1. WG ECOSTAT: Good Ecological Potential (GEP)
SCG meeting 7 May 2014

2. ECOSTAT Task 1: ‘Intercalibration’ of ecological potential
General approach has been agreed:
Step 1 – information exchange on HMWB designation and mitigation measures, focusing on specific uses
Step 2 - Harmonisation / intercalibration according to the recommendations in step1 (to be specified)
18 January 2019

3. Step 1 – Information Exchange
designation procedure and criteria
relevant biological quality element and classification thresholds
pressures and impacts associated with use
measures used to mitigate the impacts of hydromorphological pressures
impact of mitigation measures on use
18 January 2019

4. Progress achieved
Initial information exchange by three "HMWB use- groups" focused on specific uses for which heavily modified water bodies have been designated:
Water storage schemes for hydroelectricity generation and for public water supply [NO,AT,UK,SE]
Uses in agricultural areas, including land drainage and irrigation [SE, IT]
Multiple uses in estuaries and lagoons [FR]
18 January 2019

5. Key conclusions
Follow-up process will benefit from more integration between use groups
Need for common terminology
Common list of impacts considered significant
Library of each country’s mitigation measures for the significant impacts
Description of the process for deciding on the mitigation required for GEP applied by Member States and compare the outcomes
Make it real – case studies
18 January 2019

6. 18 January 2019

7. More integration
Joint meeting of the three use groups back-to-back with ECOSTAT
Core group members of the Water Storage use group will actively contribute to the relevant chapters of the e-flows guidance to ensure coherence
18 January 2019

8. Next steps (1) Before next ECOSTAT meeting:
Compile common mitigation measures library, linked to the impacts
Compile summaries of how Member States define GEP using a common template for all use categories
18 January 2019

9. Next steps (2) At the next ECOSTAT meeting (October 2014):
Identify key similarities and differences in MS approaches
Agree the focus for further comparison needs
By spring 2015:
Document similarities and common understanding
Review differences and scope for further alignment
18 January 2019