Post a comment on the text below

Previous comments

• ES - Spain (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 19 Mar 2019 13:25:52

  The Guidance should clarify how ubiquitous substances are considered.

  If 'Poor status' is due to ubiquitous substances, it can be reported as:

  • Good status and expresing in another field that it is Good but with problems due to ubiquitous substances
  • Poor status, expressing in another field that it is only due to ubiquitous substances

  Both aproaches have advantages and disadvantages, but it should be clearly stated how to deal with this issue.

  The solution adopted should be in line with the one taken in Class SWPrioritySubstance/swPrioritySubstanceCausingFailure

• ES - Spain (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 19 Mar 2019 13:35:02

  We suggest to made the codelist 'self explanatory'. See comments to swEcologicalStatusOrPotentialValue

  • HU1 - Hungary (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 13:53:16

     
    

    We suggest to made the codelist 'self explanatory'. See comments to swEcologicalStatusOrPotentialValue

     

    HU: It is advantageous if the code list is self-explanatory, but it is more important to be the same throughout all WISE and EEA reporting!

• LU - Luxembourg1 (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 19 Apr 2019 11:47:36

  In order to avoid any confusion, we suggest to use, derived from the enumeration list used for ecological status, the following options:

  2 =  Good status

  5 = Failing to achieve good status

  Unknown = Unknown status

• NO - Norway (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 14:43:34

  We want to keep it as it is