pfra reporting – output from test phase fd drafting group, meeting 16 february 2011 mette wolstrup

PFRA reporting – Output from test phase

FD Drafting Group, Meeting 16 February 2011

Mette Wolstrup

Test phase – kick off

• Email sent to MS 19.01.2011 - three weeks testing

• Volunteer MS: FR, CZ, AT, UK (comments from AT, UK)-Additional comments received from FI

Tools and documents to be tested

• Database/schemas• Database to xml conversion tool• Desktop validation tool• User Manual, v2.0• User Guide to the reporting schema v2.0• User Guide to reporting spatial data v2.0 • Stylesheets• Upload in cdrtest and QA's• Ressource page:

http://water.eionet.europa.eu/schemas/dir200760ec/resources/

Outcome

Database

• CAUoM data in updated database?

Import function in database

Database (2)

• AT: UOMcode in the PFRA schema should be prefilled with information from either WFD or the CAUOM schema.

•  UK: Could Mandatory, Conditional, Optional be included in the field descriptions?

PFRA Schema

• UK: As with WFD, the attribute table should include a [Classified] field to allow member states to identify xml files as either:

- Unclassified, available for general circulation

- Confidential, available for EC reporting only

PFRA Schema (2)

• UK: Datatype of [DurationofFlood] be changed to allow decimals (for part days)

• UK: Possibility to include range in [Recurrence] and [Frequency]

PFRA Schema (3)

UK: Fatalities and FatalitiesDescriptionhave a 1:1 relationship with flood events so would be better placed either in the PFRA_FloodInformationArt4 table or in a table on their own.

-> same for APSFR, 1 to 1 relationship with AreasofFloodRisk

PFRA Schema (4)

• AT: possible to report both FloodEventCode and/or NameofLocation

PFRA Schema (5)

• AT/UK: Unclear how to report Art13.1.a and b

New annotation text: Yes/No code to indicate if article 13.1.a has been applied. If Yes has been chosen but no SpecificArea has been reported it is assumed that Article 13.1.a has been applied for the entire UoM.

PFRA Schema (6)

• AT: Only Source of flooding should be mandatory (table A1)

PFRA Schema (7)

• AT: Annotation text should be more clear for FloodEventCode.

Unique code for the flood event - up to 40 characters in total. Only to be used if a polygon/line/point is reported to establish link between spatial feature (eg. polygon) and information in xml schema.

PFRA Schema (8)

• AT: Inconsistency in wording

PFRA: Type of consequencesAPSFR: Type of potential consequences

The element HumanHealth should follow the wording from List of flood types and

consequences -> HumanHealth (Social)

Database to xml conversion tool

• AT/UK: both experienced problems with the DB to xml

conversion – ghost tags and mapping levels – Atkins to

correct the conversion tool.

Upload files in test environment,QA's, factsheets

• AT/UK: No errors when running QA's• AT/UK: Factsheets ok• AT/UK: No feedback generated and not possible to

complete envelope.

Ressource page

http://water.eionet.europa.eu/schemas/dir200760ec/resources/

• AT: Missing links (corrected)• AT: GIS Guidance (uploaded 11.02.2011)

GIS Guidance document

Short introduction to version 2.0

• Map examples inserted for UOM

• Description and examples of maps to be shown in WISE on the basis of the reported information in the PFRA and APSFR schemas

• New templates added to be used when reporting spatial information in both PFRA and APSFR

• Description of the data behind the maps added (Data production)

Maps of the river basin district (RBD) or unit of management (UOM) at the appropriate scale including the borders of the river basins, sub-basins and, where existing, coastal areas, showing topography and land use

• Maps showing if articles 4, 5 or 13.1(a) or (b) have been applied.

• Areas with potential significant flood risk (APSFR schema)

• Areas with potential significant flood risk (APSFR schema) shown together with applied Article

Map of river basin, sub-basins, coastalstretches or other areas where there has in thepast been a significant flood event or wherepotential future significant floods could occur.

3 new templates to be used when reportingPFRA and APSFR

Attribute name

Obligation Type Description

EU_CD_FE Mandatory string (42) Unique code for the flood event - up to 40 characters in total as defined in the PFRA reporting schema (FloodEventCode). Codes MUST have a 1-to-1 relationship with further attribute data described in the related XML file.

Attribute name

Obligation Type Description

EU_CD_FA Mandatory string (42) Unique code for the specific area - up to 40 characters in total as defined in the PFRA reporting schema (SpecificAreaCode). Codes MUST have a 1-to-1 relationship with further attribute data described in the related XML file.This shape file covers submissions for TransitionalMeasuresArt13.1.a or TransitionalMeasuresArt13.1.b. It will be derived from the schema by matching the SpecificAreaCode which Article is appliedAreas are as a default option, assumed to be subject to article 4-5, but there would not be a need to ask for that information again.

Attribute name

Obligation Type Description

EU_CD_FR Mandatory string (42) Unique EU code for the area of potential significant flood risk as defined in the APSFR reporting schema (APSFRCode). Codes MUST have a 1-to-1 relationship with further attribute data described in the related XML file.

Schema change

Past floods

• Added the possibility to report past floods under article 13.1.a and b in the PFRA schema to make it more intuitive and userfriendly

Report same area several times?

• FI: Is it required to report the same area (or line/point) several times if there are several flood events connected to the same location?

Next step

Timetable (preliminary, exact dates of further follow-up to be confirmed)

• January/February: Testing phase

• February/March - Corrections and new versions on ressource page

• 22.12.2011: Deadline for finalisation of PFRA