Back to section

Post a comment on the text below

qeCode - Required. (StatusQE_Enum)

Select in turn each of the quality elements once and provide the associated information.

Previous comments

  • ES - Spain (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 19 Mar 2019 13:21:32

    In the text of the guidance it would be more clear if we add in the Quality check the underlined text.

    Quality checks: Information for all quality elements should be provided. Each quality element should be chosen only once per water body.

  • SE - Sweden (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 22 Mar 2019 10:59:06

    The reporting requirements changed between cycles regarding elements. In reporting 2010 the element General conditions, Q3-1, were reported. In reporting 2016 it was changed to the 3 number level (QE3-1-1 to 5) and even to the 3 number level for nutrients (QE3-1-6-1). This affects the way these elements are classified. The method in Sweden för classifying nutrients does not distinguish between N and P. So it is not possible to report the status classification on nutrients in a proper manner.

  • SI - Slovenia (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 22 Mar 2019 14:16:20

    table Schema: SWB (continued); Schema element: qeCode, Field type / facets: StatusQE_Enum (see Annex 8h)

    Proposed change:

    We suggest adding quality element QE1-2-5 ‒ Macrophytes and phytobenthos to the table StatusQE_Enum in Annex 8h.

     

    Explanation for the proposed change:

    According to Slovenian methodology for ecological status assessment using phytobenthos and macrophytes, phytobenthos and macrophytes are defined as one biological element in accordance with Water Framework Directive. According to the methodology, classification of ecological status is not done separately for sub-elements but combination of both is used in the classification. Therefore, we cannot report ecological status for elements QE1-2-3 ‒ Macrophytes and QE1-2-4 ‒ Phytobenthos so we suggest adding element QE1-2-5 ‒ Macrophytes and phytobenthos to the table StatusQE_Enum in Annex 8h.

    • NO - Norway (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 14:36:25

       

      table Schema: SWB (continued); Schema element: qeCode, Field type / facets: StatusQE_Enum (see Annex 8h)

      Proposed change:

      We suggest adding quality element QE1-2-5 ‒ Macrophytes and phytobenthos to the table StatusQE_Enum in Annex 8h.

       

      Explanation for the proposed change:

      According to Slovenian methodology for ecological status assessment using phytobenthos and macrophytes, phytobenthos and macrophytes are defined as one biological element in accordance with Water Framework Directive. According to the methodology, classification of ecological status is not done separately for sub-elements but combination of both is used in the classification. Therefore, we cannot report ecological status for elements QE1-2-3 ‒ Macrophytes and QE1-2-4 ‒ Phytobenthos so we suggest adding element QE1-2-5 ‒ Macrophytes and phytobenthos to the table StatusQE_Enum in Annex 8h.

      We need macrophytes and Phytobentos separate, so we want to keep it as it is

  • IT - Italy (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 12:32:05

    It should be avoided to report the QEs that are “Not applicable” for each surface water category.

    • BE (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 16:23:37

       

      It should be avoided to report the QEs that are “Not applicable” for each surface water category.

       There must be a distinguish between 'not applicable' and 'unknown'. 

You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.