Origins and development - Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment - page 50

reviews an EIS for compliance with legal requirements. Italy also has an EIA
commission.
• The decision to proceed with a project is, in the simplest case, the responsibility of the
competent authority (e.g. in Flanders, Germany, the UK). However, in some cases the
minister responsible for the environment must first decide whether a project is
environmentally compatible (e.g. in Denmark, Italy, Portugal).
2.7.1 Reviews of the original Directive
The first five-year review of the original Directive (CEC 1993), as noted, expressed
concern about a range of inconsistencies in the operational procedures across the Member
States (project coverage, alternatives, public participation, etc). As a result, several
Member States strengthened their regulations to achieve a fuller implementation. A
second five-year review in 1997 (CEC 1997b) had the following key findings:
• EIA is a regular feature of project licensing/authorization systems, yet wide variation
exists in relation to those procedures (e.g. different procedural steps, relationships with
other relevant procedures);
• Whilst all Member States had made provision for the EIA of the projects listed in
Annex I, there were different interpretations and procedures for Annex II projects;
• Quality control over the EIA process is deficient;
• Member States did not give enough attention to the consideration of alternatives;
• Improvements had been made on public participation and consultation; and
• Member States, themselves, complained about the ambiguity and lack of definitions of
several key terms in the Directive.
The amendments of 1997 sought to reduce further several of the remaining differences. In
addition to the substantial extensions and modification to the list of projects in Annex I
and Annex II, the amended Directive (CEC 1997a) also strengthened the procedural base
of the EIA Directive. This included a provision for new screening arrangements,
including new screening criteria (in Annex III) for Annex II projects. It also introduced
EIS content changes, including an obligation on developers to include an outline of the
main alternatives studied, and an indication of the main reasons for their choices, taking
into account environmental effects. The amended Directive also enables a developer, if it
so wishes, to ask a competent authority for formal advice on the scope of the information
that should be included in a particular EIS. Member States, if they so wish, can require
competent autborities to give an opinion on the scope of any new proposed EIS, whether
the developer has requested one or not. The amended Directive also strengthens
consultation and publicity, obliging competent authorities to take into account the results
of consultations with the public and the reasons and considerations on which the decision
on a project proposal has been based.
2.7.2 Review of the amended Directive
A third review of the original Directive, as amended by Directive 97/11/EC (CEC
1997a), undertaken for the EC by the Impacts Assessment Unit at Oxford Brookes
University (UK), provided a detailed overview of the implementation of the Directive (as