1. * 100% = 15 Member States

2. A majority of MS used a different Descriptor definition from Annex 1 MSFD or the same definition but with different criteria from COM Decision, resulting in many variations across MS. This is particularly true when policies are well-developed (e.g. D8).
A minority of MS have made an exact or similar copy of the definitions in Annex 1 and the criteria of the COM Decision.

3. D8: Concentrations of contaminants are at levels not giving rise to pollution effects.
Example 1:
Concentrations of contaminants in water, sediment, or biota are kept within agreed levels (national/EU/RSC level) and are not increasing;
The effects of contaminants on selected biological processes and taxonomic groups, where a cause/effect relationship has been established, are kept within agreed levels (national/EU/RSC levels)
Example 2:
Contaminants concentration levels do not cause pollution, meaning in practice that less than 10% of the area under evaluation is subjected to impacts and threats to the ecosystems, i.e. positive deviations to the reference conditions established.
Example 3:
Set of GES conditions:
Concentrations of contaminants for which a threshold is available (WFD and OSPAR) do not exceed these thresholds;
Concentrations in biota do not increase over time;
Concentrations in top predators do not increase over time;
The effects of contaminants are assessed as insignificant.
UK: for both concentration and effects = broad reference to national, EU, international (RSC) standards but without details – would point to WFD, OSPAR and any additional national standards. Use criteria and partial use of indicators.
Portugal: simple reproduction of GES definition, no reference to any standard, no use of criteria and indicators.
France: use criteria and partially indicators, reference to WFD and OSPAR

4. Key conclusions D8:
Significant differences between GES definitions in terms of level of detail, reference to appropriate legislation or standards and use of criteria and indicators
In particular, the criterion ‘effect of contaminants’ when used remains poorly specified

5. Results Initial Assessment

7. Key conclusions (taking into account uncertainties):
Only a small proportion of MS have used their GES determination to make a judgment on the level of impact of the relevant pressures in their initial assessment.
For D10 and D8, a larger group of MS has used other standards to make this judgement (e.g. RSC standards)
For D7, the relatively broad definition of GES can explain why GES determination is more frequently used in the IA.