Seán Conlan (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

600. To ask the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the reason EirGrid has not consulted with the communities affected by the North-South interconnector regarding specific underground route options. [4660/15]

Seán Conlan (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

601. To ask the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he will direct EirGrid to ensure that specific underground route options have been determined and that the communities of counties Monaghan, Cavan and Meath have been consulted with before EirGrid makes any fresh application to An Board Pleanála in respect of the North-South interconnector. [4661/15]

Alex White (Dublin South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 600 and 601 together.

One of the key concerns arising from public consultation processes on EirGrid’s Grid25 Strategy has been the extent to which undergrounding options have been explored, so as to allow ready comparison with overhead line solutions, for individual projects, including the North South (N/S) transmission line project.In January 2014, an Independent Expert Panel (IEP) was established to oversee the integrity of the process being undertaken by EirGrid to report on comprehensive, route-specific studies of overhead and underground options for both the Grid Link and Grid West projects. The studies are required to take account of environmental (including visual amenity) impacts, technical efficacy and cost factors. The IEP will comment on the completeness, objectivity and comparability of the studies and reports.

The Panel was also asked to consider what work it might usefully undertake to establish whether or not there has been parity of treatment between the N/S project and the Grid West and Grid Link projects, including route-specific studies of overhead and underground options. Having considered and discussed all of the material provided by EirGrid, in July 2014 the Panel provided its unanimous opinion that, in all material respects, what has already been done on the N/S project is compatible with the methodologies now being employed on the Grid West and Grid Link projects.

The N/S project is part of an on-going process which is expected to be subjected to rigorous assessment as part of the planning processes in both jurisdictions (Ireland and Northern Ireland). I understand that EirGrid, prior to submitting its planning application, will re-engage with communities in Meath, Cavan and Monaghan. I am advised that this will involve opening offices in Navan, Kingscourt and Carrickmacross and that EirGrid also intend to appoint dedicated community liaison officers to ensure all interested stakeholders are engaged with fully.

Seán Conlan (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

602. To ask the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if the expert panel in reaching their decision on 1 July 2014 were aware of the existence of the Tobin report which was published on his Department's website on 3 July 2014. [4662/15]

Alex White (Dublin South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

An Independent Expert Panel (IEP) was established in January 2014 to oversee the integrity of the process being undertaken by EirGrid to report on comprehensive, route-specific studies of overhead and underground options for both the Grid Link (GL) and Grid West (GW) projects. On 2 May 2014, the IEP finalised the Terms of Reference for the studies and published the Terms of Reference on 7 May 2014. While the North South Transmission Line project (N/S) is outside of the IEP's Terms of Reference, the IEP did agree, on foot of a request by my predecessor, to provide an opinion on the compatibility of the methodologies to be employed on the GL and GW projects with what has already been done on the N/S project up to and including 2 May 2014, being the date that the Panel decided to examine the N/S project.

Having considered and discussed all of the material, the Panel issued a statement on 1 July 2014, indicating its unanimous opinion that, in all material respects, what had already been done on the N/S project is compatible with the methodologies now being employed on the GW and GL projects. While the Panel acknowledged that no two grid infrastructure projects are identical, and that some non-comparabilities are likely to arise when assessing the potential environmental impacts, technical efficacy and cost factors, the Panel was of the opinion that no material differences in the methodologies arise.

It is important to note that the Tobin report referred to in the Question relates specifically to the GW project and is one of several pieces of analysis undertaken at the request of the IEP. In other words, the Tobin report was undertaken within the methodologies being employed on the GW project in accordance with Terms of Reference set by the IEP.