Procurement procedures were always in line with EU and EIB policies. In one case, the process was not entirely satisfactory in terms of the results achieved, but accepted by PJ as being in line with the Bank's Procurement Procedures. The Bank's standard environmental assessment procedures were carried out on all projects. Projects located within the EU at the time of appraisal also received a favourable opinion from the European Commission (EC) on compliance with EU legislation. Only two projects raised any environmental concerns. On the public-sector financed part of an inter-city motorway past a major conurbation, between the sections built by the Provider, there was an issue relating to the effect on the local water supply. This section had already been financed by the Bank, which was criticised by a non-governmental organisation for doing so. On a rail project, the EIB's loan originally received a negative opinion from EC on environmental grounds. This surprised both the Bank and the Promoter but the issue, relating to the habitat of an indigenous mouse, was relatively minor and was dealt with by a further study.
While the background of the Provider's shareholders was always reviewed, though sometimes in limited detail, very little attention seems to have been paid to the quality of the Provider's Operational Management, or how it was to be organised and run. This might appear reasonable, given the strong links between the Providers and the Contractors, all of whom were experienced and capable of carrying out or overseeing the construction work. However, as SPVs with responsibility for O&M stretching into decades, a deeper analysis of the Provider's operational expertise and stability might have been expected.
The calculation of the Project Cost for some projects was complicated by elements which were part of the overall project, but not part of the PPP, and elements of the PPP which were not eligible for EIB funding. This led to some ineligible costs filtering through to the Bank's Project Cost definition, e.g. IDC on ineligible components, operating costs during implementation, maintenance reserve accounts, and general working capital. The overall impact of these costs was small, but indicative of the problems associated with abnormal projects.