Member State report / Art10 / 2012 / D8 / Poland / Baltic Sea
| Report type | Member State report to Commission |
| MSFD Article | Art. 10 Environmental targets (and Art. 17 updates) |
| Report due | 2012-10-15 |
| GES Descriptor | D8 Contaminants |
| Member State | Poland |
| Region/subregion | Baltic Sea |
| Reported by | National Water Management Authority |
| Report date | 2015-11-20 |
| Report access | MSFD10TI_20160226_150132.xml |
BAL-PL-AA-27, BAL-PL-AA-33, BAL-PL-AA-35, BAL-PL-AA-35A, BAL-PL-AA-36, BAL-PL-AA-38, BAL-PL-AA-38A, BAL-PL-AA-62, BAL-PL-MS-001
Feature [Target or Indicator code] |
D8 |
8.1 |
8.1.1 |
8.2 |
8.2.1 |
8.2.2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GES descriptor, criterion or indicator [GEScomponent] |
D8
|
D8C1
|
D8C1
|
D8C2
|
D8C2
|
D8C3
|
MarineUnitID |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Method used |
In all sub-basins the same approach for setting targets was applied. For all indicators 5-class classification scales were developed, similarly to FWD approach of high, good, moderate, poor and bad status. The target=GES border was set at the border between Good and Moderate status. Indicators are set in Commission Decision. |
In all sub-basins the same approach for setting targets was applied. For all indicators 5-class classification scales were developed, similarly to FWD approach of high, good, moderate, poor and bad status. The target=GES border was set at the border between Good and Moderate status. Indicators are set in Commission Decision. |
In all sub-basins the same approach for setting targets was applied. For all indicators 5-class classification scales were developed, similarly to FWD approach of high, good, moderate, poor and bad status. The target=GES border was set at the border between Good and Moderate status. Indicators are set in Commission Decision. |
In all sub-basins the same approach for setting targets was applied. For all indicators 5-class classification scales were developed, similarly to FWD approach of high, good, moderate, poor and bad status. The target=GES border was set at the border between Good and Moderate status. Indicators are set in Commission Decision. |
In all sub-basins the same approach for setting targets was applied. For all indicators 5-class classification scales were developed, similarly to FWD approach of high, good, moderate, poor and bad status. The target=GES border was set at the border between Good and Moderate status. Indicators are set in Commission Decision. |
In all sub-basins the same approach for setting targets was applied. For all indicators 5-class classification scales were developed, similarly to FWD approach of high, good, moderate, poor and bad status. The target=GES border was set at the border between Good and Moderate status. Indicators are set in Commission Decision. |
Description [Targets] |
Indicator 2 - The effects of pollutants on a level that guarantees the correct functioning of organisms including maintenance of normal physiological functions of individual organisms and proper development at various levels of the organization. Accidental pollution are reduced to a minimum, and their impact not significantly affect the proper functioning of marine organisms. |
|||||
Threshold value [TargetValue] |
||||||
Reference point type |
LimitReferencePoint |
LimitReferencePoint |
LimitReferencePoint |
LimitReferencePoint |
LimitReferencePoint |
LimitReferencePoint |
Baseline |
Method of determining the value depends on the nature of the substance and for each pollutant baseline may be different |
Method of determining the value depends on the nature of the substance and for each pollutant baseline may be different |
Method of determining the value depends on the nature of the substance and for each pollutant baseline may be different |
Method of determining the value depends on the nature of the substance and for each pollutant baseline may be different |
Method of determining the value depends on the nature of the substance and for each pollutant baseline may be different |
Method of determining the value depends on the nature of the substance and for each pollutant baseline may be different |
Proportion |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
Assessment method |
The concentrations of hazardous substance in selected matrices are related to the target values defining the border between GES and subGES. If the contamination factor (CF) calculated as a ratio of environmental concentration to the target concentration is lower than 1 (CF<1), the GES is reached. When CF > 1, the status is subGES. |
The concentrations of hazardous substance in selected matrices are related to the target values defining the border between GES and subGES. If the contamination factor (CF) calculated as a ratio of environmental concentration to the target concentration is lower than 1 (CF<1), the GES is reached. When CF > 1, the status is subGES. |
The concentrations of hazardous substance in selected matrices are related to the target values defining the border between GES and subGES. If the contamination factor (CF) calculated as a ratio of environmental concentration to the target concentration is lower than 1 (CF<1), the GES is reached. When CF > 1, the status is subGES. |
The concentrations of hazardous substance in selected matrices are related to the target values defining the border between GES and subGES. If the contamination factor (CF) calculated as a ratio of environmental concentration to the target concentration is lower than 1 (CF<1), the GES is reached. When CF > 1, the status is subGES. |
The concentrations of hazardous substance in selected matrices are related to the target values defining the border between GES and subGES. If the contamination factor (CF) calculated as a ratio of environmental concentration to the target concentration is lower than 1 (CF<1), the GES is reached. When CF > 1, the status is subGES. |
The concentrations of hazardous substance in selected matrices are related to the target values defining the border between GES and subGES. If the contamination factor (CF) calculated as a ratio of environmental concentration to the target concentration is lower than 1 (CF<1), the GES is reached. When CF > 1, the status is subGES. |
Development status |
Further development needed (expected to be operational by 2018 if adopted) |
Further development needed (expected to be operational by 2018 if adopted) |
Further development needed (expected to be operational by 2018 if adopted) |
Further development needed (expected to be operational by 2018 if adopted) |
Further development needed (expected to be operational by 2018 if adopted) |
Further development needed (expected to be operational by 2018 if adopted) |
Type of target/indicator |
Pressure |
Pressure |
Pressure |
Pressure |
Pressure |
Pressure |
Timescale |
2020-12 |
|||||
Interim or GES target |
GES |
|||||
Compatibility with existing targets/indicators |
Indicator is compatible with all objectives to which Poland is committed in the frame of national, regional and international agreements. |
Indicator is compatible with all objectives to which Poland is committed in the frame of national, regional and international agreements. |
Indicator is compatible with all objectives to which Poland is committed in the frame of national, regional and international agreements. |
Indicator is compatible with all objectives to which Poland is committed in the frame of national, regional and international agreements. |
Indicator is compatible with all objectives to which Poland is committed in the frame of national, regional and international agreements. |
Indicator is compatible with all objectives to which Poland is committed in the frame of national, regional and international agreements. |
Physical/chemical features |
||||||
Predominant habitats |
||||||
Functional group |
||||||
Pressures |