# Official Journal L 232/2010

| | ISSN 1725-2555
  doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2010.232.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 232 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 532 September 2010 |

ISSN 1725-2555

doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2010.232.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 232

English edition

Legislation

Volume 532 September 2010

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EU) No 772/2010 of 1 September 2010 amending Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 on the common organisation of the market in wine as regards support programmes, trade with third countries, production potential and on controls in the wine sector | 1 |
| | | Commission Regulation (EU) No 773/2010 of 1 September 2010 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 4 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | | 2010/475/EU |
| | * | Commission Decision of 30 August 2010 amending Decision 2006/594/EC fixing an indicative allocation by Member State of the commitment appropriations for the Convergence Objective for the period 2007-2013 as regards additional allocations for the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia
  (notified under document C(2010) 5817) | 6 |
| | | 2010/476/EU |
| | * | Commission Decision of 30 August 2010 amending Decision 2006/593/EC fixing an indicative allocation by Member State of the commitment appropriations for the Regional competitiveness and employment objective for the period 2007-2013 as regards the Czech Republic and Slovakia
  (notified under document C(2010) 5818) | 11 |
| | | 2010/477/EU |
| | * | Commission Decision of 1 September 2010 on criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status of marine waters
  (notified under document C(2010) 5956)

   (
  1
  ) | 14 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Regulation (EU) No 772/2010 of 1 September 2010 amending Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 on the common organisation of the market in wine as regards support programmes, trade with third countries, production potential and on controls in the wine sector

1

Commission Regulation (EU) No 773/2010 of 1 September 2010 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

4

DECISIONS

2010/475/EU

*

Commission Decision of 30 August 2010 amending Decision 2006/594/EC fixing an indicative allocation by Member State of the commitment appropriations for the Convergence Objective for the period 2007-2013 as regards additional allocations for the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia
  (notified under document C(2010) 5817)

(notified under document C(2010) 5817)

6

2010/476/EU

*

Commission Decision of 30 August 2010 amending Decision 2006/593/EC fixing an indicative allocation by Member State of the commitment appropriations for the Regional competitiveness and employment objective for the period 2007-2013 as regards the Czech Republic and Slovakia
  (notified under document C(2010) 5818)

(notified under document C(2010) 5818)

11

2010/477/EU

*

Commission Decision of 1 September 2010 on criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status of marine waters
  (notified under document C(2010) 5956)

   (
  1
  )

(notified under document C(2010) 5956)

1

14

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.

---

II Non-legislative acts

REGULATIONS

| 2.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 232/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 232/1

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 772/2010

of 1 September 2010

amending Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 on the common organisation of the market in wine as regards support programmes, trade with third countries, production potential and on controls in the wine sector

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1) and in particular Article 103za, in conjunction with Article 4 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Point (d) of the first paragraph of Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 of 27 June 2008 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 on the common organisation of the market in wine as regards support programmes, trade with third countries, production potential and on controls in the wine sector (2) provides that the support for promotion and information on third-country markets lasts no longer than three years for a given beneficiary in a given third-country. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Point (d) of the first paragraph of Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 of 27 June 2008 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 on the common organisation of the market in wine as regards support programmes, trade with third countries, production potential and on controls in the wine sector (2) provides that the support for promotion and information on third-country markets lasts no longer than three years for a given beneficiary in a given third-country.

| (2) | In the light of the experience gained during the implementation of those support actions, it is necessary to foresee their renewal by two years at the most, given the specificity of the promotion and information actions in third countries, which for example require longer administrative formalities at Member State and third country level. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In the light of the experience gained during the implementation of those support actions, it is necessary to foresee their renewal by two years at the most, given the specificity of the promotion and information actions in third countries, which for example require longer administrative formalities at Member State and third country level.

| (3) | Article 5(1) of Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 foresees that Member States shall lay down the application procedure, in particular to provide detailed rules on evaluating any given supported action. It is also necessary to provide an obligation for the Member States to lay down the procedure for the possible renewal of the support, as well as a prior evaluation of supported actions. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Article 5(1) of Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 foresees that Member States shall lay down the application procedure, in particular to provide detailed rules on evaluating any given supported action. It is also necessary to provide an obligation for the Member States to lay down the procedure for the possible renewal of the support, as well as a prior evaluation of supported actions.

| (4) | Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 describes the financial management of restructuring and conversion of vineyards, without however establishing specific provisions relating to the control of the operations. The operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards may in certain cases be subject to multiple on-the-spot checks without bringing an improvement of the administrative and financial costs they involve. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 describes the financial management of restructuring and conversion of vineyards, without however establishing specific provisions relating to the control of the operations. The operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards may in certain cases be subject to multiple on-the-spot checks without bringing an improvement of the administrative and financial costs they involve.

| (5) | Article 81 of Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 lays down provisions relating to monitoring of the production potential only. Although the operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards are closely related to the operations relating to production potential, they are currently excluded from the application of that Article. In order to simplify the control system, it is necessary to establish rules concerning the verification of operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards similar to the current rules concerning the verification of production potential operations. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

Article 81 of Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 lays down provisions relating to monitoring of the production potential only. Although the operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards are closely related to the operations relating to production potential, they are currently excluded from the application of that Article. In order to simplify the control system, it is necessary to establish rules concerning the verification of operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards similar to the current rules concerning the verification of production potential operations.

| (6) | In order to simplify the verification of the operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards, provisions should be made for allowing, in addition to the use of graphical tools, the use of equivalent instruments which also allow identification, measurement and localisation of the parcel. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

In order to simplify the verification of the operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards, provisions should be made for allowing, in addition to the use of graphical tools, the use of equivalent instruments which also allow identification, measurement and localisation of the parcel.

| (7) | Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 should therefore be amended accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 should therefore be amended accordingly.

| (8) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets, |
| --- | --- |

(8)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 is amended as follows:

| (1) | In Article 4, first paragraph, point (d) is replaced by the following:






  ‘(d) | The support for promotion and information lasts no longer than three years for a given beneficiary in a given third-country; however, if necessary, it may be renewed once, for a period no longer than two years;’; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(1)

In Article 4, first paragraph, point (d) is replaced by the following:

‘(d)

The support for promotion and information lasts no longer than three years for a given beneficiary in a given third-country; however, if necessary, it may be renewed once, for a period no longer than two years;’;

| (2) | Article 5(1) is amended as follows:






  (a) | the introductory phrase is replaced by the following:

  ‘Member States shall lay down the application procedure and the procedure for the possible renewal, as referred to in point (d) of the first paragraph of Article 4, which shall in particular provide detailed rules on:’; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(2)

Article 5(1) is amended as follows:

(a)

the introductory phrase is replaced by the following:

‘Member States shall lay down the application procedure and the procedure for the possible renewal, as referred to in point (d) of the first paragraph of Article 4, which shall in particular provide detailed rules on:’;

| (b) | point (e) is replaced by the following:






  ‘(e) | evaluating any given supported action. In case of renewal in accordance with point (d) of the first paragraph of Article 4, the results of the supported actions shall in addition be evaluated prior to the renewal.’ |
| --- | --- | --- |

(b)

point (e) is replaced by the following:

‘(e)

evaluating any given supported action. In case of renewal in accordance with point (d) of the first paragraph of Article 4, the results of the supported actions shall in addition be evaluated prior to the renewal.’

| (3) | In Article 9(1), the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:
  ‘Support shall be paid once it is ascertained that either a single operation or all the operations covered by the support application, according to the choice made by the Member State for the management of the measure, have been implemented and checked on-the-spot, in accordance with Article 81 of this Regulation.’; |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In Article 9(1), the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:

‘Support shall be paid once it is ascertained that either a single operation or all the operations covered by the support application, according to the choice made by the Member State for the management of the measure, have been implemented and checked on-the-spot, in accordance with Article 81 of this Regulation.’;

| (4) | Article 81 is replaced by the following:

  ‘Article 81
  Control related to the production potential and to the operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards

  1.   In order to verify the compliance with the provisions on production potential laid down in Section IVa of Chapter III of Title I of Part II of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, including the transitional prohibition on new planting laid down in Article 85g(1) of that Regulation, as well as with the provisions foreseen in Article 103q of that Regulation relating to operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards, Member States shall make use of the vineyard register.


  2.   When granting replanting rights as foreseen in Article 85i of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, areas shall be systematically verified before and after the execution of the grubbing up. The plots to be checked shall be those for which a replanting right is to be granted.
  The control before the grubbing-up shall also cover the verification of the existence of the vineyard concerned.
  This control shall be carried out by an on-the-spot check. However, if the Member State has available a reliable updated computerised vineyard register, the control may be carried out administratively and the obligation of an on-the-spot check before grubbing-up may be limited to 5 % of the applications, on an annual basis, in order to confirm the reliability of the administrative control system. Should such an on-the-spot check reveal significant irregularities or discrepancies in a region or part of a region, the competent authority shall appropriately increase the number of on-the-spot checks during the year concerned and the following year.


  3.   Areas receiving a grubbing-up premium shall be systematically verified before and after the grubbing up. The plots to be verified shall be those which are subject to an application for aid.
  The control before the grubbing-up shall also cover the verification of the existence of the vineyard concerned, the area planted determined in accordance with Article 75 and whether the given area has been properly tended.
  This control shall be carried out by an on-the-spot check. However, if the Member State has available a graphical tool or an equivalent instrument that allows measurement of the area planted in accordance with Article 75 in the computerised vineyard register, and reliable updated information about the parcel being properly tended, the control may be carried out administratively and the obligation to carry out an on-the-spot check before the grubbing up, may be limited to 5 % of the applications in order to confirm the reliability of the administrative control system. Should such an on-the-spot check reveal significant irregularities or discrepancies in a region or part of a region, the competent authority shall increase the number of on-the-spot checks appropriately during the year concerned.


  4.   The control that the grubbing-up has actually taken place, shall be carried out by an on-the-spot check. In the case of grubbing up of the entire vineyard parcel or if the resolution of the remote sensing is equal to or better than 1 m2, the verification may be carried out by remote sensing.


  5.   As regards areas receiving a grubbing-up premium, without prejudice to paragraph 3, third subparagraph and paragraph 4, at least one of the two verifications mentioned in the first subparagraph of paragraph 3 shall be carried out by an on-the-spot check.


  6.   Areas receiving aid for operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards shall be systematically verified before and after the execution of the operations. The plots to be checked shall be those for which an application for aid has been submitted.
  The control before the operations shall also cover the verification of the existence of the vineyard concerned, the area planted determined in accordance with Article 75 and the exclusion of the case of normal renewal of vineyards as defined in Article 6.
  The control referred to in the second subparagraph shall be carried out by an on-the-spot check. However, if the Member State has available a graphical tool or an equivalent instrument that allows measurement of the area planted in accordance with Article 75 in the computerised vineyard register, and reliable updated information about the planted grape wine varieties, the control may be carried out administratively and, consequently, the obligation to carry out an on-the-spot check before the execution of the operations may be limited to 5 % of the applications in order to confirm the reliability of the administrative control system. Should such an on-the-spot check reveal significant irregularities or discrepancies in a region or part of a region, the competent authority shall increase the number of on-the-spot checks appropriately during the year concerned.’ |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Article 81 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 81

Control related to the production potential and to the operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards

1.   In order to verify the compliance with the provisions on production potential laid down in Section IVa of Chapter III of Title I of Part II of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, including the transitional prohibition on new planting laid down in Article 85g(1) of that Regulation, as well as with the provisions foreseen in Article 103q of that Regulation relating to operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards, Member States shall make use of the vineyard register.

2.   When granting replanting rights as foreseen in Article 85i of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, areas shall be systematically verified before and after the execution of the grubbing up. The plots to be checked shall be those for which a replanting right is to be granted.

The control before the grubbing-up shall also cover the verification of the existence of the vineyard concerned.

This control shall be carried out by an on-the-spot check. However, if the Member State has available a reliable updated computerised vineyard register, the control may be carried out administratively and the obligation of an on-the-spot check before grubbing-up may be limited to 5 % of the applications, on an annual basis, in order to confirm the reliability of the administrative control system. Should such an on-the-spot check reveal significant irregularities or discrepancies in a region or part of a region, the competent authority shall appropriately increase the number of on-the-spot checks during the year concerned and the following year.

3.   Areas receiving a grubbing-up premium shall be systematically verified before and after the grubbing up. The plots to be verified shall be those which are subject to an application for aid.

The control before the grubbing-up shall also cover the verification of the existence of the vineyard concerned, the area planted determined in accordance with Article 75 and whether the given area has been properly tended.

This control shall be carried out by an on-the-spot check. However, if the Member State has available a graphical tool or an equivalent instrument that allows measurement of the area planted in accordance with Article 75 in the computerised vineyard register, and reliable updated information about the parcel being properly tended, the control may be carried out administratively and the obligation to carry out an on-the-spot check before the grubbing up, may be limited to 5 % of the applications in order to confirm the reliability of the administrative control system. Should such an on-the-spot check reveal significant irregularities or discrepancies in a region or part of a region, the competent authority shall increase the number of on-the-spot checks appropriately during the year concerned.

4.   The control that the grubbing-up has actually taken place, shall be carried out by an on-the-spot check. In the case of grubbing up of the entire vineyard parcel or if the resolution of the remote sensing is equal to or better than 1 m2, the verification may be carried out by remote sensing.

5.   As regards areas receiving a grubbing-up premium, without prejudice to paragraph 3, third subparagraph and paragraph 4, at least one of the two verifications mentioned in the first subparagraph of paragraph 3 shall be carried out by an on-the-spot check.

6.   Areas receiving aid for operations of restructuring and conversion of vineyards shall be systematically verified before and after the execution of the operations. The plots to be checked shall be those for which an application for aid has been submitted.

The control before the operations shall also cover the verification of the existence of the vineyard concerned, the area planted determined in accordance with Article 75 and the exclusion of the case of normal renewal of vineyards as defined in Article 6.

The control referred to in the second subparagraph shall be carried out by an on-the-spot check. However, if the Member State has available a graphical tool or an equivalent instrument that allows measurement of the area planted in accordance with Article 75 in the computerised vineyard register, and reliable updated information about the planted grape wine varieties, the control may be carried out administratively and, consequently, the obligation to carry out an on-the-spot check before the execution of the operations may be limited to 5 % of the applications in order to confirm the reliability of the administrative control system. Should such an on-the-spot check reveal significant irregularities or discrepancies in a region or part of a region, the competent authority shall increase the number of on-the-spot checks appropriately during the year concerned.’

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 1 September 2010.

For the Commission

The President

José Manuel BARROSO

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 170, 30.6.2008, p. 1.

2

---

| 2.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 232/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 232/4

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 773/2010

of 1 September 2010

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules for Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (2), and in particular Article 138(1) thereof,

Whereas:

Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XV, Part A thereto,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 138 of Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 are fixed in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 2 September 2010.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 1 September 2010.

For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 350, 31.12.2007, p. 1.

2

---

ANNEX

Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

| (EUR/100 kg) |
| --- |
| CN code | Third country code (1) | Standard import value |
| 0702 00 00 | MK | 41,0 |
| ZZ | 41,0 |
| 0707 00 05 | TR | 141,2 |
| ZZ | 141,2 |
| 0709 90 70 | TR | 126,2 |
| ZZ | 126,2 |
| 0805 50 10 | AR | 107,0 |
| CL | 159,0 |
| TR | 153,5 |
| UY | 75,6 |
| ZA | 133,6 |
| ZZ | 125,7 |
| 0806 10 10 | BA | 91,2 |
| EG | 131,2 |
| IL | 123,0 |
| TR | 112,7 |
| ZA | 147,0 |
| ZZ | 121,0 |
| 0808 10 80 | AR | 92,9 |
| BR | 69,6 |
| CL | 103,2 |
| CN | 65,6 |
| NZ | 89,6 |
| US | 95,6 |
| ZA | 88,5 |
| ZZ | 86,4 |
| 0808 20 50 | AR | 115,4 |
| CL | 96,6 |
| CN | 70,5 |
| TR | 133,1 |
| ZA | 100,4 |
| ZZ | 103,2 |
| 0809 30 | TR | 143,9 |
| ZZ | 143,9 |
| 0809 40 05 | BA | 53,2 |
| IL | 161,0 |
| XS | 52,3 |
| ZZ | 88,8 |

(EUR/100 kg)

CN code

Third country code (1)

Standard import value

0702 00 00

MK

41,0

ZZ

41,0

0707 00 05

TR

141,2

ZZ

141,2

0709 90 70

TR

126,2

ZZ

126,2

0805 50 10

AR

107,0

CL

159,0

TR

153,5

UY

75,6

ZA

133,6

ZZ

125,7

0806 10 10

BA

91,2

EG

131,2

IL

123,0

TR

112,7

ZA

147,0

ZZ

121,0

0808 10 80

AR

92,9

BR

69,6

CL

103,2

CN

65,6

NZ

89,6

US

95,6

ZA

88,5

ZZ

86,4

0808 20 50

AR

115,4

CL

96,6

CN

70,5

TR

133,1

ZA

100,4

ZZ

103,2

0809 30

TR

143,9

ZZ

143,9

0809 40 05

BA

53,2

IL

161,0

XS

52,3

ZZ

88,8

---

(1)  Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). Code ‘
  ZZ
  ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.

---

DECISIONS

| 2.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 232/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 232/6

---

COMMISSION DECISION

of 30 August 2010

amending Decision 2006/594/EC fixing an indicative allocation by Member State of the commitment appropriations for the Convergence Objective for the period 2007-2013 as regards additional allocations for the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia

(notified under document C(2010) 5817)

(2010/475/EU)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 laying down general provisions for the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (1), and in particular Article 18(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | By Decision 2006/594/EC (2), as amended by Decision 2007/191/EC (3), the Commission fixed an indicative allocation by Member State of the commitment appropriations for the Convergence Objective for the period 2007 to 2013. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By Decision 2006/594/EC (2), as amended by Decision 2007/191/EC (3), the Commission fixed an indicative allocation by Member State of the commitment appropriations for the Convergence Objective for the period 2007 to 2013.

| (2) | In accordance with paragraph 10 of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, in 2010 it has been established that the cumulated GDP for the years 2007 to 2009 in the Czech Republic, in Poland and in Slovakia has each diverged by more than ± 5 % from the cumulated GDP estimated in accordance with paragraph 9 of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, including as a consequence of exchange rate changes. The amounts allocated for the period 2011 to 2013 to the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia should therefore be adjusted accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In accordance with paragraph 10 of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, in 2010 it has been established that the cumulated GDP for the years 2007 to 2009 in the Czech Republic, in Poland and in Slovakia has each diverged by more than ± 5 % from the cumulated GDP estimated in accordance with paragraph 9 of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, including as a consequence of exchange rate changes. The amounts allocated for the period 2011 to 2013 to the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia should therefore be adjusted accordingly.

| (3) | In accordance with points 16 and 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (4) on 16 April 2010 the Commission adopted the Communication on the technical adjustment of the financial framework for 2011 in line with movements in GNI, including the adjustment of amounts allocated from funds supporting cohesion to the Member States concerned by divergence between estimated and actual GDP for the period 2007-2009 (5), by which it informed that a positive adjustment is necessary for the Czech Republic of EUR 237 045 801, for Poland of EUR 632 392 153 and for Slovakia of EUR 137 711 534, to be shared in equal amounts in 2011, 2012 and 2013. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In accordance with points 16 and 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (4) on 16 April 2010 the Commission adopted the Communication on the technical adjustment of the financial framework for 2011 in line with movements in GNI, including the adjustment of amounts allocated from funds supporting cohesion to the Member States concerned by divergence between estimated and actual GDP for the period 2007-2009 (5), by which it informed that a positive adjustment is necessary for the Czech Republic of EUR 237 045 801, for Poland of EUR 632 392 153 and for Slovakia of EUR 137 711 534, to be shared in equal amounts in 2011, 2012 and 2013.

| (4) | In order to establish the amounts allocated to the Member States concerned, it is necessary to take into account the pro-rata allocation between the Convergence and Regional competitiveness and employment objectives in the current programming period 2007-2013 for each of the Member States concerned and the need to make the most efficient use of the allocation of the funds to projects currently being implemented. Therefore, this Decision should allocate only the part of the overall positive adjustments concerning the Convergence objective. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

In order to establish the amounts allocated to the Member States concerned, it is necessary to take into account the pro-rata allocation between the Convergence and Regional competitiveness and employment objectives in the current programming period 2007-2013 for each of the Member States concerned and the need to make the most efficient use of the allocation of the funds to projects currently being implemented. Therefore, this Decision should allocate only the part of the overall positive adjustments concerning the Convergence objective.

| (5) | For reasons of efficiency, it is appropriate to replace the amounts in the row Total of Table 2 of Annex III to Decision 2006/594/EC for the years 2007 to 2010 since they do not reflect the figures given for Bulgaria. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

For reasons of efficiency, it is appropriate to replace the amounts in the row Total of Table 2 of Annex III to Decision 2006/594/EC for the years 2007 to 2010 since they do not reflect the figures given for Bulgaria.

| (6) | Decision 2006/594/EC should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(6)

Decision 2006/594/EC should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Decision 2006/594/EC is amended as follows:

| 1. | Annex I is replaced by the text set out in Annex I to this Decision; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annex I is replaced by the text set out in Annex I to this Decision;

| 2. | Annex III is replaced by the text set out in Annex II to this Decision. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Annex III is replaced by the text set out in Annex II to this Decision.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 30 August 2010.

For the Commission

Johannes HAHN

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 25.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 243, 6.9.2006, p. 37.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 87, 28.3.2007, p. 18.

3

(4)  
  OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.

4

(5)  COM(2010) 160 final.

5

---

ANNEX I

‘ANNEX I

Indicative allocation by Member State of the commitment appropriations for the regions eligible for funding from the Structural Funds under the Convergence Objective for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013

| (EUR) |
| --- |
| Member States | TABLE 1 — | Amount of appropriations (2004 prices) |

(EUR)

Member States

TABLE 1 —

Amount of appropriations (2004 prices)

Regions eligible under the Convergence Objective

Additional funding referred to in Annex II of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 under point:

10

14

20

24

26

28

30

Bulgaria

3 863 601 178

Česká republika

15 111 066 754

197 709 105

Deutschland

10 360 473 669

166 582 500

Eesti

1 955 979 029

31 365 110

Elláda

8 358 352 296

España

17 283 774 067

1 396 500 000

France

2 403 498 342

427 408 905

Italia

17 993 716 405

825 930 000

Latvija

2 586 694 732

53 886 609

Lietuva

3 875 516 071

79 933 567

Magyarország

12 622 187 455

Malta

493 750 177

Polska

38 507 171 321

359 874 111

880 349 050

Portugal

15 143 387 819

58 206 001

România

11 115 420 983

Slovenija

2 401 302 729

Slovensko

6 214 921 468

110 544 803

United Kingdom

2 429 762 895

Total

172 720 577 390

668 128 019

880 349 050

485 614 906

165 185 286

1 396 500 000

825 930 000

166 582 500

| (EUR) |
| --- |
| Member State | TABLE 2 — | Yearly breakdown of appropriations (2004 prices) |

(EUR)

Member State

TABLE 2 —

Yearly breakdown of appropriations (2004 prices)

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Bulgaria

300 892 058

431 830 557

576 458 082

595 526 527

625 067 349

653 446 232

680 380 373

Česká republika

1 993 246 617

2 050 979 461

2 106 089 584

2 162 632 571

2 283 395 438

2 332 343 673

2 380 088 515

Deutschland

1 503 865 167

1 503 865 167

1 503 865 167

1 503 865 167

1 503 865 167

1 503 865 167

1 503 865 167

Eesti

229 977 253

245 929 572

262 982 602

281 212 290

300 982 256

322 136 118

344 124 048

Elláda

1 194 050 328

1 194 050 328

1 194 050 328

1 194 050 328

1 194 050 328

1 194 050 328

1 194 050 328

España

2 668 610 581

2 668 610 581

2 668 610 581

2 668 610 581

2 668 610 581

2 668 610 581

2 668 610 581

France

404 415 321

404 415 321

404 415 321

404 415 321

404 415 321

404 415 321

404 415 321

Italia

2 688 520 915

2 688 520 915

2 688 520 915

2 688 520 915

2 688 520 915

2 688 520 915

2 688 520 915

Latvija

308 012 292

330 054 158

353 328 505

376 808 997

400 322 218

424 084 983

447 970 188

Lietuva

528 903 377

525 252 930

525 724 448

549 071 072

581 530 171

606 085 051

638 882 589

Magyarország

1 838 275 243

1 749 371 409

1 634 208 005

1 659 921 561

1 847 533 517

1 913 391 641

1 979 486 079

Malta

81 152 175

73 854 132

68 610 286

61 225 559

61 225 559

68 610 286

79 072 180

Polska

5 686 360 306

5 705 409 032

5 720 681 799

5 535 346 918

5 679 612 617

5 699 319 089

5 720 664 721

Portugal

2 171 656 260

2 171 656 260

2 171 656 260

2 171 656 260

2 171 656 260

2 171 656 260

2 171 656 260

România

782 254 110

1 123 289 385

1 498 844 810

1 773 286 696

1 875 412 911

1 979 406 577

2 082 926 494

Slovenija

423 258 365

397 135 571

370 643 430

343 781 942

316 551 106

288 950 923

260 981 392

Slovensko

939 878 406

896 645 972

845 960 417

765 136 058

845 313 158

910 570 647

1 121 961 613

United Kingdom

347 108 985

347 108 985

347 108 985

347 108 985

347 108 985

347 108 985

347 108 985

Total

24 090 437 759

24 507 979 736

24 941 759 525

25 082 177 748

25 795 173 857

26 176 572 777

26 714 765 749 ’

---

ANNEX II

‘ANNEX III

Indicative allocation by Member State of the commitment appropriations for the Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund under the Convergence Objective for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013

| (EUR) |
| --- |
| Member State | TABLE 1 — | Amount of appropriations (2004 prices) |

(EUR)

Member State

TABLE 1 —

Amount of appropriations (2004 prices)

Additional funding referred to in Annex II of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 under paragraph:

10

24

Bulgaria

2 009 650 238

Česká republika

7 809 984 551

Eesti

1 000 465 639

16 157 785

Elláda

3 280 399 675

Kýpros/Kibris

193 005 267

Latvija

1 331 962 318

27 759 767

Lietuva

1 987 693 262

41 177 899

Magyarország

7 570 173 505

Malta

251 648 410

Polska

19 512 850 811

179 937 056

Portugal

2 715 031 963

România

5 754 788 708

Slovenija

1 235 595 457

Slovensko

3 424 078 134

Total

58 077 327 938

179 937 056

85 095 451

| (EUR) |
| --- |
| Member State | TABLE 2 — | Tearly breakdown of appropriations (2004 prices) |

(EUR)

Member State

TABLE 2 —

Tearly breakdown of appropriations (2004 prices)

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Bulgaria

161 567 407

227 036 657

299 350 419

308 884 642

323 655 053

337 844 495

351 311 565

Česká republika

1 032 973 476

1 061 839 898

1 089 394 960

1 117 666 453

1 144 441 732

1 169 574 794

1 194 093 238

Eesti

118 267 391

126 243 551

134 770 066

143 884 910

153 769 893

164 346 824

175 340 789

Elláda

468 628 525

468 628 525

468 628 525

468 628 525

468 628 525

468 628 525

468 628 525

Kýpros/Kibris

52 598 692

42 866 160

33 133 627

23 401 096

13 668 564

13 668 564

13 668 564

Latvija

159 639 206

170 660 138

182 297 312

194 037 557

205 794 168

217 675 551

229 618 153

Lietuva

180 857 472

230 966 558

277 869 373

303 013 907

320 491 883

348 611 677

367 060 291

Magyarország

328 094 604

687 358 082

1 080 433 910

1 308 130 864

1 343 212 938

1 388 664 318

1 434 278 789

Malta

24 809 997

32 469 219

37 971 049

45 716 955

45 716 955

37 971 049

26 993 186

Polska

1 883 652 471

2 208 285 009

2 532 817 229

2 755 750 999

3 136 326 090

3 437 744 747

3 738 211 322

Portugal

387 861 709

387 861 709

387 861 709

387 861 709

387 861 709

387 861 709

387 861 709

România

419 281 086

589 798 724

777 576 436

914 797 379

965 860 486

1 017 857 319

1 069 617 278

Slovenija

86 225 407

115 705 905

145 555 750

175 774 942

206 363 481

237 321 369

268 648 603

Slovensko

197 125 902

317 519 267

452 740 053

630 951 164

664 262 430

668 505 352

492 973 966

Total

5 501 583 345

6 667 239 402

7 900 400 418

8 778 501 102

9 380 053 907

9 896 276 293

10 218 305 978 ’

---

| 2.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 232/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 232/11

---

COMMISSION DECISION

of 30 August 2010

amending Decision 2006/593/EC fixing an indicative allocation by Member State of the commitment appropriations for the Regional competitiveness and employment objective for the period 2007-2013 as regards the Czech Republic and Slovakia

(notified under document C(2010) 5818)

(2010/476/EU)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 laying down general provisions for the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (1), and in particular Article 18(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | By Decision 2006/593/EC (2), the Commission fixed an indicative allocation by Member State of the commitment appropriations for the Regional competitiveness and employment objective for the period 2007 to 2013. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By Decision 2006/593/EC (2), the Commission fixed an indicative allocation by Member State of the commitment appropriations for the Regional competitiveness and employment objective for the period 2007 to 2013.

| (2) | In accordance with paragraph 10 of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, in 2010 it has been established that the cumulated GDP for the years 2007 to 2009 in the Czech Republic, in Poland and in Slovakia has each diverged by more than ± 5 % from the cumulated GDP estimated in accordance with paragraph 9 of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, including as a consequence of exchange rate changes. The amounts allocated for the period 2011 to 2013 to the Czech Republic and Slovakia should therefore be adjusted accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In accordance with paragraph 10 of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, in 2010 it has been established that the cumulated GDP for the years 2007 to 2009 in the Czech Republic, in Poland and in Slovakia has each diverged by more than ± 5 % from the cumulated GDP estimated in accordance with paragraph 9 of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, including as a consequence of exchange rate changes. The amounts allocated for the period 2011 to 2013 to the Czech Republic and Slovakia should therefore be adjusted accordingly.

| (3) | In accordance with points 16 and 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (3) on 16 April 2010 the Commission adopted the Communication on the technical adjustment of the financial framework for 2011 in line with movements in GNI, including the adjustment of amounts allocated from funds supporting cohesion to the Member States concerned by divergence between estimated and actual GDP for the period 2007-2009 (4), by which it informed that a positive adjustment is necessary for the Czech Republic of EUR 237 045 801 and for Slovakia of EUR 137 711 534, to be shared in equal amounts in 2011, 2012 and 2013. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In accordance with points 16 and 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (3) on 16 April 2010 the Commission adopted the Communication on the technical adjustment of the financial framework for 2011 in line with movements in GNI, including the adjustment of amounts allocated from funds supporting cohesion to the Member States concerned by divergence between estimated and actual GDP for the period 2007-2009 (4), by which it informed that a positive adjustment is necessary for the Czech Republic of EUR 237 045 801 and for Slovakia of EUR 137 711 534, to be shared in equal amounts in 2011, 2012 and 2013.

| (4) | In order to establish the amounts allocated to the Member States concerned, it is necessary to take into account the pro-rata allocation between the Convergence and Regional competitiveness and employment objectives in the current programming period 2007-2013 for each of the Member States concerned and the need to make the most efficient use of the allocation of the funds to projects currently being implemented. Therefore, this Decision should allocate only the part of the overall positive adjustments concerning the Regional competitiveness and employment objective. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

In order to establish the amounts allocated to the Member States concerned, it is necessary to take into account the pro-rata allocation between the Convergence and Regional competitiveness and employment objectives in the current programming period 2007-2013 for each of the Member States concerned and the need to make the most efficient use of the allocation of the funds to projects currently being implemented. Therefore, this Decision should allocate only the part of the overall positive adjustments concerning the Regional competitiveness and employment objective.

| (5) | Decision 2006/593/EC should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(5)

Decision 2006/593/EC should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Annex I to Decision 2006/593/EC is replaced by the text set out in the Annex to this Decision.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 30 August 2010.

For the Commission

Johannes HAHN

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 25.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 243, 6.9.2006, p. 32.

2

(3)  
  OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.

3

(4)  COM(2010) 160 final.

4

---

ANNEX

‘ANNEX I

Indicative allocation by Member State of the commitment appropriations for the regions eligible for funding from the Structural Funds under the Regional competitiveness and employment objective for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013

| (EUR) |
| --- |
| TABLE 1 — | Amount of appropriations (2004 prices) |

(EUR)

TABLE 1 —

Amount of appropriations (2004 prices)

Member State

Regions eligible under the Regional competitiveness and employment objective

Additional funding referred to in Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 under point:

10

16

20

23

25

26

28

29

Belgique/België

1 264 522 294

Česká republika

172 351 284

4 633 651

199 500 000

Danmark

452 135 320

Deutschland

8 273 934 718

74 812 500

España

2 925 887 307

199 500 000

France

9 000 763 163

99 750 000

Éire/Ireland

260 155 399

Italia

4 539 667 937

209 475 000

Luxembourg

44 796 164

Nederland

1 472 879 499

Österreich

761 883 269

149 625 000

Portugal

435 196 895

Slovensko

398 057 758

7 006 030

Suomi/Finland

778 631 938

153 552 511

Sverige

1 077 567 589

215 598 656

149 624 993

United Kingdom

5 335 717 800

Total

37 194 148 334

11 639 681

199 500 000

369 151 167

149 624 993

224 437 500

199 500 000

209 475 000

99 750 000

| (EUR) |
| --- |
| Member State | TABLE 2 — | Yearly breakdown of appropriations (2004 prices) |

(EUR)

Member State

TABLE 2 —

Yearly breakdown of appropriations (2004 prices)

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Belgique/België

180 646 042

180 646 042

180 646 042

180 646 042

180 646 042

180 646 042

180 646 042

Česká republika

53 121 612

53 121 612

53 121 612

53 121 612

54 696 847

54 665 961

54 635 679

Danmark

64 590 760

64 590 760

64 590 760

64 590 760

64 590 760

64 590 760

64 590 760

Deutschland

1 192 678 174

1 192 678 174

1 192 678 174

1 192 678 174

1 192 678 174

1 192 678 174

1 192 678 174

España

446 483 901

446 483 901

446 483 901

446 483 901

446 483 901

446 483 901

446 483 901

France

1 300 073 309

1 300 073 309

1 300 073 309

1 300 073 309

1 300 073 309

1 300 073 309

1 300 073 309

Éire/Ireland

37 165 057

37 165 057

37 165 057

37 165 057

37 165 057

37 165 057

37 165 057

Italia

678 448 991

678 448 991

678 448 991

678 448 991

678 448 991

678 448 991

678 448 991

Luxembourg

6 399 452

6 399 452

6 399 452

6 399 452

6 399 452

6 399 452

6 399 452

Nederland

210 411 357

210 411 357

210 411 357

210 411 357

210 411 357

210 411 357

210 411 357

Österreich

130 215 467

130 215 467

130 215 467

130 215 467

130 215 467

130 215 467

130 215 467

Portugal

62 170 985

62 170 985

62 170 985

62 170 985

62 170 985

62 170 985

62 170 985

Slovensko

59 287 258

57 274 995

54 915 823

51 153 834

55 518 251

58 543 272

68 370 355

Suomi/Finland

133 169 207

133 169 207

133 169 207

133 169 207

133 169 207

133 169 207

133 169 207

Sverige

206 113 034

206 113 034

206 113 034

206 113 034

206 113 034

206 113 034

206 113 034

United Kingdom

762 245 400

762 245 400

762 245 400

762 245 400

762 245 400

762 245 400

762 245 400

Total

5 523 220 006

5 521 207 743

5 518 848 571

5 515 086 582

5 521 026 234

5 524 020 369

5 533 817 170 ’

---

| 2.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 232/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 232/14

---

COMMISSION DECISION

of 1 September 2010

on criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status of marine waters

(notified under document C(2010) 5956)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2010/477/EU)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to the 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) (1), and in particular, Article 9(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | The criteria for the achievement of good environmental status are the starting point for the development of coherent approaches in the preparatory stages of marine strategies, including the determination of characteristics of good environmental status and the establishment of a comprehensive set of environmental targets, to be developed in a coherent and coordinated manner in the framework of the requirement of regional cooperation. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The criteria for the achievement of good environmental status are the starting point for the development of coherent approaches in the preparatory stages of marine strategies, including the determination of characteristics of good environmental status and the establishment of a comprehensive set of environmental targets, to be developed in a coherent and coordinated manner in the framework of the requirement of regional cooperation.

| (2) | The Commission has consulted all interested parties, including regional sea conventions, in particular on the scientific and technical assessment prepared by the Task Groups set up by the Joint Research Centre and the International Council on the Exploration of the Seas to support the development of criteria and methodological standards. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Commission has consulted all interested parties, including regional sea conventions, in particular on the scientific and technical assessment prepared by the Task Groups set up by the Joint Research Centre and the International Council on the Exploration of the Seas to support the development of criteria and methodological standards.

| (3) | One major finding of such scientific and technical work is that there is a substantial need to develop additional scientific understanding for assessing good environmental status in a coherent and holistic manner to support the ecosystem-based approach to management. An improved scientific knowledge needs to be developed, in particular through the Communication ‘A European Strategy for Marine and Maritime Research. A coherent European Research Area framework in support of a sustainable use of oceans and seas’ (2), in the framework of the Communication ‘Europe 2020 A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’ (3) and in coherence with other Union legislation and policies. It is also appropriate to integrate later on in the process the forthcoming experience to be developed at national and regional level in the implementation of the preparatory stages of the marine strategies listed in Article 5(2)(a) of Directive 2008/56/EC. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

One major finding of such scientific and technical work is that there is a substantial need to develop additional scientific understanding for assessing good environmental status in a coherent and holistic manner to support the ecosystem-based approach to management. An improved scientific knowledge needs to be developed, in particular through the Communication ‘A European Strategy for Marine and Maritime Research. A coherent European Research Area framework in support of a sustainable use of oceans and seas’ (2), in the framework of the Communication ‘Europe 2020 A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’ (3) and in coherence with other Union legislation and policies. It is also appropriate to integrate later on in the process the forthcoming experience to be developed at national and regional level in the implementation of the preparatory stages of the marine strategies listed in Article 5(2)(a) of Directive 2008/56/EC.

| (4) | It is therefore appropriate that the Commission revises this Decision in the framework of Article 25(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC. In addition to revising criteria, the further development of methodological standards is required, in close coordination with the establishment of monitoring programmes. This revision should be carried out as soon as possible after the completion of the assessment required in Article 12 of Directive 2008/56/EC, in time to support a successful update of marine strategies that are due by 2018 pursuant to Article 17 of that Directive, as a further contribution to adaptive management. This is coherent with the fact that the determination of good environmental status may have to be adapted over time, taking into account the dynamic nature of marine ecosystems, their natural variability, and the fact that the pressures and impacts on them may vary with the evolution of different patterns of human activity and the impact of climate change. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

It is therefore appropriate that the Commission revises this Decision in the framework of Article 25(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC. In addition to revising criteria, the further development of methodological standards is required, in close coordination with the establishment of monitoring programmes. This revision should be carried out as soon as possible after the completion of the assessment required in Article 12 of Directive 2008/56/EC, in time to support a successful update of marine strategies that are due by 2018 pursuant to Article 17 of that Directive, as a further contribution to adaptive management. This is coherent with the fact that the determination of good environmental status may have to be adapted over time, taking into account the dynamic nature of marine ecosystems, their natural variability, and the fact that the pressures and impacts on them may vary with the evolution of different patterns of human activity and the impact of climate change.

| (5) | The criteria for good environmental status build on existing obligations and developments in the context of applicable Union legislation, including 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 (4), which applies to coastal waters, as well as Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (5), Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (6), and a number of instruments developed in the framework of the common fisheries policy, taking also into account, where appropriate, the information and knowledge gathered and approaches developed in the framework of regional conventions. As this Decision contributes to the further development of the concept of good environmental status of marine waters, it supports in relation to marine ecosystems the process to revise the biodiversity strategy of the European Union beyond 2010 and the Biodiversity Action Plan. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

The criteria for good environmental status build on existing obligations and developments in the context of applicable Union legislation, including 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 (4), which applies to coastal waters, as well as Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (5), Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (6), and a number of instruments developed in the framework of the common fisheries policy, taking also into account, where appropriate, the information and knowledge gathered and approaches developed in the framework of regional conventions. As this Decision contributes to the further development of the concept of good environmental status of marine waters, it supports in relation to marine ecosystems the process to revise the biodiversity strategy of the European Union beyond 2010 and the Biodiversity Action Plan.

| (6) | Directive 2008/56/EC, which is the environmental pillar of the Integrated Maritime Policy, requires the application of the ecosystem approach to the management of human activities, covering all sectors having an impact on the marine environment. The Green Paper on the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (7) states that the latter must be set up to provide the right instruments to support this ecosystem approach. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

Directive 2008/56/EC, which is the environmental pillar of the Integrated Maritime Policy, requires the application of the ecosystem approach to the management of human activities, covering all sectors having an impact on the marine environment. The Green Paper on the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (7) states that the latter must be set up to provide the right instruments to support this ecosystem approach.

| (7) | The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established by Article 25(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC, |
| --- | --- |

(7)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established by Article 25(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Criteria to be used by the Member States to assess the extent to which good environmental status is being achieved, accompanied with references to applicable methodological standards where available, are set out in the Annex.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 1 September 2010.

For the Commission

Janez POTOČNIK

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19.

1

(2)  COM(2008) 534 final.

2

(3)  COM(2010) 2020 final.

3

(4)  
  OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.

4

(5)  
  OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

5

(6)  
  OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7.

6

(7)  COM(2009) 163 final, p. 19.

7

---

ANNEX

CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGICAL STANDARDS FOR GOOD ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS

PART A

General conditions of application of the criteria for good environmental status

| 1. | The criteria for assessing the extent to which good environmental status is being achieved are specified and numbered in Part B in relation to each of the eleven descriptors of good environmental status set out in Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC. The criteria are accompanied by a list of related indicators to make such criteria operational and allow subsequent progress. In Part B, criteria are accompanied with references to applicable methodological standards where available. For a number of such criteria and related indicators, the need for further development and additional information is identified, to be further addressed in the process for the revision of this Decision (1). This Part specifies the general conditions of application of such criteria and related indicators. |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | For most criteria, the assessment and methodologies required need to take into account and, where appropriate, be based on those applicable under existing Community legislation, in particular Directive 2000/60/EC, Directive 2008/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), Directive 92/43/EEC, Directive 2009/147/EC and other relevant Union legislation (including under the common fisheries policy, e.g. Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 (3)), taking also into account reports of the Task Groups set up by the Joint Research Centre and the International Council on the Exploration of the Seas (4) and, where relevant, the information and knowledge gathered and the approaches developed in the framework of regional sea conventions. |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | Good environmental status requires that all relevant human activities are carried out in coherence with the requirement of protecting and preserving the marine environment and the concept of sustainable use of marine goods and services by present and future generations referred to in Article 1 of Directive 2008/56/EC. The application of criteria for good environmental status needs to be carried out keeping in mind the need to target assessment and monitoring and to prioritise action in relation to the importance of impacts and threats to marine ecosystems and its components. However, it is important that assessment considers the main cumulative and synergetic effects of impacts on the marine ecosystem, as mentioned in Article 8(1)(b)(ii) of Directive 2008/56/EC. |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | In a number of cases, and in particular taking into account the relation between information needs and the geographical scope of the marine waters concerned, it can be appropriate to apply as a first step some selected criteria and related indicators for an overall screening of the environmental state at a broader scale and only then identify instances and specific areas where, having regard to the importance of impacts and threats in view of the environmental characteristics and/or human pressures, a finer assessment is necessary, involving all relevant indicators related to criteria. |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | The temporal and spatial scale of impacts varies considerably depending on the type of pressure and the sensitivity of the ecosystem components affected. Because of their intrinsic characteristics, some criteria and indicators may require applying various timescales for capturing a range of different processes. When the assessment needs to start at a relatively small spatial scale to be ecologically meaningful (for instance because pressures are localised), it could be necessary to scale up assessments at broader scales, such as at the levels of subdivisions, sub-regions and regions. |
| --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | A combined assessment of the scale, distribution and intensity of the pressures and the extent, vulnerability and resilience of the different ecosystem components including where possible their mapping, allows the identification of areas where marine ecosystems have or may have been adversely affected. It is also a useful basis to assess the scale of the actual or potential impacts marine ecosystems. This approach, which takes into account risk-based considerations, also supports the selection of the most appropriate indicators related to the criteria for assessment of progress towards good environmental status. It also facilitates the development of specific tools that can support an ecosystem-based approach to the management of human activities required to achieve good environmental status through the identification of the sources of pressures and impacts, including their cumulative and synergetic effects. Such tools include spatial protection measures and measures in the list in Annex VI to Directive 2008/56/EC, notably spatial and temporal distribution controls, such as maritime spatial planning. |
| --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | There is a diversity of environmental conditions at sea and of human activities having an impact on it. In particular, diversity exists between regions and even within marine regions, sub-regions and subdivisions. For this reason, the applicability of specific indicators related to the criteria may require considering whether they are ecologically relevant to each situation being assessed. |
| --- | --- |

7.

| 8. | Member States need to consider each of the criteria and related indicators listed in this Annex in order to identify those which are to be used to determine good environmental status. On the basis of the initial assessment, when a Member State considers that it is not appropriate to use one or more of the criteria, it needs to provide the Commission with a justification in the framework of the notification made pursuant to Article 9(2) of Directive 2008/56/EC, when relevant in relation to consistency and comparison between regions and sub-regions. In this context, Member States are subject to the obligation of regional cooperation laid down in Articles 5 and 6 of Directive 2008/56/EC, and in particular to the requirement to ensure that the different elements of the marine strategies are coherent and coordinated across the marine region or sub-region concerned. |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | It is important that the application of the criteria takes into account the results of the initial assessment, required under Article 8 and Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC, and that they are not carried out in isolation. The initial assessment is the main process for identifying the essential features and characteristics as well as the predominant pressures and impacts on the marine environment, subject to its regular updates and to monitoring programmes. This first assessment needs to be finalised by the date specified in Article 5(2) of Directive 2008/56/EC on the basis of the indicative lists of elements contained in Annex III to that Directive and taking account of existing data where available. Consideration needs to be given to the fact that some criteria and related indicators are acknowledged as being still under development during this initial period. |
| --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | Progress towards good environmental status is taking place in the context of continuous broader changes in the marine environment. Climate change is already having an impact on the marine environment, including on ecosystem processes and functions. In developing their respective marine strategies, Member States need to specify, where appropriate, any evidence of climate change impacts. Adaptive management on the basis of the ecosystem-based approach includes the regular update of the determination of good environmental status. |
| --- | --- |

10.

PART B

Criteria for good environmental status relevant to the descriptors of Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC

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 climate conditions.

Assessment is required at several ecological levels: ecosystems, habitats (including their associated communities, in the sense of biotopes) and species, which are reflected in the structure of this section, taking into account point 2 of Part A. For certain aspects of this descriptor, additional scientific and technical support is required (5). To address the broad scope of the descriptor, it is necessary, having regard to Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC, to prioritise among biodiversity features at the level of species, habitats and ecosystems. This enables the identification of those biodiversity features and those areas where impacts and threats arise and also supports the identification of appropriate indicators among the selected criteria, adequate to the areas and the features concerned (6). The obligation of regional cooperation contained in Articles 5 and 6 of Directive 2008/56/EC is directly relevant to the process of selection of biodiversity features within regions, sub-regions and subdivisions, including for the establishment, where appropriate, of reference conditions pursuant to Annex IV to Directive 2008/56/EC. Modelling using a geographic information system platform may provide a useful basis for mapping a range of biodiversity features and human activities and their pressures, provided that any errors involved are properly assessed and described when applying the results. This type of data is a prerequisite for ecosystem-based management of human activities and for developing related spatial tools (7).

Species level

For each region, sub-region or subdivision, taking into account the different species and communities (e.g. for phytoplankton and zooplankton) contained in the indicative list in Table 1 of Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC, it is necessary to draw up a set of relevant species and functional groups, having regard to point 2 of Part A. The three criteria for the assessment of any species are species distribution, population size and population condition. As to the later, there are cases where it also entails an understanding of population health and inter- and intra-specific relationships. It is also necessary to assess separately subspecies and populations where the initial assessment, or new information available, identifies impacts and potential threats to the status of some of them. The assessment of species also requires an integrated understanding of the distribution, extent and condition of their habitats, coherent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (8) and Directive 2009/147/EC, to make sure that there is a sufficiently large habitat to maintain its population, taking into consideration any threat of deterioration or loss of such habitats. In relation to biodiversity at the level of species, the three criteria for assessing progress towards good environmental status, as well as the indicators related respectively to them, are the following:

1.1.   Species distribution

| — | Distributional range (1.1.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Distributional range (1.1.1)

| — | Distributional pattern within the latter, where appropriate (1.1.2) |
| --- | --- |

—

Distributional pattern within the latter, where appropriate (1.1.2)

| — | Area covered by the species (for sessile/benthic species) (1.1.3) |
| --- | --- |

—

Area covered by the species (for sessile/benthic species) (1.1.3)

1.2.   Population size

| — | Population abundance and/or biomass, as appropriate (1.2.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Population abundance and/or biomass, as appropriate (1.2.1)

1.3.   Population condition

| — | Population demographic characteristics (e.g. body size or age class structure, sex ratio, fecundity rates, survival/mortality rates) (1.3.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Population demographic characteristics (e.g. body size or age class structure, sex ratio, fecundity rates, survival/mortality rates) (1.3.1)

| — | Population genetic structure, where appropriate (1.3.2). |
| --- | --- |

—

Population genetic structure, where appropriate (1.3.2).

Habitat level

For the purpose of Directive 2008/56/EC, the term habitat addresses both the abiotic characteristics and the associated biological community, treating both elements together in the sense of the term biotope. A set of habitat types needs to be drawn up for each region, sub-region or subdivision, taking into account the different habitats contained in the indicative list in Table 1 of Annex III and having regard to the instruments mentioned in point 2 of Part A. Such instruments also refer to a number of habitat complexes (which means assessing, where appropriate, the composition, extent and relative proportions of habitats within such complexes) and to functional habitats (such as spawning, breeding and feeding areas and migration routes). Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by adequate mapping, are essential for assessment at habitat level, taking also into account variations along the gradient of distance from the coast and depth (e.g. coastal, shelf and deep sea). The three criteria for the assessment of habitats are their distribution, extent and condition (for the latter, in particular the condition of typical species and communities), accompanied with the indicators related respectively to them. The assessment of habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of associated communities and species, coherent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (9) and Directive 2009/147/EC, including where appropriate an assessment of their functional traits.

1.4.   Habitat distribution

| — | Distributional range (1.4.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Distributional range (1.4.1)

| — | Distributional pattern (1.4.2) |
| --- | --- |

—

Distributional pattern (1.4.2)

1.5.   Habitat extent

| — | Habitat area (1.5.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Habitat area (1.5.1)

| — | Habitat volume, where relevant (1.5.2) |
| --- | --- |

—

Habitat volume, where relevant (1.5.2)

1.6.   Habitat condition

| — | Condition of the typical species and communities (1.6.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Condition of the typical species and communities (1.6.1)

| — | Relative abundance and/or biomass, as appropriate (1.6.2) |
| --- | --- |

—

Relative abundance and/or biomass, as appropriate (1.6.2)

| — | Physical, hydrological and chemical conditions (1.6.3). |
| --- | --- |

—

Physical, hydrological and chemical conditions (1.6.3).

Ecosystem level

1.7.   Ecosystem structure

| — | Composition and relative proportions of ecosystem components (habitats and species) (1.7.1). |
| --- | --- |

—

Composition and relative proportions of ecosystem components (habitats and species) (1.7.1).

In addition, the interactions between the structural components of the ecosystem are fundamental for assessing ecosystem processes and functions for the purpose of the overall determination of good environmental status, having regard, inter alia, to Articles 1, 3(5) and 9(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC. Other functional aspects addressed through other descriptors of good environmental status (such as descriptors 4 and 6), as well as connectivity and resilience considerations, are also important for addressing ecosystem processes and functions.

Descriptor 2:   Non-indigenous species introduced by human activities are at levels that do not adversely alter the ecosystem.

The identification and assessment of pathways and vectors of spreading of non-indigenous species as a result of human activities is a prerequisite to prevent that such species introduced as a result of human activities reach levels that adversely affect the ecosystems and to mitigate any impacts. The initial assessment has to take into account that some introductions due to human activities are already regulated at Union level (10) to assess and minimise their possible impact on aquatic ecosystems and that some non-indigenous species have commonly been used in aquaculture for a long time and are already subject to specific permit treatment within the existing Regulations (11). There is still only limited knowledge about the effects of the non-indigenous species on the environment. Additional scientific and technical development is required for developing potentially useful indicators (12), especially of impacts of invasive non-indigenous species (such as bio-pollution indexes), which remain the main concern for achieving good environmental status. The priority in relation to assessment and monitoring (13) relates to state characterisation, which is a prerequisite for assessment of the magnitude of impacts but does not determine in itself the achievement of good environmental status for this descriptor.

2.1.   Abundance and state characterisation of non-indigenous species, in particular invasive species

| — | Trends in abundance, temporal occurrence and spatial distribution in the wild of non-indigenous species, particularly invasive non-indigenous species, notably in risk areas, in relation to the main vectors and pathways of spreading of such species (2.1.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Trends in abundance, temporal occurrence and spatial distribution in the wild of non-indigenous species, particularly invasive non-indigenous species, notably in risk areas, in relation to the main vectors and pathways of spreading of such species (2.1.1)

2.2.   Environmental impact of invasive non-indigenous species

| — | Ratio between invasive non-indigenous species and native species in some well studied taxonomic groups (e.g. fish, macroalgae, molluscs) that may provide a measure of change in species composition (e.g. further to the displacement of native species) (2.2.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Ratio between invasive non-indigenous species and native species in some well studied taxonomic groups (e.g. fish, macroalgae, molluscs) that may provide a measure of change in species composition (e.g. further to the displacement of native species) (2.2.1)

| — | Impacts of non-indigenous invasive species at the level of species, habitats and ecosystem, where feasible (2.2.2). |
| --- | --- |

—

Impacts of non-indigenous invasive species at the level of species, habitats and ecosystem, where feasible (2.2.2).

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.

This section applies for all the stocks covered by Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 (within the geographical scope of Directive 2008/56/EC) and similar obligations under the common fisheries policy. For these and for other stocks, its application depends on the data available (taking the data collection provisions of Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 into account), which will determine the most appropriate indicators to be used. For this descriptor, the three criteria for assessing progress towards good environmental status, as well as the indicators related respectively to them, are the following.

3.1.   Level of pressure of the fishing activity

| | Primary indicator. The primary indicator for the level of pressure of the fishing activity is the following:






  — | Fishing mortality (F) (3.1.1). |
| --- | --- | --- |

Primary indicator. The primary indicator for the level of pressure of the fishing activity is the following:

—

Fishing mortality (F) (3.1.1).

Achieving or maintaining good environmental status requires that F values are equal to or lower than FMSY, the level capable of producing Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY). This means that in mixed fisheries and where ecosystem interactions are important, long term management plans may result in exploiting some stocks more lightly than at FMSY levels in order not to prejudice the exploitation at FMSY of other species (14).

F is estimated from appropriate analytical assessments based on the analysis of catch (to be taken as all removals from the stock, including discards and unaccounted catch) at age or at length and ancillary information. Where the knowledge of the population dynamics of the stock do not allow to carry out simulations, scientific judgement of F values associated to the yield-per-recruit curve (Y/R), combined with other information on the historical performance of the fishery or on the population dynamics of similar stocks, can be used.

| | Secondary indicators (if analytical assessments yielding values for F are not available):






  — | Ratio between catch and biomass index (hereinafter ‘catch/biomass ratio’) (3.1.2). |
| --- | --- | --- |

Secondary indicators (if analytical assessments yielding values for F are not available):

—

Ratio between catch and biomass index (hereinafter ‘catch/biomass ratio’) (3.1.2).

The value for the indicator that reflects FMSY needs to be determined by scientific judgement following analysis of the observed historical trends of the indicator combined with other information on the historical performance of the fishery. Where stock production-based assessments are available, the catch/biomass ratio yielding MSY can be taken as indicative reference.

Alternatively to the catch/biomass ratio, secondary indicators may be developed on the basis of any other appropriate proxy for fishing mortality, adequately justified.

3.2.   Reproductive capacity of the stock

| | Primary indicator. The primary indicator for the reproductive capacity of the stock is the following:






  — | Spawning Stock Biomass (SSB) (3.2.1). |
| --- | --- | --- |

Primary indicator. The primary indicator for the reproductive capacity of the stock is the following:

—

Spawning Stock Biomass (SSB) (3.2.1).

This is estimated from appropriate analytical assessments based on the analysis of catch at age or at length and ancillary information.

Where an analytical assessment allows the estimation of SSB, the reference value reflecting full reproductive capacity is SSBMSY, i.e. the spawning stock biomass that would achieve MSY under a fishing mortality equal to FMSY. Any observed SSB value equal to or greater than SSBMSY is considered to meet this criterion.

Further research is needed to address the fact that a SSB corresponding to MSY may not be achieved for all stocks simultaneously due to possible interactions between them.

Where simulation models do not allow the estimation of a reliable value for SSBMSY, then the reference to be used for the purpose of this criterion is SSBpa, which is the minimum SSB value for which there is a high probability that the stock is able to replenish itself under the prevailing exploitation conditions.

| | Secondary indicators (if analytical assessments yielding values for SSB are not available):






  — | Biomass indices (3.2.2). |
| --- | --- | --- |

Secondary indicators (if analytical assessments yielding values for SSB are not available):

—

Biomass indices (3.2.2).

It can be used if such indices can be obtained for the fraction of the population that is sexually mature. In such cases, such indices need to be used when scientific judgement is able to determine, through detailed analysis of the historical trends of the indicator combined with other information on the historical performance of the fishery, that there is a high probability that the stock will be able to replenish itself under the prevailing exploitation conditions.

3.3.   Population age and size distribution

| | Primary indicators. Healthy stocks are characterised by high proportion of old, large individuals. Indicators based on the relative abundance of large fish include:






  — | Proportion of fish larger than the mean size of first sexual maturation (3.3.1) |
| --- | --- | --- |

Primary indicators. Healthy stocks are characterised by high proportion of old, large individuals. Indicators based on the relative abundance of large fish include:

—

Proportion of fish larger than the mean size of first sexual maturation (3.3.1)

| — | Mean maximum length across all species found in research vessel surveys (3.3.2) |
| --- | --- |

—

Mean maximum length across all species found in research vessel surveys (3.3.2)

| — | 95 % percentile of the fish length distribution observed in research vessel surveys (3.3.3). |
| --- | --- |

—

95 % percentile of the fish length distribution observed in research vessel surveys (3.3.3).

| | Secondary indicator:






  — | Size at first sexual maturation, which may reflect the extent of undesirable genetic effects of exploitation (3.3.4). |
| --- | --- | --- |

Secondary indicator:

—

Size at first sexual maturation, which may reflect the extent of undesirable genetic effects of exploitation (3.3.4).

For the two sets of indicators (proportion of old fish and size at first sexual maturation), expert judgement is required for determining whether there is a high probability that the intrinsic genetic diversity of the stock will not be undermined. The expert judgement needs to be made following an analysis of the time series available for the indicator, together with any other information on the biology of the species.

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.

This descriptor concerns important functional aspects such as energy flows and the structure of food webs (size and abundance). Additional scientific and technical support is required, at this stage, for the further development of criteria and potentially useful indicators to address the relationships within the food web (15).

4.1.   Productivity (production per unit biomass) of key species or trophic groups

To address energy flows in food webs, adequate indicators need to be developed further to assess the performance of the main predator-prey processes, reflecting the long-term viability of components in the part of the food web that they inhabit, based on the experience in some sub-regions in selecting appropriate species (e.g. mammals, seabirds).

| — | Performance of key predator species using their production per unit biomass (productivity) (4.1.1). |
| --- | --- |

—

Performance of key predator species using their production per unit biomass (productivity) (4.1.1).

4.2.   Proportion of selected species at the top of food webs

To address the structure of food webs, size and abundance of components, there is a need to assess the proportion of selected species at the top of food webs. Indicators need to be further developed, based on the experience in some sub-regions. For large fish, data are available from fish monitoring surveys.

| — | Large fish (by weight) (4.2.1). |
| --- | --- |

—

Large fish (by weight) (4.2.1).

4.3.   Abundance/distribution of key trophic groups/species

| — | Abundance trends of functionally important selected groups/species (4.3.1). |
| --- | --- |

—

Abundance trends of functionally important selected groups/species (4.3.1).

It is necessary to identify changes in population status potentially affecting food web structure. Detailed indicators need to be further specified, taking account of their importance to the food webs, on the basis of suitable groups/species in a region, sub-region or subdivision, including where appropriate:

| — | groups with fast turnover rates (e.g. phytoplankton, zooplankton, jellyfish, bivalve molluscs, short-living pelagic fish) that will respond quickly to ecosystem change and are useful as early warning indicators, |
| --- | --- |

—

groups with fast turnover rates (e.g. phytoplankton, zooplankton, jellyfish, bivalve molluscs, short-living pelagic fish) that will respond quickly to ecosystem change and are useful as early warning indicators,

| — | groups/species that are targeted by human activities or that are indirectly affected by them (in particular, by-catch and discards), |
| --- | --- |

—

groups/species that are targeted by human activities or that are indirectly affected by them (in particular, by-catch and discards),

| — | habitat-defining groups/species, |
| --- | --- |

—

habitat-defining groups/species,

| — | groups/species at the top of the food web, |
| --- | --- |

—

groups/species at the top of the food web,

| — | long-distance anadromous and catadromous migrating species, |
| --- | --- |

—

long-distance anadromous and catadromous migrating species,

| — | groups/species that are tightly linked to specific groups/species at another trophic level. |
| --- | --- |

—

groups/species that are tightly linked to specific groups/species at another trophic level.

Descriptor 5:   Human-induced eutrophication is minimised, especially adverse effects thereof, such as losses in biodiversity, ecosystem degradation, harmful algal blooms and oxygen deficiency in bottom waters.

The assessment of eutrophication in marine waters needs to take into account the assessment for coastal and transitional waters under Directive 2000/60/EC (Annex V, 1.2.3 and 1.2.4) and related guidance (16), in a way which ensures comparability, taking also into consideration the information and knowledge gathered and approaches developed in the framework of regional sea conventions. Based on a screening procedure as part of the initial assessment, risk-based considerations may be taken into account to assess eutrophication in an efficient manner (17). The assessment needs to combine information on nutrient levels and on a range of those primary effects and of secondary effects which are ecologically relevant (18), taking into account relevant temporal scales. Considering that the concentration of nutrients is related to nutrient loads from rivers in the catchment area, cooperation with landlocked Member States using established cooperation structures in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Directive 2008/56/EC is particularly relevant.

5.1.   Nutrients levels

| — | Nutrients concentration in the water column (5.1.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Nutrients concentration in the water column (5.1.1)

| — | Nutrient ratios (silica, nitrogen and phosphorus), where appropriate (5.1.2) |
| --- | --- |

—

Nutrient ratios (silica, nitrogen and phosphorus), where appropriate (5.1.2)

5.2.   Direct effects of nutrient enrichment

| — | Chlorophyll concentration in the water column (5.2.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Chlorophyll concentration in the water column (5.2.1)

| — | Water transparency related to increase in suspended algae, where relevant (5.2.2) |
| --- | --- |

—

Water transparency related to increase in suspended algae, where relevant (5.2.2)

| — | Abundance of opportunistic macroalgae (5.2.3) |
| --- | --- |

—

Abundance of opportunistic macroalgae (5.2.3)

| — | Species shift in floristic composition such as diatom to flagellate ratio, benthic to pelagic shifts, as well as bloom events of nuisance/toxic algal blooms (e.g. cyanobacteria) caused by human activities (5.2.4) |
| --- | --- |

—

Species shift in floristic composition such as diatom to flagellate ratio, benthic to pelagic shifts, as well as bloom events of nuisance/toxic algal blooms (e.g. cyanobacteria) caused by human activities (5.2.4)

5.3.   Indirect effects of nutrient enrichment

| — | Abundance of perennial seaweeds and seagrasses (e.g. fucoids, eelgrass and Neptune grass) adversely impacted by decrease in water transparency (5.3.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Abundance of perennial seaweeds and seagrasses (e.g. fucoids, eelgrass and Neptune grass) adversely impacted by decrease in water transparency (5.3.1)

| — | Dissolved oxygen, i.e. changes due to increased organic matter decomposition and size of the area concerned (5.3.2). |
| --- | --- |

—

Dissolved oxygen, i.e. changes due to increased organic matter decomposition and size of the area concerned (5.3.2).

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.

The objective is that human pressures on the seabed do not hinder the ecosystem components to retain their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, having regard to ecosystem resilience. The scale of assessment for this descriptor may be particularly challenging because of the patchy nature of the features of some benthic ecosystems and of several human pressures. Assessment and monitoring needs to be carried out further to an initial screening of impacts and threats to biodiversity features and human pressures, as well as an integration of assessment results from smaller to broader scales, covering where appropriate a subdivision, sub-region or region (19).

6.1.   Physical damage, having regard to substrate characteristics

The main concern for management purposes is the magnitude of impacts of human activities on seafloor substrates structuring the benthic habitats. Among the substrate types, biogenic substrates, which are the most sensitive to physical disturbance, provide a range of functions that support benthic habitats and communities.

| — | Type, abundance, biomass and areal extent of relevant biogenic substrate (6.1.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Type, abundance, biomass and areal extent of relevant biogenic substrate (6.1.1)

| — | Extent of the seabed significantly affected by human activities for the different substrate types (6.1.2). |
| --- | --- |

—

Extent of the seabed significantly affected by human activities for the different substrate types (6.1.2).

6.2.   Condition of benthic community

The characteristics of the benthic community such as species composition, size composition and functional traits provide an important indication of the potential of the ecosystem to function well. Information on the structure and dynamics of communities is obtained, as appropriate, by measuring species diversity, productivity (abundance or biomass), tolerant or sensitive taxa and taxocene dominance and size composition of a community, reflected by the proportion of small and large individuals.

| — | Presence of particularly sensitive and/or tolerant species (6.2.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Presence of particularly sensitive and/or tolerant species (6.2.1)

| — | Multi-metric indexes assessing benthic community condition and functionality, such as species diversity and richness, proportion of opportunistic to sensitive species (6.2.2) |
| --- | --- |

—

Multi-metric indexes assessing benthic community condition and functionality, such as species diversity and richness, proportion of opportunistic to sensitive species (6.2.2)

| — | Proportion of biomass or number of individuals in the macrobenthos above some specified length/size (6.2.3) |
| --- | --- |

—

Proportion of biomass or number of individuals in the macrobenthos above some specified length/size (6.2.3)

| — | Parameters describing the characteristics (shape, slope and intercept) of the size spectrum of the benthic community (6.2.4). |
| --- | --- |

—

Parameters describing the characteristics (shape, slope and intercept) of the size spectrum of the benthic community (6.2.4).

Descriptor 7:   Permanent alteration of hydrographical conditions does not adversely affect marine ecosystems.

Permanent alterations of the hydrographical conditions by human activities may consist for instance of changes in the tidal regime, sediment and freshwater transport, current or wave action, leading to modifications of the physical and chemicals characteristics set out in Table 1 of Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC. Such changes may be particularly relevant whenever they have the potential to affect marine ecosystems at a broader scale and their assessment may provide an early warning of possible impacts on the ecosystem. For coastal waters, Directive 2000/60/EC sets hydromorphological objectives that need to be addressed through measures in the context of river basin management plans. A case by case approach is necessary to assess the impact of activities. Tools such as environmental impact assessment, strategic environmental assessment and maritime spatial planning may contribute to evaluate and assess the extent and the cumulative aspects of impacts from such activities. It is however important to ensure that any such tools provide for adequate elements to assess potential impacts on the marine environment, including transboundary considerations.

7.1.   Spatial characterisation of permanent alterations

| — | Extent of area affected by permanent alterations (7.1.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Extent of area affected by permanent alterations (7.1.1)

7.2.   Impact of permanent hydrographical changes

| — | Spatial extent of habitats affected by the permanent alteration (7.2.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Spatial extent of habitats affected by the permanent alteration (7.2.1)

| — | Changes in habitats, in particular the functions provided (e.g. spawning, breeding and feeding areas and migration routes of fish, birds and mammals), due to altered hydrographical conditions (7.2.2). |
| --- | --- |

—

Changes in habitats, in particular the functions provided (e.g. spawning, breeding and feeding areas and migration routes of fish, birds and mammals), due to altered hydrographical conditions (7.2.2).

Descriptor 8:   Concentrations of contaminants are at levels not giving rise to pollution effects.

The concentration of contaminants in the marine environment and their effects need to be assessed taking into account the impacts and threats to the ecosystem (20). Relevant provisions of Directive 2000/60/EC in territorial and/or coastal waters have to be taken into consideration to ensure proper coordination of the implementation of the two legal frameworks, having also regard to the information and knowledge gathered and approaches developed in regional sea conventions. The Member States have to consider the substances or groups of substances, where relevant for the marine environment, that:

| (i) | exceed the relevant Environmental Quality Standards set out pursuant to Article 2(35) and Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC in coastal or territorial waters adjacent to the marine region or sub-region, be it in water, sediment and biota; and/or |
| --- | --- |

(i)

exceed the relevant Environmental Quality Standards set out pursuant to Article 2(35) and Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC in coastal or territorial waters adjacent to the marine region or sub-region, be it in water, sediment and biota; and/or

| (ii) | are listed as priority substances in Annex X to Directive 2000/60/EC and further regulated in Directive 2008/105/EC, which are discharged into the concerned marine region, sub-region or subdivision; and/or |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

are listed as priority substances in Annex X to Directive 2000/60/EC and further regulated in Directive 2008/105/EC, which are discharged into the concerned marine region, sub-region or subdivision; and/or

| (iii) | are contaminants and their total releases (including losses, discharges or emissions) may entail significant risks to the marine environment from past and present pollution in the marine region, sub-region or subdivision concerned, including as a consequence of acute pollution events following incidents involving for instance hazardous and noxious substances. |
| --- | --- |

(iii)

are contaminants and their total releases (including losses, discharges or emissions) may entail significant risks to the marine environment from past and present pollution in the marine region, sub-region or subdivision concerned, including as a consequence of acute pollution events following incidents involving for instance hazardous and noxious substances.

Progress towards good environmental status will depend on whether pollution is progressively being phased out, i.e. the presence of contaminants in the marine environment and their biological effects are kept within acceptable limits, so as to ensure that there are no significant impacts on or risk to the marine environment.

8.1.   Concentration of contaminants

| — | Concentration of the contaminants mentioned above, measured in the relevant matrix (such as biota, sediment and water) in a way that ensures comparability with the assessments under Directive 2000/60/EC (8.1.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Concentration of the contaminants mentioned above, measured in the relevant matrix (such as biota, sediment and water) in a way that ensures comparability with the assessments under Directive 2000/60/EC (8.1.1)

8.2.   Effects of contaminants

| — | Levels of pollution effects on the ecosystem components concerned, having regard to the selected biological processes and taxonomic groups where a cause/effect relationship has been established and needs to be monitored (8.2.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Levels of pollution effects on the ecosystem components concerned, having regard to the selected biological processes and taxonomic groups where a cause/effect relationship has been established and needs to be monitored (8.2.1)

| — | Occurrence, origin (where possible), extent of significant acute pollution events (e.g. slicks from oil and oil products) and their impact on biota physically affected by this pollution (8.2.2). |
| --- | --- |

—

Occurrence, origin (where possible), extent of significant acute pollution events (e.g. slicks from oil and oil products) and their impact on biota physically affected by this pollution (8.2.2).

Descriptor 9:   Contaminants in fish and other seafood for human consumption do not exceed levels established by Community legislation or other relevant standards.

In the different regions or sub-regions, Member States need to monitor in edible tissues (muscle, liver, roe, flesh, soft parts as appropriate) of fish, crustaceans, molluscs and echinoderms, as well as seaweed, caught or harvested in the wild, the possible presence of substances for which maximum levels are established at European, regional, or national level for products destined to human consumption.

9.1.   Levels, number and frequency of contaminants

| — | Actual levels of contaminants that have been detected and number of contaminants which have exceeded maximum regulatory levels (9.1.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Actual levels of contaminants that have been detected and number of contaminants which have exceeded maximum regulatory levels (9.1.1)

| — | Frequency of regulatory levels being exceeded (9.1.2). |
| --- | --- |

—

Frequency of regulatory levels being exceeded (9.1.2).

Descriptor 10:   Properties and quantities of marine litter do not cause harm to the coastal and marine environment.

The distribution of litter is highly variable, which needs to be taken into consideration for monitoring programmes. It is necessary to identify the activity to which it is linked including, where possible, its origin. There is still a need for further development of several indicators, notably those relating to biological impacts and to micro-particles, as well as for the enhanced assessment of their potential toxicity (21).

10.1.   Characteristics of litter in the marine and coastal environment

| — | Trends in the amount of litter washed ashore and/or deposited on coastlines, including analysis of its composition, spatial distribution and, where possible, source (10.1.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Trends in the amount of litter washed ashore and/or deposited on coastlines, including analysis of its composition, spatial distribution and, where possible, source (10.1.1)

| — | Trends in the amount of litter in the water column (including floating at the surface) and deposited on the sea-floor, including analysis of its composition, spatial distribution and, where possible, source (10.1.2) |
| --- | --- |

—

Trends in the amount of litter in the water column (including floating at the surface) and deposited on the sea-floor, including analysis of its composition, spatial distribution and, where possible, source (10.1.2)

| — | Trends in the amount, distribution and, where possible, composition of micro-particles (in particular micro-plastics) (10.1.3) |
| --- | --- |

—

Trends in the amount, distribution and, where possible, composition of micro-particles (in particular micro-plastics) (10.1.3)

10.2.   Impacts of litter on marine life

| — | Trends in the amount and composition of litter ingested by marine animals (e.g. stomach analysis) (10.2.1). |
| --- | --- |

—

Trends in the amount and composition of litter ingested by marine animals (e.g. stomach analysis) (10.2.1).

This indicator needs to be developed further, based on the experience in some sub-regions (e.g. North Sea), to be adapted in other regions.

Descriptor 11:   Introduction of energy, including underwater noise, is at levels that do not adversely affect the marine environment.

Together with underwater noise, which is highlighted throughout Directive 2008/56/EC, other forms of energy input have the potential to impact on components of marine ecosystems, such as thermal energy, electromagnetic fields and light. Additional scientific and technical progress is still required to support the further development of criteria related to this descriptor (22), including in relation to impacts of introduction of energy on marine life, relevant noise and frequency levels (which may need to be adapted, where appropriate, subject to the requirement of regional cooperation). At the current stage, the main orientations for the measurement of underwater noise have been identified as a first priority in relation to assessment and monitoring (23), subject to further development, including in relation to mapping. Anthropogenic sounds may be of short duration (e.g. impulsive such as from seismic surveys and piling for wind farms and platforms, as well as explosions) or be long lasting (e.g. continuous such as dredging, shipping and energy installations) affecting organisms in different ways. Most commercial activities entailing high level noise levels affecting relatively broad areas are executed under regulated conditions subject to a license. This creates the opportunity for coordinating coherent requirements for measuring such loud impulsive sounds.

11.1.   Distribution in time and place of loud, low and mid frequency impulsive sounds

| — | Proportion of days and their distribution within a calendar year over areas of a determined surface, as well as their spatial distribution, in which anthropogenic sound sources exceed levels that are likely to entail significant impact on marine animals measured as Sound Exposure Level (in dB re 1μPa2.s) or as peak sound pressure level (in dB re 1μPapeak) at one metre, measured over the frequency band 10 Hz to 10 kHz (11.1.1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Proportion of days and their distribution within a calendar year over areas of a determined surface, as well as their spatial distribution, in which anthropogenic sound sources exceed levels that are likely to entail significant impact on marine animals measured as Sound Exposure Level (in dB re 1μPa2.s) or as peak sound pressure level (in dB re 1μPapeak) at one metre, measured over the frequency band 10 Hz to 10 kHz (11.1.1)

11.2.   Continuous low frequency sound

| — | Trends in the ambient noise level within the 1/3 octave bands 63 and 125 Hz (centre frequency) (re 1μΡa RMS; average noise level in these octave bands over a year) measured by observation stations and/or with the use of models if appropriate (11.2.1). |
| --- | --- |

—

Trends in the ambient noise level within the 1/3 octave bands 63 and 125 Hz (centre frequency) (re 1μΡa RMS; average noise level in these octave bands over a year) measured by observation stations and/or with the use of models if appropriate (11.2.1).

---

(1)  See recitals 3 and 4.

(2)  
  OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 84.

(3)  
  OJ L 60, 5.3.2008, p. 1.

(4)  See recital 2.

(5)  See recitals 3 and 4.

(6)  See points 3 to 6 in Part A.

(7)  See point 6 in Part A.

(8)  
  ‘Assessment, monitoring and reporting of conservation status — Preparing the 2001-2007 report under Article 17 of the Habitats Directive’, 15 March 2005, accepted in the Habitats Committee on 20 April 2005.

(9)  See footnote 8.

(10)  Council Regulation (EC) No 708/2007 of 11 June 2007 concerning use of alien and locally absent species in aquaculture (OJ L 168, 28.6.2007, p. 1).

(11)  See Annex IV to Regulation (EC) No 708/2007.

(12)  See recitals 3 and 4.

(13)  See point 9 in Part A.

(14)  Communication ‘Implementing sustainability in EU fisheries through maximum sustainable yield’ (COM(2006) 360 final).

(15)  See recitals 3 and 4.

(16)  
  Guidance Document on the Eutrophication Assessment in the Context of European Water Policies, Document No 23. European Commission (2009). See http://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/env/wfd/library

(17)  See points 3 to 6 in Part A.

(18)  See point 7 in Part A.

(19)  See points 3 to 6 in Part A.

(20)  See points 3 and 4 in Part A.

(21)  See recitals 3 and 4.

(22)  See recitals 3 and 4.

(23)  See point 9 in Part A.

---