18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/1

(1)

A beneficiary country under the Generalised Scheme of Tariff Preferences (‘GSP’) may request to benefit from additional tariff preferences under the special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance (GSP+). For that purpose, Article 9(1) of Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 establishes specific eligibility criteria for the granting of the tariff preferences provided under the GSP+. The country should be considered vulnerable due to a lack of sufficient diversification and insufficient integration with the international trading system. It should have ratified all the conventions listed in Annex VIII to Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 and the most recent available conclusions of the relevant monitoring bodies should not identify a serious failure to effectively implement any of those conventions. In relation to any of the relevant conventions, the country should not have formulated a reservation which is prohibited by the convention or which, for the exclusive purposes of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 978/2012, is considered to be incompatible with the object and purpose of that convention. It should accept without reservation the reporting requirements imposed by each convention and give the binding undertakings referred to in points (d), (e) and (f) of Article 9(1) of Regulation (EU) No 978/2012.

(2)

A GSP beneficiary country wishing to benefit from GSP+ has to submit a request accompanied by comprehensive information concerning ratification of the relevant conventions, its reservations and the objections to those reservations made by other parties to the convention, and its binding undertakings.

(3)

The Commission has been empowered to adopt delegated acts to amend Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 in order to grant GSP+ to a requesting country by adding it to the list of GSP+ beneficiary countries.

(4)

On 12 July 2016, the Commission received a GSP+ request from the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (‘Sri Lanka’).

(5)

The Commission has examined the GSP+ request from Sri Lanka in accordance with the provisions of Article 10(1) of Regulation (EU) No 978/2012, and the Commission has established that Sri Lanka meets the conditions. Sri Lanka should therefore be granted GSP+ from the date of entry into force of this Regulation. Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 should be amended accordingly.

(6)

Pursuant to Article 13 of Regulation (EU) No 978/2012, the Commission should keep under review the status of ratification of the relevant conventions, the effective implementation of those conventions, as well as the cooperation with the relevant monitoring bodies by the government of Sri Lanka,

18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/3

(1)

The Polish language version of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1998 (2) contains an error in point 11.4.3(a) of the Annex as regards the list of competencies requiring recurrent training at specific intervals.

(2)

The Swedish language version of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1998 contains errors in the Annex, namely in points 8.1.1.2 and 9.1.1.3 as regards the requirement of a renewed screening; in point 8.3.1 as regards the object of the delivery obligation; in the first paragraph of point 9.1.3.5(b) as regards the scope of the validation method; in point 9.3.1 as regards the object of the delivery obligation; and in the introductory phrase of point 11.2.3.1 as regards persons covered by the training obligation.

(3)

The Polish and Swedish language versions of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1998 should therefore be corrected accordingly. The other language versions are not affected.

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Civil Aviation Security,

18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/5

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 establishes basic requirements for the organic production of aquaculture animals, including requirements with regard to feed. Detailed rules for implementing those requirements are laid down in Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 (2).

(2)

Article 15(1)(d)(i) of Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 requires that fish and crustaceans are fed with feed that meets the animal's nutritional requirements at the various stages of its development.

(3)

Article 25l of Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 sets out specific rules on feed for certain aquaculture animals referred to in Sections 6, 7 and 9 of Annex XIIIa to that Regulation. The rules set out in that Article aim to prioritise naturally available feed, where it is available.

(4)

Under Article 25l(1) of Regulation (EC) No 889/2008, the animals concerned are to be fed with feed naturally available in ponds and lakes. Article 25l(2) of that Regulation permits the use of organic feed of plant origin or seaweed where natural feed resources are not available in sufficient quantities. Article 25l(3)(a) and (b) of that Regulation establish maximum percentages of fishmeal and fish oil that can be included in the feed ration of siamese catfish and shrimps where naturally available feed is supplemented.

(5)

Naturally occurring feed is limited or non-existent in the hatchery stage. Member States have indicated to the Commission that the rules on feeding penaeid shrimps, in particular Tiger shrimp (Penaeus monodon), set out in Article 25l(3)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 889/2008, would lead to malnutrition and increased mortality if applied in the juvenile stages in a hatchery environment.

(6)

Article 25l(1) of Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 requires the animals concerned to be fed with feed naturally available in ponds and lakes. The rule set out in that Article should concern only the grow-out stages where the animals are kept in ponds and lakes rather than hatchery environments where naturally available feed is insufficient. This is especially pertinent from 31 December 2016, since when, in accordance with Article 25e(3) of Regulation (EC) No 889/2008, juvenile aquaculture animals subject to non-organic management conditions can no longer be brought into an organic holding. Prior to this date, it was permitted to bring a proportion of non-organic juvenile animals into an organic holding, following a hatchery stage under non-organic management.

(7)

Furthermore, the expert group for technical advice on organic production (‘EGTOP’), set up by Commission Decision 2009/427/EC (3), has confirmed that the specific rules contained in Article 25l(3)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 are suitable only for the grow-out stages (4). EGTOP considers that the limitations on fishmeal and fish oil set out in that Article do not allow the animal's nutritional requirements to be met during the early life stages while in a hatchery environment.

(8)

The Commission has identified the need to amend the rules on feeds for certain aquaculture animals by clarifying that these rules apply only to the grow-out stages. In arriving at this conclusion the Commission has taken into account the requirement to meet the animal's nutritional needs at the various stages of its development as set out in Article 15(1)(d)(i) of Regulation (EC) No 834/2007, the aim of Article 25l of Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 to prioritise naturally available feed where it is available, and the opinion of EGTOP.

(9)

Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(10)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on organic production,

18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/7

(1)

Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 lays down a Union list of food additives approved for use in foods and their conditions of use.

(2)

The Union list of food additives may be updated in accordance with the common procedure referred to in Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1331/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), either on the initiative of the Commission or following an application.

(3)

On 10 March 2016 an application was submitted by Poland for the authorisation of the use of nitrites (E 249-250) as a preservative in ‘golonka peklowana’. The application was subsequently made available to the Member States pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1331/2008.

(4)

According to the applicant ‘golonka peklowana’ is a traditional Polish meat preparation in which nitrites apart from their preserving effect are used as a curing agent to achieve the desired colour, flavour and texture properties as expected by the consumers. ‘Golonka peklowana’ is offered to the consumers to be further heat-treated before consumption.

(5)

Recital 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 stipulates that the approval of food additives should also take into account other factors relevant to the matter under consideration including, inter alia, traditional factors. Therefore, it is appropriate to maintain certain traditional products on the market in some Member States where the use of food additives comply with the general and specific conditions laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008.

(6)

In order to ensure uniform application of the use of additives covered by the present regulation, ‘golonka peklowana’ will be described in the guidance document describing the food categories in Part E of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 on food additives (3).

(7)

Pursuant to Article 3(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1331/2008, the Commission has to seek the opinion of the European Food Safety Authority (the Authority) in order to update the Union list of food additives set out in Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008, except where the update in question is not liable to have an effect on human health. Nitrites are authorised for the use in meat products on a general basis, the use in meat preparations is restricted to certain traditional preparations and specific provisions are laid down for traditionally cured meat products. Since the application for the extension of use of nitrites is limited to the specific meat preparation that has been traditionally used it is not expected that the extension will have a significant impact on the overall exposure to nitrites. Therefore, the extended use of these additives constitutes an update of the Union list which is not liable to have an effect on human health and it is not necessary to seek the opinion of the Authority.

(8)

Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 should be amended accordingly.

(9)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,

18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/10

(1)

In accordance with Article 80(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, Council Directive 91/414/EEC (2) is to apply, with respect to the procedure and the conditions for approval, to active substances for which a decision has been adopted in accordance with Article 6(3) of that Directive before 14 June 2011. For orthosulfamuron the conditions of Article 80(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 are fulfilled by Commission Decision 2006/806/EC (3).

(2)

In accordance with Article 6(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC Italy received on 4 July 2005 an application from Isagro S.p.A. for the inclusion of the active substance orthosulfamuron in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC. Decision 2006/806/EC confirmed that the dossier was ‘complete’ in the sense that it could be considered as satisfying, in principle, the data and information requirements of Annexes II and III to Directive 91/414/EEC.

(3)

For that active substance, the effects on human and animal health and the environment have been assessed, in accordance with the provisions of Article 6(2) and (4) of Directive 91/414/EEC, for the uses proposed by the applicant. The designated rapporteur Member State submitted a draft assessment report on 27 July 2012. In accordance with Article 6(3) of Commission Regulation (EU) No 188/2011 (4) additional information was requested from the applicant. The evaluation by Italy of the additional information submitted by the applicant was submitted in the format of addenda to the draft assessment report and compiled by the European Food Safety Authority (hereinafter ‘the Authority’) in August 2013.

(4)

The draft assessment report was reviewed by the Member States and the Authority. The Authority presented to the Commission its conclusion on the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance orthosulfamuron (5) on 3 September 2013. The Authority concluded that the information available on the nature of residues in primary and succeeding crops in combination with a lack of toxicological information and intake assessment on some plant metabolites does not allow finalising the assessment of the consumer risk. In addition, also the risk assessment to soil dwelling organisms and aquatic organisms could not be finalised. Moreover, the Authority identified concerns from some metabolites, and consequently the exposure assessment to groundwater could not be finalised.

(5)

The Commission invited the applicant to submit its comments on the conclusion of the Authority, and, in accordance with Article 9(1) of Regulation (EU) No 188/2011 on the draft review report. The applicant submitted its comments, which have been carefully examined.

(6)

However, despite the arguments put forward by the applicant, the concerns identified/referred to in recital 4 could not be eliminated.

(7)

Consequently it has not been demonstrated that it may be expected that, under the proposed conditions of use, plant protection products containing orthosulfamuron satisfy in general the requirements laid down in Article 5(1)(a) and (b) of Directive 91/414/EEC.

(8)

Orthosulfamuron should therefore not be approved pursuant to Article 13(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.

(9)

In accordance with Article 8(1)(b) of Directive 91/414/EEC, Member States were given the possibility to grant provisional authorisations for plant protection products containing orthosulfamuron for an initial period of three years. Commission Implementing Decision 2013/205/EU (6) allowed Member States to extend provisional authorisations for orthosulfamuron for a period ending on 30 April 2015 at the latest.

(10)

As all existing authorisations have expired, it is not necessary to provide an additional period to withdraw authorisations for plant protection products containing orthosulfamuron.

(11)

This Regulation does not prejudice the submission of a further application for orthosulfamuron in accordance with Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.

(12)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,

18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/12

(1)

Part A of the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (2) sets out the active substances deemed to have been approved under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.

(2)

The approval periods of the active substances bentazone, diquat, DPX KE 459 (flupyrsulfuron-methyl), famoxadone, flumioxazine, metalaxyl-m and pymetrozine were last extended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/549 (3). The approval of those substances will expire on 30 June 2017. Applications for the renewal of the inclusion of those substances in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC (4) were submitted in accordance with Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EU) No 1141/2010 (5).

(3)

The approval periods of the active substances carfentrazone ethyl, cyazofamid, fenamidone, foramsulfuron, imazamox, isoxaflutole, oxasulfuron, pendimethalin, and trifloxystrobin were last extended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/950 (6).The approval of those substances will expire on 31 July 2017.

(4)

The approval periods of the active substances alpha-cypermethrin, Ampelomyces quisqualis strain: aq 10, benalaxyl, bifenazate, bromoxynil, chlorpropham, desmedipham, etoxazole, Gliocladium catenulatum strain: j1446, imazosulfuron, laminarin, methoxyfenozide, milbemectin, phenmedipham, and s-metolachlor were extended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1197/2012 (7). The approval of those substances will expire on 31 July 2017.

(5)

Applications for the renewal of the approval of substances listed in recitals 3 and 4 were submitted in accordance with Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012 (8).

(6)

Due to the fact that the assessment of the substances has been delayed for reasons beyond the control of the applicants, the approvals of those active substances are likely to expire before a decision has been taken on their renewal. It is therefore necessary to extend their approval periods.

(7)

In view of the aim of the first paragraph of Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, as regards cases where the Commission will adopt a Regulation providing that the approval of an active substance referred to in the Annex to this Regulation is not renewed because the approval criteria are not satisfied, the Commission will set the expiry date at the same date as before this Regulation or at the date of the entry into force of the Regulation providing that the approval of the active substance is not renewed, whichever date is later. As regards cases where the Commission will adopt a Regulation providing for the renewal of an active substance referred to in the Annex to this Regulation, the Commission will endeavour to set, as appropriate under the circumstances, the earliest possible application date.

(8)

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(9)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,

18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/16

(1)

Commission Directive 2003/79/EC (2) included Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08 as an active substance in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC (3).

(2)

Active substances included in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC are deemed to have been approved under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and are listed in Part A of the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (4).

(3)

The approval of the active substance Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08, as set out in Part A of the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011, expires on 31 October 2017.

(4)

An application for the renewal of the approval of Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08 was submitted in accordance with Article 1 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012 (5) within the time period provided for in that Article.

(5)

The applicant submitted the supplementary dossiers required in accordance with Article 6 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The application was found to be complete by the rapporteur Member State.

(6)

The rapporteur Member State prepared a renewal assessment report in consultation with the co-rapporteur Member State and submitted it to the European Food Safety Authority (‘the Authority’) and the Commission on 29 May 2015.

(7)

The Authority communicated the renewal assessment report to the applicant and to the Member States for comments and forwarded the comments received to the Commission. The Authority also made the supplementary summary dossier available to the public.

(8)

On 8 June 2016 the Authority communicated to the Commission its conclusion (6) on whether Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08 can be expected to meet the approval criteria provided for in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. The Commission presented the draft renewal report for Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08 to the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed on 6 December 2016.

(9)

The applicant was given the possibility to submit comments on the renewal report.

(10)

It has been established with respect to one or more representative uses of at least one plant protection product containing Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08 that the approval criteria provided for in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 are satisfied. It is therefore appropriate to renew the approval of Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08.

(11)

The risk assessment for the renewal of the approval of Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08 is based on a limited number of representative uses, which however do not restrict the uses for which plant protection products containing Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08 may be authorised. It is therefore appropriate not to maintain the restriction to use only as a fungicide.

(12)

The Commission further considers that Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08 is a low-risk active substance pursuant to Article 22 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08 is not a substance of concern and fulfils the conditions set in point 5 of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08 is a wild-type strain naturally occurring in the environment. It is not pathogenic to humans or animals. The additional exposure of humans, animals and the environment by the uses approved under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 is expected to be negligible compared to exposure expected through realistic natural situations.

(13)

It is therefore appropriate to renew the approval of Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08 as a low-risk substance. In accordance with Article 13(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 should be amended accordingly.

(14)

In accordance with Article 14(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 in conjunction with Article 6 thereof and in the light of current scientific and technical knowledge, it is, however, necessary to include certain conditions and restrictions.

(15)

In accordance with Article 20(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, in conjunction with Article 13(4) thereof, the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 should be amended accordingly.

(16)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/950 (7) extended the approval period of Coniothyrium minitans strain CON/M/91-08 to 31 October 2017 in order to allow the renewal process to be completed before the expiry date of the approval of that substance. However, given that a decision on renewal has been taken ahead of this extended expiry date, this Regulation shall apply from 1 August 2017.

(17)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,

18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/21

(1)

In accordance with Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 France received on 6 November 2012 an application from Arysta Lifescience S.A.S. for the approval of the active substance Beauveria bassiana strain NPP111B005. In accordance with Article 9(3) of that Regulation, France, as rapporteur Member State, notified the applicant, the other Member States, the Commission and the European Food Safety Authority (hereinafter ‘the Authority’) on 5 February 2013 of the admissibility of the application.

(2)

On 7 October 2014 the rapporteur Member State submitted a draft assessment report to the Commission with a copy to the Authority, assessing whether that active substance can be expected to meet the approval criteria provided for in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.

(3)

The Authority complied with Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. In accordance with Article 12(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, it requested that the applicant supply additional information to the Member States, the Commission and the Authority. The assessment of the additional information by the rapporteur Member State was submitted to the Authority in the format of an updated draft assessment report on 3 July 2015.

(4)

On 6 October 2015 the Authority communicated to the applicant, the Member States and the Commission its conclusion (2) on whether the active substance Beauveria bassiana strain NPP111B005 can be expected to meet the approval criteria provided for in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. The Authority made its conclusion available to the public.

(5)

On 8 March 2016 the Commission presented to the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed the review report for Beauveria bassiana strain NPP111B005 and a draft Regulation providing that Beauveria bassiana strain NPP111B005 is approved.

(6)

The applicant was given the possibility to submit comments on the review report.

(7)

It has been established with respect to one or more representative uses of at least one plant protection product containing the active substance, and in particular the uses which were examined and detailed in the review report, that the approval criteria provided for in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 are satisfied. It is therefore appropriate to approve Beauveria bassiana strain NPP111B005.

(8)

In accordance with Article 13(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 in conjunction with Article 6 thereof and in the light of current scientific and technical knowledge, it is, however, necessary to include certain conditions and restrictions.

(9)

In accordance with Article 13(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (3) should be amended accordingly.

(10)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,

18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/25

(1)

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 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 XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)

The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union,

18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/27

(1)

Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC lays down the indicative lists of characteristics, pressures and impacts which are referred to in Articles 8(1), 9(1), 9(3), 10(1), 11(1) and 24 of that Directive.

(2)

In 2012, on the basis of the initial assessment of their marine waters made pursuant to Article 8(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC and as part of the first cycle of implementation of their marine strategies, Member States notified to the Commission a set of characteristics for good environmental status and their environmental targets, in accordance with Articles 9(2) and 10(2) of Directive 2008/56/EC, respectively. The Commission's assessment (2) of those Member State's reports, undertaken in accordance with Article 12 of that Directive, highlighted that more efforts were urgently needed if Member States and the Union are to reach good environmental status by 2020.

(3)

To ensure that the second cycle of implementation of the marine strategies of the Member States further contributes to the achievement of the objectives of Directive 2008/56/EC and yields more consistent determinations of good environmental status, the Commission recommended in its report on the first phase of implementation that, at Union level, the Commission services and Member States collaborate to revise, strengthen and improve Commission Decision 2010/477/EU (3) by 2015, aiming at a clearer, simpler, more concise, more coherent and comparable set of good environmental status criteria and methodological standards and, at the same time, review Annex III of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, and if necessary revise it, and develop specific guidance to ensure a more coherent and consistent approach for assessments in the next implementation cycle.

(4)

The review of Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC is needed to complement the review of Decision 2010/477/EU. Furthermore, the relationship between Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC and the qualitative descriptors for determining good environmental status listed in Annex I to that Directive is only implicit in that Directive and, therefore, not sufficiently clear. The Commission, in a staff working paper from 2011 (4), explained relationships between the qualitative descriptors listed in Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC, the elements set out in Annex III to that Directive, and the criteria and indicators set out in Decision 2010/477/EU, but could provide only a partial answer due to their inherent content. A revision of Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC is needed in order to further clarify those relationships and facilitate implementation, better linking ecosystem elements, and anthropogenic pressures and impacts on the marine environment with the descriptors in Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC and the outcome of the review of Decision 2010/477/EU.

(5)

Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC should provide elements for assessment (Article 8(1) of that Directive) with regard to good environmental status (Article 9(1) of that Directive), provide elements for monitoring (Article 11(1) of that Directive), which are complementary to assessment (e.g. temperature, salinity), and provide elements for consideration when setting targets (Article 10(1) of the Directive). The relevance of these elements will vary by region and Member State due to differing regional characteristics. This means that elements need to be addressed only if they are considered ‘essential features and characteristics’ or ‘predominant pressures and impacts’ as referred to in points (a) and (b) of Article 8(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC, respectively, and if they occur in the relevant Member State's waters.

(6)

It is important to ensure that the elements set out in Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC are clearly related to the qualitative descriptors of Annex I to that Directive and to the criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status of marine waters laid down by the Commission on the basis of Article 9(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC, as well as to their application in relation to Articles 8, 9, 10 and 11 of Directive 2008/56/EC. In this context, those elements need to be generic and generally applicable across the Union, considering that more specific elements can be laid down by the Commission on the basis of Article 9(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC or in the context of determining sets of characteristics for good environmental status under Article 9(1) of that Directive.

(7)

Tables 1 and 2 of Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC should be clarified to more clearly relate to state elements (Table 1) and to pressure elements and their impacts (Table 2), and to directly link the elements listed in them with the qualitative descriptors laid down in Annex I of that Directive and through this with the criteria laid down by the Commission on the basis of Article 9(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC.

(8)

To guide the assessments on uses of marine waters under point (c) of Article 8(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC, and on human activities under point (b) of Article 8(1), and associated monitoring provided under Article 11 of that Directive, Table 2 should be extended to contain an indicative list of uses and human activities in order to ensure consistency in their assessment across the marine regions and subregions.

(9)

Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.

(10)

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

18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/34

—

having regard to the proposal by the Conference of Presidents,

—

having regard to Article 226 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to Decision 95/167/EC, Euratom, ECSC of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission of 19 April 1995 on the detailed provisions governing the exercise of the European Parliament's right of inquiry (1),

—

having regard to Decision (EU) 2016/1021 of the European Parliament of 8 June 2016 on setting up a Committee of Inquiry to investigate alleged contraventions and maladministration in the application of Union law in relation to money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion, its powers, numerical strength and term of office (2),

—

having regard to Rule 198(11) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas the Committee of Inquiry requested an extension of its term of office in order to enable it to implement its mandate fully and appropriately, taking into account the number of documents yet to be examined, the analyses commissioned, and the stakeholders to be heard;

1.

Decides to extend by three months the term of office of the Committee of Inquiry.

18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/35

(1)

On 18 November 2002, the Commission adopted Decision 2002/915/EC (2) granting a derogation requested by Denmark pursuant to Directive 91/676/EEC concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources, allowing the application of livestock manure containing up to 230 kg nitrogen per hectare per year on certain cattle holdings within the framework of the Danish action programme 1999 to 2003. The derogation was extended by Commission Decision 2005/294/EC (3) in connection with the Danish action programme 2004 to 2007, by Commission Decision 2008/664/EC (4) in connection with the Danish action programme 2008-2012 and by Commission Implementing Decision 2012/659/EU (5) in connection with the Danish action programme 2008 to 2015.

(2)

The derogation granted by Implementing Decision 2012/659/EU concerned approximately (for the period 2014/2015) 1 500 cattle holdings, 425 102 livestock units and 205 165 hectares of arable land, corresponding respectively to 4,0 % of total number of holdings, 18,6 % of total livestock units and 8,2 % of the total arable area in Denmark.

(3)

On 4 February 2016, Denmark submitted to the Commission a request for renewal of the derogation under the third subparagraph of paragraph 2 of Annex III to Directive 91/676/EEC.

(4)

Denmark has an action programme covering the period 2016 to 2018, in conformity with Article 5 of Directive 91/676/EEC, by means of parts of Order on commercial livestock, livestock manure, silage, etc. no 1324 of 15 November 2016, Consolidated Act on farms' use of fertiliser and on plant cover no 388 of 27 April 2016 and Order on farms' use of fertiliser in the planning period 2016/2017 no 1055 of 1 July 2016, a new targeted catch crop scheme, obligatory part, as stated in Act on farms' use of fertiliser and on plant cover. In addition, Danish legislation includes a new general phosphorus regulation, according to Act on environmental approval etc. of livestock holdings and Order on commercial livestock, livestock manure, silage etc.

(5)

The Danish legislation implementing Directive 91/676/EEC includes limits for the application of nitrogen. Legislation limiting the application of phosphorus has been adopted and will enter into force in August 2017.

(6)

The Danish report on the ‘Status and trends of the aquatic environment and agricultural practice’ concerning the period 2012 to 2015 show an annual surplus of the national field balance of 80 kg N/ha in 2014 and a total nitrogen discharge to the sea from agriculture at approximately 70 % of the total in 2012. Denmark estimated that the land based nitrogen load to coastal waters needs to be reduced from 56,8 Mt to 44,7 Mt N, to support a good ecological status.

(7)

The Danish legislation should include a combined targeted scheme for voluntary and mandatory catch crops for 2017 and 2018. Under this scheme, the obligatory provisions for catch crops should enter into force automatically if the voluntary agreements for catch crops fail to deliver the environmental objectives. The areas under catch crops should be in addition to the national requirement for mandatory catch crops pursuant to the Danish Act on farms' use of fertiliser and on plant cover. These measures are necessary to ensure that the application of the current derogation would not lead to deterioration of water quality.

(8)

The information provided by Denmark in the context of the derogation granted by Implementing Decision 2012/659/EU shows that the derogation has not led to a deterioration of water quality as compared to areas not encompassed by the derogation. Data presented by Denmark on the implementation of Directive 91/676/EEC for the period 2012 to 2015 (6) shows that in Denmark for groundwater, around 16 % of monitoring stations have mean nitrate concentrations exceeding 50 mg/l and around 23 % of monitoring stations have mean nitrate concentrations exceeding 40 mg/l. Monitoring data show a stable trend in nitrate concentration in groundwater as compared to the previous reporting period (2008 to 2011). For surface water, most of monitoring points in surface waters shows mean nitrate concentrations below 50 mg/l and a stable trend in nitrate concentrations. The report covering the period 2012 to 2015 states that 2 out of 119 coastal waters were classified in a ‘good’ status.

(9)

The Commission, after examination of Denmark's request on the basis of the elements described in the third subparagraph of paragraph 2 of Annex III of Directive 91/676/EEC and in the light of the experience gained from the derogation as provided for in Decisions 2002/915/EC, 2005/294/EC, 2008/664/EC and Implementing Decision 2012/659/EU, considers that the amount of manure envisaged by Denmark, 230 kg nitrogen per hectare per year, will not prejudice the achievement of the objectives of Directive 91/676/EEC, subject to certain strict conditions being met.

(10)

In farms authorised to apply livestock manure containing up to 230 kg nitrogen per hectare per year, fertilisation plans are updated in a timely manner to ensure consistency with actual agricultural practices and permanent vegetal cover of arable area and catch crops are used to ensure recovering subsoil autumn losses of nitrates and limit nitrogen winter losses.

(11)

Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and the Council (7) provides for a comprehensive, cross-border approach to water protection organised around river basin districts, with the objective of achieving a good status for European bodies of water by 2015. Reducing nutrients is an integral part of that objective. The granting of a derogation under this Decision is without prejudice to the provisions pursuant to Directive 2000/60/EC and does not exclude that additional measures may be needed to fulfil obligations derived from it.

(12)

Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (8) lays down general rules aimed at the establishment of the Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the Union for the purposes of environmental policies of the Union and policies or activities which may have an impact on the environment. Where applicable, the spatial information collected in the context of this Decision should be in line with the provisions set out in that Directive. In order to reduce the administrative burden and enhance data coherence, Denmark, when collecting the necessary data under this Decision should make use of the information generated under the Integrated Administration and Control System established pursuant to Chapter II of Title V of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (9).

(13)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Nitrates Committee set up pursuant to Article 9 of Directive 91/676/EEC,

(a)

‘cattle farm’ means a holding with a yearly production of nitrogen in livestock manure above 300 kg of which at least two thirds are from cattle;

(b)

‘grass’ means permanent or temporary grassland;

(c)

‘crops being undersown by grass’ means silage cereals, silage maize, spring barley or spring barley and pea, to be undersown by grass before or after harvest;

(d)

‘crops with high nitrogen uptake and long growing season’ means any of the following:

(e)

‘soil profile’ means the soil layer below ground level to a depth of 0,90 m or to the average highest groundwater level where that level is less than 0,90 m below ground level;

(1)

As from August 2017 a phosphorus regulation shall enter into force establishing direct phosphorus ceilings at different levels throughout the country depending on geographical location and fertiliser type. Ceilings shall cover application of phosphorus from all types of fertilisers: organic fertilisers, including manure, biogas digestate, degassed plant biomass, sludge from sewage water treatment as well as industrial fertilisers. Stricter phosphorus application ceilings covering all types of fertilisers shall be applied in catchments of phosphorus vulnerable aquatic environment.

(2)

An indicator and monitoring system shall be in place concerning the amount of phosphorus applied on agricultural fields in Denmark. Should either the indicator system or the monitoring system show that the actual annual average phosphorus fertilisation rate on agricultural soils in Denmark might exceed or has actually exceeded the levels of average national phosphorus fertilisation to be reached over the period 2018 to 2025, the ceilings for maximum phosphorus application will be reduced accordingly.

(3)

A combined targeted scheme for voluntary and mandatory catch crops shall be in place based on the need to reduce nitrates contents in groundwater bodies and in coastal waters. Under the scheme, the obligatory provisions for catch crops shall enter into force automatically if the voluntary agreements for catch crops fail to deliver the environmental objectives.

(4)

The catch crops established under this scheme shall be additional to the national mandatory requirement of 10 or 14 % catch crops on the farms crop ground area, and may not be established on the same area used to meet the EFA requirement for catch crops.

(a)

a crop rotation plan specifying the following:

(b)

the number of livestock on the farm, a description of the housing and manure storage system, including the volume of manure storage available;

(c)

a calculation of the manure nitrogen and phosphorus produced on the farm;

(d)

a description of manure treatment, where applicable, and expected characteristics of the treated manure;

(e)

the amount, type and characteristics of manure delivered outside the farm or to the farm;

(f)

the foreseeable amount of nitrogen and phosphorus required for the crop in each parcel;

(g)

a calculation of nitrogen and phosphorus application from manure for each parcel;

(h)

a calculation of nitrogen and phosphorus application from chemical and other fertilisers for each parcel;

(i)

an indication of the time of application of manure and chemical fertilisers.

(a)

clover in grassland with less than 50 % clover and alfalfa;

(b)

alfalfa in grassland with less than 50 % clover and alfalfa;

(c)

barley and pea undersown with grass;

(a)

the percentage of the cattle farms in each municipality which are covered by authorisations;

(b)

the percentage of the livestock in each municipality which is covered by authorisations;

(c)

the percentage of the agricultural land in each municipality which is covered by authorisations;

(a)

clover or alfalfa in grassland;

(b)

barley and pea undersown with grass.

(a)

maps showing the percentage of cattle farms, percentage of livestock, percentage of agricultural land covered by individual derogations for each municipality, as well as maps on local land use, referred to in Article 10(1);

(b)

the results of ground and surface water monitoring, as regards nitrates and phosphorus concentrations, including information on water quality trends, both under derogation and non-derogation conditions, as well as the impact of derogation on water quality, as referred to in Article 10(2);

(c)

the results of soil monitoring as regards nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations in the root zone water, both under derogation and non-derogation conditions, as referred to in Article 10(2);

(d)

results of the surveys on local land use, crop rotations and agricultural practices, referred to in Article 10(3);

(e)

results of model-based calculations of the magnitude of nitrogen and phosphorus losses from farms benefitting from an authorisation, referred to in Article 10(3);

(f)

tables showing the percentage of agricultural land under derogation covered by clover or alfalfa in grassland and by barley/pea undersown with grass, referred to in Article 10(4);

(g)

evaluation of the implementation of the derogation conditions, on the basis of controls at farm level and information on non-compliant farms, on the basis of the results of the administrative and field inspections, referred to in Article 11;

(h)

trends in livestock numbers and manure production for each livestock category in Denmark and in derogation farms.

18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/43

(1)

Commission Decision 2010/477/EU (2) established criteria to be used by the Member States to determine the good environmental status of their marine waters and to guide their assessments of that status in the first implementation cycle of Directive 2008/56/EC.

(2)

Decision 2010/477/EU acknowledged that additional scientific and technical progress was required to support the development or revision of those criteria for some qualitative descriptors, as well as further development of methodological standards in close coordination with the establishment of monitoring programmes. In addition, that Decision stated that it would be appropriate to carry out its revision as soon as possible after the completion of the assessment required under 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 Directive 2008/56/EC.

(3)

In 2012, on the basis of the initial assessment of their marine waters made pursuant to Article 8(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC, Member States reported on the environmental status of their marine waters and notified to the Commission their determination of good environmental status and their environmental targets in accordance with Articles 9(2) and 10(2) of Directive 2008/56/EC, respectively. The Commission's assessment (3) of those Member State reports, undertaken in accordance with Article 12 of Directive 2008/56/EC, highlighted that more efforts were urgently needed if Member States are to reach good environmental status by 2020. The results showed the necessity to significantly improve the quality and coherence of the determination of good environmental status by the Member States. In addition, the assessment recognised that regional cooperation must be at the very heart of the implementation of Directive 2008/56/EC. It also emphasised the need for Member States to more systematically build upon standards stemming from Union legislation or, where they do not exist, upon standards set by Regional Sea Conventions or other international agreements.

(4)

To ensure that the second cycle of implementation of the marine strategies of the Member States further contributes to the achievement of the objectives of Directive 2008/56/EC and yields more consistent determinations of good environmental status, the Commission recommended in its report on the first phase of implementation that, at Union level, the Commission services and Member States collaborate to revise, strengthen and improve Decision 2010/477/EU, aiming at a clearer, simpler, more concise, more coherent and comparable set of good environmental status criteria and methodological standards and, at the same time, review Annex III of Directive 2008/56/EC, and if necessary revise it, and develop specific guidance to ensure a more coherent and consistent approach for assessments in the next implementation cycle.

(5)

On the basis of those conclusions, the review process started in 2013 when a roadmap, consisting of several phases (technical and scientific, consultation, and decision-making), was endorsed by the Regulatory Committee established under Article 25(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC. During this process, the Commission consulted all interested parties, including Regional Sea Conventions.

(6)

In order to facilitate future updates of the initial assessment of Member States' marine waters and their determination of good environmental status, and to ensure greater coherence in implementation of Directive 2008/56/EC across the Union, it is necessary to clarify, revise or introduce criteria, methodological standards, specifications and standardised methods to be used by Member States, compared to the elements currently set out in Decision 2010/477/EU. As a result, the number of criteria that Member States need to monitor and assess should be reduced, applying a risk-based approach to those which are retained in order to allow Member States to focus their efforts on the main anthropogenic pressures affecting their waters. Finally, the criteria and their use should be further specified, including providing for threshold values or the setting thereof, thereby allowing for the extent to which good environmental status is achieved to be measured across the Union's marine waters.

(7)

In accordance with the commitment taken by the Commission when adopting its communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: ‘Better regulation for better results — An EU agenda’ (4), this Decision should ensure coherence with other Union legislation. To ensure greater consistency and comparability at Union level of Member States' determinations of good environmental status and avoid unnecessary overlaps, it is appropriate to take into account relevant existing standards and methods for monitoring and assessment laid down in Union legislation, including Council Directive 92/43/EEC (5), Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (6), Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 (7), Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006 (8), Directive 2008/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (9), Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (10) and Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (11).

(8)

For each of the qualitative descriptors listed in Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC, and on the basis of the indicative lists in Annex III to that Directive, it is necessary to define the criteria, including the criteria elements and, where appropriate, the threshold values, to be used. Threshold values are intended to contribute to Member States' determination of a set of characteristics for good environmental status and inform their assessment of the extent to which good environmental status is being achieved. It is also necessary to set out methodological standards, including the geographic scales for assessment and how the criteria should be used. Those criteria and methodological standards are to ensure consistency and allow for comparison, between marine regions or subregions, of assessments of the extent to which good environmental status is being achieved.

(9)

To ensure comparability between the details of any updates by the Member States following the reviews of certain elements of their marine strategies, sent under Article 17(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC, specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment should be defined, taking into account existing specifications and standards at Union or international level, including regional or subregional level.

(10)

Member States should apply the criteria, methodological standards, specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment laid down in this Decision in combination with the ecosystem elements, anthropogenic pressures and human activities listed in the indicative lists of Annex III to Directive 2008/56/EC and by reference to the initial assessment made pursuant to Article 8(1) of that Directive, when determining a set of characteristics for good environmental status in accordance with Article 9(1) of that Directive, and when establishing coordinated monitoring programmes under Article 11 of that Directive.

(11)

In order to establish a clear link between the determination of a set of characteristics for good environmental status and the assessment of progress towards its achievement, it is appropriate to organise the criteria and methodological standards on the basis of the qualitative descriptors laid down in Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC, taking into account the indicative lists of ecosystem elements, anthropogenic pressures and human activities laid down in Annex III to that Directive. Some of those criteria and methodological standards relate in particular to the assessment of environmental status or of predominant pressures and impacts under points (a) or (b) of Article 8(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC, respectively.

(12)

In cases where no threshold values are laid down, Member States should establish threshold values through Union, regional or subregional cooperation, for instance by referring to existing values or developing new ones in the framework of the Regional Sea Conventions. In cases where threshold values should be established through cooperation at Union level (for the descriptors on marine litter, underwater noise and seabed integrity), this will be done in the framework of the Common Implementation Strategy set up by the Member States and the Commission for the purposes of Directive 2008/56/EC. Once established through Union, regional or subregional cooperation, these threshold values will only become part of Member States' sets of characteristics for good environmental status when they are sent to the Commission as part of Member States' reporting under Article 17(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC. Until such threshold values are established through Union, regional or subregional cooperation, Member States should be able to use national threshold values, directional trends or pressure-based threshold values as proxies.

(13)

Threshold values should reflect, where appropriate, the quality level that reflects the significance of an adverse effect for a criterion and should be set in relation to a reference condition. Threshold values should be consistent with Union legislation and set at appropriate geographic scales to reflect the different biotic and abiotic characteristics of the regions, subregions and subdivisions. This means that even if the process to establish threshold values takes place at Union level, this may result in the setting of different threshold values, which are specific to a region, subregion or subdivision. Threshold values should also be set on the basis of the precautionary principle, reflecting the potential risks to the marine environment. The setting of threshold values should accommodate the dynamic nature of marine ecosystems and their elements, which can change in space and time through hydrological and climatic variation, predator-prey relationships and other environmental factors. Threshold values should also reflect the fact that marine ecosystems may recover, if deteriorated, to a state that reflects prevailing physiographic, geographic, climatic and biological conditions, rather than return to a specific state of the past.

(14)

In accordance with Article 1(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC, the collective pressure of human activities needs to be kept within levels compatible with the achievement of good environmental status, ensuring that the capacity of marine ecosystems to respond to human-induced changes is not compromised. This may entail, where appropriate, that threshold values for certain pressures and their environmental impacts are not necessarily achieved in all areas of Member States' marine waters, provided that this does not compromise the achievement of the objectives of Directive 2008/56/EC, while enabling the sustainable use of marine goods and services.

(15)

It is necessary to lay down threshold values which will be part of the set of characteristics used by Member States in their determination of good environmental status in accordance with Article 9(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC, and the extent to which the threshold values are to be achieved. Threshold values therefore do not, by themselves, constitute Member States' determinations of good environmental status.

(16)

Member States should express the extent to which good environmental status is being achieved as the proportion of their marine waters over which the threshold values have been achieved or as the proportion of criteria elements (species, contaminants, etc.) that have achieved the threshold values. When assessing the status of their marine waters in accordance with Article 17(2)(a) of Directive 2008/56/EC, Member States should express any change in status as improving, stable or deteriorating compared to the previous reporting period, in view of the often slow response of the marine environment to change.

(17)

Where threshold values, set in accordance with this Decision, are not met for a particular criterion, Member States should consider taking appropriate measures or carrying out further research or investigation.

(18)

Where Member States are required to cooperate at regional or subregional level, they should use, where practical and appropriate, existing regional institutional cooperation structures, including those under Regional Sea Conventions, as provided under Article 6 of Directive 2008/56/EC. Similarly, in the absence of specific criteria, methodological standards, including for integration of the criteria, specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment, Member States should build upon, where practical and appropriate, those developed at international, regional or subregional level, for instance those agreed in the framework of the Regional Sea Conventions, or other international mechanisms. Otherwise, Member States may choose to coordinate amongst themselves within the region or subregion, where relevant. In addition, a Member State may also decide, on the basis of the specificities of its marine waters, to consider additional elements not laid down in this Decision and not dealt with at international, regional or subregional level, or to consider applying elements of this Decision to its transitional waters, as defined in Article 2(6) of Directive 2000/60/EC, in support of the implementation of Directive 2008/56/EC.

(19)

Member States should have sufficient flexibility, under specified conditions, to focus on the predominant pressures and their environmental impacts on the different ecosystem elements in each region or subregion in order to monitor and assess their marine waters in an efficient and effective manner and to facilitate prioritisation of actions to be taken to achieve good environmental status. For that purpose, firstly, Member States should be able to consider that some of the criteria are not appropriate to apply, provided this is justified. Secondly, Member States should have the possibility to decide not to use certain criteria elements or to select additional elements or to focus on certain matrices or areas of their marine waters, provided that this is based on a risk assessment in relation to the pressures and their impacts. Finally, a distinction should be introduced between primary and secondary criteria. While primary criteria should be used to ensure consistency across the Union, flexibility should be granted with regard to secondary criteria. The use of a secondary criterion should be decided by Member States, where necessary, to complement a primary criterion or when, for a particular criterion, the marine environment is at risk of not achieving or not maintaining good environmental status.

(20)

Criteria, including threshold values, methodological standards, specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment should be based on the best available science. However, additional scientific and technical progress is still required to support the further development of some of them, and should be used as the knowledge and understanding become available.

(21)

Decision 2010/477/EU should therefore be repealed.

(22)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Regulatory Committee,

(a)

criteria and methodological standards to be used by Member States when determining a set of characteristics for good environmental status in accordance with Article 9(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC, on the basis of Annexes I and III and by reference to the initial assessment made pursuant to Article 8(1) of that Directive, to assess the extent to which good environmental status is being achieved, in accordance with Article 9(3) of that Directive;

(b)

specifications and standardised methods for monitoring and assessment, to be used by Member States when establishing coordinated monitoring programmes under Article 11 of Directive 2008/56/EC, in accordance with Article 11(4) of that Directive;

(c)

a timeline for the establishment of threshold values, lists of criteria elements and methodological standards through Union, regional or subregional cooperation;

(d)

a notification requirement for criteria elements, threshold values and methodological standards.

(1)

‘subregions’ means the subregions listed in Article 4(2) of Directive 2008/56/EC;

(2)

‘subdivisions’ means subdivisions as referred to in Article 4(2) of Directive 2008/56/EC;

(3)

‘invasive non-indigenous species’ means ‘invasive alien species’ within the meaning of Article 3(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council (12);

(4)

‘criteria elements’ means constituent elements of an ecosystem, particularly its biological elements (species, habitats and their communities), or aspects of pressures on the marine environment (biological, physical, substances, litter and energy), which are assessed under each criterion;

(5)

‘threshold value’ means a value or range of values that allows for an assessment of the quality level achieved for a particular criterion, thereby contributing to the assessment of the extent to which good environmental status is being achieved.

(a)

be part of the set of characteristics used by Member States in their determination of good environmental status;

(b)

be consistent with Union legislation;

(c)

where appropriate, distinguish the quality level that reflects the significance of an adverse effect for a criterion and be set in relation to a reference condition;

(d)

be set at appropriate geographic scales of assessment to reflect the different biotic and abiotic characteristics of the regions, subregions and subdivisions;

(e)

be set on the basis of the precautionary principle, reflecting the potential risks to the marine environment;

(f)

be consistent across different criteria when they relate to the same ecosystem element;

(g)

make use of best available science;

(h)

be based on long time-series data, where available, to help determine the most appropriate value;

(i)

reflect natural ecosystem dynamics, including predator-prey relationships and hydrological and climatic variation, also acknowledging that the ecosystem or parts thereof may recover, if deteriorated, to a state that reflects prevailing physiographic, geographic, climatic and biological conditions, rather than return to a specific state of the past;

(j)

be consistent, where practical and appropriate, with relevant values set under regional institutional cooperation structures, including those agreed in the Regional Sea Conventions.

(a)

national threshold values, provided the obligation of regional cooperation laid down in Articles 5 and 6 of Directive 2008/56/EC is complied with;

(b)

directional trends of the values;

(c)

pressure-based threshold values as proxies.

18.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/75