[1] In the analyses in this report, no distinction has been made between ecological status and potential. The criteria for classification of natural water bodies (ecological status) and HMWBs or AWBs (ecological potential) vary, but the ecological conditions they reflect are assumed to be comparable, having the same deviation from reference conditions.
[2] RBSPs are substances discharged in significant quantities into a water body and are identified by Member States. Environmental quality standards (EQS) are set by the Member State, often at national level but can be at river basin district level. Where the environmental quality standard is exceeded, a water body cannot not be in good or better status. In contrast with priority substances, which are considered under chemical status (chapter 3) the comparability of number of substances set as RBSPs and the value of the EQS can vary between Member States.
[3] Ecological status by RBSPs see Link and RBSPs status including water bodies with unknown status Link
You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.
Previous comments
Comment to footnote no. 1: It is stated that no distinction has been made between ecological status and potential. It is not clear from the report how data from artificial and strongly modificied water bodies are included in the analysis and the presentation of the results.
Comment to footnote no. 1: It is stated that no distinction has been made between ecological status and potential. It is not clear from the report how data from artificial and strongly modificied water bodies are included in the analysis and the presentation of the results.