MS/Art8/2018/D10/France/NE Atlantic: Bay of Biscay & Iberian Coast

Member State report / Art8 / 2018 / D10 / France / NE Atlantic: Bay of Biscay & Iberian Coast

Report type	Member State report to Commission
MSFD Article	Art. 8 Initial assessment (and Art. 17 updates)
Report due	2018-10-15
GES Descriptor	D10 Litter
Member State	France
Region/subregion	NE Atlantic: Bay of Biscay & Iberian Coast
Reported by	Ministère de la transition Ecologique et Solidaire
Report date	2020-02-19
Report access	ART8_GES_FR_2020-02-17.xml

UMR GdG Nord (ABI-FR-MS-GDG-NORD)

Simplified table

GES component	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10
Feature	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Micro-litter in the environment	Micro-litter in the environment	Micro-litter in the environment	Litter and micro-litter in species	Litter and micro-litter in species
Element	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Ceramics/pottery	Chemicals	Cloth	Cloth/textile	Food waste	Glass	Glass/ceramics	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Machined wood	Medical waste	Metal	Metal	Metal	Paper/cardboard	Paper/cardboard	Plastic/polystyrene	Processed/worked wood	Rubber	Rubber	Sanitary waste	Undefined	Undefined	Micro-litter - Artificial polymer materials	Micro-litter - Artificial polymer materials	Micro-litter - Other	Artificial polymer materials	Other litter/ micro-litter
Element code	ARTPOLY	ARTPOLY	Pottery.OSPAR-Beach	CHEM	Cloth.OSPAR-Beach	TEXTILE	FOOD	Glass.OSPAR-Beach	GLASS	PresEnvLitter	PresEnvLitter	PresEnvLitter	Wood.OSPAR-Beach	Medical.OSPAR-Beach	METAL	METAL	Metal.OSPAR-Beach	PAPER	Paper.OSPAR-Beach	Plastic.OSPAR-Beach	WOOD	RUBBER	Rubber.OSPAR-Beach	Sanitary.OSPAR-Beach	UNDEF	UNDEF	MicrolitterArtPoly	MicrolitterArtPoly	MicrolitterOther	ARTPOLY	LitterOther
Element code source	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	EU	EU	OSPAR	EU	OSPAR	EU	EU	OSPAR	EU	EU	EU	EU	OSPAR	OSPAR	EU	EU	OSPAR	EU	OSPAR	OSPAR	EU	EU	OSPAR	OSPAR	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU
Criterion	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C2	D10C2	D10C2	D10C3	D10C3
Parameter	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed		Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Other	Other	Other	Amount on coastline	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline		Amount on coastline	Amount on coastline	Amount on water surface	Amount on seabed	Amount on coastline	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on water surface	Other
Parameter other										Trend in sediment (coastline)	Trend in sediment (seabed)	Trend in water																Trend in water
Threshold value upper
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet		Not available yet	Not available yet	Achievement of the parameter is defined as a significant decrease in the number of wastes observed (all categories).	Achievement of the parameter is defined as a significant decrease (Kendall's correlation coefficient and Kruskall-Wallis test) in the number of wastes observed (all categories).	Achievement of the parameter is defined as a significant decrease (Kendall's correlation coefficient and Kruskall-Wallis test) in the number of wastes observed (all categories).	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet		Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Achievement of the parameter is defined as a significant decrease (Kendall's correlation coefficient and Kruskall-Wallis test) in the number of wastes observed (all categories).
Threshold value source										Other (specify)	Other (specify)	Other (specify)																Other (specify)
Threshold value source other										National	National	National																National
Value achieved upper	154.04	0.21			3.0	2.37		24.5	2.87				18.5	0.5	1.22		5.5		11.0	979.0	0.02	1.05	4.5	4.5	16.51	0.46	479.4
Value achieved lower	46.48	0.01			1.0			3.5					17.0		0.31		2.0		4.5	578.0			2.0		5.8	0.04	170.2
Value unit	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	Other	number of items per square kilometre	Other	number of items per square kilometre		Other	number of items per square kilometre	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	Other		Other	Other	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	Other	Other	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	Other	Other
Value unit other			items/100m		items/100m			items/100m		no unit	no unit	no unit	items/100m	items/100m			items/100m		items/100m	items/100m			items/100m	items/100m			units/ha	no unit
Proportion threshold value
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit
Trend	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown		Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown		Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown		Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	No	No	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown		Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	No
Description parameter	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should be noted that certain categories of waste from the various waste collection protocols on the substance had to be added together to correspond to the categories of Decision 2017/848/EU. This is the case for the "Artificial polymer materials" category of the decision, which includes the "Plastic" and "Sanitary waste" categories, and it is important to specify that the geographical unit of evaluation for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between the north and the south. Consequently, the results reported for this parameter will be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category concerned. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category considered, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2013. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric had been reached.	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category concerned. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category considered, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2013. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric had been reached.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.		The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category considered, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2013. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric had been reached.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Trend in sediment (shoreline)" is based on the analysis of the trend, per collection site, of the total quantities of waste on the shoreline (all waste categories) over the reporting period (2011-2013) by the software "Litter Analyst". To assess the achievement of this parameter, a target of 10 sites per MRU has been set in order to constitute a national network. This target has not yet been achieved. In the absence of a threshold and due to a generally too limited amount of data, this parameter could not be evaluated.	The parameter "Trend in sediment (seabed)" is based on the analysis of the trend in total quantities of waste on the seabed (all categories of waste) over the period considered (2012-2016) using non-parametric tests (Kendall correlation and Kruskall-Wallis test). The study of the total quantities of waste per km2 and the statistical tests carried out show that there is no significant decrease in the quantities of waste on the seabed (Kendall's correlation coefficient not significantly negative). Thus, the parameter "Trend in sediment (seabed)" is not reached in this MRU. Furthermore, it is important to specify that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results reported for this parameter will be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Trend in water" is based on the analysis of the trend of the total quantities of floating waste (all waste categories) over the period considered (2010-2015) by non-parametric tests (Kendall correlation and Kruskall-Wallis test). The study of the total quantities of waste per km2 and the statistical tests carried out show that there is no significant decrease in the quantities of floating waste for the period 2010-2015 (Kendall's correlation coefficient not significantly positive) . Thus, the "Trend in water" parameter is not reached in this MRU. Furthermore, it is important to specify that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results reported for this parameter will be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category considered, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2013. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric had been reached.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category considered, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2013. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric had been reached.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category concerned. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category considered, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2013. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric had been reached.		The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category considered, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2013. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric had been reached.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category considered, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2013. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric had been reached.	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category concerned. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category considered, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2013. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric had been reached.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category considered, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2013. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric had been reached.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should be noted that certain categories of waste from the various waste collection protocols on the substance had to be added together to correspond to the categories of Decision 2017/848/EU. This is the case for the decision category "Not defined" which includes the "Miscellaneous", "Unspecified" and "Natural Product" categories. The category "Natural Product" includes the sub-categories "Processed Wood", "Paper/Cardboard" and "Rope". Furthermore, it is important to specify that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results reported for this parameter will be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should be noted that certain categories from the various floating waste collection protocols had to be added together to correspond to the categories of Decision 2017/848/EU. This is the case for the Decision category "Not defined", which includes the categories "fishing waste", "small waste" and "Unspecified". Furthermore, it is important to specify that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results reported for this parameter will be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The 'Quantity (number) in water' parameter for floating micro-waste is calculated from data collected during fishing trips using a specific device ('Manta net'), according to a protocol defined by the TG ML. The unit is a number of units (micro-waste) per hectare and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of plastic micro-waste. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter had been reached. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Trend in water" for floating micro-waste is based on the analysis of the trend of the quantities of floating micro-waste over the considered period (2013-2016) by non-parametric tests (Kendall correlation and Kruskall-Wallis test). The study of the quantities of micro-waste per hectare and the statistical tests carried out show that there is no significant decrease in the quantities of floating micro-waste for the period 2013-2016 (Kendall correlation coefficient not significantly positive) . Thus, the "Trend in the water" parameter is not reached in this MRU. Moreover, it is important to specify that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results reported for this parameter will be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.
Related indicator	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins		Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur le littoral		Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets flottants	Micro-déchets flottants	Micro-déchets flottants
Criteria status	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description criteria	The lack of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters for the floating waste and the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of the D10C1 criterion for the waste category Artificial polymeric materials. In addition, no rules are currently defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires the continuation of the work that is in progress at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters for the floating waste and the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of the D10C1 criterion for the waste category Artificial polymeric materials. In addition, no rules are currently defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires the continuation of the work that is in progress at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Ceramics/pottery. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of amount of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for floating waste is met or not does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Chemicals (category not assessed for waste on the merits). In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Textile. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the waste parameter is met on the merits does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Fabric/textile (category not assessed for floating waste). In addition, development is underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.		The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Glass. In parallel, developments are under way to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters for quantities of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether the waste parameter is met on the merits does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category glass/ceramic (category not assessed for floating waste). In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The TG ML (Technical Group on Marine Litter) has so far not been able to define usable thresholds for criterion D10C1 - however this work is ongoing and will be operational in the next evaluation cycle. In the general absence of agreed thresholds or baselines in EU Member States for each waste category, the assessment is based on statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all categories). The three parameters evaluated are "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)". However, at present, no integration rule between these three parameters has been established, which does not allow to conclude on criterion D10C1. However, the results show for floating and bottom litter no significant decrease in the number of litters over the evaluated period: the parameters "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)" are therefore not met. The parameter "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", on the other hand, could not be assessed due to insufficient data.	The TG ML (Technical Group on Marine Litter) has so far not been able to define usable thresholds for criterion D10C1 - however this work is ongoing and will be operational in the next evaluation cycle. In the general absence of agreed thresholds or baselines in EU Member States for each waste category, the assessment is based on statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all categories). The three parameters evaluated are "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)". However, at present, no integration rule between these three parameters has been established, which does not allow to conclude on criterion D10C1. However, the results show for floating and bottom litter no significant decrease in the number of litters over the evaluated period: the parameters "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)" are therefore not met. The parameter "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", on the other hand, could not be assessed due to insufficient data.	The TG ML (Technical Group on Marine Litter) has so far not been able to define usable thresholds for criterion D10C1 - however this work is ongoing and will be operational in the next evaluation cycle. In the general absence of agreed thresholds or baselines in EU Member States for each waste category, the assessment is based on statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all categories). The three parameters evaluated are "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)". However, at present, no integration rule between these three parameters has been established, which does not allow to conclude on criterion D10C1. However, the results show for floating and bottom litter no significant decrease in the number of litters over the evaluated period: the parameters "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)" are therefore not met. The parameter "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", on the other hand, could not be assessed due to insufficient data.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", has been reached does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Machined wood. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories with the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on the shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is not sufficient to conclude on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Medical waste. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on the shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters for the floating waste and the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Metal. In addition, no rules are currently defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires the continuation of the work that is ongoing at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters for the floating waste and the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Metal. In addition, no rules are currently defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires the continuation of the work that is ongoing at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", has been reached does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Metal. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories with the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on the shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.		The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Paper/board. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of amount of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the waste parameter "Quantity (number) on shore" has been reached does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Plastic/Polystyrene. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the HHWW and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether the parameter for floating waste is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Processed/worked wood (category not assessed for waste on the merits). In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the waste parameter is met on the merits does not allow a conclusion on the status of the D10C1 criterion for the waste category Rubber (category not assessed for floating waste). In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of coastal, floating and bottom waste quantities to be integrated by category for the next assessment.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the waste parameter "Quantity (number) on shore" is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Rubber. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories with the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of amount of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category sanitary waste. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on the shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether the parameters for floating waste and on the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Not defined. In addition, there are currently no rules defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires further work which is ongoing at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether the parameters for floating waste and on the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Not defined. In addition, there are currently no rules defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires further work which is ongoing at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The "Trend in Water" parameter for floating micro-waste is not reached in this MRU for plastics. On the other hand, the absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter relating to the quantities of floating micro-waste has been reached does not allow a conclusion to be drawn on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Artificial polymeric materials. Furthermore, no rules are currently defined to integrate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Trend in water". In addition, two other indicators are being developed to assess micro-waste on the shoreline and in bottom sediments.	The "Trend in Water" parameter for floating micro-waste is not reached in this MRU for plastics. On the other hand, the absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter relating to the quantities of floating micro-waste has been reached does not allow a conclusion to be drawn on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Artificial polymeric materials. Furthermore, no rules are currently defined to integrate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Trend in water". In addition, two other indicators are being developed to assess micro-waste on the shoreline and in bottom sediments.
Element status	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description element	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Artificial polymeric materials". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the seabed"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Artificial polymeric materials". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the seabed"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coast" has been affected makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Ceramics/pottery". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the status of criterion D10C1, let alone the status of the element "Chemicals". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Textile" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the element code is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Fabric/textile". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coastline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Glass" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Glass/ceramic". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The lack of a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 does not allow a conclusion on the status of the element "Waste in the environment (excluding micro-waste)". This element has been added in order to be able to perform a statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all waste categories). The results in terms of the parameters assessed for this element show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes observed (floating and bottom), but rather an increasing trend in this MRU for floating wastes. It should be noted that the source of the code for this element comes from the European Environment Agency.	The lack of a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 does not allow a conclusion on the status of the element "Waste in the environment (excluding micro-waste)". This element has been added in order to be able to perform a statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all waste categories). The results in terms of the parameters assessed for this element show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes observed (floating and bottom), but rather an increasing trend in this MRU for floating wastes. It should be noted that the source of the code for this element comes from the European Environment Agency.	The lack of a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 does not allow a conclusion on the status of the element "Waste in the environment (excluding micro-waste)". This element has been added in order to be able to perform a statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all waste categories). The results in terms of the parameters assessed for this element show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes observed (floating and bottom), but rather an increasing trend in this MRU for floating wastes. It should be noted that the source of the code for this element comes from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion as to whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coast" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Machined wood" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code because there is no official reference for the main categories from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the status of criterion D10C1, let alone the status of the "Medical waste" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Metal". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Metal". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Metal" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code because there is no official reference for the main categories from the OSPAR protocols.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Paper/board" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coast" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Plastics/polystyrene". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the element code is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the status of criterion D10C1, let alone the status of the element "Processed/worked wood". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters 'Quantity (number) in water' and 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' are met does not allow the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the 'Rubber' element, to be assessed. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coast" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Rubber". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coastline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Sanitary waste" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Not defined". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Not defined". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The lack of a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C2 does not allow a conclusion on the status of the element "Micro-waste - Artificial polymeric materials". However, the results obtained for the parameter "Trend in Water" of floating micro-waste show that there is no significant decrease in the number of obeserved micro-wastes, but rather an increasing trend in this MRU. The main area of micro-waste accumulation is in the southern Bay of Biscay, in the Pyrénées-Atlantiques and along the northern coast of Spain, due to the influence of currents (south-north oriented in winter). The Gironde estuary and the Arcachon basin are also sensitive areas because they concentrate micro-waste inputs from the land. Note that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The lack of a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C2 does not allow a conclusion on the status of the element "Micro-waste - Artificial polymeric materials". However, the results obtained for the parameter "Trend in Water" of floating micro-waste show that there is no significant decrease in the number of obeserved micro-wastes, but rather an increasing trend in this MRU. The main area of micro-waste accumulation is in the southern Bay of Biscay, in the Pyrénées-Atlantiques and along the northern coast of Spain, due to the influence of currents (south-north oriented in winter). The Gironde estuary and the Arcachon basin are also sensitive areas because they concentrate micro-waste inputs from the land. Note that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.
Integration rule type parameter	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other
Integration rule description parameter	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C2 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C2 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C2 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.
Integration rule type criteria	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant
Integration rule description criteria
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description overall status	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C2 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds for the indicator on "floating micro-waste" and the lack of a method and data for the indicators on "micro-waste on the coast" and "micro-waste on the bottom". However, the indicator on "micro floating waste" shows that there is no significant decrease in the number of plastic micro-wastes over the assessment period.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C2 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds for the indicator on "floating micro-waste" and the lack of a method and data for the indicators on "micro-waste on the coast" and "micro-waste on the bottom". However, the indicator on "micro floating waste" shows that there is no significant decrease in the number of plastic micro-wastes over the assessment period.	The results obtained for the northern part of the Bay of Biscay Marine Sub-Region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C2 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds for the indicator on "floating micro-waste" and the lack of a method and data for the indicators on "micro-waste on the coast" and "micro-waste on the bottom". However, the indicator on "micro floating waste" shows that there is no significant decrease in the number of plastic micro-wastes over the assessment period.	Criterion D10C3 could not be assessed due to lack of data and the absence of a threshold for the indicator on waste ingested by marine turtles.	Criterion D10C3 could not be assessed due to lack of data and the absence of a threshold for the indicator on waste ingested by marine turtles.
Assessments period	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2013-2016	2013-2016	2013-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016
Related pressures
Related targets

UMR GdG Sud (ABI-FR-MS-GDG-SUD)

Simplified table

GES component	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10
Feature	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Micro-litter in the environment	Micro-litter in the environment	Micro-litter in the environment	Litter and micro-litter in species	Litter and micro-litter in species
Element	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Ceramics/pottery	Chemicals	Cloth	Cloth/textile	Food waste	Glass	Glass/ceramics	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Machined wood	Medical waste	Metal	Metal	Metal	Paper/cardboard	Paper/cardboard	Plastic/polystyrene	Processed/worked wood	Rubber	Rubber	Sanitary waste	Undefined	Undefined	Micro-litter - Artificial polymer materials	Micro-litter - Artificial polymer materials	Micro-litter - Other	Artificial polymer materials	Other litter/ micro-litter
Element code	ARTPOLY	ARTPOLY	Pottery.OSPAR-Beach	CHEM	Cloth.OSPAR-Beach	TEXTILE	FOOD	Glass.OSPAR-Beach	GLASS	PresEnvLitter	PresEnvLitter	PresEnvLitter	Wood.OSPAR-Beach	Medical.OSPAR-Beach	METAL	METAL	Metal.OSPAR-Beach	PAPER	Paper.OSPAR-Beach	Plastic.OSPAR-Beach	WOOD	RUBBER	Rubber.OSPAR-Beach	Sanitary.OSPAR-Beach	UNDEF	UNDEF	MicrolitterArtPoly	MicrolitterArtPoly	MicrolitterOther	ARTPOLY	LitterOther
Element code source	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	EU	EU	OSPAR	EU	OSPAR	EU	EU	OSPAR	EU	EU	EU	EU	OSPAR	OSPAR	EU	EU	OSPAR	EU	OSPAR	OSPAR	EU	EU	OSPAR	OSPAR	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU
Criterion	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C2	D10C2	D10C2	D10C3	D10C3
Parameter	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed		Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Other	Other	Other	Amount on coastline	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline		Amount on coastline	Amount on coastline	Amount on water surface	Amount on seabed	Amount on coastline	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on water surface	Other
Parameter other										Trend in sediment (coastline)	Trend in sediment (seabed)	Trend in water																Trend in water
Threshold value upper
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet		Not available yet	Not available yet	Achievement of the parameter is defined as a significant decrease in the number of wastes observed (all categories).	Achievement of the parameter is defined as a significant decrease (Kendall's correlation coefficient and Kruskall-Wallis test) in the number of wastes observed (all categories).	Achievement of the parameter is defined as a significant decrease (Kendall's correlation coefficient and Kruskall-Wallis test) in the number of wastes observed (all categories).	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet		Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Achievement of the parameter is defined as a significant decrease (Kendall's correlation coefficient and Kruskall-Wallis test) in the number of wastes observed (all categories).
Threshold value source										Other (specify)	Other (specify)	Other (specify)																Other (specify)
Threshold value source other										National	National	National																National
Value achieved upper	154.04	0.21	1.0		26.5	2.37		32.5	2.87				6.0	31.0	1.22		42.5		83.5	2636.0	0.02	1.05	21.0	51.5	16.51	0.46	479.4
Value achieved lower	46.48	0.01													0.31										5.8	0.04	170.2
Value unit	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	Other	number of items per square kilometre	Other	number of items per square kilometre		Other	number of items per square kilometre	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	Other		Other	Other	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	Other	Other	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	Other	Other
Value unit other			items/100m		items/100m			items/100m		no unit	no unit	no unit	items/100m	items/100m			items/100m		items/100m	items/100m			items/100m	items/100m			units/ha	no unit
Proportion threshold value
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit
Trend	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown		Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown		Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown		Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	No	No	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown		Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	No
Description parameter	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should be noted that certain categories of waste from the various waste collection protocols on the substance had to be added together to correspond to the categories of Decision 2017/848/EU. This is the case for the "Artificial polymer materials" category of the decision, which includes the "Plastic" and "Sanitary waste" categories, and it is important to specify that the geographical unit of evaluation for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between the north and the south. Consequently, the results reported for this parameter will be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category concerned. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2014-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category concerned. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2014-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.		The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2014-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Trend in sediment (shoreline)" is based on the analysis of the trend, per collection site, of the total quantities of waste on the shoreline (all waste categories) over the reporting period (2014-2017) by the software "Litter Analyst". In order to assess the achievement of this parameter, a target of 10 sites per sub-marine region was set in order to constitute a national network. This target has not yet been achieved. In the absence of thresholds and due to a generally too limited amount of data, this parameter could not be evaluated.	The parameter "Trend in sediment (seabed)" is based on the analysis of the trend in total quantities of waste on the seabed (all categories of waste) over the period considered (2012-2016) using non-parametric tests (Kendall correlation and Kruskall-Wallis test). The study of the total quantities of waste per km2 and the statistical tests carried out show that there is no significant decrease in the quantities of waste on the seabed (Kendall's correlation coefficient not significantly negative). Thus, the parameter "Trend in sediment (seabed)" is not reached in this MRU. Furthermore, it is important to specify that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results reported for this parameter will be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Trend in water" is based on the analysis of the trend of the total quantities of floating waste (all waste categories) over the period considered (2010-2015) by non-parametric tests (Kendall correlation and Kruskall-Wallis test). The study of the total quantities of waste per km2 and the statistical tests carried out show that there is no significant decrease in the quantities of floating waste for the period 2010-2015 (Kendall's correlation coefficient not significantly positive) . Thus, the "Trend in water" parameter is not reached in this MRU. Furthermore, it is important to specify that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results reported for this parameter will be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2014-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2014-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category concerned. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2014-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.		The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2014-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2014-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category concerned. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2014-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2014-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should be noted that certain categories of waste from the various waste collection protocols on the substance had to be added together to correspond to the categories of Decision 2017/848/EU. This is the case for the decision category "Not defined" which includes the "Miscellaneous", "Unspecified" and "Natural Product" categories. The category "Natural Product" includes the sub-categories "Processed Wood", "Paper/Cardboard" and "Rope". Furthermore, it is important to specify that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results reported for this parameter will be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should be noted that certain categories from the various floating waste collection protocols had to be added together to correspond to the categories of Decision 2017/848/EU. This is the case for the Decision category "Not defined", which includes the categories "fishing waste", "small waste" and "Unspecified". Furthermore, it is important to specify that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results reported for this parameter will be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The 'Quantity (number) in water' parameter for floating micro-waste is calculated from data collected during fishing trips using a specific device ('Manta net'), according to a protocol defined by the TG ML. The unit is a number of units (micro-waste) per hectare and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of plastic micro-waste. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter had been reached. It should also be noted that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results obtained for this parameter will therefore be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.	The parameter "Trend in water" for floating micro-waste is based on the analysis of the trend of the quantities of floating micro-waste over the considered period (2013-2016) by non-parametric tests (Kendall correlation and Kruskall-Wallis test). The study of the quantities of micro-waste per hectare and the statistical tests carried out show that there is no significant decrease in the quantities of floating micro-waste for the period 2013-2016 (Kendall correlation coefficient not significantly positive) . Thus, the "Trend in the water" parameter is not reached in this MRU. Moreover, it is important to specify that the geographical unit of assessment for this parameter is the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region as a whole, without distinction between north and south. Consequently, the results reported for this parameter will be identical between the North MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region and the South MRU of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region.
Related indicator	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins		Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur le littoral		Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets flottants	Micro-déchets flottants	Micro-déchets flottants
Criteria status	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description criteria	The lack of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters for the floating waste and the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of the D10C1 criterion for the waste category Artificial polymeric materials. In addition, no rules are currently defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires the continuation of the work that is in progress at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters for the floating waste and the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of the D10C1 criterion for the waste category Artificial polymeric materials. In addition, no rules are currently defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires the continuation of the work that is in progress at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Ceramics/pottery. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of amount of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for floating waste is met or not does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Chemicals (category not assessed for waste on the merits). In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Textile. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the waste parameter is met on the merits does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Fabric/textile (category not assessed for floating waste). In addition, development is underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.		The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Glass. In parallel, developments are under way to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters for quantities of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether the waste parameter is met on the merits does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category glass/ceramic (category not assessed for floating waste). In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The TG ML (Technical Group on Marine Litter) has so far not been able to define usable thresholds for criterion D10C1 - however this work is ongoing and will be operational in the next evaluation cycle. In the general absence of agreed thresholds or baselines in EU Member States for each waste category, the assessment is based on statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all categories). The three parameters evaluated are "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)". However, at present, no integration rule between these three parameters has been defined, which does not allow to conclude on criterion D10C1. However, the results show for floating and bottom litter no significant decrease in the number of litter over the period assessed: the parameters "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)" are therefore not met. The parameter "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", on the other hand, could not be assessed due to insufficient data.	The TG ML (Technical Group on Marine Litter) has so far not been able to define usable thresholds for criterion D10C1 - however this work is ongoing and will be operational in the next evaluation cycle. In the general absence of agreed thresholds or baselines in EU Member States for each waste category, the assessment is based on statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all categories). The three parameters evaluated are "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)". However, at present, no integration rule between these three parameters has been defined, which does not allow to conclude on criterion D10C1. However, the results show for floating and bottom litter no significant decrease in the number of litter over the period assessed: the parameters "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)" are therefore not met. The parameter "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", on the other hand, could not be assessed due to insufficient data.	The TG ML (Technical Group on Marine Litter) has so far not been able to define usable thresholds for criterion D10C1 - however this work is ongoing and will be operational in the next evaluation cycle. In the general absence of agreed thresholds or baselines in EU Member States for each waste category, the assessment is based on statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all categories). The three parameters evaluated are "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)". However, at present, no integration rule between these three parameters has been defined, which does not allow to conclude on criterion D10C1. However, the results show for floating and bottom litter no significant decrease in the number of litter over the period assessed: the parameters "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)" are therefore not met. The parameter "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", on the other hand, could not be assessed due to insufficient data.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", has been reached does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Machined wood. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories with the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on the shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is not sufficient to conclude on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Medical waste. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on the shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters for the floating waste and the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Metal. In addition, no rules are currently defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires the continuation of the work that is ongoing at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters for the floating waste and the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Metal. In addition, no rules are currently defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires the continuation of the work that is ongoing at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", has been reached does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Metal. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories with the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on the shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.		The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Paper/board. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of amount of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the waste parameter "Quantity (number) on shore" has been reached does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Plastic/Polystyrene. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the HHWW and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether the parameter for floating waste is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Processed/worked wood (category not assessed for waste on the merits). In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the waste parameter is met on the merits does not allow a conclusion on the status of the D10C1 criterion for the waste category Rubber (category not assessed for floating waste). In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of coastal, floating and bottom waste quantities to be integrated by category for the next assessment.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the waste parameter "Quantity (number) on shore" is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Rubber. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories with the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of amount of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category sanitary waste. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on the shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether the parameters for floating waste and on the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Not defined. In addition, there are currently no rules defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires further work which is ongoing at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether the parameters for floating waste and on the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Not defined. In addition, there are currently no rules defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires further work which is ongoing at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The "Trend in Water" parameter for floating micro-waste is not reached in this MRU for plastics. On the other hand, the absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter relating to the quantities of floating micro-waste ("Quantity (number) in water") is reached does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Artificial polymeric materials. Furthermore, no rules are currently defined to integrate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Trend in water". In addition, two other indicators are being developed to assess micro-waste on the shoreline and in bottom sediments.	The "Trend in Water" parameter for floating micro-waste is not reached in this MRU for plastics. On the other hand, the absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter relating to the quantities of floating micro-waste ("Quantity (number) in water") is reached does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Artificial polymeric materials. Furthermore, no rules are currently defined to integrate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Trend in water". In addition, two other indicators are being developed to assess micro-waste on the shoreline and in bottom sediments.		An indicator is currently being developed for waste ingested by marine turtles. Indeed, data on ingested waste is collected during autopsies of animals arriving in care centres, according to a protocol harmonised at European level and implemented since 2013. However, in the absence of a threshold and sufficiently large data sets, the status of criterion D10C3 could not be assessed for this cycle.	An indicator is currently being developed for waste ingested by marine turtles. Indeed, data on ingested waste is collected during autopsies of animals arriving in care centres, according to a protocol harmonised at European level and implemented since 2013. However, in the absence of a threshold and sufficiently large data sets, the status of criterion D10C3 could not be assessed for this cycle.
Element status	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description element	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Artificial polymeric materials". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the seabed"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Artificial polymeric materials". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the seabed"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coast" has been affected makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Ceramics/pottery". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the status of criterion D10C1, let alone the status of the element "Chemicals". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Textile" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the element code is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Fabric/textile". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coastline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Glass" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Glass/ceramic". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The lack of a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 does not allow a conclusion on the status of the element "Waste in the environment (excluding micro-waste)". This element has been added in order to be able to make a statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all waste categories). The results in terms of the parameters assessed for this element show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes observed (floating and bottom), but rather an increasing trend in this MRU for floating wastes. It should be noted that the source of the code for this element comes from the European Environment Agency.	The lack of a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 does not allow a conclusion on the status of the element "Waste in the environment (excluding micro-waste)". This element has been added in order to be able to make a statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all waste categories). The results in terms of the parameters assessed for this element show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes observed (floating and bottom), but rather an increasing trend in this MRU for floating wastes. It should be noted that the source of the code for this element comes from the European Environment Agency.	The lack of a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 does not allow a conclusion on the status of the element "Waste in the environment (excluding micro-waste)". This element has been added in order to be able to make a statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all waste categories). The results in terms of the parameters assessed for this element show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes observed (floating and bottom), but rather an increasing trend in this MRU for floating wastes. It should be noted that the source of the code for this element comes from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion as to whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coast" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Machined wood" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code because there is no official reference for the main categories from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the status of criterion D10C1, let alone the status of the "Medical waste" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Metal". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Metal". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Metal" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code because there is no official reference for the main categories from the OSPAR protocols.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Paper/board" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coast" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Plastics/polystyrene". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the element code is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the status of criterion D10C1, let alone the status of the element "Processed/worked wood". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters 'Quantity (number) in water' and 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' are met does not allow the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the 'Rubber' element, to be assessed. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coast" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Rubber". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coastline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Sanitary waste" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Not defined". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Not defined". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The lack of a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C2 does not allow a conclusion on the status of the element "Micro-waste - Artificial polymeric materials". However, the results obtained for the "Trend in Water" parameter for floating micro-waste show that there is no significant decrease in the number of obeserved micro-wastes, but rather an increasing trend in this MRU. It should be noted that the source of the code for the element comes from the European Environment Agency.	The lack of a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C2 does not allow a conclusion on the status of the element "Micro-waste - Artificial polymeric materials". However, the results obtained for the "Trend in Water" parameter for floating micro-waste show that there is no significant decrease in the number of obeserved micro-wastes, but rather an increasing trend in this MRU. It should be noted that the source of the code for the element comes from the European Environment Agency.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.
Integration rule type parameter	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other
Integration rule description parameter	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C2 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C2 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C2 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.
Integration rule type criteria	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant
Integration rule description criteria
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description overall status	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C2 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds for the indicator on "floating micro-waste" and the lack of a method and data for the indicators on "micro-waste on the coast" and "micro-waste on the bottom". However, the indicator on "micro floating waste" shows that there is no significant decrease in the number of plastic micro-waste over the assessment period.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C2 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds for the indicator on "floating micro-waste" and the lack of a method and data for the indicators on "micro-waste on the coast" and "micro-waste on the bottom". However, the indicator on "micro floating waste" shows that there is no significant decrease in the number of plastic micro-waste over the assessment period.	The results obtained for the southern part of the Bay of Biscay marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for the descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C2 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds for the indicator on "floating micro-waste" and the lack of a method and data for the indicators on "micro-waste on the coast" and "micro-waste on the bottom". However, the indicator on "micro floating waste" shows that there is no significant decrease in the number of plastic micro-waste over the assessment period.	Criterion D10C3 could not be assessed due to lack of data and the absence of a threshold for the indicator on waste ingested by marine turtles.	Criterion D10C3 could not be assessed due to lack of data and the absence of a threshold for the indicator on waste ingested by marine turtles.
Assessments period	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2013-2016	2013-2016	2013-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016
Related pressures
Related targets