As you may be aware, there has been an active campaign on Anglesey against National Grid's proposals for a second line of pylons across Anglesey. Although the project is now officially cancelled, I am fearful that when the power station project is resurrected, or there is significant development of renewables, National Grid will return with exactly the same proposals. I want to make sure that doesn't happen, and see that the Planning Inspectorate, being ultimately responsible for making a recommendation to the Secretary of State, has a significant role to play. In general, the people of Anglesey are supportive of inward investment, so this is not a NIMBY campaign. I would like to see greater investment, so that electricity transmission does not harm other industries such as tourism and agriculture or effect house values. When you wrote the North Wales Connection Scoping Opinion, of behalf of the Secretary of State, you explicitly put impact on property value out of scope. However, when you wrote the similar Opinion for the similar project in Cumbria, there was no mention of property value being out of scope (so, therefore, was in scope). It strikes me as fundamentally unfair that you should treat Anglesey this way. The vast majority of the impact from the Wylfa Newydd project on property value derives from the grid connection. It is recognised in the Assessment of Sustainability for National Policy Statement EN-5 that electricity infrastructure can have a negative impact on property value, and this contributes to the negative socio-economic impact, estimated at £500 million. I request that in future the impact on property value is explicitly in scope. When National Grid financially appraise alternative options for the connection, they do so using a methodology of their own design. This does not follow the rigour of similar appraisals arising from Government policy. For example, the business case for the proposed deposit return scheme for plastic bottles puts a financial value to improved visual amenity from reduced littering. However, National Grid do not put a financial value to reduced visual amenity caused by pylons. If you, as the examiner of National Grid’s proposals, were to insist that the Treasury Green Book be used as the basis for all their financial analysis, I am convinced that the underground option would be selected. The public consultation was unsatisfactory. If you, as examiner, had engaged during the project development process, and understood the strength of feeling against pylons voiced during the consultation, I feel National Grid might have actually listened, and, more importantly, acted on that feedback. If you were to “host” the consultation feedback process, just as you host the Relevant and Written Representations, I think the public would have greater confidence in being given a “fair trial”. National Grid have way too much control over how they "play" the development process within existing guidelines, and I hope that you, and Ofgem, are able to rein them in, and in the process protect Anglesey.
Fel y gwyddoch, tynnwyd Prosiect Cysylltiad Gogledd Cymru (NWC) yn ôl gan yr Ymgeisydd ym mis Chwefror 2019; felly, o ganlyniad, nid yw’r Arolygiaeth Gynllunio yn cymryd unrhyw gamau pellach ar y cais hwnnw. Os bydd y Grid Cenedlaethol yn penderfynu dilyn cynnig ar gyfer Prosiect Cysylltiad Gogledd Cymru, neu gynnig tebyg, bydd Tudalen Prosiect newydd yn ymddangos ar wefan yr Arolygiaeth Gynllunio, lle bydd yr holl ddogfennau’n cael eu cyhoeddi. Bydd yn ofynnol, ymhlith pethau eraill, i’r Ymgeisydd gynnal ymgynghoriad statudol cyn cyflwyno cais i’w archwilio. Mewn perthynas â’r sylwadau sydd wedi’u cynnwys yn eich e-bost, rydym yn eich cynghori i’w codi’n uniongyrchol â’r Grid Cenedlaethol os bydd unrhyw gynnig yn codi yn y dyfodol. Nid yw Rheoliadau Cynllunio Seilwaith (Asesu Effeithiau Amgylcheddol) 2017 yn ei gwneud yn ofynnol i Ymgeisydd ofyn am Farn Gwmpasu gan yr Ysgrifennydd Gwladol. Fodd bynnag, gall Ymgeisydd ofyn am un os yw’n credu bod angen hynny. Os gwneir cais o’r fath, bydd yr Arolygiaeth Gynllunio, ar ran yr Ysgrifennydd Gwladol, yn ceisio barn ymgyngoreion statudol (megis Cyngor Sir Ynys Môn a Chyfoeth Naturiol Cymru) ynghylch yr hyn y maent yn ystyried y dylid ei gynnwys yn Natganiad Amgylcheddol yr Ymgeisydd. Rhoddir ystyriaeth lawn i’r ymatebion hyn wrth gwblhau’r Adroddiad Cwmpasu ac fe’u cynhwysir fel atodiad. Yn amlwg, gan nad oes cais gerbron yr Arolygiaeth, ni ellir gwneud unrhyw sylwadau ar gynnwys unrhyw Farn Gwmpasu yn y dyfodol, os gofynnir am un. Nid oes gan yr Arolygiaeth unrhyw awdurdodaeth i “gynnal” ymgynghoriad cyn ymgeisio gan Ymgeisydd. Mae’r gofyniad i ymgynghori, a’r holl faterion cysylltiedig, yn gorwedd gyda’r Ymgeisydd yn unig, o dan Ddeddf Cynllunio 2008, ac mae hyn yn helpu i sicrhau bod yr Ymgeisydd yn derbyn adborth uniongyrchol ar eu cynigion, gan eu galluogi, felly, i ystyried y sylwadau a wnaed. As you are aware, the North Wales Connection (NWC) Project was withdrawn by the Applicant in February 2019; therefore, as a result, no further action is being taken by the Planning Inspectorate on that application. Should National Grid decide to pursue a proposal for the North Wales Connection Project, or a similar proposal, a new Project Page will appear on the Planning Inspectorate’s website where all documents will be published. The Applicant will be required, amongst other things, to carry out statutory consultation before an application is submitted for examination. In relation to the comments included in your email, we advise you to raise them directly with National Grid if any future proposal arises. The Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 do not require an Applicant to request a Scoping Opinion from the Secretary of State (SoS). However, an Applicant may seek one if it considers necessary. If such a request is made, the Planning Inspectorate, on behalf of the SoS, will seek the views of statutory consultees (such as the Isle of Anglesey County Council and Natural Resources Wales) about what they consider should be included in the Applicant’s Environmental Statement. These responses are fully considered when finalising the Scoping Report and are included as an appendix. Clearly, as there is no application before the Inspectorate, no comments can be made on the contents of any future Scoping Opinion, if one is requested. The Inspectorate has no jurisdiction to “host” an Applicant’s pre-application consultation. The requirement to consult, and all associated matters, lies solely with the Applicant, under the Planning Act 2008, this helps to ensure that the Applicant receives direct feedback on their proposals, therefore enabling them to take account of the comments made.

Anglesey Says No to Pylons - Various Parties

Further to our telephone conversation this morning ,for completeness I would be grateful if you could kindly confirm -:

1. that affected parties (i.e owners and occupiers ) are interested parties and don’t need to register with the Planning Inspectorate (and accordingly will be directly contacted by the Planning Inspectorate to be informed of timescales and given the opportunity to make representations and attend at hearings ? Also, will such contact be made by ordinary post? )

2. whether there is guidance on the requirement for a DCO applicant to -:
a)act reasonably when approaching affected parties and to meaningfully engage to seek consensus on achieving voluntary agreements (on a consensual basis) without any attempt to influence in respect of specifying/imposing time limits (or in any other way) in advance of a DCO being granted (to seek to achieve such voluntary agreements)
b) continue to meaningfully seek reasonable voluntary agreements for a specific period in the event of (and subsequent to ) a DCO being granted (instead of merely going through the motions of issuing voluntary document templates so as to indicate an attempt to comply with the process requirements with little or no intention of entering into purposeful discussions to achieve reasonable consensus on the same, and in the event of no agreement being completed with the premediated aim of imposing compulsory purposes as soon as possible in the event of being granted a Development Consent Order.
c) to duly recompense affected parties (such as landowners & occupiers) in respect of any reasonable loss or expense (including professional fees) incurred in respect of the DCO application (and in the event of the DCO being granted in consequence of scheme operations) without imposing or specifying limits .

3. whether there is any redress /sanctions that are available to be imposed (and/or a dispute resolution process other than in respect of Compensation ) in the event of a DCO being granted and the “applicant “ subsequently acting unreasonably (potentially abusing powers) e.g. by not seeking to achieve voluntary agreements within a specific period on a consensual & reasonable basis.
In relation to point 1, the definition of an Interested Party (IP) is contained within Section 102 of the Planning Act 2008 (as amended). The Planning Inspectorate will write to anyone who it considers to be an IP to invite them to the Preliminary Meeting (PM). We will also provide IP’s with the confirmed timetable following the PM, which will set out the deadlines for the submission of evidence, and they will be invited to attend hearings. Where possible, we will send notification by e-mail. If we do not have an e-mail address we will issue correspondence by post.

In relation to point 2, please see attached guidance issued by the Department of Communities and Local Government relating to procedures for Compulsory Acquisition: [attachment 1].

Finally, in relation to point 3, neither the Planning Inspectorate nor the Secretary of State become involved in disputes relating to the compensation or the implementation of any Compulsory Acquisition powers that may be granted in a Development Consent Order. We would suggest that your clients obtain their own legal advice on such matters if they are of concern.

I hope this is of assistance.

Davis Meade Property Consultants - Eifion Bibby

I notice that some of the Wylfa Newydd RRs are over 500 words - is this not a hard limit?
Advice Note 8.2: How to register to participate in an Examination ([attachment 1]) states on page 3 that:

There is no word limit on how much to include in your Relevant Representation; however, the Examining Authority may only have a short period of time to read all the Relevant Representations before the Preliminary Meeting. As such, you should make sure your main points are clearly set out. We recommend the use of bullet points and headings to highlight your main points.

While information on the online registration form states:

Here you must provide an outline of the main points you intend to make in relation to the application. Failure to provide this will mean that we are unable to register you as an Interested Party. Please aim to limit this section to no more than 500 words.

Taking this information in to consideration, there is no maximum word limit; however we encourage parties to provide a concise summary of their opinions.

Jonathan Dean

Query 1 (from Jonathan Dean by e-mail on 12 September 2018)

Many thanks for starting to load the DCO documents. I understand from them that I should now not correspond with them anymore but only with you

I have spotted some errors in the documents:

a link to their old documents on the project website which does not work
the maps for Clorach Fawr do not correspond with emails they have sent me or the land over which they seek rights

These are probably just typos and/or minor errors. Should I provide details now or wait for submitting my written representation?

Query 2 (from Jonathan Dean by e-mail on 17 September 2018)

I am in the process of preparing my Relevant Representation. Will it be possible to include photos and tables?

Query 3 (from Jonathan Dean by e-mail on 18 September 2018)

When will sections 5.2 - 5.9 be loaded? These are some of the ones we have waited a long time for
It is still open to you to correspond directly with the developer, should you wish. However matters relating to the DCO application should be sent to the Planning Inspectorate.

If you feel that there are errors within the Applicant’s documentation you may wish to include these matters in your Relevant Representation (RR).

The purpose of the Relevant Representation is to summarise the points which you agree and/or disagree with about the application. Whilst we do not actively encourage the submission of photos and tables as part of a RR, as there is an opportunity to submit a Written Representation to elaborate on those matters during the course of the Examination, we would not explicitly refuse to accept them at the RR stage.

The views put forward in RR are used by the Examining Authority to help inform their initial assessment of the principal issues.

The application documentation is still in the process of being uploaded; this will be completed as soon as practicable.

Jonathan Dean

I live in Tregele the closest village to wylfa, im horrified by the prospect of a second ungodly row of pylons in my back garden ( literally) , if there is anything the inspectorate can do to assist the local community it will be very welcome, im not againt the wylfa B but for heavens sake get the cables buried
The North Wales Connection application was submitted to the Planning Inspectorate (the Inspectorate) on 7 September 2018. A decision whether the application should be accepted for Examination will be made by no later than Friday 5 October 2018.

If the project is accepted for Examination you will be able to register as an Interested Party.

Becoming an Interested Party gives you the right to make representations about the application, attend meetings and hearings, stay informed of the progress of the Examination and be given notification of the final Decision.

Each individual that wishes to become an Interested Party will need to make a Relevant Representation; the Applicant has a duty to notify the local community on how to register as an Interested Party.

For more information about how and when you can have your say, please see our Advice Note 8.2: How to register to participate in an Examination

[attachment 1]

[attachment 2]

Kevin Otten

What are these ‘hundreds of changes’ Horizon have made to accommodate the second pylon route across Ynys Môn? They only need to make one change - listen to the voice of the Islanders and put the cables underground
The North Wales Connection application was submitted to the Planning Inspectorate (the Inspectorate) on 7 September 2018. A decision whether the application should be accepted for Examination will be made by no later than Friday 5 October 2018. Amongst other matters, the Inspectorate will be considering the adequacy of the Applicant's pre-application consultation.

If the project is accepted for Examination you will be able to register as an Interested Party.

Becoming an Interested Party gives you the right to make representations about the application, attend meetings and hearings, stay informed of the progress of the Examination and be given notification of the final Decision.

Each individual that wishes to become an Interested Party will need to make a Relevant Representation; the Applicant has a duty to notify the local community on how to register as an Interested Party.

For more information about how and when you can have your say, please see our Advice Note 8.2: How to register to participate in an Examination

[attachment 1]

[attachment 2]

Gwynfor Roberts

I am very unhappy with the National Grid's proposals for taking electricity from Wylfa Newydd and would like the chance to submit my comments during the Planning Application
The North Wales Connection application was submitted to the Planning Inspectorate (the Inspectorate) on 7 September 2018. A decision whether the application should be accepted for Examination will be made by no later than Friday 5 October 2018.

If the project is accepted for Examination you will be able to register as an Interested Party.

Becoming an Interested Party gives you the right to make representations about the application, attend meetings and hearings, stay informed of the progress of the Examination and be given notification of the final Decision.

Each individual that wishes to become an Interested Party will need to make a Relevant Representation; the Applicant has a duty to notify the local community on how to register as an Interested Party.

For more information about how and when you can have your say, please see our Advice Note 8.2: How to register to participate in an Examination

[attachment 1]

[attachment 2]

Andria Massey

I am writing with regard to the North Wales Connection project to express my deepest concern about the actual, potential and perceived negative impacts a second high voltage overhead power line will have on Anglesey. Constructing a second line from Wylfa to Pentir in addition to the existing one will create a ‘no go’ corridor dissecting this beautiful island, not to mention concerns about the adverse effects due to exposure to electro-magnetic pollution. In his scoping opinion the Secretary of State identifies issues that are of deep concern to the island population and also visitors who come to enjoy the natural beauty of Anglesey. They come to escape the industrial environments of Manchester, Liverpool and Warrington not to be confronted by unsightly overhead power cables and monster pylons. The negative visual impact will inevitably threaten the status of Anglesey as a popular tourist destination.

The precise route of the electricity transmission line and location of individual pylons have not been determined and it is therefore of critical importance to fully take into account the island’s opposition to an overhead line. If National Grid ignore the voice of the people directly affected by this project, history will repeat itself again, as so many times before. Over the past three hundred years or so, Wales has made a substantial contribution to the economy of the UK, be it through the extraction of mineral resources (e.g. slate, copper, coal) or the provision of water, and as a consequence has been left with a legacy of industrial pollution and extinction of culture. A second line of monster pylons would be another example. The electricity transported will benefit England, but Anglesey will have to bear the cost. This is grossly unfair and raises the question of equity across the four nations of the UK. For example, an approximately 33km long underground high voltage cable has been installed across the Wirral peninsula. Why can this not be a viable option for Anglesey? This island is unique in terms of its stunning coastline and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and we therefore have a moral duty to protect this precious asset against increasing industrialisation, not just for now, but for generations to come. Higher costs for the consumer must not be cited as a reason to go for the cheapest option, as many are willing to pay slightly more for their electricity if that means that jewels like Anglesey can be spared a second line of monster pylons.

The Scoping Report raises further issues. For example, in the section ‘Undergrounding cables’ 2.61 Para 2.4.14) it states that the ‘Preferred Route Corridor Report’ concluded that cables would be installed underground through the Anglesey AONB and across the Menai Strait, and yet, there is no further reference within the report to undergrounding within the Anglesey AONB and how users of the Anglesey Coastal Path might be affected. In Appendix 14.2 it is proposed that effects on house prices are scoped out for all components and all stages of the proposed development, as the existing line forms part of the existing baseline and should therefore be considered in that context. I fail to understand the logic of this argument, as two power lines, one even bigger than the first, obviously will have more than twice the negative visual impact.

Another issue relates to the National Grid’s lack of engagement with relevant stakeholders, in particular the Isle of Anglesey County Council and the island population. The role of the tourism sector must be fully recognised as well as the well-being of key natural and historic environment resources. They are crucial to maintain the area's status as a visitor destination. In this respect it is worrying that there is no reference made to: the AONB setting between Wylfa and Rhosgoch, the Mynydd Mechell Special Landscape Area (SLA) within the scoping corridor and the direct impact through the route alignment, Parciau SLA or the AONB setting, Maltraeth Marsh and the surrounding SLA, Southern Anglesey Estateland SLA, important woodlands, topography and the setting of Snowdonia National Park.

Undergrounding high voltage power lines has become the default position in other European Countries, as for example in Germany’s federal state of Bavaria where the people’s concerns have been taken seriously. When will National Grid listen to the people’s voice in Anglesey?
Thank you for your email of 6 September 2018.

The North Wales Connection application was submitted to the Planning Inspectorate (the Inspectorate) on 7 September 2018. A decision whether the application should be accepted for Examination will be made by no later than Friday 5 October 2018.

As part of the acceptance process, the Inspectorate will request the relevant local authorities’ views on adequacy of the consultation. The local authorities should also take into account any comments made by stakeholders to them when they submit their comments on whether the developer has fulfilled its consultation duties. Comments relating to the adequacy of consultation will be taken into account when the Acceptance Inspector decides whether to accept the application for Examination.

Please note that this response relates solely to the comments you have made in relation to the applicant’s consultation; the remainder of your e-mail relates to the merits of the proposed development, which cannot be considered at this stage. Should the application be accepted by the Inspectorate for Examination, the applicant has a duty to notify the local community on how to register as an Interested Party. Comments relating to the merits of the application can be made at that stage.

The process under the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008) has been designed to allow members of the public and statutory stakeholders to participate in the Examination of all DCO applications so that anyone interested in the proposed developments, their potential impacts and any relevant matters can be fully engaged in the Examination process.

Dr Marion Jones

Various enquiries by email from Jonathan Dean concerning the scoping opinion
Advice given by email on 30 August 2018:

Enquiry 1: The environmental impact assessment shall identify, describe and assess in an appropriate manner, in the light of each individual case, the direct and indirect significant effects of a project on ... (d) material assets". "material assets" would include property? Please advise if I have interpreted this correctly.

Response: The Inspectorate is unable to provide advice on the interpretation of legislation.

Enquiry 2: Can I make a suggestion to improve the planning process. Before the scope of the Environmental Statement is locked down, the public should be consulted;

Response: The scoping process is governed by the Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017. As part of the process the Inspectorate, on behalf of the SoS, is required to consult with the consultation bodies as defined in the regulations. There is no requirement to consult with the public.

Enquiry 3: Is there a process to challenge the scope? If so, I would think it is better to do this before the DCO is submitted so Grid have an opportunity to respond.

Response: The Scoping Opinion is the SoS’s opinion as to the scope, and level of detail, of the information to be provided in the Environmental Statement. There is no process to challenge the SoS’s opinion. Should you have any views on the proposed assessment scope we suggest you contact the Applicant directly.

Enquiry 4: Impact on property value.

Response: It is for the Applicant to interpret the content of the SoS’s Scoping Opinion and undertake the assessment accordingly.

Enquiry 5: I understand from BEIS that the Scoping Opinion is in fact the work of PINS rather than the SoS. Is there not a potential conflict of interest?

Response: The Scoping Opinion is issued by the Planning Inspectorate on behalf of the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government. The decision whether to grant development consent for an energy project is made by the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.

Jonathan Dean

Enquiry (from Jonathan Dean by email on 16 July 2018):

Can I make a suggestion for a way to improve the overall process for future projects? I am particularly impressed by PINS website presenting all questions etc, such as this, for the public to access. I am now being sent, by various members of the public, their submissions to the three stages of consultation by National Grid. The vast majority of which has not been reported in the consultation reports. Many of these have clearly involved considerable effort and technical, legal and economic consideration. Would it be possible for future projects that either PINS host the consultation repository, or the developer have to maintain a public repository? In this way the consultation would be more collaborative, and may be more acceptable to the public. Currently the vast majority of the public's effort is "lost" into National Grid's archive, and no one knows what others are saying. Collaborative efforts generally result in better acceptance of the outcomes.
Response (by email on 30 August 2018):

Thank you for your suggestion. The pre-application consultation is the responsibility of the applicant and therefore it would not be appropriate for the Planning Inspectorate’s website to host consultation documents. There is a risk that this could cause some confusion as any responses to the consultation should be sent to the applicant, and not the Inspectorate. It is for an applicant to determine the best way of presenting their consultation material and they consult the relevant local authorities on this in their Statement of Community Consultation.

Jonathan Dean

Enquiry (from Jonathan Dean by email on 22 August 2018):

I understand from National Grid that PINS conducted a consultation on the SoS Scoping Opinion. Please could I have more details of that consultation as I do not recall being consulted.
Response (by email on 30 August 2018):

Under the Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2009 that were in force at the time of the scoping request for the North Wales Connection (but have since been replaced by the Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017), the Planning Inspectorate was required to consult with the person who made the request and the consultation bodies prior to adopting a scoping opinion.

Consultation bodies are defined under the EIA Regulations as:
•a body prescribed under s42(1)(a) of the PA2008 (duty to consult) and listed in column 1 of the table set out at Schedule 1 to the Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations where the circumstances set out in column 2 are satisfied in respect of that body;
•each authority that is within s43 of the PA2008 (local authorities for purposes of s42(1)(b)); and
•if the land to which the application, or proposed application, relates or any part of that land is in Greater London, the Greater London Authority.

The Planning Inspectorate conducted this consultation upon receipt of the North Wales Connection scoping request in May 2016. The consultation bodies are detailed in Appendix 2 of the Scoping Opinion.

The Planning Inspectorate’s approach to identifying scoping consultation bodies is detailed in Advice Note three: EIA consultation and notification.

Jonathan Dean

Query 1 (from Jonathan Dean by e-mail on 9 July 2018)

I’m sorry but this is a circular argument !
National Grid requested impact on house prices be put out of scope
The SoS agreed
You put this in “the opinion”
I want to know why? And why is it in scope in Cumbria?

It cannot be right for National Grid to make up the rules and police themselves! There simply has to be some form of check!

Who wrote “the opinion”? Who signed it off? What was the decision making process?
Anglesey is being discriminated against, again!

Query 2 (from Jonathan Dean by e-mail on 10 July 2018)

Thank you for this

The scoping opinion may well have been in the public domain, but Grid never made reference to it in the public consultation, and certainly never drew attention to the fact that impact on house prices was out of scope (PMO please take note)

I am trying to find out the rational behind impact on house prices being out of scope. BEIS direct me to you, and you direct me to National Grid. Obviously Grid want as much as possible out of scope, so who made the decision? I had assumed it was the SoS - is this not the case? Someone, somewhere, other than National Grid must think this is reasonable, so who was it? And on what basis?

Grid are currently taking about two months to answer any questions, so if I wait for a reply from them the DCO will have been submitted!

Query 3 (from Jonathan Dean by e-mail on 11 July 2018)

I have just been reading the Scoping Opinion for Wylfa Newydd, as well as the North West Coast Connection, and , of course, the North Wales Connection.
Impact on house prices has not been put out of scope for Wylfa Newydd, but has for the North Wales Connection, and I have already mentioned the North West Coast
Horizon presumably consider their project will have an impact on house prices, and the SoS must agree, and yet National Grid believe the opposite, and the SoS agrees
Is this a question for PINS, Horizon or the SoS, and now that Horizon's DCO has been accepted for examination, is it still appropriate to ask them or wait for the inquiry?
Response (by e-mail dated 23 July 2018)

The Scoping Opinions for both North Wales Connection and North West Coast Connection were prepared by the Planning Inspectorate, on behalf of the Secretary of State.

The Scoping Opinion for North Wales Connection agreed to scope out impacts on house prices, for the reasons explained in paragraph 3.53. Whilst the Scoping Opinion for North Coast Connection did not make specific reference to impacts on house prices, the Applicant stated their intent to scope this matter out in paragraph 16.9.11 of the Scoping Report on the basis that “This is not a matter that requires assessment under the 2009 EIA Regulations and is not a material consideration in the determination of planning merits of the proposal”.

Notwithstanding the above, it is important to note that decisions within a Scoping Opinion are primarily based on the information provided by the Applicant and by having regards to the characteristics of the Proposed Development and the receiving environment. It does not necessarily follow that a decision made in relation to one Scoping Opinion would equally translate to another.

As you are aware, the Wylfa Newydd Nuclear Power Station application has been accepted. As you have already registered as an Interested Person for the Wylfa application, you may submit any additional views on the application that you would like to make known to the Examining Authority by the relevant deadline, which will be confirmed in due course.

Jonathan Dean

I know ignorance is no defence, but I have only just become aware of the Scoping Report and the SoS's Scoping Opinion, both on your website. Both of these were prepared prior to the 2016 consultation, but many facts in these documents were not made public during the consultation. I would go as far as to say that the very existence of them was not publicised during the consultation. This cannot be right and proper behaviour, but I am keen to know your views
The purpose of the scoping process is for an applicant to ask the Secretary of State its opinion as to the scope and level of detail of the information to be provided in the Environmental Statement. This will help inform the applicant’s Preliminary Environmental Information Report (PEIR). National Grid published their PEIR in October 2016 as part of their statutory consultation. The Scoping Report was published on our website on 9 June 2016 and the Scoping Opinion was published on 1 July 2016, so both were in the public domain prior to statutory consultation. As advised previously, any concerns you have about the Applicant’s consultation should be directed to Isle of Anglesey County Council who may wish to include them with their adequacy of consultation response.

Thanks

Jonathan Dean

I read with interest your advice given on April 12, 2017 regarding access rights. I understand there are two pieces of legislation that could be used:

s53 of the Planning Act 2008
s172 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016
To paraphrase, your advice was to use s53 of the Planning Act 2008. This states:

"Any person duly authorised in writing by the Secretary of State may at any reasonable time enter any land for the purpose of surveying and taking levels ..."

Please could you comment on the following:
1 - if access has been granted under s172 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016, ie against your advice, will the findings be considered acceptable in the DCO
2 - if access is being requested under s172 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016, what should the land owner do?

3 - if access is requested under s53 of the Planning Act 2008, what evidence does the requester have to provide to demonstrate that they are "authorised in writing by the Secretary of State"
1 - The Planning Inspectorate is not responsible for requests made under s172 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016. Decisions regarding whether or not to accept applications for examination are made in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Act 2008 and associated statutory instruments.
2 – The Planning Inspectorate is not responsible for requests made under s172 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016. As such the Inspectorate is unable to provide advice regarding this process.
3 – If the Secretary of State authorises access to land under s53 of the Planning Act 2008, it will issue an authorisation notice to the requester. The authorisation notice would also be published on the Planning Inspectorate website. Further information is available in Planning Inspectorate Advice Note Five: Section 53 – Rights of entry.

Jonathan Dean

I have just read the North Wales Connection scoping opinion. While it is clear dormice are out of scope, it is not clear if brown hare are out of scope also. Please could you advise?

With regard to sections 3.50 - 3.52 of the Scoping Opinion, can I interpret from this that the effect of EMFs in a high radon environment is also out of scope? Radon is particularly high in some areas of Anglesey, through which the proposed development will pass, and the combined effects of EMFs and radon together can be quite different to the two in isolation.
With regard to section 3.53 of the Scoping Opinion, whilst many projects are planned for Anglesey and will happen in tandem for the construction phase, this is not the case for the operation phase. There is only one project that will impact 30 km of Anglesey. Was it really the intent of the SoS to out-scope the operation phase of the proposed development? It would not be difficult to assign impacts to this single project as section 3.53 suggests.
It would appear to the the SoS's opinion that impact on house prices is out of scope for the North Wales Connection (Anglesey), but is in scope for the North West Coast Connection (Cumbria). I can think of no rational reason why this should be, and it seems a little unfair. Please could you explain this.
With regard to section 3.60 of the scoping Opinion, should the Wylfa Newydd project not go ahead, the existing line would be largely redundant and no doubt removed. As such, it could be argued, the existing line is not part of the 60 year baseline scenario. Please could you comment on how the cumulative baseline has been created and what, exactly has been determined to be the "do nothing" scenario against which proposed scenarios are compared.
The Scoping Opinion for the North Wales Connection Project was adopted by the Planning Inspectorate on behalf of the Secretary of State and in accordance with the Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2009. In making the Opinion the Planning Inspectorate had regard to information provided by the Applicant in its Scoping Report and to responses from consultation bodies. The purpose of the Scoping Opinion is to set out those aspects/matters which the Secretary of State considered could result in likely significant effects and so should be assessed by the Applicant and presented in their Environmental Statement (ES). Interpretation of the Scoping Opinion and preparation of the ES is a responsibility of the Applicant; accordingly if you have any comments on the approach to the assessment in the ES during the pre-application stage these should be directed to the Applicant.

Jonathan Dean

I read recently in the Wylfa Newydd PEIR that 41% of Anglesey adults had never been online.My concern is engaging them to participate in the National Grid examination. Could you comment on ways that you have effectively tackled this issue before?
If the application is accepted for Examination, members of the public who are unable to register online can request a paper copy of the Relevant Representation form. We will then communicate with those individuals by post throughout the Examination.

Unfortunately, when considering which deposit locations to use for access to documents during the Examination, we are unable to insist on hard copies in all locations. However, we will be looking for libraries in the vicinity of the Proposed Development that provide free internet access with printing facilities. We also understand that National Grid will be providing a hard copy of all application documents in the council offices and members of the public can request paper copies of documents directly from the Applicant, which may be subject to a cost.

Jonathan Dean

Project Update Meeting
Please see attached

National Grid - anon.

Cyfarfod diweddaru prosiect
Gweler yr atodedig

National Grid - anon.

There is an Ofgem publication that says the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy is the decision maker only for projects in England.
As the North Wales Connection and Wylfa Newydd applications fall under section 14 of the Planning Act 2008 (as amended) jurisdiction to determine the applications lies with the Secretary of State for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy.

Jonathan Dean

Will the application documents be available on your site before the application is accepted? The Horizon application was submitted on June 1st and the documents are not available yet (June 6th). If it is similar with National Grid, where the results of the pre-application consultation have never been published, any delay is eating into the 14 days for the local authority to respond to you on the adequacy of consultation. Until we see the consultation report, we don't know if we need to write to the authority. (Obviously we have already written to the LA about some issues, and there may be no further issues, but the lack of the report makes this impossible to determine). I don't mean to be critical, but I was expecting the application documents to be available to the public from the day of application, or have I misunderstood the process?
As explained in Advice Note 6 it is for the Applicant to decide when they wish for the application documents to be published. Although it is helpful for documents to be published on submission, it is not mandatory.

We will publish the application documents on our website as soon as practicable after receipt, providing the Applicant agrees. The speed at which an application is published can vary depending on the size of the application. However, regardless of whether or not the application documents are published during the Acceptance period, the local authority(ies) are sent a link to the Consultation Report so that they can provide us comments on the adequacy of the Applicant’s consultation within the 14 day period.

Jonathan Dean

Can I ask about how the decision will be made for both these projects (Wylfa Newydd and North Wales Connection). As both are essentially components of a single programme, will the decisions be made simultaneously as one is pointless without the other? Which SoS will (the decision maker) be? Wales or BEIS?
The Planning Inspectorate will examine the applications separately and make its recommendations to the Secretary of State within the statutory timeframes. While the Secretary of State has three months in which to determine the projects ultimately it will be for him to decide when to issue his decisions for each project. The recommendation reports will be sent to the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.

Jonathan Dean

Discussion regarding the s52 authorisation request process.
There are no statutory timeframes for the Planning Inspectorate to process a section 52 authorisation request, however previous experience has shown they take a minimum of 3 months to determine. It is a criminal offence for the recipient of a s52 notice to fail to comply with a notice without reasonable excuse.

National Grid - National Grid

In the attached press article, National Grid say they have shared 40,000 pages of technical information about the North Wales Connection. I have always meant to estimate how much stuff they have produced but never had the time. However I am sure they are correct. How is the general public supposed to find the time, or technical expertise, to meaningfully engage with such a quantity of information? My understanding of the Planning Act 2008 is that the consultation that is required under the Act is supposed to allow for such engagement. In your advice note nine you state:

"Clearly for consultation to be effective there will need to be a genuine possibility to influence the proposal and therefore a project should not be so fixed as to be unable to respond to comments from consultees"
In none of the consultations (2012, 2015 & 2016) has there ever been a "genuine possibility to influence the proposal" in a macro sense, only minor detail, and so it is reasonable to conclude that the consultation has not been "effective"
Paragraph 81 of the DCLG guidance on pre application consultation states:

"81. It is good practice that those who have contributed to the consultation are informed of the results of the consultation exercise; how the information received by applicants has been used to shape and influence the project"
So far, all we have seen is yet another glossy "sales" leaflet, not what I would consider results. How can a developer such as National Grid be allowed to so openly flout such good practice guidance? I accept it is only guidance, not mandatory, but to my mind this clearly demonstrates a breakdown in the relationship between NGET and the Anglesey public
The volume of consultation material for each application will vary depending on the scale of the scheme. The DCLG Guidance on the pre-application process suggests that consultation should be ‘engaging and accessible in style, encouraging consultees to react and offer their views’. Once the application has been formally submitted, compliance with the guidance will be an important consideration when deciding whether the application is of a satisfactory standard to proceed to examination.

The Applicant is required to submit a consultation report with their application and in this they should evidence how feedback from the consultation has influenced the proposals.

Jonathan Dean

Nodyn Cyfarfod - 17 Mai 2018 / Meeting Note - 17 May 2018

National Grid - anon.

Just to be clear, only one written representation per interested party will be allowed, even if this contains entirely different topics under relevant headings and para numbers. Is that correct?
We would expect Interested Parties (IP) to submit one Written Representation covering all the matters they wish to raise. However the Regulations do not prevent IPs from submitting multiple representations covering different topics if they so wish provided they are submitted by the deadline given in the Examination timetable.

An example of an Examination timetable can be viewed here. This shows, at Appendix A, that there is one deadline for Written Representations and then opportunities in the Examination to respond to the Examining Authority’s written questions and other parties representations. Please note we advise that clear and concise submissions add more value to the Examination.

Jonathan Dean

The issue I have drawn your attention to (in the emails of 3 and 4 April 2018) is not an issue for the Applicant but an issue for PINS. When advised of "targeted consultation" in Cumbria you advised NGET to consider wider consultation, however you did not do this in respect of Anglesey when informed of the same. My question is why are PINS treating the two projects differently?
The advice given in our note of 14 March 2017 needs to be read within the context of the changes proposed. Our meeting notes are not a full transcript of the meeting and the Applicant’s attention would have been drawn to the DCLG guidance on the pre-application process in terms of the appropriate level of consultation for change to proposals (see paragraphs 68-77). As it states in all of our meeting notes, any advice given does not constitute legal advice upon which the Applicant, or others, can rely. Therefore it is for National Grid to decide on the extent of any further consultation they decide to undertake.

Jonathan Dean

My concern about the Written Representation is that these will take time, so I need to start now. I have no intention of writing War & Peace, but there are several entirely distinct issues/themes, and want to be assured that I can submit more than one Written Representation.
Please note that there will only be one opportunity within the Examination timetable to submit your Written Representation. Information about the Examination and Written Representations is in Advice Note 8.4.

Jonathan Dean

Query (from Jonathan Dean by email on 5/4/18):

Re the following para (from the meeting note dated 22 September 2017):

"The Applicant advised that they are in contact with Horizon regarding which Welsh documents will be translated so that there is consistency between projects. This will then be passed to the local authorities for comment. The Applicant advised that they are considering placing all translated documents into one volume so they will be easy to find. The Inspectorate advised the Applicant to make this clear in the Guide to the Application."

Can I request that as well as placing all translated documents into one volume (I assume this refers to the Welsh versions) that all English documents are also made available in a format such that they are easy to find. Please advise the applicant of this.

I have just read the Planning Inspectorate’s Advice Note 8.2. Is there a limit to number of individual "relevant representations" an interested party can make? I have several, individual, distinct issues regarding the need, the options and the impacts of the proposed project which I feel would not be given justice if condensed into a single written submission, or would become too cumbersome.
In response to your concern about the ease of finding application documents, I can advise that for their last two applications to us (Hinkley Point C Connection and the Richborough Connection Project), National Grid have provided a Guide to the Application, which assists all parties in navigating the application documents. We have published the Richborough Guide as a good example document on our website to encourage other applicants to follow as we have found this very helpful. We have suggested that National Grid provide this for the North Wales Connection project and they have confirmed that they intend to do so; they will also provide hyperlinks to the documents on our website as the Examination progresses.

With regard to your query about Relevant Representations, the purpose of making a Relevant Representation is to register as an Interested Party so that you can participate in the Examination of the application. As it states in Advice Note 8.2 which you refer to, we recommend the use of bullet points and headings to summarise your concerns. Once the Examination has started you will then have an opportunity to submit a Written Representation to expand on the matters set out in your Relevant Representation.

If you do submit more than one Relevant Representation we will simply combine your comments into one representation.

Jonathan Dean

Query (from Jonathan Dean by email on 3 and 4 April 2018):

I have taken the following text from one of your notes about the North West Coast Connection (Meeting note, 14/03/2017) in Cumbria. The meeting was between PINS and National Grid.

"The Inspectorate advised that should targeted consultation be undertaken National Grid may want to consider providing the opportunity for all consultees to comment." "The Inspectorate advised that National Grid should keep the local community informed as much as possible." "National Grid explained that they are attending regular meetings with various stakeholder groups and will share further information with them as soon as they are able"

This is exactly what we want in Anglesey! National Grid have been conducting "targeted consultation" and yet all consultees are denied the opportunity to comment. National Grid have refused to establish a stakeholder reference group on the model they use in Cumbria. Why is Anglesey being treated differently to Cumbria?

Further to my email of yesterday, can I draw your attention to the following text from one of your meeting notes about the North Wales Connection (Meeting note, 10/02/2017). The meeting was between PINS and National Grid. "The Applicant informed the Inspectorate that any further consultation needed was likely to be targeted; for example around changes to specific pylon locations." So, when National Grid inform you they will be conducting "targeted consultation" in Cumbria, you advise them to: "... consider providing the opportunity for all consultees to comment." "... should keep the local community informed as much as possible." And yet when National Grid suggest exactly the same in Anglesey, you didn't advise them to do anything! So I ask again, why is Anglesey being treated differently to Cumbria?
The Applicant will be aware of the Guidance on the pre-application process and we will expect them to set out and justify their consultation in their consultation report, which we will check at Acceptance. If you have concerns about the consultation then, assuming you have already made the Applicant aware of your concerns, we would advise you to contact your local authority and set out why you think the Applicant is failing to conduct its consultation properly.

Your comments should be taken into account when the local authority sends the Inspectorate its comments on whether the Applicant has fulfilled its consultation duties. The local authority’s comments on the Applicant’s consultation will be taken into account when the Acceptance Inspector makes their decision whether to accept the application for Examination.

Jonathan Dean

I note the following section from EN-1

“The Planning Act 2008 aims to create a holistic planning regime so that the cumulative effect of different elements of the same project can be considered together. The Government therefore envisages that wherever possible, applications for new generating stations and related infrastructure should be contained in a single application … or in separate applications submitted in tandem which have been prepared in an integrated way.”

Please could you explain the logic behind the power station and the connection being considered as two separate projects. Please can you confirm that you will consider "the cumulative effect of different elements", ie both the power station and the connection, when addressing just part of the overall project ie just the connection.

I note from your meeting minutes that National Grid are sharing draft copies of the DCO and related documents with various consultees. Please could you pressure them to share these with the public. We have a lot of preparation to do if we are to be able to scrutinise them effectively, especially due to the flawed "consultation" process.

I understand that National Grid have made numerous changes to their proposals since they last consulted the public. They consider the changes to not be material. Can you assure me that they have made you fully aware of these changes and that you agree that they are not material?
As the Wylfa Newydd and North Wales Connection applications will be made by different applicants it is not possible for these to be made in a single application. The Examining Authorities will consider cumulative impacts when making their recommendations to the Secretary of State.

National Grid are not required to share any of their draft documents but if you wish to see a copy of their draft DCO I suggest you request this from National Grid. If they do not wish to provide this then, if the application is accepted, the first iteration of their draft DCO will be available on our website before the start of the Examination.

We would expect proposals to change as an applicant responds to consultation feedback. We will look at the consultation undertaken as part of our check of the application at Acceptance stage, as well as asking the local authorities for their views on the adequacy of the Applicant’s consultation. Guidance which sets out the requirements and procedures and consultation for major infrastructure projects can be viewed here: [attachment 1]

Jonathan Dean

Nodyn Cyfarfod - 19 Mawrth 2018 / Meeting Note - 19 March 2018

Isle of Anglesey County Council - anon.

I assume it is your role to ensure that National Grid adhere to NETS SQSS. Please can you confirm this for me.
If National Grid’s application is accepted for examination the Examining Authority (ExA) will conduct the examination in accordance with Planning Act 2008: Guidance for the examination of applications for development consent and assess the proposed development against the policy requirements of the energy National Policy Statements (NPS) EN-1 Overarching and EN-5 Electricity Networks Infrastructure. The ExA will examine the need for the project, any alternatives and assess whether there are any adverse impacts that outweigh the benefits of the project.

Jonathan Dean

What is the correct mechanism to present a petition to the Inspectorate?
In order for you to submit any representations for the Examining Authority to consider you will need to register as an Interested Party, if the application is accepted to proceed to Examination. Advice on how to register to participate in an Examination can be found here: [attachment 1]. The best way of submitting the petition would be as part of your Written Representation. Please note that we cannot accept links to websites however we could accept a screen shot showing the number of signatures.

Jonathan Dean

Nodyn Cyfarfod - 15 Mawrth 2018 / Meeting Note - 15 March 2018

National Grid

Nodyn Cyfarfod - 12 Ionawr 2018 / Meeting Note - 12 January 2018

National Grid - anon.

I have finally got from the project team a copy of the Statement of Community Consultation

Is this normally made available to the public?

It is not on the project website and if you had not told me they have to produce it, I would not have known about it. I had to ask several times before they sent me a link to it on their main website
The Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC) is available on National Grid’s website here: [attachment 1]. In accordance with s47(6)(za) of the Planning Act 2008 the SoCC should be made available for inspection by the public in a way that is reasonably convenient for people living in the vicinity of the land. In accordance with s47(6)(a) the SoCC should also be published in a newspaper circulating in the vicinity of the land.

How National Grid has met these requirements should be set out in their Consultation Report which will be submitted with their application and we will be looking at this as part of our compliance checks with s55 of PA2008.

Jonathan Dean

Nodyn Cyfarfod - 26 Medi 2017/ Meeting Note - 26 September 2017

Cyngor Sir Ynys Môn/ Isle of Anglesey C Council - anon.

Project update telecon meeting
Please see attached meeting note

National Grid - Eloise Frank

So the NWConnection is not yet a NSIP? They are telling the public it already is, and threatening compulsory purchase on this basis
As advised previously, NSIPs are defined in ss14 through s30A of the Planning Act 2008 (as amended). In the Non-Technical Summary of the Applicant’s Preliminary Environmental Information Report it states: “The connection project is an overhead line with a voltage greater than 132 kV, and is longer than 2km; hence the project is classed as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) under the Planning Act 2008.”

The application is therefore being progressed under the Planning Act 2008 and we will check that the application meets the criteria under s14(1)(b) and s16 once it is submitted.

Jonathan Dean

At what point in the development process does a project become a NSIP?

National Grid were telling the public that the NWC had the potential to be one in 2012, while it was one by 2015

As no DCO has been submitted, is it a NSIP yet?

I have spoken to many people who have basically been mislead. They think pylons are unstoppable as it is a NSIP so have not bothered engaging in the consultation. They do not know that a buried cable would not be a NSIP as information like this has never been publicised
It is for an applicant to decide on the design of their application, in consultation with the local community and stakeholders and taking into account the cost and effects on the environment.

NSIPs are defined in ss14 through s30A of the Planning Act 2008 (as amended). It will be for National Grid to show in their application for a Development Consent Order that the development falls under s14(1)(b) and s16.

Jonathan Dean

When National Grid submit their DCO and the LA provide their adequacy of consultation report, please could you outline the metrics you will look at and what form of communication is accepted

Specifically, are the following viewed as acceptable forms of communication about the project:

Letters
Phone calls
Public conversations
Email
Facebook posts
Tweets
Petitions
Other social media
Filled in template forms on paper
Ditto online

It would help me prepare for the DCO response.
In section 37(7) of the Planning Act 2008 it states that ‘“the consultation report” means a report giving details of-

(a) what has been done in compliance with sections 42, 47 and 48 in relation to a proposed application that has become the application,
(b) any relevant responses, and
(c) the account taken of any relevant responses.’

Once the application is submitted, and as part of our Acceptance check we will look at how the Applicant said they were going to consult the local community (which is set out in their Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC)), and what the Applicant describes what they did do.

We will be looking for evidence in the Applicant’s Consultation Report to demonstrate what they did. It is up to the Applicant to decide how to present any feedback they may have received via the methods you have listed below.

At Acceptance stage we must also have regard to any representations received from any local authority consultees about how the Applicant carried out consultation in the pre-application stage. We look at these responses to confirm whether the consultation has been carried out in accordance with the SoCC.

For further information you may wish to look at the Department for Communities and Local Government’s guidance on the pre-application process:

[attachment 1]

Jonathan Dean

Project update telecon meeting
Please see the attached meeting note

National Grid - anon.

Project update meeting 19 July 2017
See attached meeting note

National Grid

Query regarding targeted consultation
As the project has not yet been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate (the Inspectorate), we have no formal powers to intervene on consultees behalf. I would therefore encourage you to contact the developer directly to make your concerns heard as the Applicant has a statutory duty to take your views into account. However, if you feel your comments are not being taken into account, I would advise you to write to your local authority and set out why you think the Applicant is failing to conduct its consultation properly. Your comments should be taken into account when the local authority sends the Inspectorate its comments on whether the Applicant has fulfilled its consultation duties. The local authority’s comments on the Applicant’s consultation will be taken into account when the Acceptance Inspector makes their decision whether to accept the application for Examination.

A copy of your correspondence has been placed on our records and will be presented to the Inspector at Acceptance, together with the application documents and local authorities’ comments on the Applicant’s consultation.

After the decision has been made regarding whether to accept the application for Examination all documents used to inform the decision will be published on our website.

If the application for development consent is formally accepted you will be able to submit your views in relation to the project which will be considered by the Examining Authority during the Examination.

The Inspectorate has published a series of advice notes which explain the Examination process, including information on how to get involved; of particular interest are advice notes 8.1 to 8.5. These are available at: [attachment 1].

Pam Roberts

Query regarding targeted consultation
As the project has not yet been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate (the Inspectorate), we have no formal powers to intervene on consultees behalf. I would therefore encourage you to contact the developer directly to make your concerns heard as the Applicant has a statutory duty to take your views into account. However, if you feel your comments are not being taken into account, I would advise you to write to your local authority and set out why you think the Applicant is failing to conduct its consultation properly. Your comments should be taken into account when the local authority sends the Inspectorate its comments on whether the Applicant has fulfilled its consultation duties. The local authority’s comments on the Applicant’s consultation will be taken into account when the Acceptance Inspector makes their decision whether to accept the application for Examination.

A copy of your correspondence has been placed on our records and will be presented to the Inspector at Acceptance, together with the application documents and local authorities’ comments on the Applicant’s consultation.

After the decision has been made regarding whether to accept the application for Examination all documents used to inform the decision will be published on our website.

If the application for development consent is formally accepted you will be able to submit your views in relation to the project which will be considered by the Examining Authority during the Examination.

The Inspectorate has published a series of advice notes which explain the Examination process, including information on how to get involved; of particular interest are advice notes 8.1 to 8.5. These are available at: [attachment 1].

Jonathan Dean

Pins Teleconference with Isle of Anglesey County Council
See attached meeting note

Isle of Anglesey County Council - anon.

Project update meeting
Please see the attached meeting note

National Grid - Eloise Frank

Project update meeting
Please see the attached meeting note

National Grid - Eloise Frank

Project update meeting
Please see attached meeting note

Eloise Frank

The Planning Inspectorate attended a meeting called by the Secretary of State for Wales. The meeting agenda was concerned with the relationship between a potential third bridge crossing of the Menai Strait (the bridge) and the proposed North Wales Grid Connection project (the connector) which is in turn related to the Wylfa Newydd Nuclear Power Station Project (the power station)
Please see attached meeting note

Secretary of State for Wales - anon.

Confirmation sought about whether the National Grid's attempt to exclude EMFs from the scope of the Environmental Statement has been decided.

Query about the status of HM Government Code of Practice on Consultation (2008) in relation to National Grid's pre application duties.
We can confirm that the scoping opinion in relation to the North wales Connection project by National Grid was published on behalf of the Secretary of State, on 1 June 2016. The Scoping Opinion is available on the relevant project page of the National Infrastructure Planning website. The response, in relation to the request to scope out EMF, is at paragraphs 3.50 -3.51. The Secretary of State did agree to scope this out from the Environmental Statement, “on the basis that evidence is provided demonstrating that the specifications for the overhead line, SECs and underground cable (including tunnel head housing) comply with regulatory thresholds”. The applicant has proposed to include a separate EMF document with the DCO application to satisfy the requirements of the National Policy Statement (EN-5) and this will include evaluations of the EMFs, but it will not be part of the ES.

The Code of Practice on Consultation, published by HM Government in July 2008 sets out some general principles that the Government will follow in consulting on policy formulation. It is most relevant to how the Government consults on National Policy Statements, the legislation relevant to that is in s7 of the Planning Act 2008. This provision gives the Secretary of State a discretionary power to conduct public consultation on new or reviewed national policy statements.

The application of the Code of Practice, in terms of what a developer might do to satisfy its pre application duties in relation to a NSIP, is limited. However, it does set down some high level best practice advice that may be applicable in a general sense, to any consultation. The main focus for measuring the quality and compliance aspects of the developer’s public (community) consultation is the Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC). The legislative requirement that is applicable to how the community consultation should be arranged and conducted by a developer is set down in s47 of the Planning Act 2008.

If you have any views about the pre application consultation carried out by National Grid, in particular whether or not NG meets the standards in its published SoCC, then please forward these on to Gwynedd and Anglesey Councils for them to consider in the context of preparing their adequacy of consultation representation. We will ask them for this as soon as we receive an application and we will have regard to any views the Councils put forward during the acceptance stage of the process.

Hannah Huws

Cyflwyniad a roddwyd mewn digwyddiad allgymorth cyhoeddus yn Llangefni ar 4 Hydref 2016. Presentation given at a public outreach event in Llangefni on 4 October 2016.
Cyflwyniad ynghlwm. Presentation attached.

Anglesey Outreach - anon.

National Grid submitted draft documents to the Planning Inspectorate for comment.
Please see attached section 51 advice.

National Grid - Eloise Frank

Presentations about the DCO process were given to members of the public, Anglesey and Gwynedd Council members and Community Council members on 6th and 7th of September 2016.
See attached presentations

Public Outreach Events - anon.

Project update meeting with National Grid
Please see attached note

National Grid - Jacqui Fenn

Project update meeting with National Grid
Please see attached note

National Grid - Jacqui Fenn

Project update meeting with National Grid
Please see attached note

National Grid - Jacqui Fenn National Grid

Project update meeting with National Grid
Please see attached note

National Grid - Jacqui Fenn National Grid

National Grid sent their early draft Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC) to the Planning Inspectorate for comment.
The Planning Inspectorate provided the following advice:

In accordance with S47(6)(za) of the Planning Act 2008 (PA2008), it would be beneficial to explicitly state where the SoCC will be made available for viewing.

The SoCC doesn?t clearly explain the project until Page 4 of the document. The explanation provided on Page 4 is not entirely clear either as it does not elaborate on the type of proposal e.g. that it is a 400kV line, nor does it mention the potential height or length of the proposed scheme. The scale of the substation works and sealing end compounds have not been stated either. It would be beneficial to include this information, so as not to leave any ambiguity to those persons reading the document.

Para 2.5 refers to ourselves as the ?National Infrastructure Directorate?, we are now the ?Major Applications and Plans Directorate? therefore we suggest amending the wording to simply state ?the Planning Inspectorate?.

On Page 5 you refer to ?some part of our work associated with Wylfa?are known as associated development.? Is the associated development only regarding the Wylfa works, or do the associated development works also extend to connect the other generating stations?

On Page 6, in the second sentence you could insert ?draft? or alternative wording into the following sentence to make it clear that consultees still have the ability to influence the scheme: ?when a final proposal is ready for comment??

Within the ?Assessing environmental effects? box on Page 7 it would be beneficial to provide information on where the PEIR it can be found.

On Page 9, titled ?Who we?ll consult? ? it would be beneficial to state which bodies/persons will receive letters/letter-drops and which persons will be consulted via newspaper adverts or posters etc? We note that it says under ?landowners and residents in close proximity? that it ?could include, for example direct contact?, however this is not clear. Are you also able to provide further information under hard to reach groups?

Page 10 refers to information on ?When and how we?ll consult,? despite the suggestion of tailoring the information depending on where you live, all information should also be made available to those who wish to see it and this should be made clear. For instance a landowner in the south may still wish to make comments on a proposal in the north. A landowner may also want access to more detailed information than the Overview Report. How can people request the technical information? On this page you also state that you intend on consulting for eight weeks in autumn 2016. This may exclude visitors to the area during holiday periods who could be interested in getting involved in the consultation process, how will such visitors be provided with an opportunity to comment?

We appreciate that this is an early version of the draft SoCC, however, from Page 11 onwards will there be information on the start and end dates for consultation, dates of meetings and exhibitions and any other information such as the location of the information points and reference locations, as other projects have done so in their SoCCs? Are you consulting with the local authorities about the dates and venues?

There are low broadband speeds within this area and as a result it may be more difficult to access the documentation for the proposal online. It is good that you have included the proposal of providing a USB stick with the documents on to mitigate this issue.

Jacqui Fenn National Grid

We are considering the Scoping report which at the moment reflects the DCO (Wylfa to Pentir) and also refers to other work which is required for the project (Pentir Traws). Can you just confirm how you will deal with this in terms of consulting on the scoping ? will you consult just with community councils ? Wylfa to Pentir or will you consult with all community Councils ? Wylfa to Traws.
In Wales we would interpret relevant community councils as those being the host community council and the adjacent councils; in PINS we use GIS to undertake this task therefore it is of high spatial accuracy. If you state the Pentir Traws works are not part of the NSIP within the scoping report, but that you are providing the information for context and in order for readers to understand the potential for cumulative effects, then the community councils within which the Pentir Traws works are located would not be identified as ?host? community councils (and adjacent community councils would not be identified). If you are stating the Pentir Traws work is part of the NSIP then this would result in the identification of additional community councils host and adjacent community councils. Therefore the answer to your query is dependent upon how you describe the project within the scoping report.

As you are aware, we require a GIS shapefile of the project at least 10 working days in advance of scoping in order for us to identify prescribed consultees. The description of the project and any applicable plans within the scoping report must therefore match exactly the shapefile which you provide us.

National Grid - Jacqui Fenn

Project update meeting with National Grid
Please see attached note.

Jacqui Fenn

Project update meeting with National Grid
Please see attached note

Jacqui Fenn

Project update meeting with National Grid
Please see attached note.

National Grid - Jacqui Fenn

National Grid provided an overview of the project explaining how the proposal had developed over time and what actions needed to be taken to proceed.
Please see attached meeting note

National Grid

National Grid introduced their North Wales Connection
proposal.
See attachments.

National Grid - Gavin Crook