L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Miljø- og Fødevareudvalget 2016-17
L 111
Offentligt

Bilag 1a

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

,-.(

1 3

3 /1 7 1

1 : / 34 6

4 81 1* 13

* 1 *

1 2 ' 34 5

* 1 1 3 / 3

/ 3

;

;'< = 3/1

3//1 13

1 *

9 1

' 34 5 3//1 13

1 3

3 &9

,1 * 1

#; 0;' 3/

/1 7 43 1 1 * 3

1 1 *1

1 3 /9

3 /1 7 1

/1 7

// : 1

7 //

1 1 *1

1 ' 34 5

// 3

34 9

1 1 *1

' 34 5 3//1 13

* 1 1 3 / 3 1 *

3 3 /1 7 1

;

;'<> ,

, / *

1 *1

/ 9

1* 1 : 3

* * 1

1 *1

8 *

1 1 1

4 /

3/ 9

' 34 5 3//1 13

@: 7

! "

"# "" $%&

)

* +++

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

B 5

13 )

(

1 1 *1

< *

13 4 38

0 ( 6 1

' 34 5 3//1 13

3 * 1 *3/1 A: 3/

1**

/ 9 ' 34 5 3//1 13

1** 3 /

/ 1

1 1 *1

3 * 1 *3/1 A 1 7

3//1 13

/6 * 1

1 3

43 *

C /6 * 1

/6 * 1

)

* 1

88 1

1/ )

!8 5 1 : 3/ 1

4 1

/9 *

*3 3 8

1/ )

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

CTTEE_12-2016-03

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

DIRECTORATE-GENERAL

ENVIRONMENT

Directorate C - Quality of Life, Water & Air

ENV.C.2 - Marine Environment & Water Industry

EETING OF THE

OMMITTEE UNDER

RTICLE

IRECTIVE

2008/56/EC

ARINE

TRATEGY

OMMITTEE

)

UESDAY

1 M

ARCH

2016 (10:00

–

18:00)

AND

EDNESDAY

2 M

ARCH

2016 (09:30-17:30)

Conference Centre Albert Borschette (CCAB) - Room 1B and 0B

36, Rue Froissart - B-1040 Brussels

Agenda Item:

Document:

Title:

Prepared by:

Date prepared:

CTTEE_12-2016-03

Proposal for a Commission Decision on GES Criteria_draft v2

European Commission

15/02/2016

This paper provides a second draft version of a proposal for a Commission Decision

laying down criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status and

specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment, and repealing

Decision 2010/477/EU. It is based on the comments made by Member States during the

Committee meeting of 27 January 2016 and received by email subsequently.

Please note that this draft:

has not yet undergone the Commission's internal consultation and could

therefore be subject to further changes.

is not for circulation outside the Regulatory Committee.

even though it will be one legal text, has to be presented in two different

sections (which have been copy-pasted one after the other below):

- the proposal for a Commission Decision containing the Recitals and Articles

- the proposal for an Annex to the Commission Decision, containing the actual

criteria, methodological standards, specifications and standardised methods.

Background

The MSFD Committee is invited to:

a. Discuss the attached draft;

Provide comments on this draft by

9 March 2016

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

EUROPEAN

COMMISSION

Brussels,

XXX

[…](2015)

XXX

draft

COMMISSION DECISION (EU) …/…

XXX

laying down criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status and

specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment, and repealing

Decision 2010/477/EU

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

COMMISSION DECISION (EU) …/…

XXX

laying down criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status and

specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment, and repealing

Decision 2010/477/EU

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17

June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine

environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive)

, and in particular Article 9(3)

and 11(4) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

[Recital on legal basis / comitology procedure] Directive 2008/56/EC provides in its

Article 9(3) for criteria and methodological standards to be adopted in accordance with

the regulatory procedure with scrutiny referred to in Article 25(3) of that Directive. It

also provides in its Article 11(4) for the adoption of specifications and standardised

methods for monitoring and assessment, in accordance with the same procedure.

[Recital on Commission Decision 2010/477/EU] Decision 2010/477/EU

provided

criteria for "good environmental status", thus setting the basis for Member States to

establish their determinations of good environmental status and to guide their

assessments of current environmental status in 2012.

[Recital on necessity to revise the 2010 Decision] Decision 2010/477/EU

acknowledged that additional scientific and technical progress was required to support

the development or revision of these criteria for some qualitative descriptors, as well

as further development of methodological standards in close coordination with the

establishment of monitoring programmes. In addition, that Decision provided in its

Recital 4 that its revision should be carried out in time to support a successful update

of marine strategies that are due by 2018, pursuant to Article 17 of Directive

2008/56/EC.

[Recital n°1 on problems with existing good environmental status decision revealed by

cycle] In 2012, Member States reported under Articles 9(2) and 10(2) of Directive

2008/56/EC on the initial assessment of their marine waters, the determination of good

environmental status and their environmental targets. The Commission's assessment

of these Member State's reports highlighted that more efforts were urgently needed if

Member States and the Union are to reach good environmental status by 2020. The

OJ L 164, 25.2.2008, p. 19.

Commission Decision 2010/477/EU of 1 September 2010 on criteria and methodological standards on

good environmental status of marine water (OJ L 232, 2.9.2010, p. 14).

Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - The first phase of

implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC) - The European

Commission's assessment and guidance (COM(2014)097 final, 20.2.2014)

(2)

(3)

(4)

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

results showed the necessity to ensure the determinations of good environmental status

in a

quantifiable comparable

and consistent way between Member States and across

the Union. In addition, the assessment

recognised that regional cooperation must be at

the very heart of the implementation of Directive 2008/56/EC and influence national

implementation processes, rather than the other way around. It also

emphasized the

need for Member States to more systematically build upon existing Union legislation

or, where relevant, standards set by Regional Sea Conventions or other international

agreements.

(5)

[Recital concluding on 2014 Commission's assessment

–

common recital to good

environmental status decision and revised Annex III]

To ensure that the second

cycle of implementation contributes to the achievement of Directive 2008/56/EC's

objectives and yields more consistent determinations of good environmental status, the

Commission therefore recommended in its report on the first phase of implementation

that, at Union level, the Commission services and Member States collaborate to

"revise, strengthen and improve Decision 2010/477/EU by 2015, aiming at a clearer,

simpler, more concise, more coherent and comparable set of good environmental

status criteria and methodological standards" and "review Annex III of the Marine

Strategy Framework Directive, and if necessary revise, and develop specific guidance

to ensure a more coherent and consistent approach for assessments in the next

implementation cycle".

[Recital on the review process] On the basis of these conclusions, the review process

started in 2013 when a roadmap for a review, consisting of several phases (technical

and scientific, consultation, and decision-making), was endorsed by the Committee

established under Article 25(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC (hereafter "Regulatory

Committee"). During this process, the Commission consulted all interested parties,

including Regional Sea Conventions [, and an open public consultation was carried out

on this Decision]. The Regulatory Committee was also duly consulted throughout the

process, [informed of the results of the public consultation] and re-confirmed the need

for a revision of Decision 2010/477/EU at its meeting of 5 May 2015.

[Recital on objectives of the new Decision] This Decision is therefore expected to

facilitate future updates of the initial assessment of Member States' marine waters and

their determination of good environmental status, by clarifying, revising or introducing

criteria, methodological standards, specifications and standardised methods to be used

by Member States, thereby ensuring greater coherence in implementation of Directive

2008/56/EC between Member States and across the Union. In accordance with the

commitment taken by the European Commission when adopting its Better regulation

package

, this Decision ensures coherence with other Union legislation.

[Recital on criteria and methodological standards] This Decision should therefore set

out criteria and methodological standards, for each of the qualitative descriptors listed

in Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC, on the basis of Annex III of that Directive. For

each descriptor, this Decision should define the

elements for assessment and the

criteria

including the elements to be used,

and, where available

[and applicable], the

reference levelsthreshold values,

that allow a quantitative assessment of whether good

environmental status is achieved.

In several cases, this Decision should enable

Member States to establish these threshold values at regional or subregional level, for

instance by referring to existing values or developing new ones.

This Decision should

COM(2015) 215 final

(6)

(7)

(8)

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

also set out

the methodological standards, including

the

geographical

scales for

assessment and application rules for the criteria, to ensure that Member States' updates

of their determinations of good environmental status and initial assessments of marine

waters, carried out in accordance with Article 17 of Directive 2008/56/EC, are

consistent, allowing for comparison between marine regions or subregions of the

extent to which good environmental status is being achieved.

(9)

[Recital on specifications and standardised methods] Specifications and standardised

methods for monitoring and assessment should take into account existing

specifications and standards at Union level and ensure comparability between

monitoring and assessment results. When such specifications and standardised

methods are not included in this Decision, Member States should endeavour to use

available Union or international guidance. This is for instance the case for

guidance

developed the qualitative descriptor (11) of Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC, for

which a sub-group of experts on underwater noise has developed,

in the framework of

the Common Implementation Strategy established between Member States and the

European Commission,

"Monitoring guidance for underwater noise in European Seas".

[Relationship between MSFD and other EU legislation]

To facilitate Member States

implementation of Directive 2008/56/EC and ensure greater consistency and

comparability at Union level of theirTo make the

determinations of good

environmental status

more effective,

this Decision should

take into accountrefer to

existing quality standards and methods of assessment and monitoring from Union

legislation, such as Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the

Council

(the 'Water Framework Directive') and Commission Decision 2013/480/EU

Directive 2008/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council

, Commission

Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006

ouncil Directive 92/43/EEC

, Directive

2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council

Regulation

(EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council

and Council

Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006

Such cross-references should not only facilitate

(10)

Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a

framework for Community action in the field of water policy (OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1).

Commission Decision 2013/480/EU of 20 September 2013 establishing, pursuant to Directive

2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, the values of the Member State monitoring

system classifications as a result of the intercalibration exercise and repealing Decision 2008/915/EC

(OJ L 266, 8.10.2013, p. 1).

Directive 2008/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on

environmental quality standards in the field of water policy, amending and subsequently replacing

Council Directive 87/176/EEC, 3/513/EEC, 84/156/EEC, 84/491/EEC, 86/280/EEC and amending

Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 84.)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 of 19 December 2006 setting maximum levels for certain

contaminants in foodstuffs (OJ L 364, 20.12.2006, p. 5).

Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna

and flora (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7).

Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the

conservation of wild birds (OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7).

Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on

the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No

1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council

Decision 2004/585/EC (OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, p. 22).

Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006 of 21 December 2006 concerning management measures for

the sustainable exploitation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean Sea, amending Regulation (EEC)

No 2847/93 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1626/94 (OJ L 409, 30.12.2006, p. 11).

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Member States' assessments under Directive 2008/56/EC by ensuring compatibility

with other obligations but should also ensure greater consistency and comparability at

Union level.

(11)

[Link with RSC and other international mechanisms: Article 3(3)] Where this

Decision does not specify details at Union level for criteria, methodological standards,

specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment, Member

States should

endeavour to

use those developed at international, regional or

subregional level

which are directly applicable to marine waters,

for instance within

the framework of the Regional Sea Conventions, as provided under Article 6 of

Directive 2008/56/EC, or other international and regional mechanisms, and inform the

Commission thereof as provided for in Article 17(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC.

[Future work] Additional scientific and technical progress is still required to support

the further development of certain criteria, methodological standards, specifications

and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment.

[Linking Article 9 to Art. 8, and Art. 8.1b to 8.1a] The determination of good

environmental status and the assessment of progress towards its achievement should

be intricately linked. This Decision should be structured to support this linkage,

particularly to clearlyand

organise the

descriptors and

criteria

and methodological

standards on the basis of the descriptors laid down in Annex I of Directive 2008/56/EC

and on the basis of the ecosystem elements and pressures laid down in Annex III of

that Directive. Some of the criteria and methodological standards relate in particular to

the needed for

assessments of

environmental status the ecosystem and its components

under point (a) of Article 8(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC,

and while other relate those

needed forto the

assessment of

predominant

pressures and

their

impacts under point

(b) of that Article.

Further, because the assessment of environmental status under point

(a) of Article 8(1) should reflect the cumulative pressures and their impacts, the

assessments under point (b) of that Article should, as far as possible and necessary, be

undertaken first and used to inform the assessments under point (a) of Article 8(1) of

Directive 2008/56/EC. This should include ensuring consistency in the ecosystem

elements assessed and in the scales of assessment.

[Trends] When assessing the status of their marine waters in accordance with Article 8

of Directive 2008/56/EC it is helpful for Member States to assess the change in status

as improving, stable or deteriorating, in view of the often slow response of the marine

environment to change.

[Flexibility:

Article 3(2),

risk-based approach and primary criteria] This Decision

should allow sufficient flexibility

to Member States when determining their good

environmental status. This flexibility is underpinned by different concepts in this

Decision. First, Member States should be able to consider that some of the criteria are

not appropriate, provided this is duly justified. Secondly, a risk-based approach should

be introduced in some criteria, by which Member States may decide not to consider

certain elements or may focus monitoring on certain matrices, provided this is based

on a risk-assessment. so that updates of the initial assessment under Article 8 of

Directive 2008/56/EC focus on the predominant pressures in each region or subregion

and their environmental impacts on the different ecosystem elements, as addressing

such pressures should provide an efficient and effective means to achieve good

environmental status. Such flexibility is underpinned in this Decision by the risk-based

approach, meaning that certain criteria would not need to be used in the assessment of

the marine waters of certain Member States, provided a risk-assessment demonstrates

(12)

(13)

(14)

(15)

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

a low risk. Finally, Ccriteria

are

further

labelled as primary or secondary

in this

Decision.

While primary criteria should be used to ensure consistency across the

Union, flexibility is introduced with regard to secondary criteria, which can either

alternativesubstitute or complement primary criteria, or be used where there is a

possibility of risk not covered by the primary criteria (if there is a lack of data for

primary criteria) or complementary (only performed whenever they are considered

relevant).

(16)

[Moved from intro Annex Part C] Articles 1(2) and 1(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC

acknowledge that Member States' marine strategies must protect and preserve the

marine environment, prevent its deterioration or, where practicable, restore marine

ecosystems in areas where they have been adversely affected. Therefore, it is

recognised that some areas may not achieve the

threshold values

set

for certain

criteria,

particularly to allow for certain sustainable uses of the marine waters,

provided the collective pressure of human activities is kept within levels compatible

with the achievement of good environmental status and the capacity of marine

ecosystems to respond to human-induced changes is not compromised. It is therefore

appropriate that Member States assess the spatial extent over which the threshold

values have been achieved in their marine waters, within each region or subregion.

[Dynamic ecosystems, climate change and recovery to new states] The determination

of good environmental status under Article 9(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC, on the basis

of this Decision, should accommodate the dynamic nature of marine ecosystems and

their elements, which can change in space and time through climatic variation,

predator-prey interactions and other

environmental

factors. These determinations

should also reflect the state of marine ecosystems as can be expected under prevailing

physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions, as they recover from deteriorated

states, rather than states in the past to which they may never return.

[Review

–

Moved from former Article 4] It is appropriate that the Commission revises

this Decision by 15 July 2023, as part of the review set out in Article 23 of Directive

2008/56/EC. The review should in particular take into account the need to adapt this

Decision to the latest scientific and technical knowledge and the experiences of the

implementation of this Decision in light of the objective of Directive 2008/56/EC of

achieving good environmental status by 2020.

[Standard

recital -

Repeal of Decision 2010/477/EU] Decision 2010/477/EU should

therefore be repealed.

[Standard

recital]

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with

the opinion of the Regulatory Committee,

(17)

(18)

(19)

(20)

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Subject-matter

This Decision sets out, in its Annex, criteria and methodological standards, on good

environmental status for each qualitative descriptor listed in Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC,

in accordance with Article 9(3) of that Directive, and specifications and standardised methods

for monitoring and assessment, in accordance with Article 11(4) of that Directive.

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Article 2

Definitions

For the purposes of this Decision, the following definitions shall apply:

(1)

'criteria' means distinctive technical features that are closely linked to qualitative

descriptors, as defined in Article 3(6) of Directive 2008/56/EC.

(a)

'primary criteria' shall be used by Member States

in all casesin accordance with

Article 3(2),

except where it is specified in the Annex to this Decision that such

criteria may be replaced by a secondary criterion;

'secondary criteria' shall be used on the basis of the conditions specified in the

Annex to this Decision, either instead of a primary criterion or in addition to

the primary criteria.

(b)

(2)

(3)

'marine regions'

shall have the same meaning as in Article 3(2) of Directive

2008/56/EC.

'subregions' and 'subdivisions' are used in the sense of Article 4 of Directive

2008/56/EC to provide for a nested set of

assessment scalesgeographical areas within

a region to be used for Article 8(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC. Further division of

these areas may be appropriate for some descriptors and assessments.

'methodological standards' means scientific or technical methods, developed at Union

or international level, for assessing and classifying environmental status.

'specification' means

Union-wide minimum

requirements for the design of

monitoring and assessment performed under Directive 2008/56/EC.

'standardised method' means

Union-wide minimum

requirements for the monitoring

and assessment performed under Directive 2008/56/EC:

(a)

'standardised method for monitoring' refers to methods for field sampling, and

other types of data collection, and for laboratory analysis. This includes quality

assurance and quality control mechanisms, such as agreed international

standards (e.g. CEN and ISO standards).

'standardised method for assessment' includes agreed rules for the spatial and

temporal aggregation of data and their use.

(4)

(5)

(6)

(b)

(7)

'marine waters', including

'coastal waters', shall

have the same meaning as in Article

3(1) of Directive 2008/56/EChave the same meaning as in Article 2(7) of Directive

2000/60/EC.

'non-indigenous species'

and 'invasive non-indigenous species'

shall be understood to

have the same meaning as 'alien species'

and 'invasive alien species'

defined in

Articles 3(1)

and 3(2) respectively

of Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the

European Parliament and of the Council

‘reference

levelthreshold values’

means

the value, values or ranges of values

[established at Union, international, regional or subregional level] which define the

quality level to be achieved for the criterion.

(8)

(9)

Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on

the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species (OJ L 317,

4.11.2014, p. 35).

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Article 3

General principles

Member States shall use these criteria, methodological standards, specifications and

standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

laid down in this Decision,

combination with the

ecosystem elements, anthropogenic pressures and human

activities listed in Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC

and by reference to the initial

assessment made pursuant to Article 8(1) of that Directive,

when

determining a set of

characteristics for good environmental status in accordance with Article 9(1)

of that

Directive, when assessing whether it has been achieved under Article 8(1),

and when

establishing coordinated monitoring programmes under Article 11

Directive

2008/56/ECthat Directive.

On the basis of the initial assessment or its subsequent updates carried out in

accordance with Article 8 and point (a) of Article 17(2) of Directive 2008/56/EC, a

Member State may consider, in exceptional circumstances, that it is not appropriate

to use one or more of the criteria laid down in this Decision.

In such case, the Member State shall provide the Commission with due justification

in the framework of the notification made pursuant to Article 9(2) or 17(3) of

Directive 2008/56/EC. The justification shall include evidence of the fulfilment of

the obligation of regional cooperation laid down in Articles 5 and 6 of Directive

2008/56/EC, and in particular the requirement to ensure that the different elements of

the marine strategies are coherent and coordinated across the marine region or sub-

region concerned.

Where this Decision does not set criteria, methodological standards, specifications or

standardised methods for monitoring and assessment, Member States shall endeavour

to use,

where practical and appropriate,

those developed at international, regional or

subregional level, such as in the relevant Regional Sea Conventions, when

determining good environmental status in accordance with Article 9(1) and when

assessing whether it has been achieved under Article 8(1).

Where the Annex to this Decision provides for Member States to establish threshold

values or list of elements at regional or subregional level, this shall be done in time

for the first review of their initial assessment and determination of good

environmental status in accordance with point (a) of Article 17(2) of Directive

2008/56/EC, i.e. by 15 July 2018.

[In exceptional circumstances, Member States may only establish these threshold

values at regional or subregional level for the second review of their initial

assessment and determination of good environmental status in accordance with point

(a) of Article 17(2) of Directive 2008/56/EC, i.e. by 15 July 2024, provided the

reasons for the delay are duly justified to the Commission in the notification made

pursuant to Article 9(2) or 17(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC.]

Article 4

Review

The Commission shall review this Decision by 15 July 2023, as part of the review set

out in Article 23 of Directive 2008/56/EC.

The review should in particular take into account:

(a)

the need to adapt this Decision to the latest scientific and technical knowledge.

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

(a)

the experiences of the implementation of this Decision in light of the objective

of Directive 2008/56/EC of achieving good environmental status by 2020.

Article 4

Repeal

Decision 2010/477/EU is hereby repealed.

Article 5

Entry into force

This Decision shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in

the

Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels,

For the Commission

The President

[…]

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

EUROPEAN

COMMISSION

Brussels,

XXX

[…](2015)

XXX

draft

ANNEX 1

ANNEX

to the

Commission Decision

laying down criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status and

specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

ANNEX

to the

Commission Decision

laying down criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status and

specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

Criteria and methodological standards for good environmental status,

and specifications

and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment,

relevant to the descriptors in

Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC, and to Annex III of that Directive

and specifications

and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

This Annex is structured in three parts:

–

under Part A are laid down the criteria, methodological standards and specifications

to be used forthat relate to

the assessment of

predominant

pressures and impacts

under point (b) of Article 8(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC,

under part B are those

to be used forthat relate to

the assessment of environmental

status under point (a) of Article 8(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC,

Part C lays down the spatial aspects

of these assessmentsnecessary to assess the

extent to which good environmental status is being achieved.

–

ART

–

RITERIA AND METHODOLOGICAL STANDARDS RELATING TO THE

ASSESSMENT OF

PREDOMINANT PRESSURES AND IMPACTS UNDER POINT

(

)

RTICLE

8(1)

IRECTIVE

2008/56/EC

The following criteria and methodological standards for determination of good environmental

status under Article 9(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC, and specifications and standardised

methods for monitoring and assessment under Article 11(4) of Directive 2008/56/EC, shall be

used

by Member States to assess the extent to which good environmental status is being

achieved,

in relation to the assessment of

predominant

pressures and impacts under point (b)

of Article 8(1) of that Directive.:

The relevant descriptors

are presented in the following order of

anthropogenic

pressures:

substances, litter and energy (Descriptors 5, 8, 9, 10, 11), biological pressures (Descriptors 2

and 3) and physical pressures (Descriptors 6 and 7), as listed in Annex III of Directive

2008/56/EC.

When this Decision refers to a 'descriptor', this is understood to refer to the relevant qualitative

descriptors under the numbered points in Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC.

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Descriptor 5

–

Human-induced eutrophication is minimised, especially adverse effects thereof, such as losses in biodiversity, ecosystem

degradation, harmful algae blooms and oxygen deficiency in bottom waters

Related pressures: Input of nutrients; Input of organic matter

Elements for assessment, cCriteria, including criteria elements,

and methodological standards

Criteria Eelements for assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen (DIN),

Total Nitrogen (TN), Dissolved Inorganic

Phosphorus (DIP), Total Phosphorus (TP)

in the water column

Chlorophyll a in the water column

Transparency Clarity

of the water column

Nuisance/toxic algal blooms (e.g.

cyanobacteria) in the water column

D5C1: Nutrient concentrations

are at do not exceed

levels

that do not

Scales of assessment:

cause adverse eutrophication effects.

–

in coastal waters, the water

bodies

under

Directive

Member States shall establish, at regional or subregional level, these

2000/60/EC;

threshold values, which shall be set at regional or subregional level by

Member States. Those levels:

–

beyond

coastal

waters,

subdivisions of the region or

(a) are

consistent with levels required to achieve good ecological status

subregion,

divided

where

under Directive 2000/60/EC;

and

needed by national boundaries

do not lead to eutrophication effects.

and/or at the 12 nautical mile

D5C2: Chlorophyll a concentration does not exceed:

limit of territorial waters.

(a) in the water column of coastal waters, the values set in Decision

2013/480/EU;

Primary and secondary criteria:

(b) beyond coastal waters, the concentration values set at regional or

Criteria D5C1, D5C2 and D5C8

subregional level by Member States, which are consistent with

–

are primary criteria.

those of Directive 2000/60/EC and indicate adverse effects of

nutrient enrichment.

–

Criteria D5C6,

and

D5C7

and

D5C9

are primary criteria in

D5C3: Water

transparency clarity equals or

exceeds the minimum level

coastal waters.

set at regional or subregional level by Member States. Those levels are

consistent with levels required to achieve good ecological status under

–

The remaining criteria are

Directive 2000/60/EC and are related to increases in suspended algae as a

secondary criteria,

they can:

consequence of nutrient enrichment.

–

D5C9 may

substitute

D5C4: Bloom events of nuisance or toxic algal blooms (e.g.

D5C8 the associated

cyanobacteria) due to nutrient enrichment do not exceed:

primary criterion in cases

of lack of data: D5C3,

(a) in coastal waters, the levels set in Decision 2013/480/EU if any, or

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria Eelements for assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

developed at regional or subregional level;

(b) beyond coastal waters, the levels set at regional or subregional level

by Member States, which are consistent with those of Directive

2000/60/EC.

D5C5: Changes in

phytoplankton

species composition and relative

abundance due to nutrient enrichment do not exceed:

(a) in coastal waters, the levels set in Decision 2013/480/EU;

(b) beyond coastal waters, the levels set at regional or subregional level

by Member States, which are consistent with those of Directive

2000/60/EC.

Methodological standards

D5C4 or D5C5 may

substitute D5C2 and

D5C9 may substitute

D5C8, orand

–

D5C3, D5C4 or D5C5

may

be used to

reinforce

complement the primary

criteriaD5C2, securing the

relationship of the

primary criterion with the

pressure criterion D5C1.

Phytoplankton in the water column

Opportunistic macroalgae of seabed

habitats

Perennial seaweeds

and or

seagrasses of

seabed habitats

D5C6: Changes in the

abundance biomass

of opportunistic macroalgae in

The use of the secondary criteria

coastal waters, due to nutrient enrichment, do not exceed the levels set in

shall be agreed at regional or

Decision 2013/480/EU.

subregional level.

Should this criterion be relevant for waters beyond coastal waters, changes

in the abundance of opportunistic macroalgae due to nutrient enrichment

do not exceed levels set at regional or subregional level by Member

Application rules:

All criteria used shall achieve the

States, which are consistent with those of Directive 2000/60/EC.

reference levelsthreshold values

set.

D5C7: Changes in the abundance

or depth distribution

of perennial

seaweeds and seagrasses (e.g. fucoids, eelgrass and Neptune grass) in

coastal waters, due to nutrient enrichment via decreases in water

transparency, do not exceed the levels set in Decision 2013/480/EU.

Should this criterion be relevant for waters beyond coastal waters, changes

in the abundance of perennial seaweeds and seagrasses (e.g. fucoids,

eelgrass and Neptune grass) due to nutrient enrichment via decreases in

water transparency do not exceed levels set at regional or subregional

level by Member States, which are consistent with those of Directive

2000/60/EC.

D5C8:

Changes in dDissolved

oxygen

concentration, due to increased

Dissolved oxygen in the

bottom of the

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria Eelements for assessment

water column

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

organic matter decomposition, levels in the bottom of the water column

are do not lead to adverse effects on seabed habitats or other

eutrophication effects.

Member States shall establish, at regional or subregional level, these

threshold values, which shall be consistent with those of Directive

2000/60/EC. not reduced, due to increased organic matter decomposition,

beyond levels set at regional or subregional level by Member States.

Those levels:

are consistent with those of Directive 2000/60/EC; and

do not lead to adverse effects on seabed habitats.

D5C9: Changes in the typical

species

composition,

including sensitive

species,

and relative abundance

of benthic invertebrate communities,

due

to increased organic matter decomposition, do not exceed:

(a) in coastal waters, the values for benthic biological quality elements

set in Decision 2013/480/EU;

(b) beyond coastal waters, the levels set at regional or subregional level

by Member States, which are consistent with those of Directive

2000/60/EC.

Methodological standards

Macroinvertebrate communities of seabed

habitats

Specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

A failure of criterion D5C1 without failure of the other criteria may require a recalibration of reference levels.Monitoring beyond coastal waters under

the Descriptor 5 criteria may not be necessary in cases where the threshold values are achieved in coastal waters.

Units of measurement for the criteria:

D5C1 Nutrient concentrations in

micrograms per litre

D5C2 Chlorophyll a concentrations in

micrograms per litre

D5C3 Water

transparency clarity

in metres

D5C8 Oxygen concentrations in

milligrams per litre

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Descriptor 8

–

Concentrations of contaminants are at levels not giving rise to pollution effects.

Related pressures: Input of hazardous substances

Criteria, including criteria elements,Elements for assessment, criteria

and methodological standards for hazardous substances in the marine

environment

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Within 12 nautical miles:

(a)

the list of

contaminants for

which an environmental quality

standard is laid down in Part A

of Annex I of Directive

2008/105/EC;

the list of

Specific Pollutants

under Annex V of Directive

2000/60/EC; and

D8C1: Within 12 nautical miles, good environmental status under

Directive 2008/56/EC is achieved when:

(a) good chemical status is achieved under Directive 2000/60/EC;

(b) good ecological status for the River Basin Specific Pollutants is

achieved,

within 1 nautical mile,

under Directive 2000/60/EC;

(c)

when contaminants under points (a) and (b) are measured in a

matrix for which no environmental quality standard is provided

under Directive 2008/105/EC, in accordance with Article 3(3) of

that Directive, the concentration of those contaminants in that

matrix do not exceed the threshold values agreed at the regional or

subregional level by Member States;

and

(d) the concentrations of the additional contaminants do not exceed the

levels values

agreed at regional or subregional level by Member

States,

considering their application within and beyond 12 nautical

miles

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

Scales of assessment:

–

within 12 nautical miles, the

water bodies used under

Directive 2000/60/EC;

beyond 12 nautical miles,

subdivisions of the region or

subregion, divided where needed

by national boundaries.

–

(b)

(c)

additional

contaminants,

relevant,

such as from offshore

sources, which are not already

identified under points (a) or (b)

and which pose a risk to or via

the marine environment in the

marine region or subregion.

Member States shall establish

the list of these additional

contaminants at regional or Beyond 12 nautical miles, good environmental status under Directive

subregional level.

2008/56/EC is achieved when the concentrations of the contaminants

to be

assessedselected under 'Criteria elements',

in the relevant matrix, do not

Beyond 12 nautical miles, the

list of

exceed the

levels values

as applicable within 12 nautical miles.

contaminants

established considered for

the purposes of the assessment

within 12

nautical miles, where these still pose a risk

Primary and secondary criteria:

D8C1

and D8C2 areis a

primary

criteriaon.

D8C2 is a secondary criterion

that may be used to complement D8C1.

Application rules:

–

For D8C1,

all contaminants

assessed

for each criterion

need toshall

achieve the

reference levelsthreshold values

set.

For D8C2, all threshold values

set shall be achieved.

–

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

to or via the marine environment.

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

Contaminants used under D8C1, as

relevant, assessed in particular species and

tissues, or particular benthic habitats.

Member States shall establish at regional

or subregional level this list of particular

species, tissues and habitats.

D8C2: The health of

individuals populations

of marine species, or of

biological communities (such as species composition/abundance changes

at locations of chronic pollution) is not adversely affected (including sub-

lethal effects) by contaminants.

Member States shall establish at regional or subregional level

those

adverse effects and

their

reference levelsthreshold values for the adverse

effects.

Criteria, including criteria elements, Elements for assessment, criteria

and methodological standards for acute pollution events

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

Scale of assessment:

Regional or subregional level.

Primary and secondary criteria:

D8C3 is

primary a secondary

criterion,

be used when a significant acute pollution

event has occurred.

Application rules:

No reference level is set for D8C3. This

criterion may be used by Member States

as an environmental target.This criterion

Polluting substances, as defined in Article

2(2) of Directive 2005/35/EC of the

European Parliament and of the Council

including crude oil and similar

compounds

D8C3:

Spatial and Ttemporal occurrence, source (where possible), spatial

distribution and

extent of significant acute pollution events

of crude oil

and similar compounds is. The level of such events is

minimised and,

where possible, eliminated.

Directive 2005/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on ship-source pollution and on the introduction of penalties for infringements

(OJ L 255, 30.9.2005, p. 11).

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

should be used to set an appropriate

environmental target, rather than a

determination of good environmental

status.

Scale of assessment:

As used for the species groups and broad

habitat types which are affected.

Primary and secondary criteria:

D8C4 is

a secondary primary

criterion,

be used when a significant acute pollution

event has occurred.

Application rules:

The outcomes of assessment of this

criterion should contribute, where

appropriate, to the assessments under

Descriptors 1 and 6.

Species groups and broad habitat types

D8C4:

The health of populations of species and the condition of habitat

types are not adversely affected by significant The adverse effects from

acute pollution events

of crude oil and similar compounds on species

groups and habitat types do not threaten their good environmental status.

Specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

For the purposes of this Decision:

(1)

(2)

Criterion D8C1: Member States shall monitor the priority substances in the relevant matrix as set under Directive 2000/60/EC at least every 6

years and shall use methods of analysis that meet the minimum performance criteria laid down in Commission Directive 2009/90/EC

Criteria D8C2 and D8C4: population demographic characteristics (e.g. fecundity rates, survival rates, mortality rates, and reproductive

capacity) may be relevant to assess the health effects.

Commission Directive 2009/90/EC of 31 July 2009 laying down, pursuant to Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, technical specifications

for chemical analysis and monitoring of water status (OJ L 201, 1.8.2009, p. 36)

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

(3)

(4)

Criteria D8C3 and D8C4: for the purposes of this Decision, monitoring is established as needed once the acute pollution event has occurred,

rather than being part of a regular monitoring programme under Article 11 of Directive 2008/56/EC.

Criterion D8C43: Member States shall

identify the source of significant acute pollution events, where possible. They shall

use the national

registers for reporting under

[EMSA

satellite surveillance.]

Units of measurement for the criteria:

D8C1 Concentrations of contaminants in

micrograms per litre for water and micrograms per kilogram of wet weight for biota.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Descriptor 9

–

Contaminants in fish and other seafood for human consumption do not exceed levels established by Community legislation or

other relevant standards.

Related pressure: Input of hazardous substances

Criteria, including criteria elements,Elements for assessment, criteria

and methodological standards

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Contaminants listed in Regulation (EC)

No 1881/2006.

For the purposes of this Decision,

Member States may decide not to consider

contaminants from

Regulation (EC) No1881/2006 where

justified on the basis of a risk assessment.

Member States may assess additional

contaminants that are not included in

Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006. Member

States shall agree at regional or

subregional level on those additional

contaminants.

Member States shall establish

at regional

or subregional level

the list of species and

relevant tissues to be assessed, according

to the conditions laid down under

'specifications'.

They may establish the

list at regional or subregional level.

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

Scales of assessment:

For commercially-exploited species which

D9C1: The level of contaminants in edible tissues (muscle, liver, roe, flesh are assessed under Descriptor 3, the same

or other soft parts, as appropriate) of seafood (including fish, crustaceans, assessment areas are used. For other

molluscs, echinoderms, seaweed and other marine plants) caught or

species, the assessment areas used under

harvested in the wild (excluding fin-fish from mariculture) does not

Descriptor 8 are used.

exceed:

(a) for contaminants listed in Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006, the

Primary and secondary criteria:

maximum levels laid down in that Regulation; and

D9C1 is a primary criterion.

(b) for additional contaminants, not listed in Regulation (EC) No

1881/2006, levels agreed at regional or subregional level by

Application rules:

Member States.

All contaminants shall achieve the

reference levelsthreshold values

set.

Specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

When Member States establish the list of species to be used, the species shall meet the following conditions:

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

(a)

(b)

(c)

the species are relevant to the marine region or subregion concerned;

the species fall under the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006; and

the species are suitable for the contaminant being assessed.

Exceedance of the standard set for a contaminant shall lead to subsequent monitoring to determine the persistence of the contamination in the

area and species sampled. Monitoring needs to continue until there is sufficient evidence that there is no risk of failure.

For the purposes of this Decision, the sampling for the assessment of the maximum levels of contaminants shall be performed in accordance

with Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and in particular with Commission Regulation (EU) No

589/2014

and Commission Regulation (EC) No 333/2007

Within each region or subregion, Member States shall ensure that the temporal and geographical scope of sampling is adequate to provide a

representative sample of the specified contaminants in seafood in the marine region or subregion.

Member States shall monitor and report:

(a)

(b)

(c)

the

location area

in the marine region or subregion

where the product

from which the samples are taken,

are caught or farmed, in

accordance with Article 35 of Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council

the species and tissue tested,

the level of contaminants and whether this has exceeded the maximum level for contaminants set in Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006.

Units of measurement for the criteria:

D9C1 Concentrations of contaminants in

micrograms per kilogram of wet weight per species.

Commission Regulation (EU) No 589/2014 of 2 June 2014 laying down methods of sampling and analysis for the control of levels of dioxins, dioxin-like PCBs and non-

dioxin-like PCBs in certain foodstuffs (OJ L 164, 3.6.2014, p. 18)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 333/2007 of 28 March 2007 laying down the methods of sampling and analysis for the official control of the levels of lead, cadmium,

mercury, inorganic tin, 3-MCPD and benzo(a)pyrene in foodstuffs (OJ L 88, 29.3.2007, p. 29)

Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture

products, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1184/2006 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 (OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, p. 1).

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Descriptor 10

–

Properties and quantities of marine litter do not cause harm to the coastal and marine environment.

Related pressure: Input of litter

Criteria, including criteria elements, Elements for assessment, criteria

and methodological standards

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Litter (excluding micro-litter), classified

in the following categories: artificial

polymer materials, rubber, cloth and

textiles, paper and cardboard, processed

and worked wood, metal, glass and

ceramics, and other. Member States may

define further sub-categories.

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

D10C1: The composition, amount and spatial distribution of litter

in the

intertidal zone including the strandlineon the coastline,

in the surface layer

of the water column, and on the sea-floor, is at a level that does not cause

harm to the coastal and marine environment or other pollution effects.

Member States and the Commission should jointly establish, at Union

level,

reference levelsthreshold values.

D10C2: The composition, amount and spatial distribution of micro-litter

in the intertidal zone including the strandlineon the coastline,

in the

surface layer of the water column,

and on the sea-floor and in sea-floor

sediment,

is at a level that does not cause harm to the coastal and marine

environment or other pollution effects.

Member States and the Commission should jointly establish, at Union

level,

reference levelsthreshold values.

D10C3: The amount of litter and micro-litter ingested by marine animals

is at levels that do not adversely affect the health of the species concerned.

Member States shall establish at regional or subregional level the

reference levels.

Scales of assessment:

National part of subdivisions of each

region or subregion.

Primary and secondary criteria:

All criteria are primary criteria.

Application rules:

Each criterion is to achieve the

reference

levelsthreshold values

set

(when they

become available).

Micro-litter (particles

between 20 µm and

<5mm as largest dimension),

classified in

the categories 'artificial polymer materials'

and 'other'.

Litter, classified in the same categories as

under D10C1, or for micro-litter in the

same categories as under D10C2, assessed

in species of birds, mammals, reptiles and

fish. Member States shall establish at

regional or subregional level the list of

species to be assessed.

Species of birds, mammals, reptiles and

fish. Member States shall establish at

regional or subregional level that species

D10C43: The number of entanglement incidents, or other types of

injury/mortality, of marine animals due to litter is at levels that do not

adversely affect populations of the species concerned.

Scale of assessment:

As used for assessment of the

corresponding species under Descriptor 1.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

list,

based on risk from marine litter.

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Member States shall establish at regional or subregional level the

reference levels.

Methodological standards

Primary and secondary criteria:

This is a primary criterion.

Application rules:

The outcomes of this criterion should

contribute to assessments under

Descriptor 1.

Specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

Under D10C1 and D10C2:

–

litter and micro-litter shall be monitored on the coastline,

litter and micro-litter shall be monitored in the surface layer of the water column and on the sea-floor (or sediment for micro-litter),

based on a risk assessment of the significance of the issue,

monitoring in biota may be used as a proxy for monitoring under D10C1 and D10C2. If used, litter and micro-litter should be assessed

in species of birds, mammals, reptiles, shellfish and fish, agreed by Member States at regional or subregional level.

The monitoring of

D10C3 and

D10C43 (the

amount of litter ingested and

the number of entanglement incidents or other types of injury/mortality due

to litter) should be based on incidental occurrences (e.g. strandings of dead animals).

Units of measurement for the criteria:

D10C1 Amount of litter in

number of items per 100 metres on the coastline, per cubic metre for surface layer, per square metre for sea-floor,

and[to

be added]

per individual for biota.

D10C2 Amount of micro-litter in

items per cubic metre for surface layer, per millilitre for sediment and per gram of intestine for biota [to

added]

D10C3 Amount of litter and micro-litter in [to

be added]

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

D10C43 Number of affected individuals per

each selected

species.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Descriptor 11

–

Introduction of energy, including underwater noise, is at levels that do not adversely affect the marine environment.

Related pressures: Input of anthropogenic sound; Input of other forms of energy

Criteria, including criteria elements, Elements for assessment, criteria

and methodological standards

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

D11C1: The proportion of days, their distribution within a calendar year

and

their

spatial distribution of impulsive anthropogenic sound do not

exceed values that are likely to adversely affect marine

mammals and

other

animals,

in particular marine mammals.

Member States and

the

Commission should jointly establish these

reference levelsthreshold values

at Union level.

In the absence of Union-

level values, Member States shall establish these reference levels at

regional or subregional level.

D11C2: Annual average levels, in two 'third octave' bands, of continuous

low-frequency

anthropogenic

sound do not exceed values that are likely to

adversely affect marine

mammals and other

animals,

in particular marine

mammals.

Member States and

the

Commission should jointly establish these

reference levelsthreshold values

at Union level.

In the absence of a Union-

level value, Member States shall establish these reference levels at

regional or subregional level.

Methodological standards

Scale of assessment:

As used for assessment of the

corresponding species under Descriptor 1.

Primary and secondary criteria:

Both criteria are primary criteria.

Application rules:

Each criterion is to achieve the

reference

levelsthreshold values

set

(when they

become available).

The outcomes of these criteria should

contribute to assessments under

Descriptor 1.

Impulsive anthropogenic sound in water

Continuous low-frequency anthropogenic

sound in water

Specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

D11C1:

–

Monitoring:

–

Spatial resolution: geographical locations whose shape and areas are to be determined (such as licence blocks for offshore industries) at

regional or subregional level.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

–

D11C2:

–

Temporal frequency: daily.

Impulsive sound measured as monopole energy source level

in units of dB re 1!Pa2 s

or zero to peak monopole energy source level in

units of dB re 1!Pa m.

Both are measured over the frequency band 10 Hz to 10 kHz.

Assessment: Proportion of days per calendar year, distribution within year and spatially within the assessment area.

Monitoring: Squared sound pressure in each of two

‘third

octave’ bands, one centred at 63 Hz and the other at 125 Hz, expressed as a level in

decibels in units of dB re 1!Pa.

This is measured either directly at observation stations, or inferred from a model used to interpolate between

or extrapolate from measurements at observation stations.

Assessment: Average noise level over a year.

–

Criteria relating to

the impact of noise or

other forms of energy input (including thermal energy, electromagnetic fields and light) still need to be

defined.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Descriptor 2

–

Non-indigenous species introduced by human activities are at levels that do not adversely alter the ecosystems.

Related pressure: Input or spread of non-indigenous species

Criteria, including criteria elements,Elements for assessment, criteria

and methodological standards

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

Scale of assessment:

National part of subdivisions of each

region or subregion.

Primary and secondary criteria:

Criterion D2C1 is a primary criterion.

Application rules:

No reference level is set for D2C1. This

criterion may be used by Member States

as an environmental target. This criterion

shall be used as an environmental target

and is thus not combined with other

criteria under Descriptor 2.

Scale of assessment:

As used for assessment of the

corresponding species group or broad

habitat type under Descriptors 1 and 6.

Primary and secondary criteria:

D2C2 and D2C3 are secondary criteria

which shouldto

be used where

there is a

possibility the species group or the broad

Non-indigenous species.

D2C1: The number of non-indigenous species which are newly introduced

via human activity into the wild, measured from the

baseline reference

year as reported for the 2012 initial assessment under Article 8(1) of

Directive 2008/56/EC, is minimised and where possible eliminated.

A list of non-indigenous species,

particularly invasive non-indigenous

species, which are specified at regional or

subregional level by Member States, and

which include any relevant

(?)

species on

the list of invasive alien species of Union

concern adopted in accordance with

Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No

1143/2014.

D2C2: Composition, abundance

or /biomass,

spatial distribution and

areal

spatial

extent of non-indigenous species, particularly of invasive species

contributing significantly to impacts on particular species groups or broad

habitat types.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

habitat type is at riskparticularly relevant

to the assessment of species groups and

habitat types under descriptors 1 and 6.

Application rules:

–

Criterion D2C2 (quantification

of non-indigenous species)

should contribute to the

assessment of D2C3 (impacts of

non-indigenous species).

Criterion D2C3 should provide

footprint ofthe extent of

impact

per species group and broad

habitat type assessed and thus

contribute to their assessments

under

Ddescriptors

1 and 6.

reference levelsthreshold

values

are set for D2C2 and

D2C3, as these are addressed

under the relevant species

groups and broad habitat types.

A list of particular species groups and

broad habitat types, as assessed under

Descriptor 1, defined by Member States at

the regional or subregional level.

D2C3:

The spatial extent The proportion

of the species group or

the spatial

extent of the

broad habitat type which is adversely altered by non-

indigenous species, particularly invasive non-indigenous species.

'Adversely altered' means the species group or broad habitat type is not in

good environmental status (for a given location) due to the number of non-

indigenous species and/or their abundance within the natural community.

–

Specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

Regarding D2C2, since species occurrence and abundance can be seasonally variable

(e.g. plankton),

monitoring needs to be undertaken at appropriate

times of year in relation to pathways and to characteristics of the community

(e.g. plankton).

Monitoring programmes should be linked to

those for

Descriptors 1 and 6, where possible, as they should use the same sampling methods and it is more practical to monitor non-indigenous species as part

of broader biodiversity monitoring, except where sampling

should needs to

focus on main risk areas for new introductions.

Units of measurement for the criteria:

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

–

Criterion

D2C1:

shall be reported as

the number of species per assessment area which have been newly-introduced in the assessment period (6

years).

Criterion

D2C3:

shall be reported as

the proportion (%) of the species group or broad habitat type adversely affected per assessment area.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Descriptor 3

–

Populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish are within safe biological limits, exhibiting a population age and size

distribution that is indicative of a healthy stock.

Related pressure: Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species, including target and non-target species

Criteria, including criteria elements,Elements for assessment, criteria

and methodological standards

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

D3C1: The fishing mortality rate (F) of populations of commercially-

exploited species is

[at

or] below levels which can produce the maximum

sustainable yield, as established by appropriate scientific bodies in

accordance with Article 26 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.

Methodological standards

Scales of assessment:

Populations (stocks) of each species are

assessed at ecologically-relevant scales

within each region or subregion, as

established by appropriate scientific bodies

D3C2: The spawning stock biomass (SSB) of populations of commercially in accordance with Article 26 of Regulation

Commercially-exploited fish and shellfish, exploited species is above biomass levels capable of producing maximum

(EU) No 1380/2013, based on specified

including all stocks that are managed under sustainable yield, as established by appropriate scientific bodies in

aggregations of ICES Areas and GFCM

Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, Regulation accordance with Article 26 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.

geographical sub-areas.

(EC) No 1967/2006 and nationally-

Primary and secondary criteria:

important stocks.

D3C3: Age and size distribution of commercially-exploited species matches Criteria D3C1, D3C2 and D3C3 are primary

at least the best available historical data that is indicative of a healthy stock. criteria.

This would include a high proportion of old/large individuals and reduced

Application rules:

adverse effects of exploitation on genetic diversity. Appropriate values are

All populations (stocks) assessed shall

set for each species or population within each region or subregion by

achieve the

reference levelsthreshold values

appropriate scientific bodies in accordance with Article 26 of Regulation

set for each criterion.

(EU) No 1380/2013.

Species of birds, mammals, reptiles and

non-commercially-exploited species of fish

and cephalopods.

Lists of relevant species as established for

the region or subregion

by appropriate

scientific bodies

in accordance with Article

25(5)6 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.

Scale of assessment:

D3C4: The levels of mortality per species from incidental by-catch do not As used for assessment of the corresponding

exceed levels which threaten the species, whilst accounting for other

species under Descriptor 1.

pressures on these species.

Primary and secondary criteria:

Member States shall set, at regional or subregional level, appropriate values

D3C4 is a primary criterion.

for each species.

Application rules:

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

This criterion

does not form part of the

assessment for Descriptor 3, but

should

contribute to the assessments of the

corresponding species under Descriptor 1.

Physical disturbance or damage to the seafloor, including effects on benthic communities, as a result of fishing activities, are addressed by the criteria

under Descriptor 6 (particularly D6C1,

D6C2

and D6C23) and are to be fed into the assessments of each broad habitat type under Descriptors 1 and 6.

Specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

2.1.

Methods for monitoring under Descriptor 3 shall be the ones established under Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008.

The following methods for assessment shall be used:

For D3C1, if quantitative assessments yielding values for Fishing mortality (F) are not available due to inadequacies in the available data, the

ratio between catch and biomass index ('catch/biomass ratio') can be used as an alternative method.

For assessment purposes an appropriate method for trend analysis can be adopted (e.g. the current value can be compared against the long-

term historical average).

2.2.

For D3C2, if quantitative assessments yielding values for Spawning Stock Biomass (SSB) are not available due to inadequacies in the

available data, biomass indices can be used as an alternative method.

For assessment purposes an appropriate method for trend analysis needs to be adopted (e.g. the current value can be compared against the

long-term historical average).

2.3.

D3C3 should reflect that healthy stocks of

many

species are characterized by a high proportion of old, large individuals. The relevant

properties are the following:

(a)

Size distribution of individuals in the population, expressed as i) Proportion of fish larger than mean size of first sexual maturation or ii)

percentile of the fish-length distribution observed in research vessel surveys.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

(b)

Selectivity pattern of the fishery exploiting the species, expressed as i) Length (or age depending on data availability) at first capture

(length/age at which 50% of individuals in the population are vulnerable to/retained by the gear) or ii) Proportion of individuals across

all species in the catch larger than the size at which 50% are mature or iii) Mean length of individuals across all species in the catch.

Genetic effects of exploitation of the species, expressed as i) Size at first sexual maturation or ii) Length at which half of the (female)

population are mature (50% of total length - TL50).

(c)

2.4.

For D3C4, data should be provided per species per fishing metier for each ICES or GFCM reporting area, to enable its aggregation to the

relevant scale for the species concerned, and to identify the particular fisheries and fishing gear most contributing to incidental catches for

each species.

Units of measurement for the criteria:

–

D3C2 in tonnes per species

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Descriptor 6

–

Sea-floor integrity is at a level that ensures that the structure and functions of the ecosystems are safeguarded and benthic

ecosystems, in particular, are not adversely affected.

Related pressures:

Physical loss (due to Cchange

of seabed substrate or morphology

(physical loss);and Eextraction

of seabed substrate)

(physical

loss);

Disturbance or damage to seabed

Criteria, including criteria elements,Elements for assessment, criteria

and methodological standards for assessment of physical disturbance or damage

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

Scale of assessment:

As used for assessment of the broad

habitat types under Descriptors 1 and 6.

Primary and secondary criteria:

D6C1 is a primary criterion.

Application rules:

No reference level for the criterion is set;

as, the extent of physical disturbance or

damage shall be used to assess the extent

of impact under

D6C2,

D6C23

and D6C4.

Scale of assessment:

As used for assessment of the

corresponding species under Descriptor 1.

Primary and secondary criteria:

D6C2 is a secondary criterion, to be used

where the status of the species is

threatened.

Application rules:

No reference level is set, as this criterion

shall contribute to the assessment of

criterion D1C4, where a reference level is

set for the habitat of the corresponding

Seabed (including intertidal areas)

D6C1 Spatial extent of physical disturbance or damage to the sea-floor.

Species of birds, mammals, reptiles, fish

and cephalopods.

Member States shall establish at regional

or subregional level a list of relevant

species, based on risk to their habitat from

physical disturbance or damage

D6C2 Spatial extent of sea-floor habitat of the species which is adversely

affected, in particular the functions provided (e.g. spawning, breeding and

feeding areas and migration routes), by physical disturbance or damage

pressures.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

species under Descriptor 1.

Benthic broad habitats types, as used for

Descriptor 1 (see list in Table 2, Part B of

this Decision).

D6C32 Spatial extent of the habitat which is adversely affected through

change in its structure and function (species composition and their relative

abundance, absence of particularly sensitive or fragile species or species

providing a key function), by physical disturbance or damage pressures.

Member States shall establish, at regional or subregional level,

reference

levelsthreshold values

for representative subtypes of each broad habitat

the appropriate biogeographical scale,

which are

consistent aligned

with

benthic

biological Bquality elementQE

values under Directive

2000/60/EC, for assessment of adverse effects.

D6C4 The size and age structure of specified species of the benthic broad

habitat reflect that of a (near) natural habitat in the absence of physical

disturbance or damage.

Member States shall establish, at regional or subregional level, reference

levels for selected species of the relevant broad habitat types where

age/size structure is at particular risk due to physical disturbance pressures

or associated fishing activity.

Scale of assessment:

As used for assessment of the broad

habitat types under Descriptors 1 and 6.

Primary and secondary criteria:

D6C32 is a primary criterion;

D6C4 is a

secondary criterion, to be used where the

physical disturbance pressure or

associated human activities (e.g. fishing)

is likely to affect the size/age structure of

key species in the habitat.

Application rules:

The outcomes of assessment of criterion

D6C32

(and where relevant D6C4) (extent

of impact) shall should

contribute to the

assessments of habitat types under

Descriptors 1

and 6.

Criteria, including criteria elements,Elements for assessment, criteria

and methodological standards for assessment of physical loss

(due

to change of

seabed substrate or morphology and extraction of seabed substrate)

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

Scale of assessment:

As used for assessment of the broad

habitat types under Descriptors 1 and 6.

Primary and secondary criteria:

D6C35

and D6C6 areis a

primary

criteriona.

Application rules:

No reference level is set

forof

criterion

D6C53

but the extent of loss (pressure)

Seabed (including intertidal areas)

D6C53

Cumulative sSpatial

extent of physical loss of

or change to

natural

seabed habitat.

Benthic broad habitats types, as used for

Descriptor 1 (see list under Table 2, Part B

of this Decision)

D6C6 Extent of each broad habitat type physically lost or changed due to

human activities.

from criterion D6C5 shall be used to

assess the extent of impact under

D6C6.

No reference level is set for criterion

D6C6 as the outcome shall contribute to

the assessment of habitat types under

Descriptors 1 and 6, where a reference

level is set for loss of habitat.

Specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

Regarding methods for monitoring,:

–

for D6C1, all relevant disturbances from different human activities shall be assessed (such as bottom-trawling fishing),

for D6C53

and D6C6,

all relevant modifications from different

human

activities shall be assessed (including changes to natural seabed

substrate or morphology via physical restructuring, infrastructure developments and loss of substrate via extraction of the seabed materials).

The area disturbed/damaged or lost shall be expressed in km

or km

per habitat type, as appropriate.

For coastal waters, data on hydromorphological modifications (mapping of alterations) in each water body should be derived from Directive

2000/60/EC. Beyond coastal waters, data can be collated from mapping of infrastructure and licenced extraction sites.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Regarding methods for assessment, the data shall be aggregated so that:

D6C2 is assessed in relation to total natural extent of the habitat of the species in the assessment area.

D6C32 is assessed in relation to total natural extent of each broad habitat type

assessed under Descriptor 1,

in the assessment area.

D6C53 is assessed as area lost in relation to total

natural

extent of all

natural

habitats in the assessment area (e.g. by extent of anthropogenic

modification).

D6C6 is assessed as proportion of total natural extent of each broad habitat type in the assessment area.

Units of measurement for the criteria:

–

D6C1: The area disturbed or damaged shall be expressed in square kilometres.

D6C2: The area disturbed or damaged shall be expressed in square kilometres per habitat type.

D6C3: The area lost shall be expressed in square kilometres.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Descriptor 7

–

Permanent alteration of hydrographical conditions does not adversely affect marine ecosystems.

Related pressures:

Physical loss (due to Cchange

of seabed substrate or morphology

(physical loss); Eor extraction

of seabed substrate

(physical loss);

Changes to hydrological conditions

Criteria, including criteria elements,Elements for assessment, criteria

and methodological standards

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

Scale of assessment:

As used for assessment of the

corresponding speciesbroad habitat types

under Descriptors 1

and 6.

Primary and secondary criteria:

D7C1 is a secondary criterion, to be used

where the permanent alterations in

hydrographical conditions are likely to put

the

species broad habitat types

at risk.

Application rules:

This criterion should contribute to the

assessment of

D7C2 habitat for the species

under Descriptor 1, where reference levels

are set.

Scale of assessment:

As used for assessment of the broad

habitat types under Descriptors 1 and 6.

Primary and secondary criteria:

D67C2 is a secondary criterion, to be used

where the extent of permanent alterations

in hydrographical conditions is likely to

put the habitat at risk.

Application rules:

Species of bird, mammals, reptiles, fish

and cephalopods.

Member States shall establish at regional

or subregional level, a list of relevant

species, based on risk to their habitat from

alterations in hydrographical conditions

Seabed (including intertidal areas)

D7C1:

Spatial extent of area Cumulative extent of habitat of the specified

species which is

adversely affected,

in particular the functions provided

(e.g. spawning, breeding and feeding areas and migration routes),

due to

permanent alteration of hydrographical conditions (e.g. changes in wave

action, currents, salinity, temperature, oxygen) associated with relevant

physical losses

to of

the seabed.

Benthic broad habitats types, as used for

Descriptor 1 (see list under Table 2, Part B

of this Decision)

D7C2:

Cumulative Spatial

extent of each benthic broad habitat type

which

has been

adversely affected (physical and hydrological characteristics and

associated biological communities) due to permanent alteration of

hydrographical conditions (e.g. changes in wave action, currents, salinity,

temperature, oxygen) associated with relevant physical losses

to of

the

seabed.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

This criterion should contribute to the

assessment of benthic habitats under

Descriptors 1 and 6, where

reference

levelsthreshold values

are set.

Specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

Regarding methods for monitoring:

Monitoring should focus on changes associated with infrastructure developments, either on the coast or offshore.

Standard EIA hydrodynamic models should be used to assess the extent of effects from each infrastructure development, validated with

ground-truth measurements.

For coastal waters, the hydromorphology data and relevant assessments under Directive 2000/60/EC should be used.

D7C1 is assessed in relation to total natural extent of all habitats in the assessment area.

D7C2 is assessed in relation to total natural extent of each broad habitat type assessed under Descriptor 1, in the assessment area.

–

Criteria

D7C1:

in square kilometres

and

D7C2:

should be reported

square kilometres per habitat typeof habitat which is adversely affected.

Regarding methods for assessment, the data shall be aggregated so that:

Units of measurement for the criteria:

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

PART B

–

RITERIA

AND METHODOLOGICAL STANDARDS RELATING TO THE

ASSESSMENT OF ESSENTIAL FEATURES AND CHARACTERISTICS AND

CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS OF MARINE WATERS UNDER POINT

(

)

RTICLE

8(1)

IRECTIVE

2008/56/EC

The following criteria and methodological standards for determination of good environmental status under Article 9(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC, and

specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment under Article 11(4) of Directive 2008/56/EC, shall be used

by Member States

to assess the extent to which good environmental status is being achieved,

in relation to the assessment of ecosystem state characteristics under point

(a) of Article 8(1) of that Directive and will contribute to the assessment of the following descriptors,

under Annex I of that Directive:

–

Descriptor 1

–

Biological diversity is maintained. The quality and occurrence of habitats and the distribution and abundance of species are in

line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.

Descriptor 4

–

All elements of the marine food webs, to the extent that they are known, occur at normal abundance and diversity and levels

capable of ensuring the long-term abundance of the species and the retention of their full reproductive capacity.

Descriptor 6

–

Sea-floor integrity is at a level that ensures that the structure and functions of the ecosystems are safeguarded and benthic

ecosystems, in particular, are not adversely affected.

Criteria D2C3,

D3C1,

D3C2, D3C3,

D3C4,

D5C2, D5C3, D5C4, D5C5, D5C6, D5C7, D5C8, D5C9,

D6C2,

D6C32,

D6C4, D6C6, D7C1,

D7C2,

D8C2, and D8C4 should contribute to the assessment

of habitats

under Descriptors 1 and 6,

by providing information on the impact of pressures.

Criteria D2C3, D3C1, D3C2, D3C3, D3C4, D8C2, D8C4 and D10C4 should contribute to the assessment of species under Descriptor 1, by providing

information on the impact of pressures.

The relevant criteria are presented in the following order of ecosystem components: birds, mammals, reptiles, fish and cephalopods (Descriptor 1),

pelagic and benthic habitats (Descriptors 1 and 6) and ecosystems, including food-webs (Descriptors 1 and 4), as listed

Annex III of Directive

2008/56/EC.

Birds, mammals, reptiles, fish and cephalopods

Theme:

Highly mobile speciesSpecies groups of marine birds, mammals, reptiles, fish and cephalopods

Criteria, including criteria elements,Elements for assessment, criteria

and methodological standards

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

D1C1: Species distributional range and, where relevant, pattern is in line

with natural physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.

Member States shall establish, at regional or subregional level,

reference

levelsthreshold values

for each species, consistent with the Favourable

Reference Range values established by the relevant Member States under

Directive 92/43/EEC.

Methodological standards

Scales of assessment:

Ecologically-relevant scales for each

species group shall be used, as follows:

–

For deep-diving toothed

cetaceans, baleen whales, deep-

sea fish: Region

For birds, small toothed

cetaceans, seals, turtles, pelagic

and demersal shelf fish,

cephalopods: Region for Baltic

and Black Seas; subregion for

North-East Atlantic and

Mediterranean Sea

For coastal fish: Subdivision of

region or subregion

All criteria are primary for

species covered by

Annex III of

Directive 92/43/EEC

For birds criteria D1C1 and

D1C2 are primary;

For commercially-exploited fish

and cephalopods, criteria D1C2

and D1C3 are primary;

For other species D1C2 is a

primary criterion;

The remaining criteria are

Species groups, as listed under Table 1

and if present in the region or subregion.

Member States shall establish, at regional

or subregional level, a set of species

representative for each species group

selected according to the criteria laid

down under

‘specifications’.

These species may be drawn from those

assessed under Union legislation

(Directive 92/43/EEC, Directive

2009/147/EC or Regulation (EU) No

1380/2013) or international agreements,

such as Regional Sea Conventions, or

other sources.

–

D1C2: Population size (abundance and/or biomass) of the species is not

significantly altered due to anthropogenic pressures, such that its long-

term viability is ensured.

Member States shall establish, at regional or subregional level, reference

levels for each species, consistent with the Favourable Reference

Population values established by the relevant Member States under

Directive 92/43/EEC, taking account of natural variation in population

size

and the level of mortality derived from D3C4, D8C4 and D10C3 and

other relevant pressures.

–

Primary and secondary criteria:

–

D1C3: Population demographic characteristics

(e.g. body size or age class

structure, sex ratio, fecundity rates, survival / mortality rates)

of the

species are indicative of a natural population which is not significantly

altered due to anthropogenic pressures.

Member States shall establish, at regional or subregional level, reference

levels for each species.

D1C4: The habitat for the species has the necessary extent and condition

–

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

to support the different stages in the life history of the species.

Member States shall establish, at regional or subregional level,

reference

levelsthreshold values

for each species.

Methodological standards

secondary and should be used

where there is a possibility the

species

are at riskmay fail the

criterion in relation to these

criteria

due to anthropogenic

pressures.

Application rules:

The status of each species shall be

assessed individually, drawing wherever

possible from assessments under

Directive

92/43/EEC, Directive 2009/147/EC or

Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013other

Union legislation or international

agreements:

For birds, criteria D1C1 and D1C2

are

equivalentcorrespond

to the

‘breeding

distribution map and range’

and

‘population

size’ criteria of Directive

2009/147/EC.

For mammals, reptiles and non-

commercial fish, criteria D1C1, D1C2,

D1IC3 and D1C4

are

equivalentcorrespond

to the

‘range’,

‘population’

and

‘habitat

for the species’

criteria of Directive 92/43/EEC.

For commercially-exploited fish and

cephalopods, criteria D1C2 and D1C3

are

equivalentcorrespond

to criteria D3C2 and

D3C3; assessments under D3 should be

used for D1 purposes.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

For aAll

species

in a species

groups,

the

species is in good status when the criteria

used shall

achieve the

reference

levelsthreshold values

set.

Good environmental status shall be

assessed for each species group, according

to the status assessments of all the

component species selected as

representative of the group. Where agreed

Union level rules are not available, all

species within the group shall achieve

good status for the group as a whole to be

considered at GES.

Elements for assessmentCriteria elements

Table 1

–

Species groups

Ecosystem component

Species groups

Grazing birds

Wading birds

Birds

Surface-feeding birds

Pelagic-feeding birds

Benthic-feeding birds

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Ecosystem component

Species groups

Small toothed cetaceans

Mammals

Deep-diving toothed cetaceans

Baleen whales

Seals

Reptiles

Turtles

Coastal fish

Fish

Pelagic shelf fish

Demersal shelf fish

Deep-sea fish

Coastal/shelf cephalopods

Cephalopods

Deep-sea cephalopods

Specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

[To

be added]

Pelagic and benthic hHabitats

Theme:

Pelagic and benthic hHabitats

Coastal fish and habitats are not confined to coastal waters, but are ecologically defined.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria, including criteria elements,Elements for assessment, criteria

and methodological standards

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

Scales of assessment:

Ecologically-relevant scales for each

broad habitat type shall be used, as

follows: sSubdivision

of region or

subregion, reflecting biogeographic

changes

in species composition of the

habitatat community level.

Primary and secondary criteria:

D1C5 and D1C6 are primary criteria,

excepting D1C5 is not used for pelagic

habitats.

Application rules:

The status of each habitat shall be assessed

using wWherever

possible, assessments

(such as of sub-types of the broad habitat

types) under

Directive 92/43/EECother

Union legislation or international

agreements should be used to support

these assessments.

Criteria D1C5 and D1C6

are

equivalentcorrespond

to the

‘range/area

covered by habitat type within range’

and

‘specific structures and functions’

criteria

of Directive 92/43/EEC.

Criterion D1C5 should use the assessment

Broad habitat types as listed in Table 2

and if present in the region or subregion.

Member States shall further define, at

regional or subregional level, habitat

types, selected according to the criteria

laid down under

‘specifications’,

of each

broad habitat type.

These may include habitat types assessed

under Directive 92/43/EEC or

international agreements. Their assessment

should be supported by the assessment,

particularly of habitat condition, of a set of

more finely-defined habitat types (e.g.

EUNIS level 4 or 5 types, or types from

Habitats Directive or international

agreements) selected according to the

criteria laid down under

‘specifications’.

D1C5:

The extent, and where relevant distribution, of the habitat is not

significantly altered due to anthropogenic pressures.

The loss of extent of the habitat type, resulting from anthropogenic

pressures, does not exceed 5% of the natural extent of the habitat in the

assessment area. In cases where the loss exceeded this value in the

baseline

reference

year used for the Initial Assessment in 2012, there shall be no

further loss of the habitat type.

D1C6: The

spatial extent of impacts from anthropogenic pressures on the

condition of the habitat, including its biotic (typical species composition

and their relative abundance) and abiotic structure, and its functions,

is not

significantly altered due to anthropogenic pressures over at least does not

exceed

30%

of its natural extent in the assessment area.

This proportion

shall include any loss of natural extent, as assessed under criterion D1C5.

From IUCN guidelines on ecosystem assessments

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

Methodological standards

made under D6C3.

For pelagic habitats, assessments should,

in particular, take into account the

assessments under D2C3, D5C2, D5C3,

D5C4, D5C5, D8C2 and D8C4. For

pelagic habitats, the assessments fulfil the

needs for assessment under Descriptor 1.

For benthic habitats, assessments should,

in particular, take into account the

assessments under D2C3, D3C2, D3C3,

D5C6, D5C7, D5C8, D5C9, D6C2, D7C2,

D8C2 and D8C4. For benthic habitats, the

assessments fulfil the needs for assessment

under Descriptors 1 and 6.

Both criteria D1C5 and D1C6 shall

achieve the threshold values set. For

pelagic habitats, assessments should, in

particular, take into account the

assessments for Descriptor 5 and

Descriptor 2.

For benthic habitats, the assessments fulfil

the needs for assessment under Descriptors

1 and 6. Both criteria shall achieve the

reference levels set. The assessments

should, in particular, take into account the

assessments for Descriptor 5, Descriptor 2,

Descriptor 3 (benthic species) and

Descriptors 6 and 7 (physical disturbance,

physical loss and associated

hydrographical changes).

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria Eelements for assessment

Table 2

–

Broad habitat types (relevant for criteria under Descriptors 1, 6 and 7), which equate to one or more habitat types of the EUNIS

classification (2016 version used), as indicated

. Updates to the EUNIS typology should be reflected in the broad habitat types used for the purposes of

Directive 2008/56/EC and of this Decision.

Ecosystem component

Broad habitat types

Littoral rock and biogenic reef

Littoral sediment

Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef

Infralittoral coarse sediment

Infralittoral sand

Infralittoral mud

Infralittoral mixed sediment

Benthic habitats

Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef

Circalittoral coarse sediment

Circalittoral sand

Circalittoral mud

Circalittoral mixed sediment

Upper bathyal

rock and biogenic reef

Upper bathyal sediment

Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef

Lower bathyal sediment

Relevant EUNIS habitat codes (version 2016)

[to be completed]

The boundary for the upper bathyal could be set as a specified depth limit.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Ecosystem component

Broad habitat types

Abyssal rock and biogenic reef

Abyssal sediment

Variable salinity

Relevant EUNIS habitat codes (version 2016)

Pelagic habitats

Coastal

Shelf

Oceanic

Specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

New requirements for monitoring and assessment may be needed for MSFD implementation issues (notably for fish, cephalopods and habitats).

Criteria for the selection of species and habitats to be assigned to the species groups and broad habitat types:

(a)

MainPrimary

scientific criteria (ecological relevance):

–

Representative of the ecosystem component (species group or broad habitat type), being relevant for assessment of state/impacts, such

as having a key functional role within the component (e.g. high or specific biodiversity, productivity, trophic link, specific resource or

service);

Relevant for assessment of a key anthropogenic pressure to which the ecosystem component is exposed, being sensitive to the pressure

and exposed to it (vulnerable) in the assessment area;

Sufficiently present across the (sub)region: high proportion (extent or occurrence) of the species/ habitat occurs within the assessment

area;

Present in sufficient numbers or extent in the assessment area to be able to construct a suitable indicator for assessment.

The set of species or habitats selected should cover, as far as possible, the full range of ecological functions of the ecosystem

component.

–

Retained for situations where estuarine plumes extend beyond waters designated as Transitional Waters under Directive 2000/60/EC.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

(b)

Secondary Additional

practical criteria (which shall not override the

primary mainset of scientific

criteria):

–

Monitoring/technical feasibility

Monitoring costs

Reliable time series

The representative set of species and habitats to be assessed are likely to be (sub)regionally specific, although certain species may occur in several

subregions.

The more species/habitats that will be included in each group, the greater the confidence in the assessment.

For monitoring of D1C6, for benthic habitats, the proportion of spatial extent of impacts from anthropogenic pressures shall include any loss of natural

extent, as assessed under criterion D1C5 for benthic habitats.

Ecosystems, including food webs

Theme: Ecosystems

Criteria, including criteria elements,Elements for assessment, criteria

and methodological standards

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Trophic guilds of an ecosystem.

Member States shall agree at regional or

subregional level on at least three trophic

guilds to assess, two of which shall be

non-fish trophic guilds. These should take

into account the ICES list of trophic

guilds

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

D4C1: Abundance

or/

biomass of trophic guilds is not

significantly

alteredadversely affected

due to anthropogenic pressures.

Member States shall establish, at regional or subregional level,

reference

levelsthreshold values.

D4C2: Size distribution

[per

species] within trophic guilds is not

adversely

affected significantly altered

due to anthropogenic pressures.

Member States shall establish, at regional or subregional level,

reference

levelsthreshold values.

Methodological standards

Scale of assessment:

Regional level for Baltic Sea and Black

Sea; subregional level for North-East

Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea,

distinguishing coastal, shelf and

oceanic/deep-sea ecosystems, as

appropriate.

ICES Advice (2015) Book 1, ICES special request advice, published 20 March 2015.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Criteria elementsElements for

assessment

Criteria, including

reference levelsthreshold values

where they exist

D4C3: Species composition and their relative abundance (diversity) within

the trophic guild are not

adversely affected significantly altered

due to

anthropogenic pressures.

Member States shall establish, at regional or subregional level,

reference

levelsthreshold values.

Methodological standards

Primary and secondary criteria:

Criteria D4C1 and D4C3 are primary

criteria. Criterion

DC4C2

is a secondary

criterion, to be used for trophic guilds in

which size distribution may be

significantly affected by anthropogenic

pressures. Criterion

DC4C4

is a secondary

criterion

which shouldto

be used in

support of criterion

DC4C1, where

necessary.

Application rules:

For all criteria used, the reference levels

set shall be achieved.

D4C4: Productivity of trophic guilds is not

adversely affected significantly

altered

due to anthropogenic pressures.

Member States shall establish, at regional or subregional level,

reference

levelsthreshold values.

Specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment

[To

be added]

Member States shall monitor whether, for each criterion, the values fall within the threshold values set.

PART C - S

PATIAL ASPECTS OF

ASSESSMENT ASSESSING THE EXTENT TO WHICHOF

GOOD ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS

IS ACHIEVED

The achievement of good environmental status under Article 1(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC needs to address both the quality to be achieved at any

given location in the marine waters of Member States and the spatial extent over which such quality levels are to be achieved within each region or

subregion. This spatial aspect is reflected in Article 1(2) and 1(3) of that Directive, and indicates that some locations may not achieve the quality levels

set, particularly to allow for certain sustainable uses of the marine waters, provided the collective pressure of human activities is kept within levels

compatible with the achievement of good environmental status and the capacity of marine ecosystems to respond to human-induced changes is not

compromised.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

For the

predominant

pressures and impacts to be assessed under point (b) of Article 8(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC, the criteria provided in Part A of this

Annex set

reference levelsthreshold values

(or provide for these to be set by Member States within each region or subregion) in relation to the

intensity

of a pressure that is considered to be compatible with (or not preventing) the achievement of good environmental statusquality to be achieved

at any

given

location area

in the marine waters of Member States.

In order to assess the extent to which

GES good environmental status

is being achieved in each region and subregion, as required under Article 9(3) of

Directive 2008/56/EC, the following are needed:

(a) the spatial distribution and extent of the

predominant

pressures and impacts addressed in the criteria under Descriptors 2 (excepting criterion

D2C1), 5, 6, 7, 8, 10 (excepting

D10C3 and

D10C34) and 11

need toshall

be assessed;

(b) the spatial extent of impacts assessed in criteria under Descriptors 2, 3 (for benthic species), 5, 6 and 7 (and if appropriate Descriptors 8, 9, 10

and 11) should be used when assessing the extent of habitat in good condition under Descriptors 1 and 6;

reporting on the updates ofreviewing

their initial assessments

and their determination of good environmental status

according to

point (a)

Article 17(2) of Directive 2008/56/EC, Member States shall

assess report

the extent to which the

reference levelsthreshold values

have been

achieved for each criterion used, per assessment element where relevant, as a proportion (%) of the total extent of the element in the assessment

area.

Last saved:

15/02/2016 18:0615/02/2016 15:5115/02/2016 09:41

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Naturstyrelsen/Naturbeskyttelse

Sags.nr.: NST-4205-00011

Dato: 15. februar 2016

Europa-Kommissionens udkast til forslag til afgørelse om fastsættelse af

kriterier og metodiske standarder for god miljøtilstand samt specifikationer og

standardmetoder for overvågning og vurdering, samt ophævelse af afgørelse

2010/477/EU. (Komitesag).

KOM-dokument foreligger ikke

Resumé

Europa-Kommissionen har med hjemmel i havstrategidirektivet fremlagt et udkast til ny afgørelse

vedrørende hvilke konkrete kriterier og metodiske standarder medlemslandene skal anvende, når

de vurderer, om der er god miljøtilstand i havmiljøet. Endvidere indeholder forslaget specifikationer

og standardmetoder for overvågning og vurdering af havmiljøet.

Europa-Kommissionens forslag er udtryk for en forenkling og en mere stringent opbygning, men er

på mange områder også en skærpelse af den nuværende afgørelse fra 2010 (2010/477/EU) og på

en række punkter også en skærpelse af selve havstrategidirektivet. Afgørelsen kan endvidere vise

sig at blive en skærpelse af vandrammedirektivet og habitatdirektivet/fuglebeskyttelsesdirektivet.

Forslaget vurderes generelt at ville hæve beskyttelsesniveauet i Danmark. Forslaget vurderes

samtidig at kunne få væsentlige økonomiske og administrative konsekvenser for både staten og

erhvervslivet. Der kan muligvis være økonomiske konsekvenser for kommunerne. Forslaget

forventes ikke at have økonomiske konsekvenser for regionerne.

Forslaget forventes sat til afstemning i havstrategidirektivets forskriftkomité den 15. juni 2016.

Regeringen kan støtte forslaget, idet der lægges afgørende vægt på:

at forslaget holder sig inden for de juridiske rammer i havstrategidirektive,.

at det fortsat er op til medlemslandene at beslutte, for hvilke kriterier der skal fastsættes

kvantitative grænseværdier,

at der indskrives større fleksibilitet i anvendelsen af kriterierne og at forholdet mellem primære

og sekundære kriterier afklares,

at der ikke i direktivet fastsættes grænseværdier for havets naturtyper. Alternativt at sådanne

grænseværdier indskrives fleksibelt,

at forslagets sammenhæng til vandrammedirektivet, fuglebeskyttelsesdirektivet og

habitatdirektivet afklares

således, at det ikke skærper beskyttelsesniveauet i forhold til disse

direktiver.

Baggrund

Europa-Kommissionens udkast til forslag er udarbejdet med hjemmel i Europa-Parlamentets og

Rådets Direktiv 2008/56/EF om fastlæggelse af en ramme for Fællesskabets havmiljøpolitiske

foranstaltninger (havstrategidirektivet).

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Havstrategidirektivet har til formål at skabe en ramme, inden for hvilken medlemslandene skal

træffe de fornødne foranstaltninger til at opnå eller opretholde en god miljøtilstand i havmiljøet

senest i år 2020. Hvert medlemsland skal hvert 6. år udarbejde dele af en havstrategi, som består

af en analyse af havmiljøets tilstand, en beskrivelse af god miljøtilstand og opstilling af en række

miljømål (næste gang i 2018), et overvågningsprogram (næste gang i 2020) og et indsatsprogram

(næste gang i 2021).

Havstrategidirektivet angiver, at Europa-Kommissionen skal fastlægge

”kriterier

og metodiske

standarder, som medlemsstaterne skal anvende, og som udformes med henblik på ændring af

ikke-væsentlige elementer i dette direktiv ved at supplere det, for at sikre konsistens og gøre det

muligt at foretage en sammenligning mellem havregionerne eller subregionerne med hensyn til, i

hvilket omfang der er opnået en god miljøtilstand”,

jf. artikel 9, stk. 3.

På den baggrund traf Europa-Kommissionen den 1. september 2010 afgørelse om kriterier og

metodiske standarder for god miljøtilstand i havområder (2010/477/EU). Denne afgørelse har

Danmark lagt til grund i første cyklus af direktivets gennemførelse. I afgørelsen fremgår det, at

den bør revideres på baggrund af bl.a. den videnskabelige udvikling og at dette bør ske rettidigt

inden den opdatering af havstrategierne, der skal ske i 2018, jf. præambel nr. 4.

Endvidere angiver direktivet, at Europa-Kommissionen skal fastsætte

”specifikationer

standardmetoder for overvågning og vurdering, der tager hensyn til eksisterende forpligtelser og

sikrer sammenlignelighed mellem overvågnings- og vurderingsresultater, og som udformes med

henblik på ændring af ikke-væsentlige elementer i dette direktiv ved at supplere det”,

jf. artikel 11,

stk. 4.

På den baggrund har Europa-Kommissionen den 13. januar 2016 fremsendt et nyt forslag til

afgørelse til behandling i havstrategidirektivets forskriftkomité. Udkastet har endnu ikke

gennemgået Europa-Kommissionens interne konsultationsprocedure og er ikke formelt fremsat.

Afgørelsen skal vedtages efter forskriftproceduren med kontrol. Forskriftkomitéen under

havstrategidirektivet træffer således afgørelse i sagen efter forskriftprocedure med kontrol (artikel

5a i Rådets afgørelse 1999/468/EF, som ændret ved Rådets afgørelse 2006/512 af 17. juli 2006),

jf. art. 25, stk. 2 i havstrategidirektivet.

Hvis der i forskriftudvalget er kvalificeret flertal for forslaget, udsteder Europa-Kommissionen

beslutningen, når Europa-Parlamentet har gennemført en legalitetskontrol af forslaget inden for tre

måneder. Opnås der ikke kvalificeret flertal i forskriftudvalget, forelægger Europa-Kommissionen

sagen for Rådet og underretter samtidig Europa-Parlamentet. Hvis der i Rådet er kvalificeret flertal

imod et forslag, skal Europa-Kommissionen behandle sagen på ny. Vedtager Rådet forslaget med

kvalificeret flertal, eller udtaler Rådet sig ikke inden en frist på højst to måneder, kan Europa-

Kommissionen udstede beslutningen, når Europa-Parlamentet har gennemført en legalitetskontrol

af forslaget inden for fire måneder fra Europa-Kommissionens forelæggelse.

Forslaget forventes sat til afstemning i havstrategidirektivets forskriftkomité den 15. juni 2016.

Side 2/3

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Formål og indhold

Formålet med forslaget er at sikre konsistens mellem landenes implementering af

havstrategidirektivet og at sikre sammenlignelighed på tværs af havregioner.

Forslaget angiver konkrete kriterier og metoder, der skal anvendes til at vurdere, om havmiljøet er

i god tilstand. Endvidere angiver forslaget, hvilke elementer i havmiljøet der skal overvåges samt i

nogle tilfælde også, hvor ofte det skal overvåges.

Europa-Kommissionen foreslår, at niveauer og grænseværdier for god miljøtilstand i langt de fleste

tilfælde fastsættes kvantitativt, hvilket vurderes at være en skærpelse i forhold til direktivet og den

gældende beslutning fra 2010, hvor niveauerne og grænseværdierne kunne være mere kvalitative.

For to kriterier har Europa-Kommissionen i udkast til afgørelse allerede foreslået kvantitative

grænseværdier:

Tabet af areal af naturtyper på grund af menneskelige påvirkninger (det være sig

havneudvidelser, strandparker, råstofindvinding eller lign.) må ikke overstige 5 % af

naturtypens naturlige udbredelsesareal.

Tilstanden af en naturtype må ikke være væsentligt negativt påvirket fra menneskelige

aktiviteter på over 30 % af naturtypens naturlige udbredelsesareal.

Mange af grænseværdierne skal fastsættes via udviklingsarbejde i de regionale havkonventioner

–

OSPAR (for Nordsøen) og HELCOM (for Østersøen)

–

mens de for undervandsstøj og marint affald

skal søges fastsat på EU-niveau. Europa-Kommissionen forudsætter samtidig, at niveauer, der

allerede er fastsat i havkonventionerne, bringes i anvendelse. Der er således tale om en skærpelse

af betydningen og forpligtelsen af det regionale samarbejde, der i højere grad fokuserer på

harmonisering og ikke kun koordinering, som er det direktivet forpligter landene til at gøre.

For mange af emnerne foreslår Europa-Kommissionen som noget nyt

en ”one-out-all-out” tilgang.

Det vil for eksempel sige, at hvis bare ét af kriterierne under et emne, fx biodiversitet (det kunne

være for en bestemt fugleart) ligger under niveauet for god miljøtilstand, falder hele emnet

”biodiversitet”

ud som værende i ikke god tilstand.

Der indføres såkaldte

primære

sekundære

kriterier, hvor det angives, at de primære kriterier

skal anvendes, mens de sekundære kriterier kan anvendes på baggrund af en nærmere vurdering.

I praksis vil denne vurdering betyde, at også de sekundære kriterier kan blive obligatoriske.

I den nuværende afgørelse fra 2010 var der mulighed for at undtage brugen af visse kriterier, hvis

medlemslandet ikke fandt det hensigtsmæssigt. Denne mulighed er ikke til stede i nærværende

udkast til afgørelse.

Ved forslaget udvides det geografiske anvendelsesområde også, idet kystvande, som er dækket af

vandrammedirektivet, indgår i forslagets ift. emner som eutrofiering og miljøfarlige stoffer, til trods

for, at det i havstrategidirektivet fremgår, at der netop ikke er et overlap mellem de to direktivets

anvendelsesområde.

Side 3/3

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

Regnearket er for stort til automatisk at lave PDF - upload en

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

CTTEE_12-2016-03

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

DIRECTORATE-GENERAL

ENVIRONMENT

Directorate C - Quality of Life, Water & Air

ENV.C.2 - Marine Environment & Water Industry

EETING OF THE

OMMITTEE UNDER

RTICLE

IRECTIVE

2008/56/EC

ARINE

TRATEGY

OMMITTEE

)

UESDAY

1 M

ARCH

2016 (10:00

–

18:00)

AND

EDNESDAY

2 M

ARCH

2016 (09:30-17:30)

Conference Centre Albert Borschette (CCAB) - Room 1B and 0B

36, Rue Froissart - B-1040 Brussels

Agenda Item:

Document:

Title:

Prepared by:

Date prepared:

CTTEE_12-2016-03

Proposal for a Commission Decision on GES Criteria_draft v2

European Commission

15/02/2016

This paper provides a second draft version of a proposal for a Commission Decision

laying down criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status and

specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment, and repealing

Decision 2010/477/EU. It is based on the comments made by Member States during the

Committee meeting of 27 January 2016 and received by email subsequently.

Please note that this draft:

has not yet undergone the Commission's internal consultation and could

therefore be subject to further changes.

is not for circulation outside the Regulatory Committee.

even though it will be one legal text, has to be presented in two different

sections (which have been copy-pasted one after the other below):

- the proposal for a Commission Decision containing the Recitals and Articles

- the proposal for an Annex to the Commission Decision, containing the actual

criteria, methodological standards, specifications and standardised methods.

Background

The MSFD Committee is invited to:

a. Discuss the attached draft;

Provide comments on this draft by

9 March 2016

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

EUROPEAN

COMMISSION

Brussels,

XXX

[…](2015)

XXX

draft

COMMISSION DECISION (EU) …/…

XXX

laying down criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status and

specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment, and repealing

Decision 2010/477/EU

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren

COMMISSION DECISION (EU) …/…

XXX

laying down criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status and

specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment, and repealing

Decision 2010/477/EU

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17

June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine

environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive)

, and in particular Article 9(3)

and 11(4) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

[Recital on legal basis / comitology procedure] Directive 2008/56/EC provides in its

Article 9(3) for criteria and methodological standards to be adopted in accordance with

the regulatory procedure with scrutiny referred to in Article 25(3) of that Directive. It

also provides in its Article 11(4) for the adoption of specifications and standardised

methods for monitoring and assessment, in accordance with the same procedure.

[Recital on Commission Decision 2010/477/EU] Decision 2010/477/EU

provided

criteria for "good environmental status", thus setting the basis for Member States to

establish their determinations of good environmental status and to guide their

assessments of current environmental status in 2012.

[Recital on necessity to revise the 2010 Decision] Decision 2010/477/EU

acknowledged that additional scientific and technical progress was required to support

the development or revision of these criteria for some qualitative descriptors, as well

as further development of methodological standards in close coordination with the

establishment of monitoring programmes. In addition, that Decision provided in its

Recital 4 that its revision should be carried out in time to support a successful update

of marine strategies that are due by 2018, pursuant to Article 17 of Directive

2008/56/EC.

[Recital n°1 on problems with existing good environmental status decision revealed by

cycle] In 2012, Member States reported under Articles 9(2) and 10(2) of Directive

2008/56/EC on the initial assessment of their marine waters, the determination of good

environmental status and their environmental targets. The Commission's assessment

of these Member State's reports highlighted that more efforts were urgently needed if

Member States and the Union are to reach good environmental status by 2020. The

OJ L 164, 25.2.2008, p. 19.

Commission Decision 2010/477/EU of 1 September 2010 on criteria and methodological standards on

good environmental status of marine water (OJ L 232, 2.9.2010, p. 14).

Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - The first phase of

implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC) - The European

Commission's assessment and guidance (COM(2014)097 final, 20.2.2014)

(2)

(3)

(4)

L 111 - 2016-17 - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 121: Spm. om uddybning af svar på MOF alm. del – spm. 135-138 og MOF alm. del – bilag 53, til miljø- og fødevareministeren