P.O. Box 106,

Navan,

County Meath,

Ireland.

18-November-2014

Ms Catharina.Sikow,

Mr Olgerts.Viksne,

Mr Adam.Romanowski,

DG Energy,

Directorate B,

European Commission,

B-1049

Brussels,

Belgium

Subject: Formal complaint to EU Commission by North East Pylon Pressure Campaign Group in relation to EirGrid’s planning applications for the North-South interconnector project, Ireland, listed as PCI001 (WE ELEC 155)

North East Pylon Pressure Campaign (NEPPC) is the overall representative group for some 45,000 people of the North East of Ireland who advocate that high power electric cables should go underground. The group was formed in November 2007, in response to the massive public outcry emanating from the EirGrid announcement of its plans for a North-South Interconnector Project (NSIP) from Meath to Tyrone. The strong consensus is that the interconnector should be established using underground cables instead of overhead transmission power lines.

Our campaign objectives are as follows:

  • Build a rational, cohesive and comprehensive case for an underground cable alternative
  • Influence the political process to achieve consensus on undergrounding
  • Achieve a change in policy through public support

NEPPC has engaged a range of professional expertise and commissioned a significant number of reports in such areas as technology, agriculture, health, environment, ecology, geology, heritage, landscape and visual impact and land and property devaluation. These reports have resulted in a technically and scientifically well researched case in support of undergrounding the North-South interconnector.

NEPPC has made submissions to the Irish Parliament, through the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources in February 2008, December 2008 and February 2012. We have made a submission and presentation to the Northern Ireland Environment Committee in Stormont, Belfast in April 2009. NEPPC also met with and shared the reports with the Danish Transmission System Operator, Energinet. NEPPC has initiated and held a number of meetings with EirGrid personnel over the last 6 years, but none of our concerns or requests have ever been acted on during this time.

NEPPC has been working diligently for the last 7 years to find a solution to the negative impact and to the concerns of the affected communities by the proposed NSIP. This, regrettably, has been to no avail, for a number of reasons. The core reason for this has been a total lack of respect by EirGrid for the integrity of the public consultation process, a process that is a central pillar of our democracy. The public have been met by a semi-state company which has shown total disregard for its duties and responsibilities to the very public it is charged with serving.

NEPPC is now making a formal complaint to the EU Commission, as is our right, in relation to numerous unacceptable activities by EirGrid, The Irish Government and An BordPleanála concerning their behavior on a number of different aspects of the project. The specific complaints are outlined in the next chapter.

NEPPC is requesting the following:

  1. That DG Energy reviews the details of the submission and commences an investigation into the matters outlined.
  2. That the EU Commission requests to EirGrid that the imminent resubmission of the planning application is postponed until a proper investigation of this complaint iscompleted.

NEPPC requests, for a number of reasons, that the EU Commission gives this complaint its urgent and serious attention. The people we represent are ordinary EU citizens, who are not involved in any type of protest groups, but who are looking for nothing more than fair play and a functioning democratic process. We have been failed by our local Government politicians, our national Government and by our semi-state company in the underhanded and dishonest manner in the way they have conducted their affairs and in the process treated us with disregard and contempt. This is despite the fact that NEPPC has always followed the democratic process. We raised significant monies to provide funding for research into the options to underground the North-South interconnector project (NSIP). We subsequently presented all of our facts and arguments in a professional manner at the oral hearing in 2010, at a cost of c. €700,000. EirGrid withdrew its application in the middle of the oral hearing, without any accountability or responsibility for its actions.

Since 2010, EirGrid has been preparing for a resubmission of its application. It has continued to refuse to acknowledge public concerns, to consult or engage with the public, or to genuinely search for a solution. Instead it has adopted the aggressive approach of assuming it will obtain planning permission and then use its assumed statutory powers to forcibly construct over 400 pylons and overhead lines.

EirGrid, the Government and ultimately the EU Commission are missing the point on projects such as the NSIP. These projects will only ever happen with the consent of the citizens it ultimately represents. Consent will only ever be obtained if people feel that they have beengiven a fair hearing and are part of a democratic, independent process. The complaint submitted clearly shows that this is not the case. It is the EU Commission’s duty to step in and avoid a deepening of conflict between EirGrid and the public. Otherwise, approval for the planning application will be nothing but a pyrrhic victory.

EirGrid’s intransigent position of exclusively focusing solely on overhead transmission lines can only lead to complete stalemate and represents a dereliction of duty in terms of its accountability for achieving the required upgrade of the Grid. EirGrid’s intransigence stems from its refusal to acknowledge the public acceptance challenges and to accept its socio-economic responsibilities in this regard.

We request that you give this complaint your urgent atention.

Yours faithfully

AiméeTreacy

Chairperson,NEPPC

Executive Summary

NEPPC has submitted a formal complaint directly to the European Commission concerning the activities and behaviour of EirGrid in particular, but also of the Irish Government and of An BordPleanála (ABP) in relation to their failure to perform their duties in a professional, objective and impartial manner concerning the NSIP to date. The substantive issues that form the essence of the complaint relate to EirGrid’s failure to objectively examine the strategic need and scale of the project, the failure to fulfill its public consultation duties under EU regulation 347, the failure to engage with the affected landowners’ concerns and recommendations, the refusal to carry out a proper cost-benefit analysis of the project, the waste of taxpayers’s monies and associated lack of accountability, the numerous incorrect and misleading claims to the public and EirGrid’s provocative and intimidatory approach in its dealings with concerned communities in the designated route corridor. The complaint also highlights the current Government’s discrimination against the NSIP, by refusing to allow it to be included in independent review being held on all other main grid infrastructure projects. Finally, the complaint highlights the concerns of the public regarding the conflict of interest and apparent lack of impartiality that exists within An BordPleanála on this project.

The complaint by NEPPC, on behalf of affected communities and landowners in the North-East, contains detailed and specific facts that have occurred over the last 7 years. It includes the following issues:

  1. Failure by the Government and by EirGrid to prove the strategic need for the scale of the project and its investment cost to citizens.
  1. Failure by EirGrid to review and downsize the project seven years after the initial planning application, in light of significant documented long-term reductions in projected demand.
  1. Failure to objectively examine all technology alternatives, especially the rapidly evolving option of underground cable technology.
  1. Failure to carry out a professional cost-benefit analysis of the technology alternatives
  1. Pre-meditated refusal by EirGrid to carry out an objective public consultation exercise
  1. Refusal by EirGrid to engage with landowners concerns’ or recommendations
  1. Refusal by EirGrid to respect landowners requests and rights for the last 7 years, resulting in provocative and intimidating behaviour by EirGrid and/or its appointed agents
  1. Lack of accountability by EirGrid and by the Government for the waste of taxpayers’ monies in the project to date
  1. Consistent use of incorrect, biased and misleading claims andstatements to the public over a 7 year period.
  1. Discrimination against the NSIP by the Government, in agreement with EirGrid, in specifically excluding it from an undergrounding analysis study
  1. Failure of Government to act on a 2007 report commissioned to take action on health related issues regarding extra high voltage lines and EMF/health concerns.
  1. Biased claims by Minister of Communications, Energy & Natural Resources that will be prejudicial to a proper oral hearing by ABP.
  1. Perceived failure by ABP to act in an impartial manner on the NSIP
  1. Conflict of interest in appointment of ABP as Competent Authority for PCI
  1. Failure by ABP to properly engage prescribed bodies in its handling of EirGrid submissions to ABP

Each of the above 15 points is substantive in its own regard and merits investigation. But the overriding substantive issue is that of the continued refusal and repeated failure to carry out a genuine public consultation on this project. This is all the more unforgiveable given that EirGrid is going through the process of a resubmitted planning application, over a 7 year period. Eirgrid’s brazen approach of paying lip-service to the option of undergrounding and to ignore public concerns and recommendations strongly indicates that it carries the imprimatur of the full backing of Government to steam-roll the North-South interconnector through the planning stages, and in so doing break the will of local communities opposing the Grid Link and Grid West projects. The current EirGrid Project Manager Mr John Fitzgerald recently stated on the airwaves that: “..public acceptability is key. We have to have these projects accepted or they simply won’t be built..”. In a sworn affidavit to the High Court, dated 19th May 2008, EirGrid’s then Project Manager, Mr TomásMahony, stated: ‘It is recognised by the Respondent that such infrastructure cannot be put in place without the general acceptance of the people of the North East...’ NEPPC concurs with Mr Mahony’s assessment.

It is an alarming development for the public that the new EU regulation 347, which espouses greater public consultation as a core component of PCI projects is in fact being ignored and manipulated by EirGrid and by An BordPleanála in a rush to force through the planning application yet again. It is incumbent of the EU Commission to investigate this aspect in particular and not to allow the whole issue of respect for the integrity of the public consultation process, a process that is a central pillar of our democracy, to be hijacked.

NEPPC Complaint to EU Commission – Supporting Facts

  1. Failure by the Government and by EirGrid to prove the strategic need for the scale of the project and its investment cost to citizens.
  1. Failure by EirGrid to review and downsize the project seven years after the initial planning application, in light of significant documented long-term reductions in projected demand.

Strategic Need

The‘Grid 25’ strategy from EirGrid, which outlines the plans to significantly upgrade the national grid, is based on the ‘All Island Grid Strategy’ (AIGS) policy document jointly commissioned by the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (DCENR) and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment (DETI) in Northern Ireland. The policy has set a target of producing 40% of Irish electricity from renewables by 2020 and EirGrid has produced a plan for grid investment (Grid 25) costing more than €4bn (subsequently reduced to €3.2bn) to accommodate total transmission investment. A significant portion of this cost arises from the requirement to connect very large quantities of renewable generation (wind).

There was no public input or involvement into this policy, and no opportunity to challenge the assumptions made. NEPPC challenges the assumptions, methodology, analysis and recommendations related to the conclusions arrived at by EirGrid in forming a justification for the project. NEPPC concurs with the findings of the Irish Academy of Engineers Report in June 2009, that:

  • the Study is quite clearly not a sufficiently robust exercise on which to base Ireland’s future energy policy. The target of 40% of Ireland’s electricity supply to come from renewables by 2020 greatly exceeds the target agreed at EU level;
  • the assumptions used in the Study are “pre economic crisis” and are no longer valid. This is particularly true of the demand growth projections used in the Study;
  • the Study itself contains many serious inconsistencies and flaws;
  • the Study authors themselves recognise that it has been under resourced and that the results are not reliable for large renewables penetration; and
  • Ireland’s policy regarding renewable development in light of changed economic circumstances and international competitiveness be re-examined and a robust techno-economic analysis be undertaken.

NEPPC submits that the project is not proposed to address an immediate or recognised strategic or national electricity demand or shortfall nor is the project considered necessary or justified on the grounds of imperative reason of overriding public interest. The proposed project is clearly based upon significant commercial interest. NEPPC has no objection to EirGrid seeking to enhance the existing electricity infrastructure to facilitate an all island and trans-boundary exchange of electricity but only where it is done in accordance with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area and where it can be demonstrated that the proposed project would not result in adverse effects on the receiving environment.

At the Oral hearing in may 2010, when the first and only opportunity for the public to challenge the strategic need occurred, counsel on behalf of NEPPC requested that the strategic need for the NSIP be justified by the DCENR and Mr Bob Hanna, chief technical manager of the project within DCENR was called as a witness to the oral hearing in June 2010. But he refused to attend and the strategic need was refused to be discussed.

Scale of the NSIP

It should be noted that the Government White Paper from the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources ”Delivering a Sustainable Energy Future for Ireland” describing The Energy Policy Framework 2007 – 2020 (March 2007) formulates as part of the Strategic Goal 1:

“3.2.3. We will ensure delivery of the second North-South electricity connector by 2011 which will more than double the existing cross border electricity transfer capacity to over 680 MW.”

The EirGrid submission to an Oireachtas Committee Report (February 2008) declares on page 12:

“EirGrid is also developing a new high capacity transmission link to Northern Ireland which will facilitate greater access to generation in Northern Ireland and the UK (via Northern Ireland’s interconnector to Scotland).Such enhanced links with Northern Ireland are likely to deliver a 200-300 MW capacity benefit, along with greater market integration and scope for integration of renewable generation”

These historical statements clearly show that a transmission capacity for the N-S Interconnector of a maximum of 340 MW is planned.

EirGrid claimed in the original planning application that a 1500MW NSIP was necessary. This contradicts its own published data on the requirements for the NSIP, which state that 750MW is the maximum requirement.


EirGrid will againbe making the claim for a need for a 1500 MW interconnector in the application being prepared for resubmission. This is despite the fact that two significant shifts have occurred:

  1. The Electricity Supply Board (ESB) submission to the recent DCENR Energy Green Paper highlighted a number of major concerns related to EirGrid’s Grid 25 strategy for upgrading the electricity grid infrastructure. These concerns carry significant weight in light of the fact that ESB is actually the asset owner of the transmission grid. The main issues outlined by ESB are that:

The scale of the Grid 25 plans far exceeds what is now actually needed. Grid 25 is founded on a projected 60% increase in overall electricity demand by 2025, whereas EirGrid’s own latest projections now declare a mere 5% projected increase.

The significant reduction in overall demand results in a reduction in the level of renewable energy required to meet our binding EU targets. Hence there is a need to reassess the timing and scope of plans for many of the Grid 25 initiatives.

  1. In the planned application resubmission EirGrid itself has taken out the originally planned substation at Kingscourt in Cavan, because of the lack of demand for at least a decade.

NEPPC has argued consistently that 500-700MW is more than adequate. This would reduce the technical costs significantly, and make it the undergrounding option even more compelling.

  1. Failure to objectively examine all technology alternatives, especially the rapidly evolving option of underground cable technology (UGC)

EirGrid, to this day, refuses to entertain undergrounding as a feasible technology, despite the fact that it is removing the substation from the application to be resubmitted; despite the fact that it is an interconnector, and despite the fact that VSC-HVDC underground cable technology has progressed considerably since 2007.

NEPPC has communications from EirGrid, as far back as 2007 statingthat EirGrid would not consider UGC as a technology alternative. It has refused to move from this position, despite the fact that, in particular, the Meath-Tyrone report, commissioned by the Government highlights quite clearly that an underground option is feasible and reliable.

Excerpts from the World Bank review are relevant to the North-South interconnector project:

‘Modern HVDC systems combine the good experience of the old installations with recently developed technologies and materials. The result is a very competitive, flexible and efficient way of transmitting electrical energy with a very low environmental impact.

· The need for ROW (Right Of Way) is much smaller for HVDC than for HVAC, for the same transmitted power. The environmental impact is smaller with HVDC.