Participation, presentation and review - Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment - page 185

development restoration

(b)

Criterion Presence/absence

(page number)

Comments Grade

Explains the purposes and
objectives of the
development

Briefly in introduction,
more details in Sec. 2

A

(p.11)

Gives the estimated
duration of construction
etc. phases

Not decommissioning B

(p. 12)

(c)
Criterion Relevant? (Y/N) Judgement (C/A/I)* Comment

Considers the “no action”
alternative, alternative
processes, etc.

Y A Alternative sites

discussed, but not
alternative processes

If unexpectedly severe
adverse impacts are
identified, alternatives are
reappraised

N Impacts of sand/

gravel working well
understood

* C=complete; A=adequate; I=inadequate.

6.6 Decisions on projects

6.6.1 EIA and project authorization

Decisions to authorize or reject projects are made at several levels:

At the top of the tree are the relevant Secretaries of State…; below them
are a host of Inspectors, sometimes called Reporters (Scotland); further
down the list come Councillors, the elected members of district, county,
unitary or metropolitan borough councils; and at the very bottom are chief
or senior planning officers who deal with “delegated decisions”…[as] a
rough guide, the larger the project the higher up the pyramid of decision
makers the decision is made. (Weston 1997)

Where required by the competent authority, an EIS must be submitted with the
application for authorization. 3 The decision on an application with an EIS must be made
within a specified period (e.g. 16 weeks for a planning application), unless the developer
agrees to a longer period. It is at this stage that the EIS review is undertaken. When
making a decision, the competent authority is required to have regard to all the
environmental information, i.e. the information contained in the EIS and other