
Information Manager
Ad-hoc S EG
Technical Expert in
Technical Expert in
Technical Expert in
River Basin Mgmt.
Pollution Control
Water Quality
IHP Water
RBM EG
ECO EG
EMIS EG
MLIM EG
APC EG
FLOOD EG
Balance WG
Technical
Support in
WG on Inventories
Tech. Support in
Ecology
ARS/Contaminated Sites
Hydrology
Technical Support
GIS ESG
in GIS
Danube Black Sea
Joint Technical WG
Tech. Support in
ECON ESG
Economics
EMIS-MLIM Joint WG
on Harmonisation
DG Roof Report
Prep. Group on
Public Relations
Public Participation
Consultant
Sava RBM
Plan WG
In 2002, six expert groups dealt with technical
­ Expert Sub-Group on Economic Analysis
issues and one ad-hoc expert group addressed
(ECON ESG);
administrative matters arising from the imple-
mentation of the DRPC. Specifically:
- Expert Group on Ecology (ECO EG) was esta-
blished to support the ICPDR activities related to
- Expert Group on River Basin Management
the conservation, restoration and sustainable
(RBM EG) defined and prepared the steps and
management of aquatic ecosystems and those
activities the ICPDR should take in the 2001-2004
terrestrial ecosystems and wetlands directly
period towards the implementation of the WFD in
depending on them. This expert group should
the Danube River Basin; the work of the RBM EG
also contribute to the implementation of the eco-
is supported by expert sub-groups, namely:
logical provisions of the WFD;
­ Expert Sub-Group on Cartography and Geo-
- Expert Group on Emission (EMIS EG) focused
graphical Information System (GIS ESG)
its activities on the reduction of pollution resul-
- 7 -

---

1. Operational and
Institutional Framework
ting from emissions into the waters of the Danube
Specialised working groups deal with the follo-
and its tributaries. A priority issue concerned har-
wing issues:
monisation with the EU water policies, e.g., com-
pliance with the WFD List of Priority Substances;
- the UNESCO-IHP Water Balance Working Group
prepares the water balance of the Danube River;
- Expert Group on Monitoring, Laboratory and
Information Management (MLIM EG) was res-
- the newly created Working Group on the Sava
ponsible for issues concerning water quality
River Basin Management Plan closely cooperates
assessment and classification including the ope-
with the RBM EG;
ration of the Transnational Monitoring Network,
Analytical Quality Control (AQC). Special activi-
- the work of the EMIS EG and MLIM EG is co-
ties of this Expert Group related to the Joint
ordinated by a joint working group to harmonize
Danube Survey and the Investigation of the Tisza
the implementation of WFD;
River have been completed and the final techni-
cal reports have been prepared and published;
- the Danube-Black Sea Joint Technical Working
Group coordinates the work of the ICPDR and the
- Expert Group on Accident Prevention and
International Commission for the Protection of
Control (APC EG) was involved in the operation
the Black Sea (BSC) aimed at nutrient reduction
of the Accident and Emergency Warning System
to ensure recovery of the Black Sea ecosystem.
(AEWS) and the communication of alarm/war-
ning messages during accidents. An additional
As a result of the growing activities and especi-
task of this expert group lies in pollution preven-
ally the work leading to the implementation of
tion and precautionary control in the whole
the WFD, the number of tasks of the Secretariat
Danube River Basin. Special working groups
considerably increased in 2002. Therefore, the
under the APC EG deal with the preparation of
5th Ordinary Meeting of the ICPDR decided to
inventories, specifically an inventory of potenti-
provide the Secretariat with further technical
al accident risk spots and of old contaminated
support and created the following new posts:
sites in potentially flooded areas;
­ External Technical Support in Ecology dealing
- Expert Group on Flood Protection (FLOOD EG)
with the work of the ECO ESG;
was created in 2002 at the 5th Ordinary Meeting
­ External Technical Support in Economics de-
of the ICPDR held in Vienna on November 28-29,
ling with the work of the ECON ESG;
2002. The main task of this expert group is to
­ External Technical Support in Hydrology de-
prepare and implement an action plan for
ling with the work of the FLOOD EG and
sustainable flood protection in the Danube River
water balance.
Basin.
- 8 -

---

1. Operational and
Institutional Framework
Role of the UNDP/GEF Danube Regional
to the development and implementation of policies
Project
for pollution reduction in agriculture, industry,
land use and wetland management, effective legal
The overall objective of the UNDP/GEF Danube
and economic instruments, mechanisms for moni-
Regional Project is to complement the activities of
toring evaluation and transboundary cooperation.
the ICPDR required to strengthen a regional
The UNDP/GEF Danube Regional Project also con-
approach to solving transboundary problems. This
tributes to the development of programmes for
includes the development of national policies and
public participation, communication and the
legislation, the definition of priority actions for
strengthening of the Danube NGOs.
pollution control and nutrient reduction in parti-
cular, as well as the achievement of sustainable
The UNDP/GEF Danube Regional Project facili-
transboundary ecological conditions within the
tates the implementation of the Danube River
Danube River Basin and the Black Sea Basin
Protection Convention and assists those Danube
areas.
River Basin countries that are in the EU accession
process in meeting the requirements of EU water-
In particular, the UNDP/GEF Danube Regional
related directives with special emphasis on the EU
Project supports the activities of the ICPDR related
Water Framework Directive.
- 9 -

---

2. Financial Contributions
and Budgetary Situation
Regular budget
Budget lines
t
EUR
The 3rd Plenary Session of the ICPDR held in
Sofia from November 27-28, 2000, approved the
1. Staff
392,416.-
budget for the year 2002 providing an overall
2. Services
136,793.-
total of EUR 799,511.
3. Equipment
43,447.-
4. Other
77,374.-
Since some contracting parties failed to meet their
5. Operational costs
72,491.-
financial obligations for 2002, the annual contri-
butions actually paid by the contracting parties
Temporarily assigned
42,552.-
amounted to a total of EUR 765,074, EUR 34,437
to the Working Capital
short of the projected figure. Consequently, the
Fund
expenditures had to be reduced by this amount.
Overall total
765,074.-
In spite of the fact that actual expenditures in
2002 nearly matched their planned figures, a
revision of the budget was deemed necessary
and was performed on January 10, 2002.
Since not all the foreseen expenditures could be
effected, the positive balance of EUR 42,552 was
The revised budget was then approved by the
temporarily assigned to the Working Capital
President. The final breakdown of regular expen-
Fund and will only be used in 2003 for its desi-
ditures per budget line is as follows:
gnated purpose.
Special funds
on chemical and biological determinands was
conducted. The Austrian and German govern-
All financial contributions to the ICPDR suppor-
ments decided to jointly finance these activities
ting special activities beyond its normal tasks
with EUR 99,110 and EUR 458,262 respectively.
represent special funds and are shown separate-
The activities were completed in 2002. Since the
ly in the account of the ICPDR.
Austrian funds were fully utilised the sub-
account was closed on December 27, 2002. The
- Joint Danube Survey (JDS)
German sub-account still shows a positive
balance of EUR 34,424. This amount is needed to
In order to improve the comparability of water
cover the printing costs of the final technical
quality data in the Danube River Basin, a survey
report.
- 10 -

---

2. Financial Contributions
and Budgetary Situation
- Joint Danube Survey ­ Investigation of the
ICPDR Secretariat. Since the final report is due in
Tisza River
the first quarter of 2003, no disbursement was
made for these activities in 2002.
The ICPDR organised the investigation of the Tisza
River as a technical follow-up on the JDS
(JDS/ITR). The JDS/ITR was partly financed by the
- Danube ­ Black Sea Task Force
European Commission (EUR 95,000) and partly by
(DABLAS Task Force)
in-kind contributions of the participating coun-
tries (appx. EUR 56,500).
The DG Environment of the European Commis-
sion asked the ICPDR Secretariat in 2002 to
Partners in the project included VITUKI Plc of
update the database on municipal investments
Budapest, Hungary (total contractual amount of
for wastewater treatment and to create a by-
EUR 54,280), the Hessisches Landesamt für
country list - with particular attention to nutrient
Umwelt und Geologie of Wiesbaden, Germany
reduction - that could attract financing, especial-
(EUR 21,720) and the Federal Hydrometeo-
ly from international finance institutions (IFIs).
rological Institute of Belgrade, Yugoslavia (EUR
Financial support for these activities was also
14,000). The ICPDR Secretariat received about
provided by the EC in the total of EUR 60,939 out
EUR 5,000 to cover its costs related to the JDS/ITR
of which about EUR 54,100 was awarded to inter-
activities.
national consultants in the Danube River Basin.
The ICPDR Secretariat received about EUR 6,800
At the end of 2002 the account of the JDS/ITR
to cover its costs related to the DABLAS Task
showed a positive balance of EUR 35,258 - the
Force activities.
amount needed to cover the final payments of the
partners when their reports are received.
- Analytical Quality Control (AQC) ­ 2002
In order to keep the AQC programme running,
the 4th Plenary Session of the ICPDR in
November 2001 received voluntary contributions
to cover the cost of continued activities in 2002.
Voluntary contributions were offered by
Hungary (EUR 11,000), Slovakia (EUR 2,000),
Romania (EUR 2,300), Germany (EUR 4,500) and
Austria (EUR 2,200). While the Hungarian,
Slovak and Romanian contributions were direct-
ly transferred to VITUKI Plc, the German and
Austrian contributions were paid through the
- 11 -

---

3. Implementation of the Water Framework
Directive in the Danube River Basin
Strategy for the development of a
development of a Strategic Paper for the Devel-
Danube River Basin District Manage-
opment of the Danube River Basin District
ment Plan
Management Plan (Danube RBM Plan). The
paper deals with defining the institutional frame
One of the greatest challenges faced by the
and the co-ordination mechanisms on the natio-
Danube countries lies in the implementation of
nal, bi-/multilateral and the Danube River Basin
the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD). All
level. In addition, it describes the approach for
countries co-operating under the Danube River
the development of the Danube RBM Plan and
Protection Convention ­ be they EU member sta-
the reporting mechanism to the European
tes, accession countries or others ­ have com-
Commission. The Danube RBM Plan will consist
mitted themselves to making all necessary
of 1) the roof report dealing with all issues of
efforts to implement the WFD in their countries.
basin-wide importance and 2) the national
The ICPDR is the co-ordination platform. The
reports dealing with all national issues and those
River Basin Management Expert Group (RBM
that have been co-ordinated bilaterally. In a later
EG) has been created to prepare the necessary
stage sub-basin plans are foreseen.
activities. One of its first tasks has been the
CH
IT
DE
Cooperation
Bilateral agreements
UA
AT
(examples)
MD
CZ
PL
RBM
ICPDR
EG
SK
RO
- platform of coordination
- information exchange
- development of strategy for
producing the RBM Plan
- hamonisation of methods
HU
BG
and mechanism
SI
S+M
MK
BA
HR
Cooperation
AL
Sub-river-basin cooperation
(example: Sava River)
- 12 -

---

3. Implementation of the
Water Framework Directive
in the Danube River Basin
The RBM EG has started developing a technical
river basin in terms of its typology and reference
outline for the roof report of the Danube RBM plan
conditions, its significant pressures and impacts as
for 2003 and for 2004. The roof report 2003 deals
well as with the economic analysis of water uses.
with the identification of competent authorities
Newly created or existing ICPDR expert groups are
and with the established international relations-
preparing the necessary steps for its implementati-
hips for WFD implementation. The roof report
on. The following pages show the technical prep-
2004 will deal with the characterisation of the
arations carried out in 2002.
ICPDR RBM EG
European Commission
- Strategy for development of RBM plan
Common Implementation
- Work plan
Strategy
Guidance documents
Development of issue papers
on special DRB topics
- Public participation
PP Prep. Group
- Danube GIS & mapping criteria
GIS ESG
- Economic analysis
ECON ESG
- Typology of surface water bodies
MLIM EG
- Definition of reference conditions
- Risk of failure to achieve good status
- Significant pressures on surface
EMIS EG
waters
- Effects from human activities on GW
ECO EG
- Register of protected areas (habitats)
- UNDP/GEF Danube
Danube countries
Regional Project
- national tasks
- EC/ISPA pilot river basin
- harmonise results with neighbours
projects
- report on progress
- Twinning projects
Danube countries
ICPDR Secretariat
ICPDR
- programme of measures
prepares roof
ensures basin-wide coordination
- harmonise measures with
RBM plan
and harmonisation of RBM plan
neighbours
- National RBM Plan
Danube River Basin Management Plan
Roof RBM plan
National plans
(part A)
(part B)
Public information and
consultation process
- 13 -

---

3. Implementation of the Water Framework
Directive in the Danube River Basin
Development of a Danube GIS
Participation in the workshops was high and
most DRB countries were represented. It showed
The Expert Sub-group on Cartography and GIS
that the Guidebook is widely used and that it is a
(GIS ESG) was created to establish a GIS for the
useful tool for the implementation of the WFD.
Danube River Basin and to produce the necessary
Follow-up workshops were suggested and are
overview maps for the implementation of the
being prepared in cooperation with the
WFD. The first step was to get an overview of
UNDP/GEF Danube Regional Project.
existing data and data exchange formats. This
task was carried out with the help of que-
Species and habitat protection areas
stionnaires. The next step was to decide on the
digital data base. The GIS ESG suggests using
The ECO EG is setting up an inventory of protec-
EuroGlobalMap (EGM) developed by EuroGeo-
ted areas in which the maintenance or improve-
graphics as the basic topographic map for the
ment of the status of water is an important fac-
Danube River Basin. It will allow map scales ran-
tor in the protection of habitats and species. For
ging from 1:500.000 to 1:4 million. An issue
EU member states these are the protected areas
paper is under preparation on the development of
designated under EC regulations (Natura 2000).
a Danube GIS. The first elements of the paper deal
Countries that are not members of the EU will
with the needs for a Danube GIS, the steps for
select protected areas under national protection
building and maintaining a Danube GIS and the
regulations. Sites of international relevance (e.g.
flow of data between national GI systems, the
Ramsar sites, national parks, IBAs, World
Danube GIS and GISCO, the GIS of the European
Heritage sites) are given priority in the inventory.
Commission. A detailed needs assessment is cur-
The inventory is being elaborated on the basis of
rently being prepared for setting up a Danube GIS.
materials and information from the contracting
parties. 10 out of 13 countries reported their pro-
Characterisation and analysis of surface
tected areas for species and habitat protection by
water and groundwater bodies
the end of 2002. So far, 605 areas have been
nominated to the ICPDR.
Two workshops were organised for the exchange
of information on testing the German LAWA
The data will be in line with the standard data
Guidebook on WFD implementation (tasks until
format for Natura 2000 sites, but in a first step
2004):
they will be limited to the following core data set:
- 1st Groundwater Workshop (Budapest,
1) site name, size, location of the protected areas
February 4-5, 2002)
(geographic co-ordinates);
- 1st Surface Water Workshop (Bucharest,
February 21-22, 2002).
2) river basin (sub-unit as defined by countries),
and altitude
The workshops gave a good overview on the sta-
tus of implementation in the Danube countries.
3) IUCN classification and type of protected areas
- 14 -

---

3. Implementation of the
Water Framework Directive
in the Danube River Basin
4) Reference to protection legislation, date of
out the economic analysis to fulfil the require-
designation;
ments of the Directive by the end of 2004. In
view of the level of effort and time required to
5) key habitat types (according to the Annex of
perform the necessary steps for implementing the
the Habitats' Directive or Emerald Network)
economic analysis in the DRB, the ICPDR at the
and the IBA criteria of the site;
end of 2002 established the Expert Sub-group on
Economic Analysis.
6) reference to database, web site and further
sources of information.
Starting the public participation process
Economic analysis of water uses
The process of public information and consultati-
on needs to be started at an early stage. In the
The RBM EG created a Drafting Group for econo-
frame of the work of the RBM EG, WWF and GWP
mic issues related to the WFD. The Drafting
developed an issue paper on the way to deal with
Group developed an issue paper on the way to
public participation in the Danube River Basin.
carry out the economic analysis of water uses as
The next step will be to develop a strategy for
required by Article 5. The first step is to define
conducting the public participation process. The
the needed economic indicators and variables.
strategy will be based on the respective EU gui-
The next step will be to check data availability in
dance document. It will be important to clarify
the countries. Once this overview has been achie-
which issue needs to be dealt with at which level.
ved, a proposal will be developed on how to carry
- 15 -

---

4. Water Quality and Hydrological Situation
in the Danube River Basin
Hydrological situation
Country
Total annual
Relative annual
The long-term daily mean flow of the Danube
precipitation in precipitation in
River is about 6500 m3s-1, which represents an
2002 [mm]
2002 [%]
average annual discharge of 207 km3. The
discharge in 2002 was 215.7 km3 (104% of the
Germany
1329
113
average annual discharge).
Austria
1115
109
Czech Rep.
765
107
The weather conditions and the hydrological
Slovakia
841
110
situation in 2002 varied dramatically. There were
Hungary
567
93
big seasonal variations in precipitation and the
Slovenia
1307
93
related discharge in the whole basin. The values
Croatia
685
105
of the total precipitation in 2002 as well as the
Romania
636
98
relative precipitation in the same year when
compared to a long-term annual average in sel-
ected countries are shown in the following table:
In general, in the upper Danube Basin the weat-
July 20 and August 20. The torrential character
her was warmer with more precipitation than
of these rainfalls caused large amounts of preci-
usual. While January and April were remarkably
pitation concentrated in 24 hours, which in cer-
drier than average, the rainfall in August, October
tain areas exceeded the value of 100 mm/day.
and November by much exceeded the long-term
Danube 2002 - Mean annual discharge
values. The extreme precipitation in August 2002
led to a disastrous flood on the upper Danube and
7000
m3/s
on some tributaries (Inn, Regen, Thaya/Dyje).
These flood events caused substantial damage in
6000
many areas in Austria, Germany and the Czech
Republic. The maximum discharge of the Danube
5000
between Melk and Vienna was estimated at
HQ100. In the Czech Republic, the lower part of
4000
the Dyje Basin was seriously impacted (100-200-
years flood). Slovakia and Hungary were less
3000
affected by this flood due to a partial reduction of
2000
the flood wave and extensive flood protection
measures. In Croatia, only minor flooding was
1000
reported in inundation areas. In the lower Danube
Basin, the most significant precipitation leading
0
to destructive floods with negative socio-econo-
rkm
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0
mic impacts at a local level was recorded between
long-term annual average mean annual discharge 2002
- 16 -

---

4. Water Quality and
Hydrological Situation in
the Danube River Basin
Pollution due to accidents
has only a limited influence and thus only a slight
increase of the percentage of connected popu-
There was no serious accident-related pollution
lation will be possible in Austria in future.
that might have seriously impacted water quality
in 2002. In Germany, the impact caused by the
At the beginning of 2002, 1,432 WWTP with more
infiltration of hexachlorobutadiene (HCBD) into
than 50 population equivalents (PE) including 612
the Inn River (information provided in Annual
treatment plants with more than 2,000 PE were in
Report 2001) was diminishing and the rehabilita-
operation in Austria. Approximately 90% of these
tion activities continued. In the Czech Republic
wastewater treatment plants utilise tertiary treat-
and Slovakia, a few minor accidents were repor-
ment. This set-up enables a reduction of the pol-
ted, but no measurable impact on the water qua-
lution load produced by population by 95% for
lity was observed. No deterioration of water qua-
BOD, 91% for COD, 69% for N and 83% for P.
lity was reported in the Danube and March/
Morava as a result of August floods.
In the Czech part of the Danube River Basin, furt-
her efforts were made to reduce the nutrient
At the end of September, the elevated flow in the
discharge from the most important WWTPs. At the
Iskar River downstream of Sofia lifted the bottom
end of 2002, the reconstruction of four out of 12
sediments. This resulted in a deficit of oxygen
WWTPs included in the Joint Action Programme
and led to fish kills.
for the Danube River Basin was completed.
Accidents that triggered the Danube Accident
In Slovakia, nitrogen reduction was performed at
Emergency Warning System are reported in
three WWTPs in the Bratislava region: Bratislava-
´`
´`
Chapter 7.
Petrzalka, Vrakuna and Devínska Nová Ves.
Similarly, technical improvements aimed at N-
Improvements in wastewater treatment
reduction were performed at several small
WWTPs in Slovenia. Regarding plants in Slovenia
The trend pursued by most Danube countries is to
with more than 100 000 PE, only three have yet
intensify nutrient reduction in wastewater treat-
to comply with the EU-directives on nitrogen tre-
ment plants (WWTPs). Such a development was
atment.
reported by Germany, where nitrogen reduction
was further improved at several WWTPs. In
In Romania, a total of 1,445 WWTPs were in ope-
Austria, the share of the population connected to
ration in 2002, out of which about 45% reported
the central WWTP in line with the national regu-
satisfactory performance. An additional 15
lations was further increased to 86%. Despite the
WWTPs are under construction.
fact that this level was for a long time considered
to be at the margin of economic feasibility, new
developments in the construction of wastewater
collection facilities have allowed construction
costs to be further decreased. However, this factor
- 17 -

---

4. Water Quality and Hydrological Situation
in the Danube River Basin
Water quality trends
tion of river stretches with very good/good bio-
logical water quality increased from 81% in 1998
In Germany, the specific weather conditions in
to 87% in 2002.
2002 (high precipitation, increased average tem-
perature) resulted in an elevated water tempera-
Slovenia reported a noticeable improvement of
ture and a decrease in dissolved oxygen concen-
the saprobic situation on the Sava River at
trations. However, the concentrations of nutrients
Jesenice. Gradual improvements in water quality
and indicators of degradable organic substances
were also reported by Romania. No significant
showed a slight decrease compared to previous
changes of the surface water quality in compari-
years. This tendency is characteristic for the
son with the previous year were observed in
long-term trend in Germany. In Austria, the frac-
Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia or Bulgaria.
- 18 -

---

5. Pollution Control Strategy
in Line with the WFD
Update of municipal and industrial
that requires additional measures to reduce phos-
emission inventories 2002
phorus and nitrate pollution from certain sewage
treatment works, while other Danube countries are
An updated basin-wide Emission Inventory of pol-
implementing specific regulation to control point
lutants released to the water from municipal and
sources.
industrial dischargers, for reference year 2000, was
made publicly accessible in 2002. The next upda-
Recent trends in industrial discharges inventories
te of municipal discharges inventory expected in
have made it necessary to consider IPPC approach,
2003 is intended to cover more than 75% of the
the use of best available techniques (BAT), the
emissions discharged into the River, which prac-
integration of cleaner production and environ-
tically means that all settlements having more
mental management standards, and the incorpora-
than 10,000 inhabitants will be included.
tion of priority list of substances. The most impor-
tant feature of the IPPC approach is that the emis-
This new update will respond to the need to ana-
sion standards are based on the best currently
lyse pressures (stated in Article 5 of the WFD),
available techniques.
which requires information on the type and scale
of significant anthropogenic pressures, including
The new emission strategy will provide policies for
point and diffuse sources of pollution. In addition
all its uses: domestic, agricultural and industrial. A
there is a requirement to consider land use patterns
better emission policy benefits both the govern-
(e.g. urban, industrial, agricultural, forest), as these
ments and the industry, i.e.:
may be useful in indicating areas in which speci-
m it helps governments to identify priorities for
fic pressures are located. Generally, point source
action aimed at reducing values for industrial and
discharges are subject to control by the local envi-
municipal discharges and to encourage cost-effec-
ronmental or water authorities. EU Member States
tive actions to limit emissions over time;
are currently designating additional sensitive areas
m it encourages industry to take proactive measures
under the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive
to reduce releases.
Emission reduction in municipal wastewater treatment plants
In the frame of the EU DABLAS project, selected Danube countries have indicated a total of 45 municipal
investments projects (wastewater treatment plants) with a total investment cost of EURO 622.6 Mio. The total
reduction of BOD, COD, total nitrogen and total phosphorus in tons per year is presented in the table below.
Czech
Hungary
Slovakia
Slovenia
Sum
Republic
Total Projects
14
9
7
15
45
Total Investments (Mio. EUR)
156.0
142.3
41.6
282.7
622.6+
Reduction BOD (t/a)
170
9,231
1,143
25,265
35,809
Reduction COD (t/a)
106
20,126
1,650
42,461
64,343
Reduction Tot-N (t/a)
856
1,802
295
40,293
7,246
Reduction Tot-P (t/a)
47
442
61
709
1,259
- 19 -

---

5. Pollution Control Strategy
in Line with the WFD
Agricultural point sources inventory
- production of an outline for a first agricultural
point sources inventory. The inventory (reference
Diffuse pollutants include nutrients resulting
year 2002) will be available in 2003.
from the over-application of fertilisers, silt from
soil erosion and pesticides from the handling and
Agreement on priority substances in the
application of the chemicals, effluent from sewa-
Danube River Basin
ge treatment works and industrial units. A better
integration with agriculture will enable action to
The ICPDR List of Priority Substances includes
be taken to reduce diffuse pollution, which
substances that raise health or environmental
remains a serious problem, preventing toxic algal
concerns. A proposal on quality standards for the
blooms from excess manure and fertilisers.
Danube Specific Priority Substances and defining
criteria for evaluation of General Parameters are
Steps initiated in 2002 by Expert Group on
beeing developed. The Emission Inventory of
Emission (EMIS EG) to improve the control of
Industrial Discharges for the year 2003 will also
pollution from agriculture and improve water
include these substances.
quality in the Danube include:
Use of MONERIS in addressing pressures
- assessment of diffuse water pollution from agri-
from pollution
culture in the Danube River Basin, examining the
available evidence from previous projects, studies
The Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland
and demonstration projects. The assessment
Fisheries assumed the task to compile a harmoni-
aimed to identify cost-effective policy measures
sed inventory for point and diffuse sources of
to control diffuse water pollution from agricultu-
pollution, which will be finalised in May 2003.
re, reducing it to levels that meet the existing
MONERIS (MOdelling Nutrient Emissions in RIver
standards and encourage sustainable farm prac-
Systems) model was developed and applied in the
tices;
Danube River Basin to estimate nutrient emissi-
ons into surface waters from point and various
- drafting of Recommendations on Best Available
diffuse sources. The total nutrient input into the
Techniques at Agricultural Point Sources, inclu-
Danube River Basin amounts to 61,300 tP/a and
ding in-plant measures for the reduction of
639,400 tN/a.
wastewater volume and abatement of pollution
load;
- 20 -

---

5. Pollution Control Strategy
in Line with the WFD
The graphs show the total nutrient input into the Danube by their input pathways:
Phosphorus input t/a
Nitrogen input t/a
3%
2%
36%
4%
21%
Atm. Deposition
Atm. Deposition
10%
14%
Surface runoff
Surface runoff
Erosion
Erosion
1%
Tile Drainage
Tile Drainage
Ground-water
11%
Ground-water
1%
Urban Area
13%
Urban Area
Point Sources
Point Sources
49%
1%
34%
While point emissions from wastewater treatment plants and industrial sources are discharged direct-
ly into the rivers, diffuse emissions into the surface waters reflect the sum of different pathways. Seven
pathways are considered: point sources, atmospheric deposition, erosion, surface runoff, groundwater,
tile drainage and urban surface water runoff.
Initial results of nutrient management in
management and its effect on water quality and
the Danube Basin and its impact on the
their consequences on the socio-economic deve-
Black Sea Project (daNUbs)
lopment in the Danube countries.
The general objectives of daNUbs project include:
The initial results include estimates of nutrient
- to improve the knowledge about sources,
input into the river network, as well as an asses-
pathways, stocks, losses and sinks of nutrients in
sment of the loads transported via the network
a large river catchment;
(N; P; Si). The GIS-based emission model (MONE-
- to improve the knowledge about the effects of
RIS) for calculating nutrient emissions, the
nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus and silica) on the
Danube Water Model for calculating the transfor-
receiving ecosystems with special emphasis on
mation and transport of nutrients in the river and
the coastal areas;
the Danube Delta Model for calculating the nutri-
- to develop, improve and combine management
ent transport through the Danube Delta are cur-
tools for nutrients in the Danube Basin, and
rently being combined to obtain more reliable
- to develop scenarios and prognoses for nutrient
results, which will be available in 2005.
- 21 -

---

6. Operation of the Danube Accident
and Emergency Warning System
In 2002 the Accident and Emergency Warning
spills. Brief information on these accident-caused
System (AEWS) transmitted information on eight
pollution events in the Danube River Basin in
accidents out of which three were caused by oil
2002 is given below.
Site of Accident / Date
Affected River
Primary
International
Tranboundary
Pollutant
Satellite Messages
Impact
Austria
Morava (rkm 61) Oil
PIAC ­ 04 e PIAC ­ 02
AT: Yes
(and Slovakia)
(Austrian bank)
"Info?"
SK: No
PIAC ­ 02 e PIAC ­ 04
08.01.2002
"Confirmation"
Slovakia
Mosoni-Danube
Oil
PIAC ­ 05 e PIAC ­ 04
SK: Yes
(and Hungary)
(at Rajka, lock
"Info?"
HU: No
No.VI:)
PIAC ­ 04 e PIAC ­ 05
03.04.2002
"End-of-Alert"
Romania
Aries River
Mining sterile PIAC ­ 05 e PIAC ­ 08
RO: No
"Info?"
03.06.2002
PIAC ­ 08 e PIAC ­ 05
"End-of-Alert"
Romania
Danube
Ammonia
PIAC ­ 08 e PIAC­
RO: Yes
(Barzava)
Belgrade
Serbia: No
"Information" (By mail)
06.06.2002
Serbia
Danube
Ashes
PIAC FROM BELGRAD e
Serbia: Yes
(Kostalat power plant)
ICPDR SECRETARIAT e
RO: No
PIAC 08
13.06.2002
notification
Romania
Prahova and
Oil
PIAC 08 e PIAC 12 Izmail RO: No
Ialomita Buzau
(also by fax):
31.06.2002
river (tributary of
"Information"
Danube river)
Hungary (Mohács)
Danube (rkm
Soya flour
PIAC ­ 05 sent fax info
HU: Yes
11.09.2002
1447)
to Hidrometeorological
Institute in Belgrade
Hungary
Public media
Cyanide
PIAC ­ 05 e PIAC ­ 08
RO: No
12.11.2002
reported signifi-
"Info?"
(conc. below
cant water pollu-
PIAC ­ 08 e PIAC ­ 05
threshold level)
tion in Romania
"End-of-Alert" by fax
on River Somes
Note: A "Yes" in the "Transboundary impact" column means that accident-caused water pollution entered the
neighbouring downstream country.
- 22 -

---

6. Operation of the Danube
Accident and Emergency
Warning System
Upgrade of AEWS
Project. Under the concept, satellite-based com-
munication will be replaced by internet commu-
To improve the operation of the warning system,
nication. This application will improve the func-
final standard forms for the AEWS have been
tionality of the current Information Processing
developed and adopted by the Expert Group on
System used by PIACs. It will reside on the web
Accident Prevention and Control (APC EG),
server of the ICPDR Information System and will
which took into consideration the "emission
be accessible via a standard web browser from
approach" (Alert Thresholds for Extraordinary
any internet-based computer. Thus, satellite com-
Water Pollution in the Framework of the
munication will be replaced by web-based infor-
International Danube Accident Emergency
mation exchange and SMS for notification of an
Warning System). A concept of an upgrade of the
alarm message. This approach will significantly
communication between PIACs has been desi-
cut the cost of AEWS operation without under-
gned within the UNDP/GEF Danube Regional
mining its efficiency.
- 23 -

---

7. Flood Protection in the Danube River Basin
The DRPC emphasises the need for transbound-
mended that it should be finalised by the end of
ary-level cooperation in forecasting and monito-
2004.
ring flood events if their impacts are to be mini-
mised. In response to this, the Danube countries
Following the proposals of the Danube flood
have decided to establish joint emergency plans.
experts, the ICPDR at its 5th Ordinary Meeting on
November 28-29, 2002, decided to establish an
The ICPDR has included flood prevention into its
Expert Group on Flood Protection responsible for
five-year Joint Action Programme 2001-2005.
elaborating by October 2004 an Action Pro-
Primary importance is given to the elaboration of
gramme for Sustainable Flood Protection in the
a flood prevention programme adjusted to the
Danube River Basin. The Action Programme
specific local situation in the various parts of the
should take into account the initiative of the
Danube River Basin with particular attention to
European Water Directors concerning flood
tributaries and sub-river-basins. According to the
management. The ICPDR also welcomed an offer
Joint Action Programme, the results should be
from the European Commission for access to the
available by the year 2005.
LISFLOOD programme aimed at developing a
European Flood Alert System for major European
Disastrous floods in the upper part of the Danube
catchments.
River Basin in August 2002 highlighted the need
for concerted, harmonised basin-wide actions to
Besides its own actions taken against the flood
strengthen the future efforts in coping with flood
hazards the ICPDR proactively participated in the
hazards. At the German Flood Conference held in
preparatory activities of the Budapest Initiative
Berlin on September 15, 2002, the German
on Sustainable Flood Management. At the mee-
Federal Government presented its Five-Point
ting held in Budapest on December 1, 2002, the
Programme to improve flood defence.
prime ministers of Hungary, Poland, the Czech
Republic, Slovakia, Germany, Austria, Romania
Immediately following the German Flood
and the European Commission adopted the
Conference, the ICPDR held its Expert Meeting on
Declaration of the Budapest Initiative as a joint
Flood Protection. Topping the agenda of this 2nd
statement calling for the strengthening of inter-
ICPDR Expert Meeting on Flood Protection (held
national cooperation in flood management. At
in Vienna on October 17, 2002) was the urgent
this meeting, the ICPDR president informed the
need for an integrated flood prevention in the
participants about the current flood policy of the
Danube River Basin. Participants at the meeting
ICPDR and supported the Initiative.
proposed that the Action Programme for
Sustainable Flood Prevention in the Danube
The Declaration clearly recognises the role of
River should be worked out on two levels: for the
river basin commissions in the preparation of
Basin as a whole and for the sub-basins.
action plans and creates a sound basis for con-
certed flood management in future.
The participating experts designed the tasks for
both levels of the Action Programme and recom-
- 24 -

---

8. Implementation of the
JAP - Investment Projects
Results of the EU DABLAS initiative on
reduction and the rehabilitation of ecosystems in
the prioritisation of water sector invest-
the wider Black Sea region. The European
ment projects in the Danube River Basin
Commission, DG Environment provided financial
support to the Danube and the Black Sea secreta-
Participants at the ministerial conference in
riats enabling them to develop an "Operational
Brussels on November 26, 2001, signed a joint
Framework for the Prioritisation of Projects".
declaration on the "Protection of Water and
Water-related Ecosystems in the Wider Black Sea
A Working Group on Prioritisation was created
Region". In order to ensure the implementation of
and charged with selecting priority projects on the
the Declaration, the DABLAS Task Force was for-
regional level. The Working Group consisted of
med to serve as a platform for co-operation and
representatives from Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria
to develop financing mechanisms for the imple-
(vice chair), the Czech Republic (vice chair), from
mentation of investment projects for pollution
the secretariats of the ICPDR and the Black Sea
Among the 158 projects, 45 are fully funded with a total of EUR 622m. The total investment required
for the remaining 113 projects is EUR 2,567m, out of which EUR 2,121m are expected to be raised from
international finance institutions (IFIs), other international organisations and bilateral donors.
- 25 -

---

8. Implementation of the
JAP - Investment Projects
Commission, representatives from the European
Investment Bank, the European Bank for Rural
Category
Default
Development, the Council of Europe Development
value (%)
Bank, Project Preparation Committee (PPC, vice
I
Environmental impact
30
chair) and consultants preparing the project fiches.
II
Black Sea impact
20
III
Finance ability
30
Update of municipal investment projects
IV
Technology efficiency
10
addressing nutrient reduction goals
V
Compliance
10
The ICPDR and the Black Sea Commission were
investment projects and to create a priority list of
asked to collect and update information on
projects for municipal wastewater treatment -
Prioritisation ranking was made for 113 projects. Of the evaluated 113 projects, only 20 were found to
be reasonably well prepared and have secured partial financing. An arbitrary division was made for the
20 top-scoring projects, so that a short list of projects could be developed.
Total Scores for Projects
I. Environmental Impact
II. Black Sea Impact
#
Project ID Location
Score
Project ID Location
Score
Project ID Location
Score
1 YU-M-01 Belgrade
88
YU-M-03 Nis
100
YU-M-03
Nis
100
2 YU-M-02 Novi Sad
82
BG-M-11
Lovech
91
YU-M-01
Belgrade
100
3 YU-M-03 Nis
80
BG-M-04 Montana
91
YU-M-02
Novi Sad
100
4 YU-M-06 VRBAS
75
BG-M-01
Russe
90
BA-M-02
Butile, Sarajevo
100
5 RO-M-11
Brasov
74
YU-M-01
Belgrade
89
BA-M-04
Bijeljina
100
6 RO-M-15 Zalau
72
YU-M-02 Novi Sad
89
RO-M-07
Ploiesti
100
7 BG-M-12 Sevlievo
71
BG-M-12 Sevlievo
88
UA-M-01
City of Uzhgorod
100
8 RO-M-18 Bucuresti (Glina)
71
BG-M-13 Popovo
88
BG-M-05
Pleven
100
9 MD-M-01 town Cahul
70
BG-M-08 Troian
88
BA-M-03
Banja Luka
100
10 RO-M-03 Onesti
69
BG-M-21
Mezdra
88
BA-M-01
Tuzla
100
11 UA-M-01 City of Uzhgorod
69
BA-M-02
Butile, Sarajevo
87
RO-M-11
Brasov
100
12 BA-M-02 Butile, Sarajevo
68
YU-M-15 Senta
84
HU-M-16
Vészprém
100
13 RO-M-08 Targoviste
68
RO-M-18
Bucuresti (Glina)
82
HR-M-04
Zagreb
100
14 BG-M-11 Lovech
68
BG-M-20 Botevgrad
81
HU-M-01
Budapest North
100
15 YU-M-05 Zrenjanin
68
BG-M-02 Svishtov
81
BG-M-01
Russe
83
16 BG-M-13 Popovo
68
BG-M-18 Pavlikeni
81
BG-M-08
Troian
83
17 HU-M-04 Budapest South Buda
67
BG-M-15 Cherven briag
81
RO-M-18
Bucuresti (Glina)
83
18 MD-M-05 town Falest
67
BG-M-10
Silistra
81
HU-M-03
Budapest Central
83
19 SK-M-09 Trencín, right side
66
BG-M-07
Razgrad
79
RO-M-15
Zalau
83
20 UA-M-02 Chernivtsi
66
BG-M-23 Biala
79
YU-M-12
Subotica
83
- 26 -

---

8. Implementation of the
JAP - Investment Projects
with particular attention to nutrient reduction ­
Prioritisation criteria were developed and
that could attract international financing.
grouped into five categories.
Therefore, the ICPDR project team, supported by
the work of consultants, revised the list of natio-
The weighting factors were considered as default
nal projects of the Joint Action Programme and
values to allow flexibility in the evaluation. As
developed a total of 158 fact sheet for the 11
more reliable finance-ability information is obtai-
Danube River Basin countries. The projects differ
ned in the future, the default values can be easily
in size from more than 1,000,000 PE (Belgrade,
changed in the database. Project data and ranking
Bucharest, Budapest, Sarajevo, Zagreb) to appro-
criteria have been programmed into the database.
ximately. 10,000 PE.
It is expected that a joint list of the Danube and the Black Sea projects will be presented to the IFIs and
the donor community in 2003 in the frame of a PPC/DABLAS meeting to attract additional financial
support for the implementation of investment projects in the Danube-Black Sea region.
The DABLAS database for investment projects in the Danube River Basin countries is accessible under
www.icpdr.org.
III. Financibility
IV. Technology Efficiency
V. Compliance
Project ID Location
Score
Project ID Location
Score
Project ID Location
Score
RO-M-04
Piatra Neamt
100
BA-M-02
Butile, Sarajevo
100
BA-M-02 Butile, Sarajevo
100
RO-M-06
Buzau
100
BA-M-03
Banja Luka
100
BA-M-01 Tuzla
100
MD-M-05
town Falest
100
BA-M-04
Bijeljina
100
BA-M-03 Banja Luka
100
MD-M-01
town Cahul
100
BA-M-05
Brdsko District
100
MD-M-01 town Cahul
70
YU-M-01
Belgrade
94
BA-M-06
Brdsko District
100
RO-M-08 Targoviste
70
RO-M-08
Targoviste
94
BG-M-01
Russe
100
SK-M-09
Trencín, right side
70
MD-M-11
town Costesti
94
BG-M-02
Svishtov
100
RO-M-03 Onesti
70
MD-M-08
town Glodeni
94
BG-M-05
Pleven
100
RO-M-11
Brasov
70
MD-M-07
town Nisporeni
94
BG-M-08
Troian
100
YU-M-02 Novi Sad
70
YU-M-06
VRBAS
87
BG-M-11
Lovech
100
SK-M-13
Zvolen
70
MD-M-09
town Leova
87
BG-M-12
Sevlievo
100
BG-M-12 Sevlievo
70
MD-M-04
town Edinet
87
BG-M-14
Dulovo
100
BG-M-13 Popovo
70
HU-M-04
Budapest South Buda
81
BG-M-16
Vidin
100
SK-M-03
Nitra
70
MD-M-12
town Cantemir
80
BG-M-17
Lom
100
YU-M-03 Nis
70
MD-M-10
town Briceni
80
BG-M-20
Botevgrad
100
HU-M-12 Sopron
70
MD-M-02
town Ungheni
79
HR-M-04
Zagreb
100
BG-M-20 Botevgrad
70
UA-M-02
Chernivtsi
75
HR-M-11
Grad Daruvar
100
SI-M-08
Vrhnika
70
SK-M-09
Trencín, right side
75
HU-M-01
Budapest North
100
HR-M-04 Zagreb
70
RO-M-03
Onesti
75
HU-M-06
Gyor
100
HR-M-20 Plitvicka Jezera
70
RO-M-13
Turda
75
HU-M-16
Vészprém
100
UA-M-06 Vilkovo WWTP
70
- 27 -

---

9. Concerted Actions Aimed at Accident
Prevention in the Danube River Basin
Inventory of accident risk spots in the
ted and ranked. The map illustrates the most sig-
Danube River Basin
nificant sites.
In response to the disastrous accidents on the
However, it must be pointed out that the
Tisza River in January and March 2000, experts
Accidental Risk Sites survey could only hint at
of the Accident Prevention and Control Expert
the potential hazards. The actual risks arising
Group in 2001 elaborated a basin-wide inven-
from the hazardous sites depend on the safety
tory of potential accident risk spots. This inven-
measures that are effectively applied in each
tory is the first international review of potential-
installation. In order to estimate the safety level
ly dangerous installations in the Danube region.
that has been attained, special checklists have
The assessment of potential risk was made using
been developed and distributed to national aut-
a combination of a quantity of a hazardous sub-
horities. At present, a methodology is being
stance with its water-endangering ability. The
created that would enable these checklists to be
Accidental Risk Sites Inventory reflects the sta-
used in a harmonised way in the whole Danube
tus as of June 30, 2001. Altogether 611 potential
River Basin.
accident risk spots in nine countries were repor-
- 28 -

---

9. Concerted Actions Aimed
at Accident Prevention in
the Danube River Basin
Inventory of old contaminated sites in
Handling of water-endangering
potentially flooded areas in the Danube
substances
River Basin
In order to strengthen the safety of surface and
The floods of August 2002 highlighted the pro-
ground water bodies and to minimise the risks
blem of inundation of landfills, dump sites and
posed by occasional spills from industrial facili-
storage facilities where harmful substances are
ties, the ICPDR agreed a set of basic require-
deposited. Potential transfer of toxic substances
ments for installations dealing with water-
into the water poses a clear threat to the envi-
endangering substances and recommended that
ronment. Such potential threats were recognised
all Danube countries should apply them. The
by the ICPDR and the preparation of an inven-
acceptance of this document represents an
tory of old contaminated sites in potentially
important contribution to the harmonisation of
flooded areas in the Danube River Basin, in
accident-caused pollution prevention policy pur-
accordance with the Resolution of the 7th ICPDR
sued by the different international river commis-
Steering Group Meeting, started in autumn 2002.
sions as the International Commission for the
The finalisation of the basin-wide inventory is
Protection of the Elbe River (IKSE/MKOL) adop-
expected in summer 2003.
ted the same basic requirements.
Basic requirements for installations
ge. As a rule, the facilities shall be equipped with
handling water endangering sub-
a leak proof and stable retention room as far as
stances
they are not double-walled and equipped with
leak detectors.
- Facilities shall be designed and operated in such
a way as to prevent the escape of any substances
- Substances which occur in cases of damage and
hazardous to water. They shall be leak proof, sta-
which are polluted with escaped substances
ble and sufficiently resistant to the mechanical,
hazardous to water shall be retained and recycled
thermal and chemical influences to be expected.
or disposed of properly and without causing any
Single-walled underground containers shall not
damage.
be permitted. The third sentence of this paragraph
shall not apply to solids.
- As a matter of principle, retention rooms shall
not have any outlets.
- Leaks from any part of a facility, which has
contact with any substances hazardous to water,
- Operating instructions including a monitoring,
must be recognisable in a quick and reliable way.
maintenance and alarm plan shall be established
and observed.
- Any leaking substances hazardous to water
must be recognised, retained and recycled or dis-
posed of properly and without causing any dama-
- 29 -

---

10. ICPDR Information
System
Geographical Information System (GIS)
Charts are also available for:
- average values;
The GIS ESG is entrusted with establishing a GIS
- determinand values by date of sampling.
for the Danube River Basin and coordinating the
production of the Danube River Basin overview
The collection, checking and processing of 2001
map for the implementation of the WFD. This
data is under way.
includes the definition of different modalities for
establishing the Danube GIS with particular atten-
Library System and electronic publishing
tion to appropriate cartographic systems (such as
of ICPDR documents
base map, coordinates, scales, etc.).
The Library System has been integrated into the
Emissions Inventory
ICPDR Information System and the user interface
has been adapted. The Library System informati-
The Emissions Inventory 2000 is available on the
on is regularly updated.
public web site and accessible through queries
(predefined reporting formats) both by country or
Several publications were placed on the public
by river basin and through click-on maps.
website in 2002, including:
Generating tabular reports of main pollutants,
detailed data of the emissions sources and bar
- Joint Danube Survey: full technical report,
charts of annual loads for selected pollutant by
summary reports (in English and German) and
river basin is also possible. The preparation of
press releases (in English and German);
Emissions Inventory 2002 has also started.
- Danube Watch Magazine 1/2002 and 2/2002;
- TNMN Yearbook 1998;
TNMN Database
- UNDP/GEF Danube Regional Project
Documentation.
Data for the years 1996 through 2000 are now
available. Data for the year 2000 were received
User support
from the TNMN Data Centre (Slovakia) and
imported into the TNMN Database. Users can
A vast training programme for all internal users
generate predefined reports for:
was launched in December with the support of the
UNDP/GEF Danube Regional Project. The first
- overview data (annual average, minimum an
step of the programme was to train the expert
maximum values of a selected determinand
groups information managers and national infor-
and/or for selected monitoring point);
mation managers. At a later step these informati-
- results of analysis at monitoring points
on managers will provide support for the
(detailed data of samples and analysis at seleted
UNDP/GEF Danube Regional Project to organize
monitoring points);
and carry out a series of training programmes in
- TNMN monitoring points, determinands and
participation countries for national members of
analytical methods.
the expert groups. A detailed electronic User
- 30 -

---

10. ICPDR Information
System
Manual has been created and placed on the Infor-
mation System (Danubis)" of the UNDP/GEF
mation System.
Danube Regional Project. The more-than-50 sur-
veyed users were asked about the hardware and
Hardware and software upgrade
software set-up and their internet connection
speed. They also made suggestions for ways to
Both the website management software (Oracle
improve the Information System.
WebDB, now called Oracle Portal) and the databa-
se management software (Oracle8 Database Server)
User and access management
were upgraded in 2001. Due to the accelerated
There have been 231 registered users by the end
activities of the expert groups and the UNDP/GEF
of 2002. Five new user groups have been created
Danube Regional Project, the number of visits to
within the Information System:
the Information System dramatically increased and
the capacity of the web server proved insufficient.
- experts to UNDP/GEF Danube Regional
In order to overcome these difficulties, new hard-
Project (GFA-TERA, RODECO, RAMBOLI)
ware was purchased and installed.
- technical experts to the different expert groups;
- observers to the ICPDR;
Other activities
- members of the contracting parties
delegations to the ICPDR;
User Survey
- national and expert groups' information
A user survey was conducted within the frame of
managers.
Component 2.4 "Reinforcement of ICPDR Infor-
Number of hits by major user groups
(period: Jan. 2001 - Dec. 2002)
12000
PUBLIC
ICPDR PS
10000
APC EG
8000
ECO EG
EMIS EG
6000
MLIM EG
4000
RBM EG
Number of hits
GIS EG
2000
HOD EXT 1
0
OBSERVERS
1
7
0
1
0
02
03
04
05
06
0
08
09
1
1
12
PROJECTS
- 31 -

---

11. International and
Regional Cooperation
11.1 Progress of the UNDP/GEF Danube
and coherent implementation of the Strategic
Regional Project
Action Plan 1994 (SAP 1994), the ICPDR Joint
Action Programme and the related investment
In May 2001, the GEF Council approved Tranche 1
programs in line with the objectives of the DRPC.
for the implementation of the first phase of the
The institutional arrangements are presented the
UNDP/GEF Danube Regional Project "Strength-
following chart:
ening the Implementation
Capacities for Nutrient
Reduction and Transboun-
dary Cooperation in the
Danube River Basin",
known in short as the
Danube Regional Project.
The initial Project Brief pre-
pared in September 2000,
endorsed by all 11 request-
ing countries and cleared by
GEF Secretariat, had envisa-
ged a total budget of USD
15m for a period of five
years. However, due to fun-
ding constraints the UNDP/
GEF Danube Regional Pro-
ject was split into two parts
(phases) to be funded by two
separate tranches.
The overall objective of the Danube Regional
Phase I of the UNDP/GEF Danube Regional Project
Project is to complement the activities of the
officially began in December 2001 and will be
ICPDR required to provide a regional approach
concluded by November 2003. The Project is sea-
and global significance to the development of
ted in the Vienna International Centre, next to the
national policies and legislation and the definition
ICPDR Permanent Secretariat offices. The project
of priority actions for nutrient reduction and pol-
team has 5 staff members ­ project manager, envi-
lution control with particular attention to achie-
ronmental / public participation specialist, financi-
ving sustainable transboundary ecological effects
al & programme officer, information management
within the DRB and the Black Sea area.
expert and project secretary.
In this context, the GEF Regional Project should
support the ICPDR, its structures and the partici-
The specific objective of Phase I is to prepare and
pating countries in order to ensure an integrated
initiate basin-wide capacity-building activities. A
- 32 -

---

11. International and
Regional Cooperation
total of 20 project components are being carried
Progress from December 1, 2001 to
out thereby establishing a solid base for the imple-
December 30, 2002
mentation of Phase II of the Project.
The Project Inception Phase (Dec. 2001 ­ Feb.
The specific objective of Phase II of the Project is
2002) was completed with an inception workshop
to set up institutional and legal instruments at the
held at Hernstein, Austria, Feb. 6-8, 2002, and the
national and regional levels to assure nutrient
drafting of the Inception Report (Feb. 27, 2002).
reduction and sustainable management of water
bodies and ecological resources, involving all sta-
To specify the details for carrying out Phase I of
keholders and building up adequate monitoring
the UNDP/GEF Danube Regional Project and to
and information systems. Phase II will be imple-
serve as a guide to all relevant stakeholders, the
mented from December 2003 to November 2006.
Project Implementation Plan (PIP) was prepared
based on the provisions of the Project Document
In line with the long-term and overall goals of the
and the results of the Inception Workshop. Once
project, the following immediate objectives have
the PIP was completed, the focus of the project
been set, covering the 20 project components:
switched to finalising the Terms of Reference for
the implementation of the various project compo-
1. creation of sustainable ecological conditions for
nents which had been thoroughly discussed and
land use and water management;
agreed with the major stakeholders including the
ICPDR Expert Groups and the Secretariat.
2. capacity building and
reinforcement of transbo-
undary cooperation;
3. strengthening of public
involvement and reinforce-
ment of community actions
through the Small Grants
Programme;
4. reinforcement of moni-
toring, evaluation and
information systems to
control transboundary pol-
lution and to reduce nutri-
ents and harmful sub-
stances.
- 33 -

---

11. International and
Regional Cooperation
Direct consultations were held with the Danube
As of the end of the year 2002, most of the pro-
Environment Forum (DEF) and the Regional
ject components of Phase I are under implemen-
Environmental Center (REC) concerning their res-
tation and the remaining ones are in the process
pective parts of the project. Several missions to
of contract preparation or finalization of the
the Danube countries were undertaken to discuss
Terms of References. The following table shows
project implementation arrangements at the natio-
the status of implementation by project compo-
nal level (coordination, identification of national
nents as of 31 December 2002:
experts, cooperation with related projects etc.).
Project
Component
Status
reference
under
Inception
Contract
ToR
number
imple-
phase
underway developed
mentation
1.1-1, 1.1-5
GIS- Danube Basin District Map, Needs assessment and conceptual
design for a DRB GIS Systeem
4
1.1-3
Applying EU Economic Guidelines for economic analysis to the DRB
4
1.1-2, 1.1-6,
Stress/pressure and impact analysis, typology of surface waters and eco-
1.1-7
logical classification
4
1.1-8
Characterisation and Analysis of Transboundary Ground Water Bodies
4
1.1-9
Pilot River Basin Plan in the Sava
4
1.1-11
Workshops on public participation for RBM Plan
1.2, 1.3
Policies for the control of agricultural point and non-point sources of
4
pollution; Pilot projects on agric pollution reduction
1.4
Integrated land use assessment and inventory of protected areas
4
1.5
Industrial reform and development of policies and legislation for
reduction of nutrients and dangerous substances
4
1.6, 1.7
Assessment and development of water and waste water tariffs and
4
effluent charges designs
1.8
Recommendations for the reduction of phosphorus in detergents
4
2.1
Interministerial Coordination Mechanisms
4
2.2
Support for TNMN and EMIS Inventory harmonisation
4
2.3-2,2.3-3
Accident Risk Spots Inventory and preventive measures
4
2.3-4
Support for DBAM
4
2.4, 2.3-1
Support for Danubis reinforcement
4
2.5
Danube - Black Sea MoU / Support for JTWG
4
2.6
Training and consultation workshops
4
3.1
Institutional development of NGOs and community involvement
4
3.2
Initiating the Small Grants Programme -1st contract
4
3.3, 3.3-1
Developing a DRB Communications Strategy
4
4.1
Indicators for project monitoring and evaluation
4
4.3
Monitoring and assessment of nutrient removal capacities of riv. wet-
4
lands
4.4
Study on pollution trading and corresponding economic instruments for
4
nutrient reduction
- 34 -

---

11. International and
Regional Cooperation
11.2 The Danube - Black Sea Cooperation
the sea flows from the Black Sea into the Medi-
terranean above this counter-flowing saline layer.
Evidence of long-term changes in the
Black Sea as a whole
For these reasons, the Black Sea is very vulnerable
to pressure from land-based sources of pollution
About 340 million cubic meters of the Danube
and in particular from nutrient over-enrichment.
water pour into the Black Sea every year. Since
this represents over 50% of the total riverine
The eutrophication (or nutrient over-enrichment)
inflow into the Black Sea it makes the Danube the
of the Black Sea due to the excessive loads of
most important river emptying into the Black Sea,
nutrients coming from rivers and directly from
apart from two other large European rivers, the
the coastal countries has led to radical changes in
Dnieper and the Don. The Black Sea is the most
the ecosystem since the 1960s. This has had a
isolated from the world's ocean body; it is
major impact on the biological diversity and
connected to the oceans via the Mediterranean
human use of the sea, including fisheries and
Sea through the Bosphorus, Dardanelle and
recreation.
Gibraltar straits.
Based on the available scientific assessments and
The thin upper layer of the Black Sea water (up
findings of the Danube Water Quality Model
to 150m) supports the unique biological life in
simulation carried out in the frame of the
the marine ecosystem. The deeper and more
Danube Pollution Reduction Programme, an esti-
dense water layers are saturated with hydrogen
mated annual load of 537,000 tons of nitrogen
sulphide that has for thousands of years been
and 48,900 tons of phosphorus enter the Black
accumulating from decaying
organic matter.
Due to the unique geomor-
phologic stru-cture and speci-
fic hydrochemical conditions,
specific protozoa and bacteri-
al organisms as well as some
multi-cellular invertebrates
inhabit the deep-sea waters.
Saline water from the Medi-
terranean Sea trickles into the
Black Sea along the bottom of
the Bosporus and spreads
across the bottom of the Black
Sea. The less saline water of Composite satellite image of the Black Sea, showing high concentrations of chlorophyll.
- 35 -

---

11. International and
Regional Cooperation
Sea from the Danube alone. The composite satel-
tries have been applying with increasing vigour
lite image shows high concentrations of chloro-
the respective EU directives for pollution control
phyll in the Sea of Azov and the North West
and water quality improvement.
shelf of the Black Sea ­ the result of micro algae
Black Sea in figures:
blooms caused by eutrophication.
Drainage area:
2,000,000km2
Total shoreline:
4,340km
Nutrient loads have over the past few years been
Area of water surface:
432,000km2
Water volume:
547,000,000m3
considerably reduced due to a dramatic reduction
River inflow:
340,600,000m3
in the use of fertilisers in many middle and lower-
Maximal depth:
2,212m
Danube countries and thanks to the considerable
Salinity:
18 ­ 22
improvement in the treatment of waste water
Black Sea species:
from municipal and industrial sources in the
Fungi, algae, higher plants
1,619
upper (Germany and Austria) and central-Danube
Invertebrates
1,983
countries (Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia,
Fishes
168
Marine mammals
4
Slovakia). EU Member States and accession coun-
Danube-Black Sea Joint Technical
(since all these three elements have been alredy
Working Group
developed for the Danube Basin, these tasks have
to be carried out for the Black Sea Convention
As a basis for environmental cooperation between
area only);
the ICPDR and the Commission for the Protection
- assessment of pollution (causes) in the Black Sea
of the Black Sea, a Memorandum of Understand-
Convention area and of the ecological
ing (MoU) was signed at the ministerial meeting
status of the Black Sea;
in Brussels in November 2001. The Danube-Black
- development of reporting formats;
Sea Joint Technical Working Group (JTWG) was
- recommendations to limit discharge of nutrients
established to assure the implementation of the
and hazardous substances;
technical measures of the MoU.
- enhancement of information mechanisms.
In 2002, the JTWG developed a detailed workplan
The current deficiencies in the national monito-
for the implementation of the MoU, which can be
ring systems in the Black Sea region adversely
summarised as follows:
affect the availability of data and the overall co-
ordination and management of the monitoring
- assessment of existing monitoring systems;
activities. Environmental quality standards and
- development of a monitoring programme;
analytical methodologies are inadequate. As for
- development of ecological status indicators
the analytical quality control, many Black Sea
- 36 -

---

11. International and
Regional Cooperation
laboratories are certified at the national level only,
Black Sea ecosystems due to nutrient inputs from
while laboratories in Bulgaria and Romania are
the Danube River, were identified by the JTWG
certified at the international level.
and approved by the ICPDR.
Within the Danube Basin, the current state of the
Finally, the secretariats of the two commissions
Transnational Monitoring Network including the
agreed to draft the reporting formats for annual
load assessment programme allows sufficient
and 5-year reports. The formats will be discussed
observation and data interpretation. Indicators
at the next meeting of the JTWG due to take place
for the assessment of the environmental status of
in early 2003.
the Black Sea, indicating changes over time in the
- 37 -

---

12. Abbreviations and Acronyms
AEWS
Accident and Emergency Warning System
APC EG
Expert Group on Pollution Prevention and Control
AQC
Analytical Quality Control
BAT
Best Avaliable Techniques
DEF
Danube Environmental Forum
DRB
Danube River Basin
DRPC
Danube River Protection Convention, short for Convention on Cooperation
for the Protection and Sustainable Use of the Danube River
ECO EG
Expert Group on Ecology
ECON ESG
Expert Sub-group on Economics
EGM
EuroGlobalMap
EMIS EG
Expert Group on Emission
GIS
Expert Sub-group on Cartography and GIS
GW
Groundwater
GWP
Global Water Partnership
ICPDR
International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River
IFI
International Finance Institutions
IPPC
Integrated Pollution Prevention Control
ITR
Investigation of the Tisza River
IUCN
World Conservation Union
JDS
Joint Danube Survey
JTWG
Joint Technical Working Group
MLIM EG
Expert Group on Monitoring, Laboratory and Information Management
MONERIS
MOdelling Nutrient Emissions in RIver Systems
MoU
Memorandum of Understanding
NGO
Non-Governmental Organisations
PE
Population Equivalent
PIAC
Principle International Alert Center
PIP
Project Implementation Plan
PP
Public Participation
RBM
River Basin Management
RBM EG
Expert Group on River Basin Management
REC
Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe
TNMN
Transnational Monitoring Network
ToR
Terms of Reference
UNDP/GEF
United Nations Development Programme/Global Environment Facility
WFD
EU Water Framework Directive (Directive 2000/60/EC)
WWF
World-wide Fund for Nature
WWTP
Wastewater Treatment Plant
- 38 -

---

Annex 1: Composition of
the ICPDR in 2002
PRESIDENT: Martina MOTLOVA,
Borislav JAKSIC,
`´ ´ Ministry for Urbanism,
Permanent Delegate of the Czech Republic to the
Construction, Communal Issues and Ecology, Trg
OECD
Srpskih Junaka 4, BA-78000 Banja Luka, Bosnia
- Herzegovina
HEADS OF THE DELEGATIONS:
Germany: Fritz HOLZWARTH, Deputy Director
Serbia - Montenegro (former Yugoslavia):
General, Federal Ministry for the Environment,
Zdravko TUVIC,
´ Head of Stability Pact Group,
Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, P.O. Box
Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Kneza
120629, Bernkasteler Str. 8, DE-53048 Bonn,
Milosha 24, YU-Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro
Germany
Bulgaria: Manoela GEORGIEVA, Deputy Minister,
Austria: Wolfgang STALZER, General Director,
Ministry of Environment and Water, Bd. Maria
Federal Minister for Agriculture, Forestry,
Luisa 22, BG-1000 Sofia, Bulgaria
Environment and Water Management, Section VII,
(until 19.11.2002)
Marxergase 2, AT-1030 Vienna, Austria
Nikolai KOUYUMDZIEV, Deputy Minister,
Czech Republic: Jaroslav KINKOR, Director of the
Ministry of Environment and Water, Bd. Maria
Water Protection Department, Ministry of the
Luisa 22, BG-1000 Sofia, Bulgaria (from
Environment, Vrsovicka 65, CZ-10010 Praha 10,
19.11.2002)
Czech Republic
Romania: Florin STADIU, Secretary of State,
Slovakia: Milan MATUSKA, General Director,
Ministry of the Water and Environmental
Ministry of Environment, Namestie L'Stura 1, SK-
Protection, 12 B-dul Libertatii, Sect. 5, RO-
81235 Bratislava, Slovakia
Bucharest, Romania
Hungary: Gyula HOLLÓ, Department of European
Moldova: Gheorge DUCA, Minister, Ministry of
River Basin Management, Ministry of Transport
Ecology, Construction and Territorial Development,
and Water Management, Fö utca 44-50, POB 351,
9 Cosmonautilor St., MD-2005 Chisinau, Moldova
HU-1394 Budapest, Hungary
Ukraine: Mykola STETSENKO, Deputy Minister of
Slovenia: Mitja BRICELJ, Advisor to the
Water Resource Departement, Ministry of
Government, Ministry of Environment, Spatial
Environment and Natural Resources, Khreshchatyk
Planning and Energy, Dunajska cesta 48, SI-1000
5, UA-252601 Kiev, Ukraine (until 22.10.2002)
Ljubljana, Slovenia
Anatoli V. GRITSENKO, Cabinet of Ministers,
Croatia: Zeljk
`´ o OSTOJIC´, Senior Adviser on Water
Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources,
Protection, State Water Directorate, Ulica grada
Khreshchatyk 5, UA-252601 Kiev, Ukraine (from
Vukovara 220, HR-10 000 Zagreb, Croatia
22.10.2002)
Bosnia-Herzegovina: Mehmed CERO, General
European Community: Jean-Francois VERSTRYNGE,
Secretary, Federal Ministry of Physical Planning
Deputy Director General, DG/Environment,
and Environment, M.Tita 9a, BA-71000 Sarajevo,
European Commission, 200, rue de la Loi, BU-9
Bosnia ­ Herzogovina
01/169, BE-1049 Brussels, Belgium
- 39 -

---

Annex 1: Composition of
the ICPDR in 2002
PERMANENT SECRETARIAT:
Expert Group on Ecology (EC EG): János
BRUHÁCS (until 25.02.2002), Janus Pananius
Joachim BENDOW, Executive Secretary
University, 48-as tér 1. H-7622 Pécs, Hungary,
Gabor MAGYAR (from 25.02.2002), Ministry of
Károly FUTAKI, Information Management,
Environment and Water, Authority for Nature
Administration Officer
Conservation, Költö utca 21, HU-1121 Budapest,
Hungary
Igor LISKA
`´
, Technical Expert for Water
Management and Water Quality
Expert Group on Emissions (EMIS EG):
Bernd MEHLHORN (until 31.08.2002), Head of
Mihaela POPOVICI, Technical Expert for Water
Unit Emissions to Water, Federal Environmental
Management and Emission Pollution Control
Agency, Bismarckplatz 1, DE-14191 Berlin,
Germany
Ursula SCHMEDTJE, Technical Expert for River
Basin Management
Zdenka KELNAROVA (from 01.09.2002), Water
protection Department, Ministry of Environment,
Julia KÖLBLINGER, Support Staff, Finance &
Namestie L' Stura 1, SK-81235 Bratislava,
Relation with Host Country Services
Slovakia
Sylvia KERSCH, Support Staff, PA
Expert Group on Monitoring, Laboratory and
Information Management (MLIM EG):
Jasmine BACHMANN, Technical Support ­ Public
Liviu POPESCU, Senior Expert, ICIM Research &
Participation & Public Relation
Engineering Institute for Environment, Spl. Inde-
pendentei 294, Sect. 6, RO-77703 Bucharest,
Romania
CHAIRPERSONS OF THE EXPERT GROUPS
AND SUBGROUPS
Expert Group on Accident Prevention and
Control (APC EG): Aurel VARDUCA, Head of the
Expert Group on River Basin Management
Department, ICIM Research & Engineering
(RBM EG): Helmut BLOECH, European
Institute for Environment, Spl. Independentei nr
Commission, DG/Environment, Rue de la Loi 200,
294, Sect. 6, RO - 77703 Bucharest, Romania
BE-1049 Brussels, Belgium
Expert Group on Legal and Strategic Issues
Expert Subgroup on GIS (GIS ESG): Visnja
(S EG): Knut BEYER, Federal Ministry for the
OMERBEGOVIC,
´ Croatian Waters, Ulica grada
Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear
Vukovara 220, HR-10 000 Zagreb, Croatia
Safety, WA I 6B, Bernkasteler Straße 8, DE­
53048 Bonn, Germany
Expert Subgroup on Economics (ECON ESG):
Ibolya GAZDAG, Ministry of Transport and Water
Management, Dob ut. 75-81, HU-1077 Budapest,
Hungary
- 40 -

---

Annex 2: Observer Status
as of 31.12.2002
Name of organisation
Address
Danube Commission for
Danail Nedialkov, Director General, Benczúr utca 25,
Inland Navigation
HU-1068 Budapest - Hungary
World Wide Fund for Nature
Jonathon Hornbrook, Director, Danube Carpathian
(WWF International)
Programme, Mariahilferstr. 88a/3/9
AT-1070 Vienna ­ Austria
International Association for Danube Water
Meinhard Breiling, General Secretary
Research (IAD; in the framework of SIL)
Schiffmühlenstr. 120, AT-1220 Vienna ­ Austria
RAMSAR Convention on Wetlands
Tobias Salathe, Regional Coordinator for Europe, Rue
Mauverney 28, CH-1196 Gland ­ Switzerland
Danube Environmental Forum (DEF)
c/o Daphne, Hanulova 5/D, SK - 844 40 Bratislava
- Slovak Republic
Regional Environmental Center for
Toni Popovski, Executive Director
Central and Eastern Europe (REC)
Ady Endre ut 9-11, HU-2000 Szentendre - Hungary
International Commission for the
Plamen Dzhadzhev, Dolmabahce Sarayi II.
Protection of the Black Sea (BSC)
Harekat Kosku, TR-80680 Besiktas, Istanbul - Turkey
Global Water Partnership (GWP)
Jozsef Gayer, Global Water Partnership
VITUKI II, P.O.Box 27, HU-1453 Budapest -
Hungary
UNESCO-IHP
Pavol Miklanek, Slovak Committee for Hydrology,
Institute of Hydrology SAS, P.O.Box 94
SK - 838 11 Bratislava 38 - Slovak Republic
Philippe Pypaert, UNESCO Venice Office
Dorsoduro, 1262/A, IT - 30123 Venice ­ Italy
International Working Association of
Markus Werderitsch, c/o Wiener Wasserwerke
Water Works in the Danube Basin (IAWD)
Grabnergasse 4-6, AT-1061 Vienna ­ Austria
- 41 -

---

Annex 3: Financial Situation
REGULAR BUDGET
Contributions:
Contracting Contribution Contributions in EUR
Parties Keys1 %
Planned
Actual
Germany
14.36
114,809.02
114,809.02
Austria
14.36
114,809.02
114,809.02
Czech Republic
10.94
87,446.44
87,446.44
Slovakia
8.65
69,204.85
69,204.85
Hungary
10.94
87,446.44
87,447.00
Slovenia
10.94
87,446.44
87,331.32
Croatia
8.65
69,204.85
69,204.85
Bulgaria
5.00
39,975.54
39,975.54
Romania
8.65
69,204.85
69,204.85
Moldova
5.00
39,975.54
5,653.27
EC
2.50
19,987.77
19,987.77
Total Contribution
100.00
799,510.76
765,073.93
Expenditures1
Approved
Expenditures
Engagements
Status as of
budget
2002
31-Dec-2002
A. Administrative
EURO
EURO
EURO
EURO
costs
1. Staff
451,500
375,765
16,651
59,084
2. Services
134,750
86,199
50,594
-2,043
3. Equipment
43,500
16,937
26,510
53
4. Other
72,500
47,256
30,118
-4,874
Sub-total A
702,250
526,157
123,874
52,219
B. Operational costs
97,261
67,791
4,700
24,770
Total (A+B)
799,511
593,948
128,574
76,989
Working Capital Fund
121,494
-42,552
0
164,046
Overall totals
785,760
593,948
128,574
75,558
1 Minor differences are due to roundings
- 42 -

---