Post a comment on the text below
swChemicalStatusExpectedAchievementDate - Conditional. (GoodStatus_Enum)
If good chemical status will NOT be achieved by 2015 (swChemicalStatusExpectedGoodIn2015 is No), report the date by which it is expected that it will be achieved in full. The methodology of this assessment should be clearly explained in the RBMP or background documents (reference reported under classification methodologies).
If good chemical status will not be achieved by 2015, exemptions should be applied. Please report the date by which it is expected that good chemical status will be achieved in full, not the date relating to individual exemptions. However, please note the following:
Article 4(4) exemptions relate to the extension of deadlines. According to Article 4(4)c of the WFD, postponing the achievement of objectives beyond two further updates of the river basin management plan is only possible due to natural conditions.
If Article 4(5) exemptions apply, report the date by when the less stringent objective is to be achieved. If the less stringent objective has already been achieved then select 'Less stringent objectives already achieved'.
If good chemical status will be achieved by 2015 (swChemicalStatusExpectedGoodIn2015 is Yes) this element should not be reported.
You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.
Previous comments
This field does not solve the problem when a WB has both 4(4) (time extension) and 4(5) (less stringent objective) exemptions.
The current codelist do not allow identifying cases when a SWB has 'less stringent objective already achieved' but it is not in compliance with all environmental objectives because of other quality element (without less stringent objective) but with a time extension (ie 2022-2027).
We suggest to split the field in two. Leaving this field as it is now but removing from the codelist 'less stringent objective already achieved'.
A new field should be included in order to report the achievement of less stringent objectives for quality elements with a 4(5) exemption.
We have introduce incoherent combinations in the access database without getting blockers
Although in the XML generation this field is ignored, the Access file that is the source of information in Spain remains unchanged and produces many problems when using it for statistical analysis.
Would it be possible to include checks in this sense in the Access database?
Next check should be implemented:
If swChemicalstatusExpectedGoodIn2015 is ‘Yes’ this element must not be reported.
GENERAL COMMENT
The Quality checks should include not only a conditional check requiring a value when the condition is fulfilled, but also requiring the field to be left empty "NULL" when the condition is not fulfilled.
It can be implemented in the Access database by adding in all codelist a 'Not applicable' value required when the condition is not fulfilled.
It could be interesting to have new achievement date for new chemicals 2028-2033 and 2034-2039 (and also in the case of exemptions for natural conditions).
How do we report for Mayotte, cuold we adopt the same system as previously : 2022-2027 meaning 2028-2033, 2028-2033 meaining 2034-2039, etc.?
We want to keep it as it is. A WB cannot logically have both exemptions 4(4) and 4(5)