MS/Art8/2018/D5/Poland/Baltic Sea — Marine Information System for Europe

Member State report / Art8 / 2018 / D5 / Poland / Baltic Sea

Report type	Member State report to Commission
MSFD Article	Art. 8 Initial assessment (and Art. 17 updates)
Report due	2018-10-15
GES Descriptor	D5 Eutrophication
Member State	Poland
Region/subregion	Baltic Sea
Reported by	Chief Inspectorate of Environmental Protection
Report date	2020-01-28
Report access	ART8_GES_PL_kor_URL.xml

Polish part of Opensea Bornholm Basin (L2-SEA-007-POL)

Simplified table

GES component	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5
Feature	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication
Element	DIN	DIP	TN	TP	Chlorophyll-a	Cyanobacterial bloom index: Cyanobacterial biomass+cyanobacteria surface accumulations	Photic limit	Dissolved oxygen	Benthic habitats - macrobenthic communities
Element code	TDIN	PHOS	NTOT	PTOT	EEA_3164-01-0	Combined_E	EEA_3111-01-1	EEA_3132-01-2	QE1-3
Element code source	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Undefined	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	Other
Criterion	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C2	D5C3	D5C4	D5C5	D5C8
Parameter	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Other	Transparency in water	Concentration in water	Other
Parameter other						Cyanobacteria bloom index			B-index
Threshold value upper	2.5	0.3	14.43	0.61	1.8	0.89	7.1	6.37	3.18
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	National	National	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper	5.37	0.48	26.4	0.84	3.281	0.8	6.9	8.1	2.7
Value achieved lower
Value unit	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	microgram per litre	Other	metre	milligram per litre	Other
Value unit other						Index			index
Proportion threshold value	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0		100.0		100.0
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value		% area of MRU achieving threshold value		% area of MRU achieving threshold value
Trend	Stable	Improving	Stable	Stable	Stable	Stable	Stable	Stable	Stable
Parameter achieved	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No
Description parameter
Related indicator	Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN)	Dissolved inorganic phosphorous (DIP)	Total nitrogen (TN)	Total phosphorus (TP)	Chlorophyll-a	Cyanobacterial bloom index	Water clarity	Oxygen debt	Multimetric zoobenthos index B
Criteria status	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Unknown
Description criteria								The criterion was assessed based on oxygen debt indicator.
Element status	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description element
Integration rule type parameter	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI
Integration rule description parameter	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.
Integration rule type criteria	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE
Integration rule description criteria	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020
Description overall status
Assessments period	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016
Related pressures	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources
Related targets	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8

Polish part of Opensea Gdansk Basin (L2-SEA-008-POL)

Simplified table

GES component	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5
Feature	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication
Element	DIN	DIP	TN	TP	Chlorophyll-a	Cyanobacterial bloom index: Cyanobacterial biomass+cyanobacteria surface accumulations	Photic limit	Dissolved oxygen	Benthic habitats - macrobenthic communities
Element code	TDIN	PHOS	NTOT	PTOT	EEA_3164-01-0	Combined_E	EEA_3111-01-1	EEA_3132-01-2	QE1-3
Element code source	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Undefined	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM
Criterion	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C2	D5C3	D5C4	D5C5	D5C8
Parameter	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Other	Transparency in water	Concentration in water	Other
Parameter other						Cyanobacteria bloom index			B-index
Threshold value upper	4.2	0.36	18.8	0.6	2.2	0.98	6.5	8.66	3.18
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper	5.24	0.51	27.64	0.82	4.1	0.83	5.62	10.85	1.33
Value achieved lower
Value unit	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	microgram per litre	Other	metre	milligram per litre	Other
Value unit other						Index			index
Proportion threshold value	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0		100.0	100.0	100.0
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value		% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value
Trend	Improving	Improving	Stable	Stable	Improving	Improving	Stable	Stable	Deteriorating
Parameter achieved	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No
Description parameter
Related indicator	Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN)	Dissolved inorganic phosphorous (DIP)	Total nitrogen (TN)	Total phosphorus (TP)	Chlorophyll-a	Cyanobacterial bloom index	Water clarity	Oxygen debt	Multimetric zoobenthos index B
Criteria status	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description criteria								The criterion was assessed based on oxygen debt indicator.
Element status	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description element
Integration rule type parameter	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI
Integration rule description parameter	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.
Integration rule type criteria	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE
Integration rule description criteria	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020
Description overall status
Assessments period	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016
Related pressures	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources
Related targets	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8

Polish part of Opensea Eastern Gotland Basin (L2-SEA-009-POL)

Simplified table

GES component	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5
Feature	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication
Element	DIN	DIP	TN	TP	Chlorophyll-a	Cyanobacterial bloom index: Cyanobacterial biomass+cyanobacteria surface accumulations	Photic limit	Dissolved oxygen	Benthic habitats - macrobenthic communities
Element code	TDIN	PHOS	NTOT	PTOT	EEA_3164-01-0	Combined_E	EEA_3111-01-1	EEA_3132-01-2	QE1-3
Element code source	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Undefined	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM	HELCOM
Criterion	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C2	D5C3	D5C4	D5C5	D5C8
Parameter	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Other	Transparency in water	Concentration in water	Other
Parameter other						Cyanobacteria bloom index			B-index
Threshold value upper	2.6	0.29	16.5	0.68	1.9	0.84	7.6	8.66	3.18
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	National		Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	Helsinki Convention	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper	4.55	0.49	24.33	0.82	2.77	0.76	7.4	10.85	2.86
Value achieved lower
Value unit	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	microgram per litre	Other	metre	milligram per litre	Other
Value unit other						Index			index
Proportion threshold value	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0				100.0
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value				% area of MRU achieving threshold value
Trend	Deteriorating	Improving	Stable	Stable	Stable	Stable	Stable	Stable	Stable
Parameter achieved	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No
Description parameter
Related indicator	Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN)	Dissolved inorganic phosphorous (DIP)	Total nitrogen (TN)	Total phosphorus (TP)	Chlorophyll-a	Cyanobacterial bloom index	Water clarity	Oxygen debt	Multimetric zoobenthos index B
Criteria status	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description criteria								The criterion was assessed based on oxygen debt indicator.
Element status	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description element
Integration rule type parameter	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI
Integration rule description parameter	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.
Integration rule type criteria	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE
Integration rule description criteria	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chla, Secchi depth and HELCOM Cya/Bl index. Indirect effects include deep bottom oxygen debt, macrophytes and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020
Description overall status
Assessments period	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016
Related pressures	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources
Related targets	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C3 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8

Bornholm Basin - PL TW I WB 9 very sheltered, fully mixed, substratum: silt/sandy silt/silty sand; ice cover >90 days, water rwesidence time 52 days (L4-POL-001)

Simplified table

GES component	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5
Feature	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication
Element	DIN	DIP	TN	TP	Chlorophyll-a	Photic limit	Dissolved oxygen	Benthic habitats - opportunistic macroalgae	Benthic habitats - macrophyte communities	Benthic habitats - macrobenthic communities
Element code	TDIN	PHOS	NTOT	PTOT	EEA_3164-01-0	EEA_3111-01-1	EEA_3132-01-2	QE1-2-1	QE1-2-2	QE1-3
Element code source	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	National	HELCOM	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National
Criterion	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C2	D5C4	D5C5	D5C6	D5C7	D5C8
Parameter	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Transparency in water	Concentration in water	Other	Other	Other
Parameter other								Index	Index	B-index
Threshold value upper	75.0	1.45	135.65	4.84	20.0	1.9	4.2	0.027	0.027	3.18
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	National	National	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper	25.64	0.74	109.23	4.13	27.43	1.1	5.4	4.55	4.55	2.52
Value achieved lower
Value unit	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	microgram per litre	metre	milligram per litre	Other	Other	Other
Value unit other								Index	Index	index
Proportion threshold value	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
Proportion value achieved	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0			100.0
Proportion threshold value unit	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value
Trend	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	No	No
Description parameter
Related indicator	Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN)	Dissolved inorganic phosphorous (DIP)	Total nitrogen (TN)	Total phosphorus (TP)	Chlorophyll-a	Water clarity	Minimal oxygen bottom concentration in summer	Coastal lagoon macrophyte index ESMIz	Coastal lagoon macrophyte index ESMIz	Multimetric zoobenthos index B
Criteria status	Good	Good	Good	Good	Not good	Not good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description criteria							Assessment is made based on the minimal bottom oxygen concentration in summer.
Element status	Good	Good	Good	Good	Not good	Not good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description element
Integration rule type parameter	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI
Integration rule description parameter	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.
Integration rule type criteria	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE
Integration rule description criteria	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020
Description overall status
Assessments period	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016
Related pressures	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources
Related targets	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8

Bornholm Basin - PL TW I WB 8 very sheltered, fully mixed, substratum: silt/sandy silt/silty sand; ice cover >90 days, water rwesidence time 52 days (L4-POL-002)

Simplified table

GES component	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5
Feature	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication
Element	DIN	DIP	TN	TP	Chlorophyll-a	Photic limit	Dissolved oxygen	Benthic habitats - opportunistic macroalgae	Benthic habitats - macrophyte communities	Benthic habitats - macrobenthic communities
Element code	TDIN	PHOS	NTOT	PTOT	EEA_3164-01-0	EEA_3111-01-1	EEA_3132-01-2	QE1-2-1	QE1-2-2	QE1-3
Element code source	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National
Criterion	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C2	D5C4	D5C5	D5C6	D5C7	D5C8
Parameter	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Transparency in water	Concentration in water	Other	Other	Other
Parameter other								Index	Index	B-index
Threshold value upper	75.0	1.45	135.65	4.84	20.0	1.9	4.2	0.036	0.036	3.18
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	National	National	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper	31.56	0.68	118.52	4.39	34.16	1.1	4.4	1.92	1.92	2.25
Value achieved lower
Value unit	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	microgram per litre	metre	milligram per litre	Other	Other	Other
Value unit other								index	index	index
Proportion threshold value	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
Proportion value achieved	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0			100.0
Proportion threshold value unit	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value
Trend	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	No	No
Description parameter
Related indicator	Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN)	Dissolved inorganic phosphorous (DIP)	Total nitrogen (TN)	Total phosphorus (TP)	Chlorophyll-a	Water clarity	Minimal oxygen bottom concentration in summer	Coastal lagoon macrophyte index ESMIz	Coastal lagoon macrophyte index ESMIz	Multimetric zoobenthos index B
Criteria status	Good	Good	Good	Good	Not good	Not good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description criteria							Assessment is made based on the minimal bottom oxygen concentration in summer.
Element status	Good	Good	Good	Good	Not good	Not good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description element
Integration rule type parameter	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI
Integration rule description parameter	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.
Integration rule type criteria	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO
Integration rule description criteria	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020
Description overall status
Assessments period	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016
Related pressures	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources
Related targets	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8

Gdansk Basin - PL TW I WB 1 very sheltered, fully mixed, substratum: silt/sandy silt/silty sand; ice cover >90 days, water rwesidence time 52 days (L4-POL-003)

Simplified table

GES component	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5
Feature	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication
Element	DIN	DIP	TN	TP	Chlorophyll-a	Photic limit	Dissolved oxygen	Benthic habitats - opportunistic macroalgae	Benthic habitats - macrophyte communities	Benthic habitats - macrobenthic communities
Element code	TDIN	PHOS	NTOT	PTOT	EEA_3164-01-0	EEA_3111-01-1	EEA_3132-01-2	QE1-2-1	QE1-2-2	QE1-3
Element code source	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National
Criterion	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C2	D5C4	D5C5	D5C6	D5C7	D5C8
Parameter	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Transparency in water	Concentration in water	Other	Other	Other
Parameter other								index	index	B-index
Threshold value upper	27.13	1.13	70.0	3.87	23.2	0.75	4.2	0.029	0.029	3.18
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	National	National	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper	7.35	0.32	64.29	2.0	51.49	0.6	2.9	2.86	2.86	1.15
Value achieved lower
Value unit	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	microgram per litre	metre	milligram per litre	Other	Other	Other
Value unit other								index	index	index
Proportion threshold value	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
Proportion value achieved	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
Proportion threshold value unit	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value
Trend	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	No
Description parameter
Related indicator	Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN)	Dissolved inorganic phosphorous (DIP)	Total nitrogen (TN)	Total phosphorus (TP)	Chlorophyll-a	Water clarity	Minimal oxygen bottom concentration in summer	Coastal lagoon macrophyte index ESMIz	Coastal lagoon macrophyte index ESMIz	Multimetric zoobenthos index B
Criteria status	Good	Good	Good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description criteria							Assessment is made based on the minimal bottom oxygen concentration in summer.
Element status	Good	Good	Good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description element
Integration rule type parameter	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI
Integration rule description parameter	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.
Integration rule type criteria	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE
Integration rule description criteria	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020
Description overall status
Assessments period	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016
Related pressures	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources
Related targets	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8

Gdansk Basin - PL TW II WB 2 very sheltered, fully mixed, substratum: lagoonal fine snd medium grained sand/silty sand; residence time 138 day, ice cover >90 days (L4-POL-004)

Simplified table

GES component	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5
Feature	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication
Element	DIN	DIP	TN	TP	Chlorophyll-a	Photic limit	Dissolved oxygen	Benthic habitats - opportunistic macroalgae	Benthic habitats - macrophyte communities	Benthic habitats - macrobenthic communities
Element code	TDIN	PHOS	NTOT	PTOT	EEA_3164-01-0	EEA_3111-01-1	EEA_3132-01-2	QE1-2-1	QE1-2-2	QE1-3
Element code source	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National
Criterion	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C2	D5C4	D5C5	D5C6	D5C7	D5C8
Parameter	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Transparency in water	Concentration in water	Other	Other	Other
Parameter other								index	index	B-index
Threshold value upper	1.86	2.9	21.43	0.97	2.0	3.4	4.2	0.8	0.8	3.18
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper	2.57	2.0	29.29	1.06	5.14	4.2	5.8	0.69	0.69	2.92
Value achieved lower
Value unit	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	microgram per litre	metre	milligram per litre	Other	Other	Other
Value unit other								index	index	index
Proportion threshold value	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
Proportion value achieved		100.0				100.0	100.0
Proportion threshold value unit	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value
Trend	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	No	No	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No
Description parameter
Related indicator	Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN)	Dissolved inorganic phosphorous (DIP)	Total nitrogen (TN)	Total phosphorus (TP)	Chlorophyll-a	Water clarity	Minimal oxygen bottom concentration in summer	Macrophyte index SM1	Macrophyte index SM1	Multimetric zoobenthos index B
Criteria status	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description criteria							Assessment is made based on the minimal bottom oxygen concentration in summer.
Element status	Not good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description element
Integration rule type parameter	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI
Integration rule description parameter	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.
Integration rule type criteria	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE
Integration rule description criteria	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020
Description overall status
Assessments period	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016
Related pressures	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources
Related targets	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8

Gdansk Basin - PL TW III WB 3 partly protected, partly stratified, substratum: medium grained sand/pebbles/marine silty sand; ice-incidental (L4-POL-005)

Simplified table

GES component	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5
Feature	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication
Element	DIN	DIP	TN	TP	Chlorophyll-a	Photic limit	Dissolved oxygen	Benthic habitats - opportunistic macroalgae	Benthic habitats - macrophyte communities	Benthic habitats - macrobenthic communities
Element code	TDIN	PHOS	NTOT	PTOT	EEA_3164-01-0	EEA_3111-01-1	EEA_3132-01-2	QE1-2-1	QE1-2-2	QE1-3
Element code source	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National
Criterion	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C2	D5C4	D5C5	D5C6	D5C7	D5C8
Parameter	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Transparency in water	Concentration in water	Other	Other	Other
Parameter other								index	index	B-index
Threshold value upper	10.71	0.58	28.57	1.13	3.76	4.5	4.2	0.8	0.8	3.18
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper	8.86	1.48	34.71	2.58	3.67	4.2	3.7	0.74	0.74	2.69
Value achieved lower
Value unit	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	microgram per litre	metre	milligram per litre	Other	Other	Other
Value unit other								index	index	index
Proportion threshold value	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
Proportion value achieved					100.0
Proportion threshold value unit	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value
Trend	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	No	No	No	No	Yes	No	No	No	No	No
Description parameter
Related indicator	Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN)	Dissolved inorganic phosphorous (DIP)	Total nitrogen (TN)	Total phosphorus (TP)	Chlorophyll-a	Water clarity	Minimal oxygen bottom concentration in summer	Macrophyte index SM1	Macrophyte index SM1	Multimetric zoobenthos index B
Criteria status	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description criteria							Assessment is made based on the minimal bottom oxygen concentration in summer.
Element status	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description element
Integration rule type parameter	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI
Integration rule description parameter	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.
Integration rule type criteria	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE
Integration rule description criteria	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020
Description overall status
Assessments period	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016
Related pressures	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources
Related targets	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C6 PL_Target_D5C7 PL_Target_D5C8

Gdansk Basin - PL TW IV WB 4 partly stratified, moderately exposed, substratum: sand/silt; ice - incidental (L4-POL-006)

Simplified table

GES component	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5
Feature	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication
Element	DIN	DIP	TN	TP	Chlorophyll-a	Photic limit	Dissolved oxygen	Benthic habitats - macrobenthic communities
Element code	TDIN	PHOS	NTOT	PTOT	EEA_3164-01-0	EEA_3111-01-1	EEA_3132-01-2	QE1-3
Element code source	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National
Criterion	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C2	D5C4	D5C5	D5C8
Parameter	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Transparency in water	Concentration in water	Other
Parameter other								B-index
Threshold value upper	10.71	0.58	28.57	1.13	3.76	4.5	4.2	3.18
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper	6.93	0.77	25.21	1.1	4.25	4.7	3.5	2.6
Value achieved lower
Value unit	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	microgram per litre	metre	milligram per litre	Other
Value unit other								index
Proportion threshold value	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
Proportion value achieved	100.0		100.0	100.0		100.0
Proportion threshold value unit	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value
Trend	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	No
Description parameter
Related indicator	Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN)	Dissolved inorganic phosphorous (DIP)	Total nitrogen (TN)	Total phosphorus (TP)	Chlorophyll-a	Water clarity	Minimal oxygen bottom concentration in summer	Multimetric zoobenthos index B
Criteria status	Good	Not good	Good	Good	Not good	Good	Not good	Not good
Description criteria							Assessment is made based on the minimal bottom oxygen concentration in summer.
Element status	Good	Not good	Good	Good	Not good	Good	Not good	Not good
Description element
Integration rule type parameter	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI
Integration rule description parameter	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.
Integration rule type criteria	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE
Integration rule description criteria	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020
Description overall status
Assessments period	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016
Related pressures	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources
Related targets	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8

Bornholm Basin - PL TW V WB 6 river mouth, partly stratified, partly sheltered, substratum: medium grained sand/silty sand (L4-POL-007)

Simplified table

GES component	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5
Feature	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication
Element	DIN	DIP	TN	TP	Chlorophyll-a	Photic limit	Dissolved oxygen	Benthic habitats - macrobenthic communities
Element code	TDIN	PHOS	NTOT	PTOT	EEA_3164-01-0	EEA_3111-01-1	EEA_3132-01-2	QE1-3
Element code source	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National
Criterion	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C2	D5C4	D5C5	D5C8
Parameter	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Transparency in water	Concentration in water	Other
Parameter other								B-index
Threshold value upper	12.85	1.13	19.28	1.35	3.8	4.5	4.2	3.18
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper	22.13	0.68	55.04	2.0	10.32	1.9	5.8	2.59
Value achieved lower
Value unit	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	microgram per litre	metre	milligram per litre	Other
Value unit other								index
Proportion threshold value	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
Proportion value achieved		100.0					100.0
Proportion threshold value unit	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value
Trend	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	No	Yes	No	No	No	No	Yes	No
Description parameter
Related indicator	Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN)	Dissolved inorganic phosphorous (DIP)	Total nitrogen (TN)	Total phosphorus (TP)	Chlorophyll-a	Water clarity	Minimal oxygen bottom concentration in summer	Multimetric zoobenthos index B
Criteria status	Not good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Good	Not good
Description criteria							Assessment is made based on the minimal bottom oxygen concentration in summer.
Element status	Not good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Good	Not good
Description element
Integration rule type parameter	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI
Integration rule description parameter	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.
Integration rule type criteria	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE
Integration rule description criteria	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020
Description overall status
Assessments period	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016
Related pressures	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources
Related targets	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8

Gdansk Basin - PL TW V WB 5 river mouth, partly stratified, partly sheltered, substratum: medium grained sand/silty sand (L4-POL-008)

Simplified table

GES component	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5
Feature	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication
Element	DIN	DIP	TN	TP	Chlorophyll-a	Photic limit	Dissolved oxygen	Benthic habitats - macrobenthic communities
Element code	TDIN	PHOS	NTOT	PTOT	EEA_3164-01-0	EEA_3111-01-1	EEA_3132-01-2	QE1-3
Element code source	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National
Criterion	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C2	D5C4	D5C5	D5C8
Parameter	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Transparency in water	Concentration in water	Other
Parameter other								B-index
Threshold value upper	16.06	1.13	28.56	1.45	5.5	3.0	4.2	3.18
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper	57.54	2.61	46.12	2.9	10.73	1.9	3.4	2.32
Value achieved lower
Value unit	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	microgram per litre	metre	milligram per litre	Other
Value unit other								index
Proportion threshold value	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value
Trend	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No
Description parameter
Related indicator	Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN)	Dissolved inorganic phosphorous (DIP)	Total nitrogen (TN)	Total phosphorus (TP)	Chlorophyll-a	Water clarity	Minimal oxygen bottom concentration in summer	Multimetric zoobenthos index B
Criteria status	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description criteria							Assessment is made based on the minimal bottom oxygen concentration in summer.
Element status	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description element
Integration rule type parameter	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI
Integration rule description parameter	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.
Integration rule type criteria	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE
Integration rule description criteria	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020
Description overall status
Assessments period	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016
Related pressures	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources
Related targets	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8

Bornholm Basin - PL TW V WB 7 river mouth, partly stratified, partly sheltered, substratum: medium grained sand/silty sand (L4-POL-009)

Simplified table

GES component	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5	D5
Feature	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication	Eutrophication
Element	DIN	DIP	TN	TP	Chlorophyll-a	Photic limit	Dissolved oxygen	Benthic habitats - macrobenthic communities
Element code	TDIN	PHOS	NTOT	PTOT	EEA_3164-01-0	EEA_3111-01-1	EEA_3132-01-2	QE1-3
Element code source	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Contaminants (D8-D9) http://vocab.ices.dk/?ref=37	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5) and contaminants (D8-D9) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedProperty/view	Eutrophication (D5)(EQRs) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/wise/ObservedPropertyBiologyEQR/view
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National
Criterion	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C1	D5C2	D5C4	D5C5	D5C8
Parameter	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Concentration in water	Transparency in water	Concentration in water	Other
Parameter other								B-index
Threshold value upper	22.86	1.13	37.84	1.45	7.5	3.75	4.2	3.18
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper	35.64	0.81	59.61	2.39	11.09	1.7	5.3	3.11
Value achieved lower
Value unit	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	micromole per litre	microgram per litre	metre	milligram per litre	Other
Value unit other								index
Proportion threshold value	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
Proportion value achieved		100.0					100.0
Proportion threshold value unit	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value
Trend	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	No	Yes	No	No	No	No	Yes	No
Description parameter
Related indicator	Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN)	Dissolved inorganic phosphorous (DIP)	Total nitrogen (TN)	Total phosphorus (TP)	Chlorophyll-a	Water clarity	Minimal oxygen bottom concentration in summer	Multimetric zoobenthos index B
Criteria status	Not good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Good	Not good
Description criteria							Assessment is made based on the minimal bottom oxygen concentration in summer.
Element status	Not good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Good	Not good
Description element
Integration rule type parameter	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI	HIE_WEI
Integration rule description parameter	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.	Eutrophication Ratio between ES (indicator value during the period of the assessment),and ET (boundary of good environmental status) (for indicators with positive response to eutrophication) and ratio between ET and ES (for indicators with negative response to eutrophication) was calculated for each indicator. ER values of indicators were averaged (weighed average) evenly within the criteria group.
Integration rule type criteria	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE	OOAO_HIE
Integration rule description criteria	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.	Core indicators results were grouped into three criteria groups: 1. Nutrient levels, 2. Direct Effects, 3. Indirect Effects nutrient levels comprise of 4 nutrient indicators (HELCOM-DIN, HELCOM-DIP, HELCOM-TN, HELCOM-TP). Direct effects include HELCOM-Chl_a and Secchi depth. Indirect effects include minimal bottom oxygen concentration, macrophyte and macrozoobenthos. Indicators were normalized according to the method applied in the HELCOM second holistic assessment of the Baltic Sea (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/). Eutrophication status is assessed by the three criteria groups described above. The criteria-specific eutrophication status is calculated as a weighted average of the eutrophication ratio (ER) of each indicator within the criteria group. The weight is evenly distributed. The lowest criteria-specific eutrophication determines the overall eutrophication status (one-out-all-out approach) of each assessment unit. The ER values below 1 indicate good environmental status.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020	GES expected to be achieved by 2020
Description overall status
Assessments period	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016	2011-2016
Related pressures	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources	Eutrophication Input of nutrients - diffuse sources, point sources, atmospheric deposition Input of organic matter - diffuse sources and point sources
Related targets	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1 PL_Target_D5C2 PL_Target_D5C4 PL_Target_D5C5 PL_Target_D5C8	PL_Target_D5 PL_Target_D5C1