European Union Water Initiative Plus for Eastern Partnership Countries (EUWI+)

THE DANUBE, PRUT AND BLACK SEA RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN IN REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA for the second planning cycle (2022-2027)

TECHNICAL REPORT N°4: SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER MONITORING IN THE DANUBE-PRUT AND BLACK SEA RIVER BASIN DISTRICT

FINAL DRAFT

April 2020

Beneficiaries IWRM department of the MARDE (legislation and supervision), Agency “Apele Moldovei” (Planning coordination and follow up of imple- mentation), Agency for Geology and Mineral Resources (groundwater)

Produced by Environmental Agency Austria, Umweltbundesamt (UBA) GmbH (AT) Authors Surface water experts: Daniel Trauner, Peggy Macaigne, Daniela Csar, blattfisch e.U., Christian Pichler-Scheder, blattfisch e.U. Kristina Schau- fler, Umweltbundesamt GmbH (AT) & Georg Wolfram, DWS Hydro- Ökologie, Groundwater experts: Andreas Scheidleder, Franko Humer, Umweltbun- desamt GmbH (AT) Produced for: MoARDE, Environmental Agency, Agency of Geology and Mineral Re- sources, Agency “Apele Moldovei”, State Hydrometerological Service Date 29 of April 2020 Version Final Acknowledgements: Boris Iurciuc, Natalia Zgîrcu Financed by: European Union Co-financed by: Austrian Development Agency and the Artois-Picardie Water Agency (France) for the implementing Member States

Disclaimer: The EU-funded program European Union Water Initiative Plus for Eastern Partnership Countries (EUWI+ 4 EaP) is implemented by the UNECE, OECD, responsible for the implementation of Result 1 and an EU member state consortium of Austria, managed by the lead coordinator Umweltbundesamt, and of France, managed by the International Office for Water, responsible for the implementation of Result 2 and 3. This document on the “Technical Report N°4 Surface and Groundwater Monitoring in the Prut River Basin District” was produced by the EU member state consortium with the financial assistance of the European Union. The views expressed herein can in no way be taken to reflect the official opinion of the European Union or the Governments of the Eastern Partnership Countries. This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of, or sovereignty over, any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries, and to the name of any territory, city or area.

Imprint Owner and Editor: EU Member State Consortium Umweltbundesamt GmbH Office International de’l Eau (IOW) Spittelauer Lände 5 21/23 rue de Madrid 1090 Vienna, Austria 75008 Paris, FRANCE

Responsible IOW Communication officer: Yunona Videnina, [email protected]; Chloé Dechelette, [email protected]

Page | 2 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

CONTENTS

1 Surface Water Monitoring ...... 7 1.1 WFD monitoring requirements ...... 7 1.2 Current surface water monitoring situation ...... 8 1.2.1 Chemical Monitoring ...... 8 1.2.2 Biological Monitoring ...... 11 1.2.3 Hydro-morphological Monitoring ...... 12 1.3 Monitoring results ...... 13 1.3.1 Chemical Status ...... 13 1.3.2 Ecological Status ...... 13 1.3.3 Hydro-morphological Status ...... 16 1.4 Proposed surface water monitoring ...... 17 1.4.1 Measures to improve the surface water monitoring ...... 17 1.4.2 Chemical Monitoring ...... 18 1.4.3 Biological Monitoring ...... 19 1.4.4 Hydro-morphological Monitoring ...... 20 1.4.5 Monitoring Costs...... 21 1.5 References ...... 21 2 Groundwater Monitoring ...... 22 2.1 Current groundwater monitoring situation ...... 22 2.1.1 Chemical groundwater monitoring...... 23 2.1.2 Quantitative groundwater monitoring ...... 24 2.2 Monitoring results ...... 24 2.2.1 Chemical groundwater monitoring...... 24 2.2.2 Quantitative groundwater monitoring ...... 24 2.3 Proposed groundwater monitoring system ...... 25 2.3.1 Chemical groundwater monitoring...... 26 2.3.2 Quantitative groundwater monitoring ...... 27 2.4 List of references ...... 28 3 Annexes ...... 29 3.1 Annex 1. Tables ...... 29 3.2 Annex 2. Procedure for the selection of operational monitoring sites ...... 35 3.2.1 Surveillance monitoring ...... 35 3.2.2 Operational monitoring ...... 35 3.2.3 Investigative monitoring ...... 38 3.3 Annex 3: list of groundwater monitoring sites ...... 39

Page | 3 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Page | 4 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

List of Tables Table 1: Overview of current chemical monitoring in rivers of the DPBS RBD (Complete list of sites see Annex 1 Table 23)...... 8 Table 2: Overview of current chemical monitoring in lakes of the DPBS RBD (Complete list of sites see Annex 1 Table 23)...... 9 Table 3: Overview of existing biological monitoring in rivers of the DPBS RBD...... 11 Table 4: Overview of existing biological monitoring in lakes and standing waters of in the DPBS RBD...... 12 Table 5: Overview of existing hydrological monitoring in rivers of the DRBS RBD...... 13 Table 6: Overview of existing hydrological monitoring in lakes and reservoirs of the DPBS RBD...... 13 Table 7: Categories of ecological classification...... 14 Table 8: Hydro-morphological sampling sites including hydro-morphological status ...... 16 Table 9: Overview of proposed chemical monitoring in rivers of the BPBS RBD (Complete list of sites see Annex 1 Table 17, Table 19, and Table 23)...... 18 Table 10: Overview of proposed chemical monitoring in lakes of the DPBS RBD (Complete list of sites see Annex 1 Table 18, Table 20, and Table 23)...... 19 Table 11 Overview of proposed biological monitoring in rivers of in the DPBS RBD (Complete list of sites see Annex 1 Table 17 and Table 19)...... 19 Table 12: Overview of proposed biological monitoring in lakes of the DPBS RBD (Complete list of sites see Annex 1 Table 18 and Table 20)...... 20 Table 13: Number of monitoring sites per groundwater body ...... 22 Table 14: Number of monitoring sites per groundwater body and proposed expansion of the network25 Table 15: Estimated Investment costs for the improvement of groundwater monitoring ...... 26 Table 16: Summary of chemical parameters and frequency proposed for GW quality monitoring...... 27 Table 17: Current and proposed Surveillance Monitoring sites in rivers of the DPBS RBD...... 29 Table 18: Current and proposed Surveillance Monitoring sites in lakes and standing waters of the DPBS RBD...... 30 Table 19: Current and proposed Operational Monitoring sites in rivers of the DPBS RBD...... 30 Table 20: Current and proposed Operational Monitoring sites in lakes and reservoirs of the DPBS RBD...... 30 Table 21: Current and proposed hydrological monitoring sites in rivers and reservoirs of the DPBS RBD...... 31 Table 22: Survey sites during the EUWI+ project ...... 31 Table 23: Overview of parameters in the chemical monitoring in the DPBS RBD...... 32 Table 24: Future capacities of the Laboratories for measuring the priority substances that are listed by the EU WFD and associated directives for surface water monitoring after re-accreditation. .. 32

List of Figures Figure 1: Surface water monitoring sites within the DPBS RBD (surveillance, operational and hydrologi- cal monitoring; cf list of sites in Annex 1 Table 17 – Table 21)...... 10 Figure 2: Ecological classification of SWB in the DRBS RBD...... 15 Figure 3: Relative proportion of ecological status classes of SWB in the DRBS RBD...... 16 Figure 4: Groundwater monitoring network in the DPBSB ...... 23

Page | 5 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Abbreviations ADA ...... Austrian Development Agency BMA ...... Basin Management Area EaP ...... Eastern Partnership EC ...... European Commission EPIRB ...... Environmental Protection of International River Basins ESCS ...... Ecological Status Classification System EU ...... European Union EU-MS ...... EU-Member States EUWI+ ...... European Union Water Initiative Plus IOWater/OIEau .... International Office for Water, France OECD ...... Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development RBD ...... River Basin District RBMP ...... River Basin Management Plan RBO ...... River Basin Organisation UBA ...... Umweltbundesamt GmbH, Environment Agency Austria UNECE ...... United Nations Economic Commission for Europe WISE ...... Water Information System for Europe WFD ...... Water Framework Directive

Country Specific Abbreviations Moldova AGRM ...... Agency for Geology and Mineral Resources DPBS RBD ...... Danube-Prut and Black Sea River Basin District EHGeoM ...... State Enterprise Hydrogeological Expedition of Moldova SHS ...... State Hydrometeorological Service

Page | 6 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

1 SURFACE WATER MONITORING

This chapter describes the current Surface Water (SW) monitoring situation of the Republic of Moldova in the Danube-Prut and Black Sea (DPBS) river basin district (RBD), gives an overview on existing monitoring results, and makes recommendations to improve future SW monitoring. Monitoring results, the measurements of the surveillance and/or operational monitoring are used to define the status of water bodies while results are compared to the respective environmental objectives set. For surface water bodies, monitoring should include measurements of chemical, biological, physico-chemical and hydro-morphological parameters. Historically, Moldovan SW quality monitoring started in the 1960s and was developed until the 1980s, with a focus on the transboundary rivers Nistru and Prut. The main objective of the monitoring pro- gramme is to provide information on the water quality of surface waters, identify cases of exceptional pollution and its sources, and to notify the local and central authorities authorised to take mitigation and restoration measures. Article 13 of the Moldovan Water Law states that systematic monitoring and recording of surface water status will be carried out by the central body in the field of environmental protection. Until 2018, the State Hydrometeorological Service used to be the responsible institution for hydrobiological, hydrochemical and hydrological monitoring of surface waters. Since January 2019, the laboratories responsible for environmental monitoring have been transferred to the newly created Environmental Agency. In this reorganizational process, the on-going monitoring system has almost been put on hold. Following the tradition of the water quality monitoring in Moldova, the description of the general physico- chemical parameters is included in the sub-sections on chemical monitoring in spite of the fact that they are supporting elements in the ecological classification.

1.1 WFD monitoring requirements

Article 8 of the WFD establishes monitoring programmes for the monitoring of surface water status. The monitoring network shall be designed as to provide a coherent and comprehensive overview of ecolog- ical and chemical status within each river basin and shall permit the classification of surface waterbodies according to Annex V WFD. Good ecological and chemical status has to be ensured and achieved for all surface water bodies. For those identified as heavily modified or artificial, good ecological potential and chemical status has to be achieved and ensured. Monitoring results according to the WFD serve the validation of the pressure analysis and an overview of the impacts on water status is required in order to initiate measures. Surveillance, operational and investigative monitoring programmes shall be established. They are to be supplemented by monitoring programmes required for Protected Areas registered under Article 6 WFD. Surveillance monitoring shall provide information for: - supplementing and validating the impact assessment - the design of future monitoring programmes - the assessment of long-term changes in natural conditions and long-term changes resulting from widespread anthropogenic activity Operational monitoring shall be undertaken in order to: - establish the status of those waterbodies identified as being at risk of failing to meet their envi- ronmental objectives - assess any changes in the status of such bodies resulting from the programmes of measures

Page | 7 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Investigative monitoring shall be carried out: - where the reason for any exceedances is unknown - where surveillance monitoring indicates that the objectives are not likely to be achieved and operational monitoring has not already been established - to ascertain the magnitude and impacts of accidental pollution.

The extent of the monitoring programmes depends on the numbers of water bodies delineated, the extent of, and variability in, impacts on the water environment and the degree to which the characteristics of, and range of pressures on, water bodies allow them to be grouped.

1.2 Current surface water monitoring situation

The previous and current SW monitoring systems of Moldova have always had a clear focus on water quality, while other pressures such as hydro-morphological alterations have been considered only to a minor extent. However, long-term hydrological monitoring data are available for rivers. Currently Mol- dova is working on establishing a WFD-compliant monitoring network.

1.2.1 Chemical Monitoring

Rivers According to the requirements of the WFD, the water quality monitoring in Moldova is divided into sur- veillance, operational and investigative monitoring (Figure 1). Until 2013, the monitoring of physico-chemical surface water quality in the DPBS RBD was carried out at 22 monitoring sites. In 2014 a new monitoring programme, which implemented key elements of the WFD, was started for the DPBS RBD. It included 52 monitoring stations on rivers: 9 sites on the Prut River and 43 sites on tributaries of the Prut River or on internal surface waters of the DPBS RBD. Based on results from the chemical monitoring 2015–20191, data are available from 23 sites. A former moni- toring report from 2015 lists data from 49 sites2. Currently chemical SW monitoring programme for rivers includes 30 surveillance and 12 operational sites (Figure 1, Table 1, Annex 1 Table 17 and Table 19). Parameters The monitoring program includes 25 general physico-chemical (e.g. oxygen, nutrient) and 11 chemical parameters (e.g. heavy metals, polyaromatic hydrocarbons) (Table 23). A former monitoring report from 2015 includes also data for a large number of priority pollutants2. Table 1: Overview of current chemical monitoring in rivers of the DPBS RBD (see Annex 1 Table 17, Table 19).

No. of sites Quality element / group of Frequency Surveillance Operational Investigative Monitoring (IV) parameters Monitoring Monitoring (SM) (OM) General physico-chemical 4x / year 30 12 – parameters

1 Source: Calitatea apei în bazinele şi sub-bazinele hidrografice pe teritoriul Republicii Moldova conform elementelor hidrobiologice pe parcursul anilor 2015–2018, and Excel table with chemical classification 2 Source: http://old.meteo.md/newen/monitoren.htm; http://old.meteo.md/monitor/anuare/2015/anuarapei_2015.pdf

Page | 8 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

No. of sites Quality element / group of Frequency Surveillance Operational Investigative Monitoring (IV) parameters Monitoring Monitoring (SM) (OM) Priority poll. (selected heavy 4x(SM) or 30 12 – metals) 12x(OM) / year Other pollutants (partly) 4x(SM) or 30 12 – 12x(OM) / year

Lakes Like for the rivers, the water quality monitoring in Moldova is divided into surveillance, operational and investigative monitoring (Figure 1). The monitoring of surface water quality in the DPBS RBD included 6 stations located at 4 artificial lakes and 2 natural lakes. During recent years, 4 sites were included in the regular monitoring programme. A former monitoring report from 20153 lists data from 5 sites. The current chemical SW monitoring pro- gramme for lakes and reservoirs includes 10 surveillance and 3 operational sites (Figure 1, Table 2, Annex 1 Table 18 Table 20). In terms of Parameters, the monitoring of lakes and standing waters is the same as for rivers. Table 2: Overview of current chemical monitoring in lakes of the DPBS RBD ( see Annex 1 Table 18, Table 20Table 23).

No. of sites Quality element / group of Frequency Data Surveillance Operational Investigative parameters available Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring (IV) (SM) (OM) General physico-chemical 4x / year 4–5 10 3 – parameters Priority poll. (selected heavy 4x(SM) or 4–5 10 3 – metals) 12x(OM) / year Other pollutants (partly) 4x(SM) or 4–5 10 3 – 12x(OM) / year

3 Source: http://old.meteo.md/newen/monitoren.htm; http://old.meteo.md/monitor/anuare/2015/anuarapei_2015.pdf

Page | 9 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Figure 1: Surface water monitoring sites within the DPBS RBD (surveillance, operational and hydrological monitoring; cf list of sites in Annex 1 Table 17 – Table 21Erreur ! Source du renvoi introuvable.).

Page | 10 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

1.2.2 Biological Monitoring

Rivers In the recent years, most sites of the chemical monitoring were also included in the biological monitoring. A distinction between surveillance and operational monitoring was agreed in 2014 and 68 monitoring sites (56 - surveillance and 12 - operational) were defined. The current biological SW monitoring pro- gramme for rivers is the same as chemical monitoring and includes 30 surveillance and 12 operational sites (Figure 1, Table 1, Annex 1 Table 17 and Table 19) Parameters Monitoring includes analyses of phytobenthos, macrozoobenthos, phytoplankton and (though not re- quired under the WFD) zooplankton, bacterioplankton, and chlorophyll a. For none of these biological quality elements a WFD compliant classification method is available, which fulfils the requirements of the CIS Guidance Documents for Intercalibration. The status assessment is based on existing bounda- ries for different biological quality elements, following the one-out-all-out principle. Table 3: Overview of existing biological monitoring in rivers of the DPBS RBD (see Annex 1 Table 17, Table 19Table 23).

No. of sites Quality element / group Frequency Surveillance Operational Investigative of parameters Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring (SM) (OM) (IV) Phytoplankton 1x(SM) or 2x(OM) / year, annually 30 12 – Zooplankton special cases 30 12 – Phytobenthos 1x(SM) or 2x(OM) / year, annually 30 12 – Benthic invertebrates 1x(SM) or 2x(OM) / year, annually 30 12 – Bacterioplankton 1x(SM) or 3x(OM) / year, annually 30 12 – Chlorophyll a 2x(SM) or 3x(OM) / year, annually 30 12 –

Lakes The monitoring approach and programme is similar to the one applied in river, additionally including macrophytes. No WFD compliant classification method, which fulfils the requirements of the CIS Guid- ance Documents for Intercalibration, is available. The status assessment is based on existing bounda- ries for different quality elements4. The current biological SW monitoring programme for lakes and res- ervoirs is the same as chemical monitoring and includes 10 surveillance and 3 operational sites (Figure 1, Table 2, Annex 1 Table 18 Table 20). The sites included in the surveys of the last years were the same as for the chemical monitoring (see above).

4 Source : http://www.justice.gov.md/file/Centrul%20de%20armonizare%20a%20legislatiei/Baza%20de%20date/Materiale% 202013/Acte/PNAL/HG_890_din_12.11.13.pdf

Page | 11 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Table 4: Overview of existing biological monitoring in lakes and standing waters of in the DPBS RBD (see Annex 1 Table 18, Table 20Table 23).

No. of sites Quality element / group Frequency Surveillance Operational Investigative of parameters Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring (SM) (SM) (IV) Phytoplankton 2x(SM) or 3x(OM) / year, annually 10 3 – Phytobenthos 2x / year, annually 10 3 – Benthic invertebrates 1x(SM) or 2x(OM) / year, annually 10 3 – Macrophytes 1x / year, annually 10 3 – Bacterioplankton 1x(SM) or 3x(OM) / year, annually 10 3 – Chlorophyll a 2x(SM) or 3x(OM) / year, annually 10 3 –

1.2.3 Hydro-morphological Monitoring

Rivers Until recently, hydro-morphological monitoring was restricted to hydrological parameters and did not include morphological aspects. The current hydrological monitoring network (quantitative) within the DPBS RBD comprises 17 surface water quantity monitoring sites in rivers (Table 5, Annex1 Table 21). Morphological parameters started to be monitored during the EPIRB and EUWI+ projects (2013-2020). Based on a training on hydro-morphological description and classification, a hydro-morphological survey was carried out in the DPBS RBD in 2019. As part of the EUWI+ sampling campaign, the Cogilnic River Basin was selected as a pilot basin. Historical maps dating back to the middle of the 19th century were studied in order to define reference conditions for some hydro-morphological parameters. Then, satellite images were used select 30 sampling sites from 15 rivers and streams, 26 of these sites were used for hydro-morphological monitoring and 4 for water quality monitoring. In a second step these sites were assessed in the field. Parameters The hydrological data have been used for general description of quantity (water level, discharge), but not for classification; thus, information on impoundments, water abstraction etc. are not covered by the monitoring. During the EUWI+ hydro-morphological survey the following parameters were used to characterize the sites: - Catchment area - Distance to source - Mean river slope at site - Morphology of cross section, banks, channel form, river valley - Transversal barriers - Land cover/use in riparian zone/floodplain - Geology, soil types, Topography - Mean annual discharge

Page | 12 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Table 5: Overview of existing hydrological monitoring in rivers of the DRBS RBD (see Annex 1 Table 21).

Quality element / group of parameters frequency no. of sites Hydrology: Water level daily 17 Hydrology: Discharge daily 17

Lakes There are three hydrological stations on the transboundary Costești-Stinca water reservoir. Quantitative hydrological data are measured by by State Hydrometerological Service (SHS) and National Agency” Apele Romane” (ANAR). Morphological aspects are covered in neither of the standing waters. Parameters The hydrological data set focusses on the water level, while morphological aspects have not been re- garded so far. Table 6: Overview of existing hydrological monitoring in lakes and reservoirs of the DPBS RBD (see Annex 1 Table 21).

Quality element / group of parameters Frequency no. of sites Hydrology: Water level daily 3

1.3 Monitoring results

1.3.1 Chemical Status

The quality and chemical status of SWB was assessed on the basis of the monitoring results from 2013– 2017 as well as from the annual surveys in the Prut river basin carried out during the EPIRB project. Based on physico-chemical parameters and specific substances, water quality of the Prut River is affected throughout the entire course of the river, including the Costeşti-Stânca reservoir (“moderately polluted”). Most Prut tributaries are moderately to highly polluted, mainly due to organic pollution and oxygen deficits. Organochlorine pesticides were not detected in the water of the sub basin rivers, with few exceptions (Prut/Branişte village: Endrin, p-DDD, p-DDE, Galmajei Valley/Zirnesti village: p-DDT, p-DDD, p-DDE). Among polyaromatic hydrocarbons, Anthracene, Fluoranthene, Naphthalene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Benz(b)fluoranthene and Benz(k)fluoranthene were detected. Increased heavy metal concentrations (e.g. cadmium, mercury) were found in the Prut River at several stations as well as in the Varsava River. As a result of the chemical data, the following monitoring sites are considered at being at risk of failing to meet the environmental objectives under Directive 2013/39/EU: Prut Lipcani , Branişte village, Valea Mare village, Leova village, Giurgiulesti village); Draghişte, Feteşti village; the Galmajei Valley, Zărneşti village; as well as the Costesti-Stânca reservoir.

1.3.2 Ecological Status

Rivers As outlined above, there is no official WFD compliant ecological status classification system (ESCS) available up to now. However, the ecological status of a selected number of SWB can be assessed

Page | 13 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

based on a new proposal for a WFD compliant ESCS for invertebrates in rivers. The confidence of the determined ecological status depends on the available data across the RBD. In order to give an overview of the confidence of the ecological status of river SWB in Moldova four categories were defined and are listen in Table 7: Table 7: Categories of ecological classification

Category Classification Confidence A Based on biological data using the proposal for a new WFD compliant ESCS High B Based on pressure data Medium C Based on risk analysis Low D Currently no classification possible –

Unless additional information was available, the following classification was done based on the risk assessment (with low confidence): - SWB not at risk  “High – Good” - SWB possibly at risk  “Good – Moderate” - SWB at risk  “Moderate – Bad” For the classification of rivers based on the existing biological assessment approach, only the status classes based on macroinvertebrates, phytobenthos and phytoplankton were considered, while zoo- plankton and bacterioplankton was not considered. Classifications based on general physico-chemical parameters following the existing boundaries ac- cording to the Governmental Decision nr.890/2013 are assigned to category B, since the values have not yet been evaluated with biological data. Annex 1 lists all SWB classified along these four categories. Figure 2 shows a map with the classification results. The results are summarised in Figure 3.

Page | 14 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Figure 2: Ecological classification of SWB in the DRBS RBD

Page | 15 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Figure 3: Relative proportion of ecological status classes of SWB in the DRBS RBD

Lakes As outlined above, there is no official WFD compliant ecological status classification system (ESCS) available up to now. Based on the existing biological assessment method, three lakes in Moldova are classified with moderate and one with poor status. Figure 2 shows a map with the classification results. The results are summarised in Figure 3. 1.3.3 Hydro-morphological Status

The hydro-morphological status of the sampling sites (with 5 point system in accordance with the re- quirements of the WFD), are based on the assessment of parameters mentioned in chapter 1.2.3. For the hydro-morphological status, see Table 8 below with the first survey results Table 8: Hydro-morphological sampling sites including hydro-morphological status

Survey unit HYMO No Basin River SWB Code Status Latitude Longitude

11 Cogâlnic Albina Cogâlnic_3 2 46,686230 28,686090

19 Cogâlnic Casim Cogâlnic_5 1,8 46,474470 28,914110

24 Cogâlnic Ceaga Ceaga_2 2,7 46,526130 29,149700 25 Cogâlnic Ceaga Ceaga_1 2,1 46,656110 28,977640

1 Cogâlnic Cogâlnic Cogâlnic_1 1,7 47,101590 28,286210

2 Cogâlnic Cogâlnic Cogâlnic_1 1,95 47,079720 28,326810

3 Cogâlnic Cogâlnic Cogâlnic_2 3,1 47,017810 28,414050

4 Cogâlnic Cogâlnic Cogâlnic_2 3 46,903170 28,538120

5 Cogâlnic Cogâlnic Cogânic_2 3,2 46,832220 28,596580

10 Cogâlnic Cogâlnic Cogâlnic_3 3,1 46,754730 28,653820

13 Cogâlnic Cogâlnic Cogâlnic_4 2,3 46,585460 28,762000

16 Cogâlnic Cogâlnic Cogâlnic_4 2,6 46,537740 28,784240

17 Cogâlnic Cogâlnic Cogâlnic_5 2,5 46,444510 28,870660

Page | 16 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Survey unit HYMO No Basin River SWB Code Status Latitude Longitude

18 Cogâlnic Cogâlnic Cogâlnic_5 3,4 46,319020 28,979680

15 Cogâlnic Coștangalia Cogâlnic_4 2,4 46,620690 28,801420

22 Cogâlnic Curugica Schinoasa_2 2,3 46,462070 28,989070

7 Cogâlnic Galbena Cogâlnic_3 2,3 46,868060 28,640490

8 Cogâlnic Galbena Cogâlnic_3 2,2 46,779590 28,682970

9 Cogâlnic Galbena Cogâlnic_3 2,4 46,695040 28,693510

14 Cogâlnic Gradiște Cogâlnic_3 1,95 46,651050 28,760950

6 Cogâlnic Hâncești Cogâlnic_2 2,7 46,850510 28,549660

12 Cogâlnic Hârtop Cogâlnic_3 2,4 46,642100 28,713100

28 Cogâlnic Husainu Ceaga_3 1,5 46,540600 29,354620

29 Cogâlnic Husainu Ceaga_3 2,7 46,443660 29,278740

26 Cogâlnic Lunga Ceaga_3 1,3 46,420200 29,250280

23 Cogâlnic Saca Schinoasa_2 3,5 46,517120 29,037560

20 Cogâlnic Schinoasa Schinoasa_2 2,2 46,468610 28,959600

21 Cogâlnic Schinoasa Schinoasa_2 2,4 46,551590 28,927740 27 Cogâlnic Tocuz Ceaga_3 1,97 46,412780 29,277220 30 Cogâlnic Tocuz Ceaga_3 2,9 46,488830 29,268470

1.4 Proposed surface water monitoring

1.4.1 Measures to improve the surface water monitoring

During recent years within the EUWI+ project, a significant improvement could be achieved through training and procurement of equipment, which is required for chemical, biological, and hydromorpholog- ical monitoring. Based on the review, analysis and assessment of the existing surface water monitoring system and the requirements of the WFD, the following steps are needed to further develop and improve the monitoring system in Moldova – some will be implemented within the next years, while others should to be realized in the future: - Enhancement of WFD compliant monitoring programmes (surveillance, operational, and investigative monitoring) to assess the chemical and ecological status of surface waters - Implementation of the requirements of the ISO EN 17025 - New equipment and training for continuous maintenance of equipment - Internal and external training of staff, following an agreed training plan - Collection of chemical and biological data in a central database - Survey of further biological quality elements (BQE) in addition to macro-invertebrates and diatoms, with the goal to create a basis for the development of WFD compliant ESCS for all BQE - Expansion of the hydro-morphological survey on other sub-basins of the DPBS RBD

Page | 17 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

- Performing an intercalibration exercise for biological, chemical and hydro-morphologi- cal parameters and an evaluation of existing ESCS by performing a joint survey at transboundary rivers for (Ukraine, Romania) - Implementation and evaluation of the measures for improvement as specified in the survey reports of EUWI+

1.4.2 Chemical Monitoring

Rivers The surveillance and operational monitoring sites will remain the same as in the current programme (Figure 1). However, it is recommended to revise and possibly adjust number of sites. Additionally, investigative sites will be implemented if the need arises. Each surveillance site will be sampled (all parameters) once per RBMP cycle with a frequency of 12 times (once per month) over one year. Each operational site will be sampled (all parameters) twice per RBMP cycle with a frequency of 12 times (once per month) over one year (Table 9). Parameters Currently, most general physico-chemical parameters relevant under the EU WFD are monitored in the Republic of Moldova. It is however suggested to include also dissolved organic carbon (DOC), which can reflect organic pollution and oxygenation conditions. In the future, it is recommended to test for parameters that are required to be monitored by the Water Framework Directive (general and priorities substances), but that are currently not included in the pro- gramme. These includes pesticides, dioxins, alkylphenols, organotin compounds, phthalates, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) (for more details seeTable 24). Considering the importance of the agricultural sector in the country, it is recommended to include the monitoring of pesticides in surface water. Table 9: Overview of proposed chemical monitoring in rivers of the BPBS RBD (see Annex 1 Table 17, Table 19, and Table 23).

Quality element/ group of Surveillance sites, once per Operational sites, twice per Frequency parameters RBMP cycle RBMP cycle

General physico-chemical 12x / year 30 12 parameters

Priority pollutants 12x / year 30 12

Rivers

Other pollutants 12x / year 30 12

Lakes The surveillance and operational monitoring sites will remain the same as in the current programme (Figure 1). However, it is recommended to revise and possibly adjust number of sites. Additionally, investigative sites will be implemented if the need arises. Each surveillance site will be sampled (all parameters) once per RBMP cycle with a frequency of 12 times (once per month) over one year. Each operational site will be sampled (all parameters) twice per RBMP cycle with a frequency of 12 times (once per month) over one year (Table 10). Parameters

Page | 18 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Parameters for surveillance sites should be the same as for rivers. Operational monitoring sites and specific pollutants should be selected according to the pressure and risk analysis. General physico- chemical parameters will be sampled in four different depth layers. Table 10: Overview of proposed chemical monitoring in lakes of the DPBS RBD (see Annex 1 Table 18, Table 20, and Table 23).

Quality element / group of Surveillance sites, Operational sites, Frequency parameters once per RBMP cycle twice per RBMP cycle

General physico-chemical 12x / year 10 3 parameters

Priority pollutants 12x / year 10 3

Lakes

Other pollutants 12x / year 10 3

1.4.3 Biological Monitoring

Rivers Surveillance and operational monitoring sites shall be the same as for the chemical monitoring (Figure 1). Each surveillance site will be sampled (all BQE) once per RBMP cycle, while each operational site will be sampled (all BQE) twice per RBMP cycle (Table 11). Parameters While currently, several biological quality elements (BQE) are monitored in all sites included in the mon- itoring program, it is proposed to restrict the limited resources to those elements required under the EU WFD: phytoplankton, phytobenthos and macrozoobenthos, but not bacteria and zooplankton. Macro- phytes and fish should be included in the next RBMP cycle. In the operational monitoring, it is recommended to focus on those BQE, which are most sensitive to the dominant pressure – in case of significant point sources of organic pollution, or hydro-morphological alterations this is macrozoobenthos. In case of diffuse pollution, phytobenthos should be monitored in small rivers, but phytoplankton in medium to large rivers. In all cases, the development of WFD compli- ant classification system is required. Table 11 Overview of proposed biological monitoring in rivers of in the DPBS RBD (see Annex 1 Table 17 and Table 19).

Surveillance sites, Operational sites, Quality element Frequency once per RBMP cycle twice per RBMP cycle

Benthic invertebrates 1x / year 30 12

Rivers Phytobenthos / 1x / year 30 12 Phytoplankton

Lakes Surveillance and operational monitoring sites shall be the same as for the chemical monitoring (Figure 1). At each surveillance site, phytoplankton will be sampled once per RBMP cycle with a frequency of 6 times (once every two months) over one year. At each operational site, phytoplankton will be sampled twice per RBMP cycle with a frequency of 6 times (once every two months) over one year (Table 12).

Page | 19 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Parameters While currently, several biological quality elements (BQE) are monitored at all sites included in the mon- itoring program, it is proposed to restrict the limited resources to those elements required under the EU WFD and most relevant for standing waters: phytoplankton and phytobenthos (indicator of eutrophica- tion) and macrozoobenthos (indicator of organic pollution and hydro-morphological alterations), but skip bacteria and zooplankton. Macrophytes and fish should be included in the next RBMP cycle II. The operational monitoring is recommended to focus on phytoplankton, as eutrophication is considered the key pressure for standing waters in Moldova. Table 12: Overview of proposed biological monitoring in lakes of the DPBS RBD (see Annex 1 Table 18 and Table 20).

Surveillance sites, Operational sites, Quality element Frequency once per RBMP cycle twice per RBMP cycle

Lakes Phytoplankton 6x / year 10 3

1.4.4 Hydro-morphological Monitoring

Rivers While previous hydro-morphological descriptions were carried out at single sites, the new monitoring shall cover the whole river network. Based on a training on hydro-morphological description and classi- fication, a hydro-morphological survey was carried out in a sub-basin of the DPBS RBD in 2019. This sampling campaign was the starting point of hydro-morphological mapping in the whole Alazani-Iori river basin. During the next RBMP cycle, increasing the dataset through additional surveys is beneficial, to get a more exact picture of the hydro-morphological situation and cover the whole RBD. Therefore, new and un-investigated sites have to be chosen, pre-classified based on historical maps and satellite im- ages, and verified/assessed in the field. The existing hydrological monitoring sites will be continued like in previous years (see Figure 1, Annex 1 Table 21). Parameters According to the new training on hydro-morphological description and classification system carried out during the EPIRB and EUWI+ project, all parameters relevant for a WFD compliant assessment shall be covered, viz. the hydrological regime (including the quantity and dynamics of water flow and the connection to groundwater bodies), the river continuity, and the morphological conditions (including river depth and width variation, structure and substrate of the river bed, and structure of the riparian zone).

Lakes The hydrological monitoring at the Costești-Stânca Reservoir will be continued and concentrate on water level like in previous years (see Figure 1, Annex 1 Table 21). In addition, it is suggested to measure water levels at the other lakes included in the list of surveillance monitoring sites. A morphological survey of the littoral zone is planned for the next RBMP. Hydrological monitoring sites, hydrological parameters and responsibilities remain like in the current monitoring.

Page | 20 Overview of surface water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

1.4.5 Monitoring Costs

Following estimations represent the costs of the whole six years of an RBMP cycle. As mentioned in Table 9, Table 10, Table 11, and Table 12, the 40 surveillance sites will be investigated once per cycle (chemical monitoring 12x / year; biological monitoring in rivers 1x / year, and lakes 6x / year), and the 15 operational monitoring sites will be sampled twice over the six year period (same annual frequency). Taking into account the survey costs of 2018 and 2019 in the EUWI+ project an approximate cost esti- mation of the surface water monitoring in the DPBS RBD can be calculated. Considering sampling and analyses of general physico-chemical parameters and all BQE (benthic invertebrates, phytobenthos, phytoplankton) for the proposed surveillance and operational monitoring sites will cost around 104,000 € in this RBMP cycle. The estimation for the monitoring of priority pollutants has lower confidence, as the costs were calculated based on a fraction of costs per parameter in Austrian surface water monitoring. An- other assumption was that the number of analyzed parameters is 15. Nevertheless, the rough cost estimate is for priority pollutants is around 245,000 € to 265,000 €. The true costs will vary, depending on the number and kind of analyzed parameters.

1.5 References

 Buijs, P. & Paukstys, B. (2013): Towards the introduction of WFD-compliant monitoring and assessment of water bodies. Monitoring Strategy Moldova. Environmental Protection of Inter- national River Basins (EPIRB).  Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy Reports and Web-Links

 Calitatea apei în bazinele şi sub-bazinele hidrografice pe teritoriul Republicii Moldova conform elementelor hidrobiologice pe parcursul anilor 2015–2018, and Excel table with chemical clas- sification  http://old.meteo.md/newen/monitoren.htm; http://old.meteo.md/monitor/anuare/2015/anuara- pei_2015.pdf  http://www.justice.gov.md/file/Centrul%20de%20armonizare%20a%20legislat- iei/Baza%20de%20date/Materiale%202013/Acte/PNAL/HG_890_din_12.11.13.pdf

Page | 21 Overview of groundwater water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

2 GROUNDWATER MONITORING

2.1 Current groundwater monitoring situation

The legal basis of the groundwater monitoring network is the government decision nr 932 from 20.11.2013, which specifies various elements that are fully in line with the requirements of the Water Framework Directive. The Agency for Geology and Mineral Resources (AGRM), which is subordinated to the Ministry of Agriculture, Territory Development and Environment, manages routine national ground- water quantity and quality monitoring and the Moldavian Hydrogeological Expedition (EHGeoM) is in charge of the monitoring and sampling. The general terms of reference (ToR) for groundwater monitoring are elaborated in the form of a 5-year monitoring program. The number of samples and the monitoring frequency are not specified in the ToR. The sampling plan for quality groundwater monitoring is elaborated by the responsible staff of EHGeoM in coordination with AGRM depending on the available budget for the analysis of groundwater samples. The groundwater monitoring activities are very much driven by the available annual budget and it is not guaranteed that a certain set of monitoring sites is regularly monitored. Results of groundwater monitor- ing are presented to AGRM annually and within a 5-year report. This report provides analysis of quantity and chemical status of the groundwater for existing aquifers. Under the Soviet time, the monitoring network included nearly 760 wells (consisting mainly of water supply points). About 45 % of these sites were situated in the Danube–Prut–Black–Sea–basin (DPBSRB). The existing groundwater monitoring network in the DPBSRB currently consists of only 63 monitoring wells (Table 13), most of them are used for monitoring purposes only. They are installed in unconfined and artesian aquifers and used for routine observations of quantity and quality (Figure 4). All of them are in operational conditions or need small maintenance. Springs and shallow wells are not included in this network. The review of the existing groundwater bodies (GWB) in 2018 led to a revision and inclusion of new GWBs. In the DPBSRB there are now eleven GWBs identified and three shallow GWBs (MDDBSGWQ220, MDPRTGWQ230 and MDPRTGWQ510) are lacking a monitoring network. Table 13: Number of monitoring sites per groundwater body

Number of monitoring wells GWB code River sub-basin Total Quantity Quality MDDBSGWQ120 Danube–Black–Sea 9 9 3 MDPRTGWQ130 Prut 10 10 7 MDDBSGWQ220 Danube–Black–Sea 0 0 0 MDPRTGWQ230 Prut 0 0 0 MDDPBGWD310 Danube–Prut–Black–Sea 7 7 4 MDDPBGWD420 Danube–Prut–Black–Sea 5 5 2 MDPRTGWQ510 Prut 0 0 0 MDDPBGWD620 Danube–Prut–Black–Sea 7 7 2 MDDPBGWD730 Danube–Prut–Black–Sea 10 10 0 MDPRTGWD740 Prut 6 6 3 MDPRTGWD820 Prut 9 9 8 TOTAL 63 63 29

Page | 22 Overview of groundwater water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Figure 4: Groundwater monitoring network in the DPBSB

2.1.1 Chemical groundwater monitoring

The monitoring frequency is depending on the available annual budget for the analysis of groundwater samples, which varies from year to year. Due to budgetary limitations, the real groundwater chemical monitoring is much less than required. The minimum frequency for the groundwater chemical monitoring of major ions is recommended twice per year [1, 3]. In fact the frequency of groundwater quality moni- toring is irregular and not sufficient; it varies from one to seven times per site for the period 2010–2014 and similarly for the period of 2005–2010. The coverage of 106 chemical analyses for 53 points over a period of 5 years is by far not sufficient to meet the requirements. Furthermore, only 23 of the 53 moni- toring wells (nearly 43 %) were sampled in that period. The other samples were taken from water supply points (other wells) and springs which are not included in the monitoring network. The groundwater quality monitoring at important water supply points is done one to two times per year. When water quality corresponds to normative values the water quality is analyzed once per year. When groundwater quality exceeds normative values for chemical composition the water quality is analyzed twice per year or more often, depending on the measures taken. The principal parameters, which were analyzed in the last monitoring period (2010–2014) are: pH, Dry residue, (Na+K, calculated), Ca, Mg, Fe, NH4, SO4, HCO3, Cl, NO3, CO3. The “micro-components” Be, Mn, Cu, Mo, As, Pb, Se, Zn, F, Al, PO4. Several microelements and organic substances, which are included in normative documents, were not analyzed.

Page | 23 Overview of groundwater water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

2.1.2 Quantitative groundwater monitoring

All 63 groundwater wells are subject to quantitative monitoring. Local observers employed by EHGeoM measure water levels by manual level gauge and send paper data on a monthly basis. The groundwater level is monitored every day in the flooding period and every week in the period of stable groundwater levels.

2.2 Monitoring results

2.2.1 Chemical groundwater monitoring

The chemical status of the 8 groundwater bodies which are subject to monitoring is good, according to the last monitoring reports for 2010–2015. Exceedances of quality standards of chemical parameters are in most cases caused by natural factors (lithology, geological structure etc.). A groundwater survey of 2018 sampled 23 monitoring wells within these 8 GWBs and analysed a com- prehensive set of substances and indicators including pesticide and PAHs. Except for groundwater body MDPRTGWQ130 where higher nitrate values had been detected, all other elevated concentrations of major ions are caused by natural reasons. The analysis of pesticides showed that in none of the 8 GWBs POPs and triazines have been detected. The pesticides λ-Cyhalothrin, Esfenvalerate, τ-Fluvalinate, Tri- fluralin, Dimethoate, Malathion, Chlorpyrifos, Triadimenol, Endosulfan, Propiconazole, Fenoxycarb, Tetradifon, Phosalon, Pyridaben and Difenoconazol have been detected in some monitoring wells in very low concentrations only. Quality standard have not been exceeded. Relatively high concentrations of PAH substances have been detected in the GWBs MDDBSGWQ120 and MDDPBGWD620. Conclusions on the chemical status of the whole GWBs cannot be derived from this survey of 2018 as not all monitoring sites in the GWBs were covered. Furthermore, the concept of groundwater bodies in Moldova is very fresh and there is no methodology in place on how to assess the overall groundwater chemical status of a GWB by aggregating the monitoring results of individual monitoring sites. This assessment was currently done by expert judgement. For the 3 shallow groundwater bodies without a monitoring network (MDDBSGWQ220, MDPRT- GWQ230 and MDPRTGWQ510) status assessment by using monitoring results is not possible. The pressure and impact analysis reveals that the river basin is a typical agrarian region with more than 50% agriculture land of the total basin area. Animal livestock as well as fertilizer application are the main sources of diffuse pollution, but also point sources of pollution exist. Due to this intensive land use and the fact that these 3 GWBs are unconfined and water levels are usually very high, there is risk that the environmental objectives for good chemical status might not be achieved for nitrates and pesticides. Furthermore, these shallow groundwater bodies are associated with aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems (wetlands, lakes, small rivers) but their interaction has not been studied so far.

2.2.2 Quantitative groundwater monitoring

The assessment of the quantitative groundwater status is carried out based on observations of the groundwater level regime, which is formed under the influence of hydrometeorological, anthropogenic and geological factors. The reports for monitoring programs for the periods 2005–2010 and 2010–2014 present the monitoring results for two groundwater regimes: disturbed (influenced by human activities) and slightly disturbed (influenced by natural and anthropogenic factors). The collected data on water levels allow for identifying the ranges of water level fluctuations during the seasons and the influence of abstractions, precipitation, the linkage to surface waters and interconnec- tions to other groundwater bodies.

Page | 24 Overview of groundwater water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

The general conclusion is that the quantity of groundwater resources mainly depends on the natural factors. The fluctuation of groundwater levels of groundwater bodies with good connectivity to rivers depends more on climatic factors. The deep aquifers showed a change of the groundwater level at monitoring points within a longer period and the change depends on natural factors (volume of recharge water, lithology of water bearing rocks, geological structure, etc.) and the volume of water abstraction from water supply points which are situated nearby the monitoring points. Overall, the 8 groundwater bodies which are subject to monitoring are identified as of good groundwater quantitative status. For the 3 shallow groundwater bodies without a monitoring network (MDDBSGWQ220, MDPRTGWQ230 and MDPRTGWQ510) status assessment is not pos- sible yet. These groundwater bodies are mainly used by private households which are not con- nected to central water supply, either by water abstractions from captured springs or by shallow wells. These groundwater bodies are associated with aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems (wet- lands, lakes, small rivers) but their interaction has not been studied so far.

2.3 Proposed groundwater monitoring system

In Moldova, there is quantitative, observational and operational monitoring; however, additional improve- ments of the monitoring network are necessary to fully comply with the monitoring requirements of the WFD. The first step in improving the network is the maintenance of existing monitoring sites. In addition, as already mentioned, three shallow GWBs (MDDBSGWQ220, MDPRTGWQ230 and MDPRTGWQ510) are lacking a groundwater monitoring network and it is proposed to establish 6 monitoring points in each of these three GWBs. Table 14: Number of monitoring sites per groundwater body and proposed expansion of the network

Number of existing monitoring wells Number of additional monitoring sites GWB code Total Quantity Chemistry Total Quantity Chemistry MDDBSGWQ120 9 9 3 2 MDPRTGWQ130 10 10 7 MDDBSGWQ220 0 0 0 6 6 6 MDPRTGWQ230 0 0 0 6 6 6 MDDPBGWD310 7 7 4 1 MDDPBGWD420 5 5 2 3 MDPRTGWQ510 0 0 0 6 6 6 MDDPBGWD620 7 7 2 3 MDDPBGWD730 10 10 0 5 MDPRTGWD740 6 6 3 2 MDPRTGWD820 9 9 8 TOTAL 63 63 29 18 18 34

An assessment study in 2019 proposed to add 15 existing springs to the national groundwater monitor- ing network and to drill 3 new wells with an approximate depth of 15m. The drilling (5,000 EUR) and the equipment for continuous level monitoring (5,000 EUR) are estimated to cost in total about 200,000 MDL (10,000 EUR) for all three wells.

Page | 25 Overview of groundwater water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Table 15: Estimated Investment costs for the improvement of groundwater monitoring

Investment activities Costs Overview of one-time investment costs  Drilling of 3 new wells (á 15m) 100,000 MDL  Automatic equipment for 3 new wells 100,000 MDL  Automatic equipment for 14 existing and refurbished wells 280,000 MDL Total investment costs 480,000 MDL Overview of chemical monitoring costs for six years Total chemical monitoring (55 sites) 1,322,000 MDL

Several GWBs are transboundary with Romania and Ukraine. It is very important to establish monitoring sites for these transboundary GWBs. There should be mutual agreement for a moni- toring program by common standards for information exchange and joint assessment of the GWB status.

2.3.1 Chemical groundwater monitoring

The current groundwater chemical monitoring network is partly too loose and also not covering all GWBs; it currently covers only 29 groundwater wells (seven of eleven GWBs). Also, the frequency of monitoring is very irregular and not sufficient. The WFD CIS guidance No 18 recommends a minimum number of three monitoring sites for homoge- nous hydrogeological condition. The confined (artesian) aquifers are heterogeneous in the chemical composition and at least five sites are recommended for their characterisation by the previous investi- gation made in the Republic of Moldova [2]. Five monitoring points will guarantee confident characteri- zation of the GWB. For the 3 GWBs without monitoring sites it is proposed to establish 6 sites per GWB in order to reflect the geological and the pressure situation in a representative way. For six GWBs with an existing network, it is proposed to increase the number of monitoring points, which are subject to regular chemical monitoring, up to 5 points per GWB (see Table 14). The frequency of chemical monitoring is specified by WFD and it depends on the local hydrogeological conditions and the expected changes in the GWB status. The minimum frequency for the evaluation of the GWB chemical status is one measurement per year [2, 9]. The total number of groundwater samples for the quality monitoring for eleven GWBs for one year would be minimum 55 samples (330 for six years). The actually monitoring frequency varies (irregularly) from one to seven times per site within a 5-year period. The minimum list of chemical parameters for groundwater, which should to be analyzed, is presented in the Governmental Decision Nr. 931 from 20.11.2013. The scope of currently analysed substances is not in accordance with the legal requirements. Even despite the fact that the list of hazardous substances of the Government Decision is too limited, several microelements and organic substances are not ana- lyzed. The proposed parameters for groundwater chemical monitoring and the proposed monitoring fre- quency are presented in Table 16. The list of parameters should be extended, depending on new possible pollution factors from point and diffuse sources and the analytical capacity of the re- sponsible institution(s). Modern groundwater monitoring equipment will provide reliable data, which will be used for surveillance and operational monitoring programs [9].

Page | 26 Overview of groundwater water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

Table 16: Summary of chemical parameters and frequency proposed for GW quality monitoring.

Year 1 Year 2-6 Initial surveillance Surveillance Operational Parameters monitoring monitoring monitoring (all GWBs) (GWB not at risk) (GWB at risk) Macro components and nutrients: conductivity, hardness, mineralization, pH, Ca, Mg, Na, K, 1 time per year 1 time per year - - - - 2- NO2 NO3 , NH4 , Cl , SO4 Trace elements: F, As, Al, Cd, Pb, Hg, Se, Sr, 1 time per year every 3 years Cr, Cu, Ni, Fe, Mn, Zn, Sb, B, Br. 1 time per year Acrilamid, Benzen, Benz(a)pyrene, Cyanides (totalandmobile) Dichlorethane, Epichlorhydrine, Ethylbenzene Microcystine, 1 time per year every 3 years Trichloroethylene, Tetrachlorethylene, Toluene, trihalomethanes, Xylene, PAHs, Pesticides

The monitoring of contaminated sites with impact to groundwater quality (prevent & limit monitoring) shall be organized obliging potential polluters to carry out groundwater monitoring. Changes in water legislation shall be made for obliging water uses and polluters to monitor the impact of their economic activities to the environment. Within the review of the chemical monitoring activity it was proposed to:  Establish chemical groundwater monitoring at 55 monitoring sites in the DPBSRB cover- ing all GWBs (5 sites per GWB).  Reduce the required monitoring frequency in such a way that the macro components and nutrients should be monitored once per year and the trace elements (metals) and hazard- ous substances (pesticides and organic substances) should be monitored every 3rd year. If a substance is causing risk, of course this substance also needs annual monitoring.  Extend the legally required minimum list of chemical parameters for groundwater, in par- ticular the list of hazardous substances, depending on new possible pollution factors from point and diffuse sources and the analytical capacity of the responsible institution(s). Considering the proposed amendments (full coverage of the DPBS RB, amended monitoring frequency and additional parameters), the approximate costs for a six year management plan period will result in: 6 x 71k MDL for macro components and nutrients, 2 x 183k MD for trace elements and 2 x 265k MDL for hazardous substances which results in total in 1,322,000 MDL (66,000 EUR) for the groundwater chemical monitoring over a period of six years.

2.3.2 Quantitative groundwater monitoring

Quantitative monitoring is done for all existing 63 wells on a daily basis in the flooding period and weekly in the period of stable groundwater levels. All sites are in operational conditions or need only small maintenance. This monitoring needs to be extended for the additional 18 sites and the additional costs will be minor. Currently 15 monitoring sites are equipped with automatic sensors. EHGeoM is planning to refurbish 14 monitoring wells and therein it is proposed to also install automatic equipment (electronic data loggers) which costs in total approximately 280,000 MDL (14,000 EUR). Installing modern ground- water monitoring equipment does not require high operation and maintenance costs. It is planned to have at least two monitoring wells per GWB equipped with automatic sensors.

Page | 27 Overview of groundwater water monitoring in the Prut River Basin District (Moldova)

2.4 List of references

1. CIS Guidance Document No. 15 on “Groundwater monitoring”; 2. Identification, Delineation and Classification of Groundwater Bodies Methodology and Pilot Area Application. Millennium Challenge Account Moldova, ISRA, River Basin Management. Groundwa- ter, report, 2012. 3. River Basin Management Plan for the Danube-Prut and Black Sea pilot river basin district in the limits of the Republic of Moldova Cycle I, 2017 – 2022. Report prepared by the Institute of Ecology and Geography of the Academy of Sciences of Moldova (ASM), 2016.

Page | 28 Annexes

3 ANNEXES

3.1 Annex 1. Tables

Table 17: Current and proposed Surveillance Monitoring sites in rivers of the DPBS RBD.

Site Code Latitude Longitude River / Reservoir Monitoring site

MD_1 48,26090833 26,63213333 Prut Criva, upstream

MD_2 48,25403056 26,80437222 Lipcani, upstream (= Şirăuţi, 0.2 km Prut upstream)

MD_3 47,84109722 27,22869444 Costeşti Res. Costeşti

MD_4 47,78976667 27,25228611 Prut Branişte, 0.2 km upstream

MD_5 47,1998 27,78843056 Prut Ungheni, 1.2 km upstream

MD_6 47,10847778 27,87471389 Prut Valea Mare, downstream

MD_9 45,47179167 28,19785 Prut Giurgiuleşti, downstream

MD_10 46,76408944 28,20652639 Călmățui Dancu, Ungheni

MD_11 47,82963889 27,36680556 Camenca Camenca

MD_12 47,95325278 27,27124167 Ciuhur Horodişte

MD_14 47,97352778 27,36438889 Ciuhureț Zăicani

MD_15 47,32047222 27,89422222 Delia Pîrlița, upstream

MD_16 47,03522222 28,01491667 Frăsinești Frăsinești

MD_19 47,31432194 27,67681 Gîrla Mare Blindeşti, downstream

MD_20 47,71759444 27,48333611 Glodeanca Dușmani, upstream

MD_23 46,09872222 28,18419444 Larga Chircani, upstream

MD_24 48,13656611 27,04991472 Lopatnic Lopatnic, downstream

MD_25 48,25480833 26,80683611 Medveja Lipcani, upstream

MD_26 46,88758333 28,18988889 Nîrnova Ivanovca, downstream

MD_28 46,38635833 28,24579722 Sarata Vîlcele, downstream

MD_30 47,63502778 27,71763889 Șovățul Mare Ilenuța, downstream

MD_32 46,00172222 28,17144444 Valea Galmage Zîrnești, downstream

MD_33 47,25651444 27,76809028 Confluența Vladnic - Șoltoaia Zagarancea

MD_37 47,19961111 27,8005 Lake Delia Ungheni

MD_42 45,46851944 28,21328889 Dunărea (Danube) Giurgiuleşti, downstream

MD_43 45,7790175 28,37474167 Cahul Găvănoasa, upstream

MD_46 46,11952167 28,61156778 Chirsova (Carsău) Congaz, Comrat

MD_49 46,36055306 28,66783278 Ialpug Bugeac, Comrat, upstream

MD_50 46,04802278 28,56255833 Ialpugel Svetlâi, Comrat, upstream

MD_55 45,80791667 28,5375 Salcia Mare Vinogradovca

Page | 29 Annexes

Table 18: Current and proposed Surveillance Monitoring sites in lakes and standing waters of the DPBS RBD.

Site Code Latitude Longitude River / Reservoir Monitoring site

MD_36 45,58691111 28,15268056 Lake Beleu Slobozia Mare

MD_38 45,78786944 28,17323611 Lake Manta Manta

MD_39 46,83285 28,59760833 Cogîlnic Hînceşti, upstream

MD_40 46,53886944 28,78519722 Cogîlnic Cimișlia, upstream

MD_41 46,55169444 28,92766667 Schinoasa Mihailovca

MD_45 46,53914472 29,13654472 Ceaga Taraclia, Căușeni

MD_47 46,32815556 28,65848611 Comrat Res. Comrat, upstream

MD_52 46,08234444 28,83748333 Lunga Ceadîr-Lunga, upstream

MD_53 46,05606944 28,82978333 Lunga Ceadîr-Lunga, downstream

MD_54 45,9392 28,59503333 Taraclia Res. Taraclia, upstream

Table 19: Current and proposed Operational Monitoring sites in rivers of the DPBS RBD.

Site Code Latitude Longitude River / Reservoir Monitoring site

MD_7 46,49300556 28,23175 Prut Leova, 0.2 km upstream

MD_8 45,91819722 28,12196389 Prut Cahul, 3.5 km downstream

MD_13 48,27042778 27,42845 Ciuhur Bîrlădeni

MD_17 47,588611 27,803056 Gîrla Mare Catranîc, downstream

MD_18 47,50613889 27,78327778 Gîrla Mare Sărata Nouă

MD_21 46,89091667 28,40255556 Lăpușna Lăpușna

MD_22 46,5976 28,2634 Lăpuşna Sărata Rezeşi

MD_27 48,163 27,16936111 Racovăț Gordinești, upstream

MD_29 46,58772222 28,46280556 Sărata Vozneseni

MD_31 46,38061111 28,37438889 Tigheci Tigheci

MD_34 47,13080556 27,86369444 Varșava Valea Mare

MD_35 48,18344444 26,96255556 Vilia Tețcani

Table 20: Current and proposed Operational Monitoring sites in lakes and reservoirs of the DPBS RBD.

Site Code Latitude Longitude River / Reservoir Monitoring site

MD_44 45,56714722 28,437775 Cahul Etulia, upstream

MD_48 45,77158611 28,57923889 Ialpug Mirnoe, upstream

MD_51 46,12532556 28,97781194 Kirghij - Kitai Tvardița, downstream

Page | 30 Annexes

Table 21: Current and proposed hydrological monitoring sites in rivers and reservoirs of the DPBS RBD

Site Code Latitude Longitude River / Reservoir Monitoring site

MD_H_1 48,253122 26,802815 river Lipcani

MD_H_2 48,226885 26,834488 river Șirăuți

MD_H_3 48,249706 26,958674 river Balasinești

MD_H_4 48,12755 27,040423 river Lopatnic

MD_H_5 48,214489 27,110432 river Trinca

MD_H_6 48,075202 27,15175 river Brânzeni

MD_H_7 47,953695 27,269337 river Horodiște

MD_H_8 47,906454 27,204208 reservoir Dumeni

MD_H_9 47,840385 27,225678 reservoir Costești-Stânca

MD_H_10 47,790917 27,249699 river Braniște

MD_H_11 47,199806 27,787204 river Ungheni MD_H_12 46,792034 28,154668 river Leușeni

MD_H_13 46,593 28,282686 river Sărata-Răzeși

MD_H_14 46,493259 28,230997 river Leova

MD_H_15 46,26017 28,128758 river Cantemir

MD_H_16 45,917521 28,119447 river Cahul

MD_H_17 45,66536 28,166761 river Brânza

MD_H_18 46,332049 28,977952 river Basarabeasca

MD_H_19 45,469045 28,211819 river Giurgiulești (Dunare)

MD_H_20 47,840385 27,225678 reservoir Costești

Table 22: Survey sites during the EUWI+ project from 2019

River name Site name SWB Code Type HMWB at risk Latitude Longitude Black Sea Schinoasa Iserlia COG SCI 02 A_12_2 no Y 46°28'28.3"N 28°57'22.8"E downstream COG SCI 02 A_12_2 yes Y 46°28'4.52" 28°57'34.3"E Cogilnic Basarabeasca COG 05 A_12_2 yes Y 46°20'33.7"N 28°58'14.7"E upstream Hincesti COG 02 A_16_2 yes Y 46°49'58.26"N 28°35'51.39"E downstream v. Ecaterinovca COG 04 A_12_2 yes Y 46°34'41.7"N 28°45'59.1"E Trib. of r.Cogilnic upstream Cimislia COG 04 A_12_2 yes Y 46°32'07.9"N 28°47'23.1"E Lunga upstream Ceadar-Lunga IAL LUN 02 A_12_2 yes Y 46°04'56.44"N 28°50'14.94"E Lunga downstream Ceadar-Lunga IAL LUN 02 A_12_2 yes Y 46°03'21.85"N 28°49'47.22"E Ceaga Taraclia COG CEA 03 A_12_2 yes Y 46°34'56.2"N 29°6'8.4"E downstream COG CEA 03 A_12_2 yes Y 46°32'56.1"N 29°7'52.9"E Copceac s. Copceac SAR COP 01 A_12_1 yes Y 45°50'48.8"N 28°34'47.7"E downstream SAR COP 01 A_12_1 yes Y 46°25'56.1"N 29°31'2.5"E Babei Volontiri SAR BAB 02 A_12_2 yes Y 46°25'40.698"N 29°36'51.5"E Babei border with Ukraine SAR BAB 02 A_12_2 yes Y 46°22'22.9"N 29°36'29.1"E Caplani Antonesti HAD CAP 01 A_12_1 yes Y 46°29'31.120"N 29°50'46.1"E Caplani border with Ukraine HAD CAP 01 A_12_1 yes Y 46°22'9.6"N 29°52'26.1"E Cahul Etulia CAH_02 A_12_2 yes Y 45°34'01.73"N 28°26'15.99"E r.Chirghiz-Chitai Tvardita, upstream KIR 01 A_12_1 no Y 46°10'52.082"N 28°58'52.5"E

Page | 31 Annexes

River name Site name SWB Code Type HMWB at risk Latitude Longitude r.Chirghiz-Chitai Tvardita, downstream KIR 01 A_12_1 no Y 46°7'31.172"N 28°58'40.123"E Djalar Stefanesti SAR_BAB_02 A_12_2 yes Y 46°26'29.223"N 29°41'46.6"E Danube-Prut Lunguta locality Tomai IAL LUN 02 A_12_2 yes Y 46°11'05.1"N 28°46'15.5"E Prut Leova MD0201/1 no na 46°29'34.82"N 28°13'54.30"E MDRivPRT- Prut Cahul MD0201/1 no na 45°55'5.51"N 28°07'19.07"E L-VL-Si-12 Prut Giurgiulesti MD0201/1 no na 45°28'18.45"N 28°11'52.26"E Salcia Mica localities Baimaclia IAL_SAL_01 A_12_1 yes Y 46°10'40.8"N 28°24'6.6"E Moscovei IAL_SAL_01 A_12_1 no Y 45°53'25.6"N 28°24'24.3"E Ialpug Besalma IAL_03 A_12_2 yes Y 46°09'33.3"N 28°37'49.3"E Mirnoe IAL_SAL_04 A_12_3 yes Y 45°44'4.394"N 28°34'58.9"E Balabanu IAL_04 A_12_2 yes Y 45°55'54.2"N 28°36'01.7"E Congaz IAL_03 A_12_2 yes Y 46°05'36.1"N 28°35'57.8"E mun. Comrat downstream IAL_03 A_12_2 yes Y 46°16'33.1"N 28°39'22.4"E

Table 23: Overview of parameters in the chemical monitoring in the DPBS RBD

Parameter group Group n Parameter Relevant for … General phys.- Thermal 1 Water temperature Ecological status chem. conditions

Oxygen regime 4 Oxygen (conc., sat.), BOD5, COD Ecological status

Salinity 10 TDS (mineralization), conductivity, Ecological status chloride, sulphate, alkalinity, calcium, magnesium, total hardness, sodium, potassium Nutrients 5 Total inorganic (mineral) nitrogen, nitrate, Ecological status ammonium, total phosphorus, orthophosphate Acidification 1 pH Ecological status Other 4 total suspended solids, turbidity, colour, Ecological status transparency National and (Heavy) metals 6 Iron, copper, zinc, nickel, lead, cadmium Ecological and WFD relevant chemical status pollutants Specific pollutants 5 phenols, petroleum products, anionic Chemical status detergents, polyaromatic hydrocarbons, p.p. organochlorine pesticides

Table 24: Future capacities of the Laboratories for measuring the priority substances that are listed by the EU WFD and associated directives for surface water monitoring after re- accreditation.

priority priority hazardous Parameter in substance Frequency of Scope of Analysis substance [Y/N] Substance name [Y/N] sampling [Y/N] Alachlor yes no 1 x/month no Anthracen yes yes 1 x/month yes Atrazine yes no 1 x/month no benzene yes no 1 x/month no

Page | 32 Annexes

priority priority hazardous Parameter in substance Frequency of Scope of Analysis substance [Y/N] Substance name [Y/N] sampling [Y/N] Brominated Diphenylether (Congeners with numbers 28, 47, yes yes 1 x/month no 99, 100, 153 and 154)1 Cadmium- and Cadmium compounds yes yes 1 x/month yes no no 1 x/quarter Carbon tetrachloride no

yes yes 1 x/month C10-13 Chloralkanes2 no

yes no 1 x/month Chlorfenvinphos no

Chlorpyrifos (Chlorpyrifos-Ethyl) yes no 1 x/month no Cyclodien Pesticides: yes Aldrin yes Dieldrin no no 1 x/quarter yes Endrin yes Isodrin no DDT instotal no no 1 x/quarter no Para-para-DDT no no 1 x/quarter yes 1,2-Dichlorethane yes no 1 x/month no Dichlormethane yes no 1 x/month no Bis(2-ethyl-hexyl)phthalat (DEHP) yes no 1 x/month no Diuron yes no 1 x/month no Endosulfan3 yes yes 1 x/month yes Fluoranthen yes no 1 x/month yes Hexachlorbenzene yes yes 1 x/month yes Hexachlorbutadien yes yes 1 x/month no Hexachlorcyclohexan4 yes yes 1 x/month yes Isoproturon yes no 1 x/month no Lead and Lead compoands yes no 1 x/month yes Mercury and mercury compoands yes yes 1 x/month yes Naphthalin yes no 1 x/month yes Nickel- and Nickel compoands yes no 1 x/month yes Nonylphenol (4-Nonylphenol)5 yes yes 1 x/month no 4-tert-Octylphenol ((4-(1,1′,3,3′- yes no 1 x/month no Tetramethylbutyl)-phenol)) Pentachlorbenzene yes yes 1 x/month no Pentachlorphenol yes no 1 x/month no Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons yes (PAH) yes yes 1 x/month Benzo(a)pyren yes

Page | 33 Annexes

priority priority hazardous Parameter in substance Frequency of Scope of Analysis substance [Y/N] Substance name [Y/N] sampling [Y/N] Benzo(b)fluoranthen6 yes Benzo(k)fluoranthen6 yes Benzo(g,h,i)-perylen yes Indeno(1,2,3-cd)-pyren yes Simazin yes no 1 x/month no Tetrachloroethylene no no 1 x/quarter no Trichloroethylene no no 1 x/quarter no Tributyltin compounds (Tributhyltin- yes yes 1 x/month no cation) Trichlorobenzene7 yes no 1 x/month no Trichlormethane yes no 1 x/month no Trifluralin yes yes 1 x/month no Dicofol yes yes 1 x/month no Perfluoroctanesulfonic acid (PFOA) yes yes 1 x/month no and derivatives (PFOS) Quinoxyfen yes yes 1 x/month no Dioxine and dioxinähnliche yes yes 1 x/month no compounds8 Aclonifen yes no 1 x/month no Bifenox yes no 1 x/month no Cybutryn yes no 1 x/month no Cypermethrin yes no 1 x/month no Dichlorvos yes no 1 x/month no Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCDD)9 yes yes 1 x/month no Heptachlor and Heptachlorepoxid10 yes yes 1 x/month yes Terbutryn yes no 1 x/month no

Page | 34 Annexes

3.2 Annex 2. Procedure for the selection of operational monitoring sites

3.2.1 Surveillance monitoring

The EU WFD requires that sufficient water bodies should be included in the surveillance monitoring programme to provide an assessment of the overall surface water status within each catchment and sub-catchment of the river basin district. It has to be undertaken for at least a period of one year during the period of a RBMP. The Directive stipulates that monitoring should be carried out at points where:  The rate of water flow is significant within the river basin district as a whole; including points on large rivers where the catchment is greater than 2,500 km2;  The volume of water present is significant within the river basin district, including large lakes and reservoirs;  Significant bodies of water cross a Member State boundary; and  At such other sites as are required to estimate the pollutant load which is transferred across Member States boundaries, and which is transferred into the marine environment. For surveillance monitoring, parameters indicative of all the biological, hydromorphological and all general and specific physico-chemical quality elements are required to be monitored.

3.2.2 Operational monitoring

The objectives of operational monitoring are to:

 Establish the status of those bodies identified as being at risk of failing to meet their environ- mental objectives; and  Assess any changes in the status of such bodies resulting from the programmes of measures. Operational monitoring has to be undertaken for all water bodies that have been identified as being at risk of failing the relevant environmental objectives. Monitoring must also be carried out for all bodies into which priority substances are discharged. However, monitoring in all such bodies will not necessarily be required as the Directive allows similar water bodies to be grouped and representatively moni- tored. Operational monitoring is highly focused on parameters indicative of the quality elements most sensi- tive to the pressures to which the water body or bodies are subject. For example, if organic pollution is a significant pressure on a river then benthic invertebrates might be the most sensitive and appropriate indicator of that pressure. The following scheme shall help to create a list of operational monitoring sites:

Page | 35 Annexes

Scheme B

WFD compliant data available?

Y N

Classification Point source? Discharge of possible priority pollutant? Scheme A Review of measures?

Is the SWB at risk or is it affected No additional by discharges of priority pollutants? operational monitoring N Y site necessary

N Y Diffuse pollution

No operational What is the reason Grouping of N monitoring necessary for the risk? SWB possible?

Y Classification based pollution hymo on existing data or Criteria for Select a representative pressure data the selection number of SWB

Criteria for setting up Set up an operational New risk H or G status SCHEME B SCHEME C a monitoring site monitoring site

Criteria for the selection of representative water bodies from the group:

 Pollution from diffuse sources  for successive SWB o diffuse load uniform o monitoring site situated in the last SWB (most downstream) o Classification results can be applied to the SWB above (upstream)  for SWB in different regions o diffuse load uniform o SWB belong to the same type o SWB are comparable in terms of agricultural use o Affected SWB of the group are affected by the same substance or combination of sub- stances o At least 25% of the SWB in a group are selected as representatives

Criteria for the setting up a monitoring site in rivers

 1 site per SWB which is representative for the pollution  Preferably at the lower end of the SWB  Beware of dilution effects of tributaries  Distance to possible additional point sources should be at least 1 km or – if the river breadth is >100 m – at least the 10-fold of the river breadth

Page | 36 Annexes

Scheme C WFD compliant data available?

Y N

Classification Review of measures? Y possible N

No additional Criteria for Assign SWB to operational monitoring pressure groups pressure groups site necessary

Criteria for Select representative the selection SWB per pressure group

Criteria for the Define number and number and position position of sites

Set up an operational monitoring site

Criteria for pressure groups in rivers A group of SWB  with same river type,  affected by the same pressure,  which can be investigated and classified by the same indicative biological quality element

Criteria for the selection within each pressure groups

 Ideally 1/3 of SWB within each pressure groups  Hydrological connex: if possible, select sites within a hydrological sub basin  No additional pressure (if possible)  Easy to reach Criteria for the number and position

 Morphology: 1 site in the longest uniform section  Water abstraction: 1 site directly below the abstraction  Continuum: 1 or 2 sites, above the weir or dam; if there is series of several weirs or dams, an- other one below the lowest one  Impoundment: 1 site beginning (source) of the impoundment, optionally another site directly above the dam

Page | 37 Annexes

3.2.3 Investigative monitoring

Investigative monitoring may also be required in specified cases. These are given as:  where the reason for any exceedences (of environmental objectives) is unknown;  where surveillance monitoring indicates that the objectives are not likely to be achieved and operational monitoring has not already been established; or  to ascertain the magnitude and impacts of accidental pollution. Investigative monitoring will thus be designed to the specific case or problem being investigated. In some cases it will be more intensive in terms of monitoring frequencies and focused on particular water bodies or parts of water bodies, and on relevant quality elements. Investigative monitoring might also include alarm or early warning monitoring, for example, for the pro- tection of drinking water intakes against accidental pollution. This type of monitoring could include con- tinuous or semi-continuous measurements of a few chemical (such as dissolved oxygen) and/or biolog- ical (such as fish) determinants. As a result, no list of sites within the investigative monitoring can and shall be given in this document.

Page | 38 Annexes

3.3 Annex 3: list of groundwater monitoring sites

Borehole X, coord. Y, coord. Quantity Chemical nr Zona number MoldRef99 MoldRef99 Locality Altitude, m Age index GWB monitoring monitoring 1 1 640 82527 348588 Lipcani 159,80 aA3 MDPRTGWQ130 Yes Yes 2 4 486 125943 326450 Bratuseni 168,80 aA3 MDPRTGWQ130 Yes Yes 3 8 498 114794 294603 Braniste 70,41 aA3 MDPRTGWQ130 Yes Yes 4 17 437 154073 230283 Ungeni 61,00 aA3 MDPRTGWQ130 Yes Yes 5 21 681 176814 204200 Grozesti 24,90 aA3 MDPRTGWQ130 Yes 6 21 689 174532 206722 Grozesti 27,30 aA3 MDPRTGWQ130 Yes 7 21 690 174694 206809 Grozesti 27,40 aA3 MDPRTGWQ130 Yes 8 25 62 188306 139269 Nicolaevca 17,40 aA3 MDPRTGWQ130 Yes Yes 9 29 32 181953 107925 Gotesti 9,50 aA3 MDPRTGWQ130 Yes Yes 10 29 33 181968 107945 Gotesti 9,50 aA3 MDPRTGWQ130 Yes Yes 11 30 70 228562 116486 Tomai 58,20 aA3 MDDBSGWQ120 Yes 12 30 71 228560 116346 Tomai 58,00 aA3 MDDBSGWQ120 Yes 13 30 586 242087 112418 Tvardita 180,60 aA3 MDDBSGWQ120 Yes 14 30 587 242199 112470 Tvardita 183,40 aA3 MDDBSGWQ120 Yes Yes 15 32 588 218609 83534 Taraclia 20,50 aA3 MDDBSGWQ120 Yes 16 32 589 218653 83529 Taraclia 20,50 aA3 MDDBSGWQ120 Yes 17 32 590 218585 83506 Taraclia 20,50 aA3 MDDBSGWQ120 Yes 18 32 591 218633 83489 Taraclia 20,50 aA3 MDDBSGWQ120 Yes Yes 19 33 481 199447 61803 Vulcanesti 50,40 aA3 MDDBSGWQ120 Yes Yes 20 30 584 241903 112453 Tvardita 180,60 N2p MDDPBGWD310 Yes Yes 21 33 107 195997 62168 Vulcanesti 61,70 N2p MDDPBGWD310 Yes 22 33 111 197546 60145 Vulcanesti 109,60 N2p MDDPBGWD310 Yes 23 33 113 202594 61442 Vulcanesti 62,50 N2p MDDPBGWD310 Yes

Page | 39 Annexes

Borehole X, coord. Y, coord. Quantity Chemical nr Zona number MoldRef99 MoldRef99 Locality Altitude, m Age index GWB monitoring monitoring 24 33 117 203380 61770 Vulcanesti 92,80 N2p MDDPBGWD310 Yes Yes 25 33 244 182248 49400 Slobodzea-Mare 48,90 N2p MDDPBGWD310 Yes Yes 26 33 245 181428 48778 Slobodzea-Mare 6,30 N2p MDDPBGWD310 Yes Yes 27 26 105 229546 155442 Cimislia 80,50 N1s3-m MDDPBGWD420 Yes 28 29 151 184602 128231 Cantemir 72,80 N1s3-m MDDPBGWD420 Yes Yes 29 29 152 184608 128228 Cantemir 72,80 N1s3-m MDDPBGWD420 Yes Yes 30 29 153 184784 127113 Cantemir 62,20 N1s3-m MDDPBGWD420 Yes 31 30 161 227989 113180 Tomai 64,00 N1s3-m MDDPBGWD420 Yes 32 29 150 186262 126046 Cania 44,60 N1s2 MDDPBGWD620 Yes Yes 33 29 239 183778 127375 Cantemir 54,00 N1s2 MDDPBGWD620 Yes Yes 34 29 241 181457 123406 Cantemir 41,00 N1s2 MDDPBGWD620 Yes 35 29 244 187620 125238 Cantemir 61,20 N1s2 MDDPBGWD620 Yes 36 30 226 231421 103140 Ceadir-Lunga 95,00 N1s2 MDDPBGWD620 Yes 37 30 233 234424 105494 Ceadir-Lunga 53,80 N1s2 MDDPBGWD620 Yes 38 32 51 205353 92842 Albota-de-Sus 85,70 N1s2 MDDPBGWD620 Yes 39 22 315 217951 192146 Fundul Galbenei 169,50 N1b-s1 MDDPBGWD730 Yes 40 26 213 229611 154262 Cimislia 78,90 N1b-s1 MDDPBGWD730 Yes 41 26 218 232243 154288 Cimislia 159,80 N1b-s1 MDDPBGWD730 Yes 42 26 219 230687 155183 Cimislia 83,90 N1b-s1 MDDPBGWD730 Yes 43 26 220 230596 155685 Cimislia 102,30 N1b-s1 MDDPBGWD730 Yes 44 28 465 300847 155450 Stefan-Voda 164,60 N1b-s1 MDDPBGWD730 Yes 45 28 466 301009 155131 Stefan-Voda 159,60 N1b-s1 MDDPBGWD730 Yes 46 30 99 218298 130655 Comrat 64,70 N1b-s1 MDDPBGWD730 Yes 47 30 852 234326 105638 Ceadir-Lunga 48,96 N1b-s1 MDDPBGWD730 Yes 48 30 853 230593 104359 Ceadir-Lunga 129,10 N1b-s1 MDDPBGWD730 Yes

Page | 40 Annexes

Borehole X, coord. Y, coord. Quantity Chemical nr Zona number MoldRef99 MoldRef99 Locality Altitude, m Age index GWB monitoring monitoring 49 2 714 102381 355697 Tabani 196,20 N1b-s1 MDPRTGWD740 Yes Yes 50 4 392 103407 338263 Fetesti 135,20 N1b-s1 MDPRTGWD740 Yes Yes 51 4 393 103415 338279 Fetesti 135,40 N1b-s1 MDPRTGWD740 Yes 52 13 459 130047 271987 Calinesti 50,50 N1b-s1 MDPRTGWD740 Yes Yes 53 17 436 148320 245474 Petresti 172,00 N1b-s1 MDPRTGWD740 Yes 54 21 285 178053 213160 Soltanesti 78,80 N1b-s1 MDPRTGWD740 Yes 55 1 650 82755 346820 Sireuti 105,00 K2-S MDPRTGWD820 Yes Yes 56 1 651 82823 346762 Sireuti 105,00 K2-S MDPRTGWD820 Yes Yes 57 1 912 77846 348686 Drepcauti 110,80 K2-S MDPRTGWD820 Yes 58 1 913 71404 349337 Criva 115,30 K2-S MDPRTGWD820 Yes Yes 59 4 492 116036 335142 Alecsandreni 168,50 K2-S MDPRTGWD820 Yes Yes 60 4 866 121871 323259 Stolnicheni 119,70 K2-S MDPRTGWD820 Yes Yes 61 4 867 120912 322749 Stolnicheni 119,80 K2-S MDPRTGWD820 Yes Yes 62 4 952 121011 322481 Stolnicheni 117,90 K2-S MDPRTGWD820 Yes 63 13 458 130037 271987 Calinesti 51,00 K2-S MDPRTGWD820 Yes Yes

Page | 41

www.euwipluseast.eu