Daniel Monks
"As a interested party in relation to the proposed nuclear power station and over head power lines currently within very close proximity to my address , I have big concerns in respect of how close they are are actually going to be to my property this not only being horrendous to look at and totally ruin the look of the landscape there is the added nuisance of noise the existing line already makes noise during bad or windy weather and as you will be fully aware anglesey is one of the windiest places in the United Kingdom , I would also like to stress the lack of support in regards to people nearest ie myself has been terrible I was told that national grid would help me in planting trees and landscaping my garden to help in the overall impact nothing has happened in regards to this , I also have huge worries in respect of overall health being so close to more pilons and feel that they should go underground , I think overall no one has a problem with the power station it’s the over head power lines why ruin such a place of outstanding natural beauty it shouldn’t be allowed to happen at present on a good day I can see snowdon soon this will no longer be and all’s I will see is power lines however if they go underground I can continue to enjoy my home "

Sparkles Textiles on behalf of Gaynor Taylor Chapman
"Gaynor Taylor Chapman [redacted] 17/10/2018 Ref 229326-CS-20180731 RE North Wales Connection Project Confirmation of interest. To whom it may concern. Please find enclosed Confirmation of interest update. At this point I would like to express our deep concerns to the connection project, As I am sure you are aware the impact of this project has a profound affect on our property's. We will be surrounded by the pylons marooned in the middle [redacted] the island as it seems we are known . This will have an adverse affect on the property value, In my opinion deeming it all but worthless, my family have lived here for 30 years .Working hard on improvements , over the years to create a home and future for our children. I feel the Nation Grid are to destroy this . As a family this matter has been discussed many times. The not knowing is the hardest, As to the plans National Grid may have had over the years and seeming to not care less about the impact It will have on my family and their home. We as a family would like to know now, not in years, we have already lived in limbo for years as it is .We as a family do not wish to live between the pylons, But never imagined even thinking of leaving our home. A home full of memory's . We are not kept informed,We have had a couple of meetings ,that told us nothing only what they wanted to discuss ,no thought for our feelings or concerns or answers to our questions, with proper answers not just given the brush of, Just requested to obtain a land agent ,That National grid will not talk to ,As there not ready to discuss at this time .Until I assume permission is granted by the government. All this is very well but leaves us in limbo, [redacted] we try not to think of the effect of living in a construction zone for so long I can not say more strongly we do not wish to and would prefer to move . This I find ludicrous as the work already started and houses that have already been purchased by National Grid/Horizon,We all know its going to happen .Even I realise that we need this line for the power we are going to need in the future,I just selfishly wish this was affecting someone else and not my family. We as a family realise this letter will make no effect or be listened to, but felt we had to put pen to paper to express our concerns Regards Gaynor Talyor Chapman"

Jane Louise Chapman
"Jane Louise Chapman [redacted] 17/10/2018 Ref 229326-CS-20180731 RE North Wales Connection Project Confirmation of interest. To whom it may concern. Please find enclosed Confirmation of interest update. At this point I would like to express our deep concerns to the connection project, As I am sure you are aware the impact of this project has a profound affect on our property's. We will be surrounded by the pylons marooned in the middle [redacted] the island as it seems we are known . This will have an adverse affect on the property value, In my opinion deeming it all but worthless, my family have lived here for 30 years .Working hard on improvements , over the years to create a home and future for our children. I feel the Nation Grid are to destroy this . As a family this matter has been discussed many times. The not knowing is the hardest, As to the plans National Grid may have had over the years and seeming to not care less about the impact It will have on my family and their home. We as a family would like to know now, not in years, we have already lived in limbo for years as it is .We as a family do not wish to live between the pylons, But never imagined even thinking of leaving our home. A home full of memory's . We are not kept informed,We have had a couple of meetings ,that told us nothing only what they wanted to discuss ,no thought for our feelings or concerns or answers to our questions, with proper answers not just given the brush of, Just requested to obtain a land agent ,That National grid will not talk to ,As there not ready to discuss at this time .Until I assume permission is granted by the government. All this is very well but leaves us in limbo, [redacted] we try not to think of the effect of living in a construction zone for so long I can not say more strongly we do not wish to and would prefer to move . This I find ludicrous as the work already started and houses that have already been purchased by National Grid/Horizon,We all know its going to happen .Even I realise that we need this line for the power we are going to need in the future,I just selfishly wish this was affecting someone else and not my family. We as a family realise this letter will make no effect or be listened to, but felt we had to put pen to paper to express our concerns Regards Jane Louise Chapman"

The Corporation of Trinity House of Deptford Strond
"Trinity House is the General Lighthouse Authority for England, Wales, the Channel Islands and Gibraltar with powers principally derived from the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 (as amended). The statutory role of Trinity House as a General Lighthouse Authority includes the superintendence and management of lighthouses, buoys and beacons within our area of jurisdiction. Trinity House wishes to be a registered interested party due to the potential impact the project may have on navigation within Trinity Houses area of jurisdiction. Please direct correspondence regarding this application to the following email addresses: [redacted] "

Dafydd Roberts
"Hoffwn wneud sylw fel unigolyn, ond hefyd fel Cynghorydd Sir ward Bro Rhosyr sydd yn cynnwys Llanedwen. Yn Llanedwen mae lleoliad agoriad y twnel arfaethedig dan y Fenai. Mae pryderon lleol nad oes cynllun addas ar gyfer cludo’r deunydd a ddaw i’r wyneb o’r gweithgareddau twnelu. Rhagwelir difrod i’r ffyrdd, a thagfeudd ac anhawster am fisoedd/ blynyddoedd. Teimlir y dylai fod rhagor o ystyriaeth i symyd y deunydd ar y rheilffordd sydd yn gyfochrog a’r safle. Ni fu ymgynhori ar yr opsiwn hwn hyd y gwn i."

Sacha Rossi
"Dear Sirs, NATS anticipates no impact from the proposal and has no comments to make on the application. NATS is also content that the applicant, can proceed to take this statement as a SOCG with NATS and it confirms that is has no objections. Regards S. Rossi NATS Safeguarding Office NATS LTD Safeguarding Office 4000 Parkway Whiteley Fareham Hampshire PO15 7FL T?: 01489 444 687 E?: [email protected] "

Ann Bates Williams
"I want to object to the proposed development due to: 1 - the effect on the environment, in particular the visual environment 2 - health impacts from EMFs, in particular the results of Prof Dennis Henshaw of Bristol Uni 3 - the permanent effect on agriculture through land loss, restricted practice below oversails and health impacts on farm animals Far, far better would be underground or undersea"

Chloe Cook
"I wish for the pylon plan to be rejected on the island because visually interup the beautiful landscape. Putting the cables underground would be better as it is a more modern technology. "

Christine Davies
"I wish to object to NG proposed second row of pylons on the grounds that they will be a detrimental intrusion on the landscape. They will also be visible from the AONB and coast areas which will adversely effect the tourism industry which is import to the financially wellbeing of the local people. House prices will also be severely reduced by the presence of pylons. "

Christopher Boyd
"I believe that Pylons are detrimental to the unspoiled ountryside views and the areas of AONB and therefore goes against the principles of the Well Being of Future Generations Act. Other technology exists both underground and sub-sea which do not have the negative effects of pylons. I also believe that the consultations were not carried out in good faith by NGET who came with their own agenda taking no notice of local views "

Christopher Crompton
"I may be one of a few prepared to express support for National Grid's proposals, but I consider those behind the campaign against pylons are ill-informed and have unrealistic expectations. The beauty of Anglesey is its coastline and there is little inland of outstanding merit. National Grid have leaned over backwards to accommodate the views of islanders and gone as far as practically possible to mitigate the negative impacts of the pylon route. There are technical reasons apart from cost which make the laying of underground cables of the required capacity impracticable, and perhaps these have not been adequately explained by National Grid. If the case for eliminating pylons in central Anglesey is extended to other areas of the UK of similar visual outlook, the cost of our electricity would be enormously more than it is now. I'm not willing to shoulder that cost myself and I don't wish it on others."

Christopher Nash
"I am concerned about EMFs as I believe these are harmful to health and have young children. The new pylons will be even closer to my home than the existing ones. [Redacted] and near neighbours have died of cancer I am also concerned about the impact on property values and disruption during construction "

Dafudd Dafies
"I am against both pylons and nuclear power and will do anything to stop them coming"

David Jones
"Pylons are unfair because all the power is transmitted to the rest of the UK with no benifit for the people of Anglesey. Anglesey is self-sufficientin energy House prices will be drastically reduced by the presence of pylons. Some properties are already unsalable and will remain so. Pylons will be detrimental to the landscape and tourism. There is an alternative- the transmission cables should and coudle be under-grounded. "

Diane Allison
"Pylons are detrimental to the landscape and will spoil the view There are serious concerns about the impact on health particularly on childhood leukaemia The economy of Anglesey relies heavily on tourism I believe that a second row of pylons will deter tourist from visiting the island I feel that it is unfair that electricity is to be generated and transmitted across the island for the benefit of the rest of the UK with no benefit to the people of Anglesey Pylons will drastically reduce property prices. This is already happening causing some properties to be unsaleable"

Elaine Bentley
"More unsightly pylons will spoil this beautiful landscape which presently attracts thousands of visitors every year who contribute to the local economy and provide numerous jobs for the local communities.It is still unknown how dangerous these pylons are on peoples health and well being."

Hard Kevin Williams
"I object due to impact on health visual impact on the countryside impact on property values effect on the tourist industry effect on agriculture there are better options the consultation was seriously flawed"

Heulwen Renshaw
"The health issues are very important. There is a huge body of evidence that indicates that the incidents of cancer are raised amongst people who live close to overhead cables. Tourism is an import part of the eccomomy and wealth of the people of Anglesey. This will be seriously reduced by the increase in the number pylons. Overhead cables and pylons are visible from the AONB and are a detrimental impact on the landscape. There are many reasons to object to the proposed second row of pylons but for me the most important is the health risks associated with overhead power lines. The scientific research is inconclusive but nevertheless there is much anicdotal evidence pointing to cases of cancer in people on the island living close to pylons and overhead lines. Until there are clear results to the research no more risks should be taken. Especially as pylons are unnecessary because other, more up to date technology such as subsea is available. The Welsh “ Well-being of Future Generations Act” requires protection of culture, language and employment. Pylons will adversely effect tourism and property prices all of which will negatively impact on future residents of Anglesey. Throughout the Consultation Process National Grid failed to listen to the people of Anglesey. There was never any alternative options other than more pylons. Therefore, I believe the consultation was flawed. "

Ian Houghton
"I want to object to the proposals because: 1 - health impact 2 - visual impact 3 - tourism impact 4 - impact on house values 5 - impact on local businesses PUT THEM UNDERGROUND "

Jennifer Raffle
"I believe that a project which is of national interest should be paid for by all inhabitants equally. The erection of a second line of pylons across Anglesey will cost Anglesey residents a great deal more than it will cost those in other parts of the UK. House prices will fall and those involved with tourism will potentially lose business as our beautiful countryside is scarred by these giant industrial structures. These lines could be placed underground or in the sea. The claims that the cost is too high is spurious. Cost calculated over a period of 60 years, which is the projected life of Wylfa Newydd and shared between 26 million taxpayers is insignificant. Lines have been placed underground in other parts of the UK and a line has been placed under the sea to transfer electricity from Scotland to Norway. Present planning considerations cannot be seen as future proof. Remember Tryweryn? No one would dream of displacing people from a small Welsh valley in order to provide water for English residents nowadays and Liverpool council recently apologised to these residents for their actions. What is acceptable today will not necessarily be so tomorrow. We have to think of the children of the future. There are already questions arising about the safety of Pylons for those who live near them. Studies show a consistent link between proximity to pylons or high powered cables and increased risk of cancer, especially in children. Are we sure that it is fair to saddle our children with potential health problems? Asbestos, cigarettes, DDT, Thalidomide; the list of previously 'harmless' products is endless. The lines should either go underground or under the sea. "

Joanna Whitfield-Jones
"Other technologies exist such as underground or under sea which will not effect the natural beauty of the island and will not be in contravention of the Well-being of Future Generations Act which The rest of Wales and Anglesey County Council are obliged to follow. It sounds to me that NGET have come with their own agenda and only paid lip service to the concerns of the local population."

John Bentley
"More unsightly pylons will spoil this beautiful landscape which presently attracts thousands of visitors every year who contribute to the local economy and provide numerous jobs for the local communities.It is still unknown how dangerous these pylons are on peoples health and well being.You have an alternative option to ruining the natural beauty of this island which yes will cost more money but you can,t put a price on such beautiful countryside. Please make note on these important comments and act accordingly in everyone.s best interest"

Keith Wood
"I believe that the pylons will visually impair the landscape This will a detrimental effect on tourism. There will also be contaminated ground at the end of the lifetime of the pylons"

Linda Jones
"I am concerned about EMFs as I believe these are harmful to health and have young children. The new pylons will be even closer to my home than the existing ones. [Redacted] and near neighbours have died of cancer "

Margret Boyd
"I wish to object to the proposed second row of pylons because I have concerns that having a further row of pylons will set a president for future rows of pylons Other technologies exist and what is more in other parts of Europe and the UK cables are going underground or sub-sea. Therefore being an AONB Anglesey should be treated the same way. National Grids proposals are in contravention of the Well-being of Future Generations Act"

Megan Houghton
"I want to object to the proposals because: 1 - they are ugly 2 - they are dangerous 3 - they will destroy the beauty 4 - 13,000 signatures cannot be wrong "underground or undersea, the only place cables should be" "

Richard Griffith Jones
"I wish to object due to: 1 - health effects due to cancer etc 2 - ugly, scruffy, spoils the landscape "

Robert M Howe
"I wish to object to the proposals due to: 1 - detrimental impact on house values 2 - health impacts on future generations 3 - the consultation was not done in good faith"

Samantha Jones
"An other row of pylons across Anglesey will create a detrimental visual impact on the landscape There is a growing body of evidence that the EMFs emmited by overhead cables has a serious effect on people’s health. Tourism is the largest economic factor on Anglesey generating vast amounts of income this will be destroyed by another row of pylons. Tourist choose to visit Anglesey to enjoy the beauty of the landscape not to see pylons visible from the AONB and coastal areas. Property prices have already been reduced due to the prospect of more overhead cables. This fall in prices will continue and be long lasting if this project goes ahead. Putting the cables underground or sub sea would wipe out all these negative effects"

Sharon Houghton
"I want to object to the proposals because: 1 - visual impact 2 - tourism impact 3 - health impact There are far better ways of doing this on so called Energy Island"

Simon Boyd
"I believe that yet more pylons on Anglesey will be detrimental to tourism,house values agriculture and the quality of life of those directly affected by this project. Anglesey seems to have an abundance of solar panels, wind turbines and pylons serving the electrical needs on England with consequential detrimental effects to the people of the island. There are far better ways of transmitting this power without the use of pylons"

Siobhan Davies
"I am against the proposal due to 1 - impact on tourism 2 - impact on property value 3 - one new line will lead to another - this is just an excuse! 4 - the power station and the grid connection should have been looked at as one project - like the Planning Act says!!! I agree the power station needs a connection, just NOT THIS ONE!"

Susan Davies
"I wish to object, because: 1 - the proposal makes our home virtually unsalable, and no compensation has been suggested 2 - the road access to our property will be severely effected during construction and may cause issues for emergency vehicles 3 - the final view will be terrible, the visual outlook ruined 4 - concerns about the impact on health from EMFs 5 - compromised privacy, safety and security during construction and operational maintenance 6 - potential damage to property utilities during construction 7 - damage and disturbance to property and vehicles during operational maintenance from dust and paint spray 8 - impacts on the tourist industry (important to the local economy) 9 - concerns that this would be the first of several more pylon lines "

Susan Howe
"I wish to object to the proposals due to: 1 - health impacts on future generations 2 - the consultation was not done in good faith 3 - detrimental impact on house values I overlook 4 pylons, all within proximity of my home. They stand in beautiful farm land. Apart from the ugly appearance of what is there already, then to add even more along side the existing ones, which is proposed, would be catestrophic. The value of my home would decrease further, the tourism of the island would suffer immensely, which is monies we need to keep our businesses and shops alive, to an already diminishing industry. I also believe, despite what we are told, that the electric field surrounding the cabling, interferes with humans and live stock health wise. I am not opposed to the nuclear power, just the pylons and cabling above ground. The general public matter most, not just the shareholders."

Tabitha Cook
"i would like to object on the idea of plylons. The island is seen as beuitful island and with these being put onto the island could cause problems for future vistors on the island. Which will be shame. Being young person on island i don't wont to see the change happen and with speaking with people i agree they should be underground. "

Terry Davies
"I wish to object, because: 1 - the proposal makes our home virtually unsalable, and no compensation has been suggested 2 - the road access to our property will be severely effected during construction and may cause issues for emergency vehicles 3 - the final view will be terrible, the visual outlook ruined 4 - concerns about the impact on health from EMFs 5 - compromised privacy, safety and security during construction and operational maintenance 6 - potential damage to property utilities during construction 7 - damage and disturbance to property and vehicles during operational maintenance from dust and paint spray 8 - impacts on the tourist industry (important to the local economy) 9 - concerns that this would be the first of several more pylon lines "

Valerie Jones
"I feel this is unfair that transmission of power will be installed across Anglesey taking the electricity to the rest of the U.K. This will benefit other people but will be detrimental to the people of Anglesey The landscape will be visually effected - this is unnecessary as there are alternative methods of transmission such as underground or sub-sea. The Welsh Wellbeing of Future Generations Act sets out to protect future Welsh language and culture. I believe the destruction caused by a second transmission row will have a huge effect to the detriment of future Welsh communities "

Veronica Hanson
"I think strongly they should select the underground solution because erecting pylons will affect the countryside, the ecology, people homes and well being, tourism and in the long term does not provide a cheaper way of meeting the need. "

Dr Jonathan F Dean on behalf of Mrs Ann J Dean
"I accept the the new power station needs to be connected to the grid, however I oppose the current proposals because: 1 - visually unattractive in the beautiful Anglesey landscape 2 - a buried cable would be a much better solution and more in line with the Holford Rules 3 - effect on house values Nuclear power brought my family and I to Anglesey, so I have no problem with the new power station, but National Grid's plans are just plain unacceptable. It is clear that generation technology has out-stripped transmission technology and we need to use a more up to date solution"

Laura Jones
"My main concern is of health implication of EMF's, my youngest daughter who has a young family live near these pylons on Anglesey and is at the moment [redacted]. I'm afraid that no one can convince me that these pylons are safe, because throughout the months [redacted] I heard about and talked to so many people who have leukaemia and the one thing they had in common is that they lived near pylons."

Cyngor Cymuned Llanddaniel Fab
"Bydd Cyngor Cymuned Llanddaniel yn bryderus am trefniadau sydd ymwneud a thwneli a fydd yn agor i'r ynys oddi fewn yr ardal democrataidd sef Llanddaniel Fab/Llanedwen. O ganlyniad, rydym yn awyddus i drafod materion/trefniadau ynglyn a'r gwaith a fyddai'n cael ei gwblhau yn yr ardal, er mwyn sicrhau nad yw'n effeithio ar drigolion yr ardal, neu ei fod yn gadw yn effaith leiaf bosib."

Jane Margaret Hughes
"'Rwyn gwrthwynebu yr ail linell am y rhesymau canlynol: * Anharddu a hagru tirwedd yr Ynys a golygfeydd cefn gwlad * Caiff effaith anffafriol ar dwristiaeth ac amaethyddiaeth * Effaith negyddol ar werth eiddo y rhai ohonom sydd wedi cael ein geni a'n magu ar yr Ynys. * Yr ydwyf i o'r farn y bydd yn niweidiol i iechyd holl drigolion yr Ynys * Fel pawb o'r bron ar Ynys Mon 'rwyf o'r farn mae tanddearu yw'r dewis call "

Janet Ann Jones
"i am extremely concerned about the over head cables, off the visual effect on the eyes the effect on property prices in the area, which will effect me, as i"m going to be looking at four directly from my cottage, and the health issues that can be caused by the pillions, as when i sit outside after work l can hear them crackle. this will also affect tourism on Anglesey as this is a small beautiful island, and a lot of business will be effected by theses pillions. as they will be going straight through the island. why cant they be buried under ground which want affect the residents of the island in the same way. the thought of them really upsets me and l feel quite depressed at the prospect of them over looking my property, the visual impact, eye pollution. and health issues. we all need electricity and l appreciate that we have to have cables, but please bury them under ground. "

Kevin William Otten
"We bought our property 6 years ago because of its beautiful location, it’s peaceful here and the views are stunning, I have one row of pylons and they where here when I bought the property, however a second row of pylons will destroy what I purchased 6 years ago, also this will blight the whole area , I am reaching retirement age and we where going to enjoy our twilight years together stress free , there is evidence that overhead pylons are not safe for human health, they need to bury the lines or no power station "

The Festiniog Railway Company
"While the railway has no objections to the stage 1 proposals currently under consideration, it is has concerns over follow up stages as proposed by National Grid during previous consultations. Therefore the company wish to be included during all stages of the planning process particularly with developments beyond Pentir and around Porthmadog area."

Mrs S Wadkins
"As a resident of Anglesey my representation is in relation to concerns around the increase in pylons on the island. This is from a environmental impact for residents and tourists. The new pylons are significantly bigger and will spoil the countryside. This will impact tourism. Residents nearby are concerned about the health risks. The addition of these pylons opens the route for more in the future. The new pylons will bring no benefit to Anglesey as all the power is heading off the island. There is no benefit to the residents. The existing pylons are not intended to be removed this means that the number of pylons is being doubled. They are a bit on the landscape. No one will want to live near them therefore restricting opportunity for any potential development."

Cyngor Cymuned Llaneilian
"Mae Cyngor Cymuned Llaneilian yn siomedig bod y Grid Cenedlaethol wedi cyflwyno DCO drafft ar gyfer ail linell b?er uwchben i allforio trydan o Orsaf B?er Niwclear arfaethedig Wylfa Newydd. Buasai Cyngor Cymuned Llaneilian yn cefnogi datrysiad sydd yn allforio drwy ceblau o dan y môr neu o dan y ddaear. Rydym hefyd yn cadw'r hawl i wneud sylwadau ar faterion eraill a allai effeithio ar drigolion Cyngor Cymuned Llaneilian yn ystod y broses arholi'r DCO."

Dafydd Griffiths
"I have followed and responded to National Grid's pre application consultation. If the Wylfa Newydd DCO is granted and the Hitachi board agree funding in 2019 I would support an underground or subsea line to export the electricity. I also reserve the right to comment and make further representations on any other aspects of National Grid's North Wales Connection during the examination process."

Peter Alton Murphy
"My Representation refers to the chosen route through the village of Rhosgoch. The new line is located closer to the village than the current line. Being located through the south of the village on the highest point of a ridge, the line will overpower the village both visually with the sky as background and from the prevailing south westerly winds from noise in addition to the current line! This location does not comply with the respected Holford Rules, Rule 4. Alternative routes have been suggested during the consultation process to rectify breach of Rule 4 and improve compliance to Rule 3 and 5, one route being shorter with a reduction in Angle Towers and I believe providing a financial saving! Holford Rule 6 is not met by the chosen route with a Wirescape being produced. Holford Rule 7 has not being met, SPU suggest Undergrounding where there is no alternative. Conclusion. Anglesey is an AONB, and thus far National Grid has shown little respect to this Worldwide recognition. Undergrounding or undersea Routes should prevail. The village and ourselves have lived with the overhead lines and have no objection to them remaining, but find the route of the new line THROUGH the VILLAGE to be unacceptable, National Grid showing a total lack of respect to ourselves and the community. We plead for an adjustment that I consider will not increase construction cost and possibly reduce it, and also perhaps show that National Grid and inspectorate are actually listening to the community. National Grid claim that they have to utilise the least costly routing in order to keep the costs of electricity down for others! Surely penalising some people for the financial benefit of others is a fundamental Breach of Human Rights legislation? Thank You, Alton Murphy. "

Alan Hargreaves
"Proximity of the pylons to the given address. Noise is already evident from the existing structures to add more can only compound this irritant. The existing pylons are already a blight on the view of the open countryside, to add more simply unacceptably increases the eyesore and interference of the views."

Arthur Hughes
"It will be detrimental to scenic beauty, tourism, farming, house values and health"

Fred McCormack
"It will be detrimental to scenic beauty, tourism, farming, house values and health Better solutions exist - underground or subsea - but these could increase bill payers cost by 11p/year - Rural North Wales is worth it! "

Ron Marsh
"The installation of ugly overground cables is bad for tourism, beauty, farming, health and local values. They can also be damaged by adverse future weather states. Why adversely damage the enjoyment of a beautiful corner of our country when it is totally unnecessary."

Andrew Jones
"My main reasons for objecting are; The consultation process has been flawed with meetings not held across the whole island and with publicity poor. Officers often refused to listen to concerns and dismissed them off-hand. Alternatives have not been properly explored considering the longevity of the site and the costs being spread over the life of the site have been non-existant and National Grid have refused to give profit forecasts for the site. Further objections; 1) Health hazard. Power lines create EMFs which are clearly dangerous. They are linked to cancers particularly in children. No study into the amount of EMF being created has been carried out on Anglesey for the power lines that were carrying power from Wylfa A and only generic, computer based estimates are available now. 2) The existing cables in certain atmospheric conditions make an extremely loud buzzing noise which can often be heard in the house through double glazing. This is affecting the quality of my life. 3) The new cables will come even closer to my house than the existing ones. They will completely block my views of the local countryside which will affect my quality of life? 4) The existing pylons are grey, ugly and monstrous symbols of industrialisation which now blight the landscape. Why has there been no effort whatsoever to blend these structures into the environment. 5) Ynys Mon is a tourist Island it attracts visitors from across the globe and is considered to be one of the best destinations in the UK pylons will destroy this."

Anna Jones
"Having an extra hundred or so pylons going across our beautiful island will scar the landscape with their ugliness. Anglesey is a jewel in the crown of Wales and should be treasured as such. We have a thriving year round tourism industry and is the second most popular tourist destination in Wales. There are alternatives to this scheme which are more expensive, but as the consumer will be footing the bill eventually I think we should have the opportunity to choose what would be the most desirable alternative for our stunningly beautiful island."

Dr Mair Edwards
"Mae Ynys Môn yn ardal sy'n denu pobl oherwydd ei phrydferthwch a'i golygfeydd. Bydd peilonau ychwanegol yn difrodi y golygfeydd ac yn hagru yr amgylchfyd. All hyn ddim bod yn dda i'r diwydiannau sydd mor ddibynnol ar dwristiaeth. A ninnau yn yr 21ain Ganrif mae'n rhaid bod gwell ffyrdd o drosglwyddo trydan na mewn gwifrau uwchben ddaear"

Dr Marion Jones
"Dear Sir/Madam, 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 on the population’s health and farming 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. The electricity transported will benefit England, but Anglesey will have to bear the cost. This is grossly unfair.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. 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. I appeal to you to give these concerns due attention. Yours sincerely Dr Marion Jones "

Gillian Mahon
"Pylons are highly unsightly and can cause distress to bird migration and the numerous starling murmations on the island. Anglesey relies on tourism to flourish and should not be turned into the powerhouse of Wales without the investment needed to protect this vital industry. The power lines must be sent underground and not overhead to protect nature and the tourism of the island. Profits will be generated by the new Wylfa and some of this money must be used to protect the environment."

Helen Grove-White
"The proposed new power lines across Anglesey will be ugly and detract from the scenic qualities of the island, now one of the top destinations for tourism. Matching the existing line reduces the impact on other areas but greatly accentuates the negative visual appearance. Those that live close to the line will experience the detrimental effects on their health that have been well documented."

Howard Fay
"I wholeheartedly condemn the proposal to erect additional pylons across the beautiful island of Anglesey when a subsea solution would avoid all the negative effects on house prices, tourism, farming, risk to health and all other aspects of island life. There is a precedent for preserving the natural beauty of A rural area of outstanding beauty as demonstrated in the Lake District. Nobody with a local connection to Anglesey wants this, so it is wholly unacceptable for this proposal to be forced on the people who live here."

Jan Underwood
"This application should not happen as it has been made very clear by the populations of Anglesey and Gwynedd that over-land pylons are not acceptable to them. It will be detrimental to the local scenery and therefore tourism, also to house values and farming. Health issue should also be considered, not only for reasons of the detrimental effect on the population re the pylons themselves but also for the main end game of the pylons, which is to power a nuclear power station that is inherently dangerous, even if there were to be just one accident, never mind the problem of nuclear waste, which has not been planned for. If cables were to be implemented for that purpose, then better solutions exist and are preferred by the local community; that is underground or subsea cables. These could increase bill payers cost by 11p/year - not a huge cost to retain the beauty of rural Wales. The whole cost, of course, will be very much higher than scrapping this outdated power form and putting finance into sustainable, green energy. "

Jill Hough
"I am a lover of Ynys Mon and it’s landscape and ecology. Pylons across our magnificent landscape are completely out of keeping with the natural beauty that residents and visitors love. We had hoped that with the end of Wylfa nuclear power station the existing pylons would be demolished. Now we do not want the potentially lethal and out of date so-called Wylfa Newydd on our island any more than we want to see more pylons which will be a constant reminder of the dangerous new nuclear development. Should Ynys Mon become an icon of green, genuinely renewable energy it could be that pylons would seem less like a blot on the landscape than a symbol of Ynys Mon’s innovations and leadership of Wales."

Jim Norris
"I object to this planning application as it will have a detrimental effect on the environment, the scenic beauty of the island, tourism farming, health and property prices. "

John Knighton
"I object to installation of new pylons to carry electricity over Anglesey. There are already existing pylons which could be used and any new developments could be facilitated by underground cables. The quality of the environment and appearance of the countryside is worth preserving at a small additional cost for underground cables. I "

Julie Davies
"Anglesey is an area of outstanding natural beauty, erecting more huge pylons across the landscape will destroy it. There are alternatives so they should be used, it is sad for all of us who live here that we have another nuclear power station on our doorstep to put these monstrosities across our landscape is just dreadful."

Marilyn Downs
"I am concerned that the huge number of new pylons will be detrimental to the island’s tourism by creating an industrial landscape across areas of natural beauty. We are already subject to a number of power cuts in Cemaes, often due to overhead problems with pylons and weather issues. It would be a real investment if ALL the power cables could be put underground. Although expensive, this would eventually be re-couped through the charges. Maintenance would be much easier. Anglesey relies on tourism as a major financial income and it needs to have the investment in the future to maintain this element. "

Robert Jones
"Pylons will definitely be detrimental to the views of the unspoilt Anglesey and North Wales countryside, which is renowned for its scenic beauty. A second line of power pylons in addition to the existing one will cause immense damage to the tourist industry, which make a considerable contribution to the island's economy. National Grid have not really taken into consideration alternative technology for electricity transmission, such as undergrounding of or subsea cables, which is being successfully used in continental Europe. In addition there is people's anxiety over the negative impact of high voltage power lines' electromagnetic fields on their health, not to mention how it will affect house prices in the vicinity of pylons. The National Grid's consultation exercise has taken little or no notice of the Council's and people's concerns and that the democratic process is only a pretense."

Stephen Ivor Garwood
"Anglesey is a unique landscape that people love to live in, work in and visit due to its unique beauty. Please don't blight yet another part of this beautiful country with pylons."

Wendy Jones
"Ni ddylid hyn mynd ymlaen oherwydd yr effaith niwediol ar olygfa, harddwch yr ardal twristiaeth, ffermio, prisiau tai ac iechyd. Nid oes angen i hyn ddigwydd, mae'n bosib eu osod oddi dan y ddaear. Mae'r ardal mor arbennig o hardd, mae wir angen ei warchod oddiwrth y math yma o datblygiad. Deallaf bod hyn yn costio 11p/y flwyddyn ond mae'r ardal yn ei haeddu. "

Aoife Ryan
"I believe pylons ruin the tourist industry. My family will not holiday on Anglesey if there are more pylons. The health implications of overhead cables are worrying It is undemocratic ti ignore the wishes of local people Other technology exits. The cables should go subsea or underground which would mean pylons are superfluous "

Catherine Williams
"I object because: 1 - EMF, health dangers 2 - esthetics, view 3 - personal disruption, misery"

Claire Masters
"NGET's proposal to impose a second line of pylons upon the Anglesey community is unfair and undemocratic, especially as the pylons will serve chiefly to export power to the South of England. NGET has prioritised cost considerations above the negative impact of more pylons on the natural environment and the consequent detriment to tourism. Scant regard has been given to the adverse effect on house values and the detriment to farming through permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations, particularly as alternative modern technologies exist for the transmission of electricity, eg. underground and subsea which do not have the negative effects of pylons. There is a body of scientific research recognising the damaging effects on the health of people and animals living in close proximity to pylons but this seems to have been ignored by NGET. The consultation was flawed and disingenuous as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. NGET and Horizon appear not to have followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008 and have not genuinely assessed or consulted on the cumulative effects of a second row of pylons on the people of Anglesey. "

Dermot Ryan
"I believe pylons ruin the tourist industry. My family will not holiday on Anglesey if there are more pylons. The health implications of overhead cables are worrying It is undemocratic ti ignore the wishes of local people Other technology exits. The cables should go subsea or underground which would mean pylons are superfluous "

Elaine Ellen
"The representation I would like to make will focus on the impact of a second row of pylons crossing Ynys Mon/Anglesey in terms of the effects on the island's landscape, its important tourist industry and working farmland as well as the human impact on island life and communities to those of us living here. Firstly, I would like to question why it is necessary to scar our landscape with ugly pylons when other alternatives exist such as undersea cables and underground transmission. I understand to use these alternatives would cost a mere 11 pence a year extra to Anglesey residents. Secondly,the beauty of our island with its coastal path and rugged countryside attracts many tourists. Recently, Angkesey has been ranked the second most beautiful place to visit in the UK. Clearly, farming is important and land would be lost to the runs alongside pylons. For these reasons, the building of further pylons would detract from our island's beauty and future prosperity, which as one of the poorer regions in Wales, we desperately need. All of this would undermine the quality of life for existing communities and damage job prospects in tourism. I urge you to consider the alternatives to keep our island beautiful and for our children and grandchildren's future prosperity. "

Elfed Jones
"I object to this proposal as it will be detrimental to Anglesey countryside, house values, health, farming and future generations I am against this proposal 1 - loss of "visual amenity" 2 - impact on tourism 3 - impact on agriculture 4 - impact on house value 5 - impact on health"

Emma Davies
"I do not want any more pylons because: 1 - other technology exists that is less detrimental to Anglesey like underground and subsea 2 - pylons will ruin the countryside 3 - dreadful impact on tourism on which Anglesey depends 4 - the potential health effects - EMFs are like tobacco in the 1950's! "

Emyr Lewis
"There is lots of evidence to suggest thar there is a link between overhead cables and serious health conditions. Until there is absolute proof that there is no link the construction of anymore pylons should be halted. Pylons also create a negative visual impact to the landscape. Changing a rural landscape to an industrial scene. Tourism is important to the economy of the island. Pylons will deter visitors and therefore effect the incomes of local people. "

Geoffrey Harry Lincoln
"I am seriously concerned about the proposed erection of over one hundred pylons across Anglesey. In my opinion they will cause not only permanent harm to it's unique scenic beauty, but also be detrimental to tourism, farming, house values and health. "

Gill Jones
"I object 1 - underground or subsea is better 2 - unfair and undemocratic 3 - impact on tourism 4 - ruin views of countryside"

Gwen Richards
"I am a resident of Anglesey. The island economy is dependent on tourism. Many visitors come to the island as they value unspoilt views and traditional landscapes. This will be spoilt by a new line of pylons. In my opinion the transmission lines should be buried undersea or underground. The cost of this spread across all electricity consumers would be low and affordable. Gwen Richards "

Gwyneth Jones
"I object to this proposal as it will be detrimental to health, Anglesey countryside, house values, farming and the wellbeing of future generations I am against this proposal 1 - loss of "visual amenity" 2 - impact on tourism 3 - impact on agriculture 4 - impact on house value 5 - impact on health"

Helen Davies
"I object 1 - it will lead to 3 or 4 more lines 2 - ruin the view 3 - unfair - all the power is needed in SE England 4 - undemocratic 5 - poor legacy for future generations"

Janet Hassall
"I object because 1 - impact on tourism 2 - impact on views of countryside 3 - potential health impacts"

Jill Jones
"I believe that another row of pylons will be detrimental to the tourist industry. I and my family will not continue to visit this island if this project goes ahead"

Joanne Lloyd
"Pylons will negatively effect a rural landscape which should be protected not destroyed They will also be detrimental to the visual effect of the landscape There appear to be links between the presence of pylons and serious health problems. Until this is clarified the construction of more pylons should halted. If this project is permitted it will be against the wishes of the local population and their elected representatives and therefore undemocratic Other technologies such a subsea or laying cables underground are available and should be used. "

Lisa Sargeant
"Unnecessary expenditure and ruins the value of people’s homes. In addition some homes will be unsaleable. Especially in the corridor where some people will have a line each side of where they live. The health issues have been ignored and not addressed at all. "

Lynn Dickson
"pylons will create a negative visual impact on the landscape. They will be seen from the AONB Pylons will have a negative effect on the tourist industry which is the most important economic factor on Anglesey. The people of Anglesey can not afford to loose this valuable income The health implications of overhead cables is not fully understood but scientific research points to probable dangerous effects. If the cables were underground this danger would be avoided. "

M Walker
"Dear Madam/Sir I am totally against another set of pylons crossing Anglesey these would further mar the landscape We are already surrounded by wind farms and existing power lines, There is very little employment on the Island, and Anglesey depends on tourism. During the summer I took an opportunity to speak to visitors to the island and asked our visitors for their opinion. Everyone I consulted said that further pylons would destroy the rural landscape They suggested that if this was happening in southern England or in the lake district it would not be accepted by the population in the areas be considered as a solution to the problem of conducting future electricity across the Island. The island has already paid the health price of the pylons which were installed to accommodate power from the Wylfa power station to erect further pylons would be beyond"

Michael Brooks
"I object to the proposal because: 1 - it will lead to 3 or 4 lines of pylons 2 - pylons will be detrimental to views of the countryside which will impact tourism 3 - the potential health impacts and perceived dangers of EMFs 4 - it is unfair - all of the power is being exported to the SE of England 5 - pylons are a poor legacy for future generations 6 - other, better technology exists and is proven, like the buried cables at Porthmadog I am against these proposals Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. "

Mr D J Reid
"I object - I do not want to see any more pylons on the island."

Mr R Fletcher
"I object because: 1 - pylons are uglier than the power station 2 - we live in a beautiful place that relies on tourism 3 - we should get rid of the existing ones as well as not have new ones"

Mrs B Kaill
"I object - I do not want to see any more pylons on the island."

Mrs J Reid
"I object - I do not want to see any more pylons on the island."

Peter Williams
"I object because: 1 - EMF, health dangers 2 - esthetics, view 3 - personal disruption, misery"

Rachel Williamn
"Other more up to date technology to transport power from generation to consumers. Taking cables undersea or underground would be far preferable Pylons would industrialise a hitherto beautiful rural landscape. If this goes ahead the pylons will be visible from the AONB The proposed pylons will be detrimental to the tourist industry which is vital to the incomes of a large percentage of the population of Anglesey Scientific research indicates that there is a probable link between overhead cables and health problems. Whilst there is any doubt we should proceed cautiously. "

Samantha Ryan
"I believe pylons ruin the tourist industry. My family will not holiday on Anglesey if there are more pylons. The health implications of overhead cables are worrying It is undemocratic ti ignore the wishes of local people Other technology exits. The cables should go subsea or underground which would mean pylons are superfluous "

Samatha Jones
"As a visitor I object because: 1 - spoiling beautiful countryside 2 - underground is much better"

Sharron Pickering
"I object to these proposals because: 1 - the effects on the local communities having to live with these towers as well as a power station 2 - the pylons will be detrimental to local unspoiled views I am against these proposals because Detrimental to local unspoilt views Effect on local community "

Stephen William
"Other more up to date technology to transport power from generation to consumers. Taking cables undersea or underground would be far preferable Pylons would industrialise a hitherto beautiful rural landscape. If this goes ahead the pylons will be visible from the AONB The proposed pylons will be detrimental to the tourist industry which is vital to the incomes of a large percentage of the population of Anglesey Scientific research indicates that there is a probable link between overhead cables and health problems. Whilst there is any doubt we should proceed cautiously. "

Stuart Pickering
"I object to these proposals because: 1 - the pylons will be detrimental to local unspoilt views 2 - the effects oin the local communities having to live with these towers as well as a power station I am against these proposals because Detrimental to local unspoilt views Effect on local community "

Alex Morgan
"pylons will spoil the countryside and the landscape Farmers will loose their land and families will have their homes effected. "

Alun Gordon Adamson
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”."

Alwyn Williams
"Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation."

Anita Hechter
"My primary objection is that even more pylons will lead to property devaluation. It is not right that the Secretary of State allowed this to be put out of scope"

Eric M Pritchard
"I object to the proposals on several counts I am a land owner and at present have 2 pylons on our land with proposals for two more permanent ones a a temporary one. I have had a cable from the existing line snap above my land and have first hand experience of how they bully people and do as they want 1. I feel that the new lines will be a blight on the landscape 2. National Grid have consulted me but they have not taken on board any of the suggestions made. 3. In the consultation with me they have told lies stating that Ynys Mon Council have insisted on certain items when the Council by admission of National Grid have not been consulted. 4. They have said that it will be easier to negotiate with us once they receive planning this is not true as all they will do is us the planning to “bully” us."

Freda Hallworth
"Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations."

Glenys Wyn Williams
"Pylons will 1 - spoil the countryside 2 - are unnecessary - there are other options 3 - use more land - take from farmers 4 - should go underground 5 - so should the current ones "

Heulwen Jones
"The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. "

Ian Hallworth
"There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. "

Jacqueline Ashworth
"I believe that there will be a massive Bio-diversity disruption if this project goes ahead It is not necessary to take the Pylons across Anglesey, why not go subsea straight to Deeside Anglesey ‘s trade is tourism- this will be detrimental to that"

Jamie Thomas
"Firstly, I think a line needs to be drawn at some point and we need to say enough is enough. I’m only 25 years old so have lived with the present line of pylons all of my life, and just accepted them, as much as I don’t like them, but now with this proposed second line, I have to express my concerns and say I think enough is enough. This is another example of us using old solutions to new problems - why, when other countries have completely moved away from pylons and are only looking at undergrounding or other alternatives, can we in Wales not do the same? There is clearly a very strong objection to another row of pylons on Anglesey, so why isn’t that objection being taken into consideration? We need a 21st century solution to this problem. Another row of pylons would be detrimental in so many respects - Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations, which is surely something which has to be considered under the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act? Especially when other solutions such as underground and subsea possibilities exist for these cables. I understand some form of impact assessments have been done, but surely this calls - given that it is such a massive decision that will affect all on Anglesey for years to come - for a full, comprehensive impact assessment in terms of affects on housing prices, tourism, health and so on. I am very blessed to live in the most beautiful place in the world, as Anglesey is second to none for many positive reasons in my opinion, but to erect another line of ugly, unnecessary pylons across our island would be a huge mistake for many reasons and it would show that the significant objections of the people of this island against this proposal are not taken seriously by the powers that be. No to pylons. Let’s be more inventive and more forward-thinking in order to preserve our incredible island and let’s have Anglesey lead the way in innovative solutions to problems such as this. Undergrounding all the way."

Janet Hughes
"The current pylons destroy our natural beauty! There are alternatives like underground, why not use this for the new connection? Yet again, we will be supplying England with power and we have to pay the price!"

Kenneth Jones
"Mae technolegau eraill ar gael megis tanddeuaru a mynd dan y môr, ac nid oes effeithiau negyddol o ddefnyddio'r dulliau yma Mae'r Grid Cenedlaethol yn diystyru hun am ei fod yn gwmni preifat sy'n ystyried 'dividends' gyfranddalwyr yn unig Bydd gwerth eiddo a thwristiaeth yn dioddef yn sgîl codi peilonau. Maent wedi medru tanddeuaru mewn rhannau o Loegr a'r Alban - pam ddim yng Nghymru. ---------- Fy ngwrthwynebiadau: 1. Mae technologau eraill arar gael megis tanddaearol a mynd o dan y mor, ac nid oes effeithiau negyddol o ddefnyddio'r dulliau yma. 2. Mae'r Grid Genedlaethol yn drystynu han am eifod yngwmni preifat y'n ystried 'dividends' ei gyfrranddalwr yn unig. 3. Bydd gwerth eiddo a twristiaeth yn dioddef yn sgil codi peilonau. 4. Maent wedi medru tanddearu mewn rhannau o Loegr o'r Alban - pm ddim yng Nghymru!! "

Kirsten Morgan
"I believe that more pylons will spoil the countryside. Tourist won’t want to come here to look at pylons. They will go somewhere else instead. This will ruin the islands economy "

Lesley E Williams
"I believe that pylons will be detrimental to the countryside and will spoil the views from the AONB There will be a negative impact on the tourist industry if this project goes ahead The impact on future generations will be enormous and contrary to the Welsh “ Well belting of Future Generations Act”"

Linda Boyle
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Lydia Morgan
"I believe that pylons will be detrimental to the countryside and will spoil the views from the AONB There will be a negative impact on the tourist industry which is important to the people of Anglesey Farming will be disrupted and there will be a permanent loss of land "

Mairwen Roberts
"Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons."

Mike Jones
"Pylons are unsightly and will do nothing positive for our tourism industry"

Nest Jones
"Dylid trosglwyddo'r trydan dan y ddaear neu'r môr fydd yn lleihau'r effaith ar y tirwedd, a thwristiaeth. Ond yn bwysicach fyth ar iechyd gan fod tystiolaeth fod peilonau yn neweidiol i iechyd bobol ac anifeiliad."

Nicola Kinsella-Taylor
"Pylons are detrimental to the very important tourism industry. They will visually impact in a bad way the landscape This scheme is unfair and undemocratic as the electricity generated will be exported to England against the wishes of the people of Anglesey. In the plans there are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN -5"

Richard Taylor
"Pylons are detrimental to the very important tourism industry. They will visually impact in a bad way the landscape This scheme is unfair and undemocratic as the electricity generated will be exported to England against the wishes of the people of Anglesey. In the plans there are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN -5"

Ron Boyle
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Adam Hudson
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second.  It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd.  If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line.  It is time for a 21st century solution."

Alan Phillips
"Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge.  Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. "

Aron Renshaw
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second.  It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd.  If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line.  It is time for a 21st century solution. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge.  Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations."

Carl Hudson
"The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge.  Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations."

Elisa Jones
"Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. Pylons will create a blight on the countryside and will be visible from thr AONB "

Emily Hudson
"Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”."

Enid Morris
"I believe that the construction of more pylons will blight the landscape by creating a negative visual impact. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”."

Enier Phillips
"There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons."

Glyn Morris
"The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options.The people of Anglesey were never given a genuin opportunity to influence the decision. Through out the consultation Anglesey residents and their elected representatives have consistently opposed the proposed pylons and stated their preference for subsea or underground as alternatives. However National Grid have ignored these requests and continued blindly with their own preferences. "

Hayden Jones
"There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge.  Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Every precaution possible should be taken to protect the future generations of the people of Anglesey this includes not constructing anymore pylons until there is solid evidence to prove the health implications one way or another. "

Hayley Jones
"Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Instead of using outdated methods National Grid should be leading the field and developing and employing modern andinivative methods which wouldn’t impinge on the beauty of the island. People’s lives would not be destroyed if other technology was used. "

L West
"I am concerned about the impact on health and house prices and the detrimental effect it will have on the scenery of the island. I believe that the cables should be in the ground, this has been done elsewhere in the UK. I am concerned about the impact on tourism. "

Michael Wadkins
"I feel that the new large sized pylons will be a detramental blot on the beautiful landscape of anglesey and the North Wales areas that they run through. For a cost of 11p per year per household the power lines should be run under the sea as it is a miniscule price to pay and could easily be paid by adding it to the electricity standing charges electricity users pay. Please do not destroy our beautiful North Wales. And the lives of ordinary people who will have to put up with the after effects of this planning decision for the rest of their lives."

Rachl Hudson
"Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Other technology is being used in other parts of the UK so it is unfair that Anglesey should be treated differently "

Sara Margaret Murphy
"National Grid route through the village of Rhosgoch has shown no consideration for the inhabitants. Passing through the highest part and to the south of the village with the sun in the southern hemisphere as a Backdrop, and the view of the AONB of Snowdonia to the South East through an array of wires and masts! Together with increased noise from the system engulfing the village via the prevailing South Westerlies! are National Grid trying to Torture the village of Rhosgoch? The process of Consultation was a Farce since [redacted] a house under the New Route was Purchased prior to the End of the Consultation!! How Dishonest can an Organisation be? the process was window dressing and should be investigated by an Independent Organisation. The process is in breach of the basic Human Rights Legislation, you must not disadvantage a group of people for the Benefit of Others, exactly what the line route through Rhosgoch is doing. Margaret Murphy."

Alan Hudson
"NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on.Serious omissions such as the effect on property prices which National Grid have removed from the process. I feel very strongly that this is unacceptable and should not have been sanctioned. "

David Hughes
"Despite saying that they have consulted the people of Anglesey this is simply not true. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. They haven’t listened to the voice of the people or the County Council, the Community Councils our MP and our AM all of whom are totally against overhead cables and pylons. What is the point of spending a vast amount of money to run a worthless consultation if the results are ignored. We are being ignored. "

Helen Cox
"I am against the erection of more wind turbines and hence pylons in North Wales and Anglesey. I believe that they blight our countryside and ruin the beautiful views and landscapes which are so important to the north wales economy. I believe there are other, better ways to provide green energy. They may cost a little more but that cost is worth it to protect our countryside landscapes. We should use turbines out at sea, more solar roof panels, biomass and of course seek new tenders for tidal lagoons ( the Swansea Bay bid was excessive and could have been done much more cheaply) providing regular cheap green energy without harming the very thing we rely on most in this part of the country - Tourism, Economy and Landscape."

Margaret J Hudson
"NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on.Serious omissions such as the effect on property prices which National Grid have removed from the process. This is unacceptable and should not have been sanctioned. "

Patricia Knox
"Where overhead high voltage wires pass over a dwelling, it has a bad effect on people's health. I do not think tourists like to see pylons striding across the land. And I think it might have a bad effect on tourism."

Vivian Hughes
"The people of Anglesey have said very loudly that they do not want any more pylons. This proposed line will visually impact the landscape and will be a visible from the AONB. National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second.  It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd.  If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line.  It is time for a 21st century solution."

Mrs K Edwards
"We live in an area of natural outstanding beautiful countryside, unfortunately we already have to suffer looking at one row of ugly pylons, the last thing we want is a second row. This will without doubt devalue my house as well as spoil the view."

Roger Vincent
"I believe that the construction of pylons across Anglesey will significantly, and adversely, affect the natural beauty of our island and will form a blot on an otherwise beautiful landscape. I also believe that the option of placing the cables underground, whilst causing temporary disruption to the scenery and the populace of the island, will be the best long-term solution to allow power transmission across the island whilst preserving the natural beauty of our island. I hope that any adverse financial implications of an underground solution will not be allowed to force a solution detrimental to the island's natural beauty."

Thomas Mullen
"I object to the over land pylon plan on the bases of this beautiful Island is already over whelmed by pylons and wind turbines. Consideration should be given to the households that will be most affected by these mega pylons and to the tourist industry’s concerns."

Alison Wood
"I believe that a second row of pylons have a huge negative impact on the beautiful island of Anglesey. They will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. In Wales there is a piece of legislation- “Well-being of Future Generations Act”. The spirit of this Act is consider the impact of what is done today on generations to come. The results of this decision will be felt for decades to come. We owe it to our children and grandchildren to protect them from lowered income due to a fall in tourists, low property prices, loss of farming land, irreparable damage to the landscape and more important than any of those reasons serious health problems all done to take power to England"

Joseph Wilde
"Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to land loss and restricted practice also detrimental to the tourist industry of the island and the impact on areas of natural beauty also I have concerns about the health issues as yet not considered to future generations. At no time has the NGET considered other options such as underground or subsea."

Kevin Wood
"Having carefully studied National’s plans for the proposed second line of pylons across Anglesey I have come to the conclusion that there are many valid reasons to why this project should not be allowed to go ahead. For instance the consultation was unethical as we were never given a choice of options. National Grid had already made up their minds that their preferred option was pylons. No other options were considered even though most people who responded stated that subsea or undergrounding were more acceptable and would have less impact on:- The landscape The well-being off future generations The tourist industry The health of the local population House values Farming When modern technology is being employed in other parts of the UK it should also be used on Anglesey. "

Myra Jones
"I OBJECT TO THE USE OF PYLONS IN THE SCHEME DUE TO THE ADVERSE VISUAL IMPACT AND POSSIBLE ADVERSE ECONOMIC EFFECT"

Cyngor Bro Llanfairpwllgwyngyll
"Mae Cyngor Bro Llanfairpwll yn cynrychioli ardal sydd yn cael ei effeithio yn uniongyrchol ac yn ddifrifol gan ddatblygiad y Grid Genedlaethol i drosglwyddo trydan o Wylfa Newydd ar draws yr Ynys. Yn fras mae’r pryder yn cwmpasu: • Anghyfiawnder cymdeithasol o anwybyddu adborth a buddiannau poblogaeth Môn drwy barhau i gynllunio cynllun peilonau sy’n gorfodi trigolion difreintiedig Môn i sybsideiddio arbedion/elw y Grid a defnyddwyr trydan gweddill y DU • Diffyg manylder yng nglyn a’r cynlluniau i groesi’r Fenai sydd yn hollol allweddol i’r datblygiad. Os mai twnel dan y Fenai yw’r dewis terfynol nid oes unrhyw wybodaeth ar: o Trafnidiaeth yn ystod y cyfnod adeiladu o Gwaredu y spwriel o ganlyniad i’r gwaith • Dim ystyriaeth o effaith y prosiect ar twristiaeth mewn ardal sydd yn ddibynol fwy na unrhyw ardal arall yn y DU ar y diwydiant yma. • Dim ystyriaeth ar effaith y prosiect ar werth tir ac asedau trigolion yr Ynys • Diffyg ystyriaeth o effaith iechyd tymor hir o beilonau yn gyfagos a chartrefi gan gynnwys EMF ac yn y blaen. Ar egwyddor dylir polisi rhagofal gael ei ddefnyddio os oes unrhyw ansicrwydd yng nglyn a ffactorau a gall gael effaith dwys ar genedlaethau y dyfodol • Dim ystyriaeth o gydlunio gyda Deddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau'r Dyfodol (Cymru) 2015 sydd yn holl bwysig gyda’r bwriad, gan ystyried: o edrych ar bethau yn yr hirdymor yn ogystal â chanolbwyntio ar y sefyllfa ar hyn o bryd o cymryd camau i geisio rhwystro problemau rhag gwaethygu - neu hyd yn oed eu hatal rhag digwydd yn y lle cyntaf. Mae yn amlwg bod hyn yn cynnwys mabwysiadu polisi rhagofal yn hytrach na symyd ymlaen gyda syniadau sydd yn ddi ddychymyg ac yn deillio o oes llai oleuedig a gwybodus. Fel aelodau etholiadol y Cyngor mae gennym bryder hefyd am y diffyg sylw i’r broses democratiaeth gyda ymgynghoriadau hollol gamarweiniol ac annidwyll. Y canlyniad yw bod barn pob aelod etholedig y Sir gan gynnwys Cynghorwyr Sir, ein Aelod Seneddol, Aelod y Cynulliad, yn ogystal a Chyngorau Bro a Chymuned a thrigolion Môn, wedi eu hanwybyddu yn llwyr. "

Idris Alan Jones
"My objections to a new power line across Ynys Mon centre on:- i) the visual impact on the landscape ii) impact on tourism which in an area that is economically deprived is vital to the area iii) that the technology and our lives with regard to "electricity" has been transformed in so many ways over my lifetime, a massive leap in so many ways. It seems that we will even do away with the internal combustion engine shortly.However the proposed line is still intends using the same technology as used in my boyhood (60 years ago!!) and to be used for the next 50+ years. iv) costs should not be a major factor in a decision vi) the people of Ynys Mon should not have to suffer such an unsightly feature for the next 50+ years. (ie the majority of the lifetime of my grandchildren!!) "

Mr R W W Edwards
"North Wales Connection I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. Due to serious misgivings about the detail of the current proposals, I request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 (previously Section E-Route Option 5C), above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual and environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", as this means routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations (Anglesey & mainland) • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales • affect on health, noise, EMFs, clearance, AONB 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • flood risks, climate change, existing infrastructure, ancient woodlands, ecological, landscape and visual constraints. • tourist route, greenbelt land, historical monuments • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained, wildlife, natural screening • listed buildings, existing infrastructure • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. Mae peilonau’n gymynrodd gwael i’r dyfodol (pylon’s are a poor legacy for future generations). "

Rick Jones
"I wish to object about this completely unacceptable situation with the proposed pylons across Anglesey. We cannot understand why such an eyesore should even be even considered when there are obvious alternatives available. The power lines should be placed underground where they will not have an impact on the landscape, on the health of the people and livestock they go over head and where they will not have a negative impact to the local areas where they pass. Anglesey is an area of outstanding natural beauty and this will be spoilt by more pylons going overhead. The developers are proposing to go under the Menai Straights with a tunnel so why can they not put all of this underground?? As regular tourists to the area, walking around a building site for a considerable length of time and then having to look at this eye sore for the longterm is not desirable. We cannot see that there has been due consideration given to the severe impact this will have on the visiting tourism trade. Please place my objection on file. "

Mr M D Griffiths
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Kathryn Stringer
"The additional pylons over Anglesey will have a significant impact on the scenic beauty of the island, and thus on tourism, which is extremely important for the local economy. There have been significant improvements and investment in the quality of tourism offerings over the last decade, with several nationally and internationally recognized establishments bringing in high spending customers. This destruction of the unspoiled beauty of the island threatens to undo all their benefits as it will no longer be a desirable place to visit. It will also adversely impact house prices in the area."

Richard Mills
"Given that undergrounding of cables is technically feasible, and that the very high number of new pylons will have a significant visual impact, it is my opinion that the additional cost for the National Grid is justified and that undergrounding should be implemented."

Tony Roberts
"My objections to the proposed line of new pylons are based on the following : 1) Visual. We rely heavily on tourism and a second line of pylons will deter visitors. 2) Cost of burying or undersea cables. Your estimates of the cost have been challenged by a number of professionals in the field. 3) Local opinion. The vast majority of people affected are against yet more pylons, which would blight our landscape for many years to come. Your defence of the scheme is based entirely on cost. The cheapest solution is not necessarily the best or the fairest. "

Alun Jones
"Unfair and undemocratic - Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation"

Andy Draper
"I object to the proposals We should keep the island picturesque for all If we have a new power station we shouldn't have to have pylons"

Anne Carman
"I object to the proposals because Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. "

Beti Llewellyn
"other technology exists like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons such as the impact on the environment, the cost of which can be absorbed in the overall cost of this multi billion project at Wylfa Newydd."

Ceridwen Williams
"I object to the proposals because: National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. "

Cheryl Weaver
"I would rather have undergrounding or subsea as it doesn't have a negative affect like pylons do. I do not want pylons on Anglesey because of the effects on health from the Electro Magnetic Field, leukaemia in children and cancers. The electro magnetic field combined with Radon Gas is a lethal cocktail that causes cancer. Anglesey has high Radon areas where the pylons are. They will have a detrimental affect on tourism which the Island relies heavily upon for its income. Pylons will be detrimental to views over to our unspoilt country side to the views of the Areas of outstanding natural beauty. The price of our properties will be greatly affected as pylons will blight our villages and Island. The consultation has not been carried out in good faith, the plans were already made and published, the National Grid would not give us any options. I feel my views have been ignored. The Wellbeing of Future Generations Act is yet another valid reason why Anglesey should not have Pylons. "

Dewi Owen
"I want Wylfa Newydd but I DO NOT want pylons"

Gareth Roberts
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Geraint Williams
"Mae Trosglwyddiad Trydan y Grid Cenedlaethol yn defnyddio presenoldeb un llinell o beilonau i gyfiawnhau un arall. Mae’n wybyddus fod y Gweinidog Gwladol yn trafod y posibilrwydd o adweithyddion ychwanegol yn yr Wylfa i’r rhai arfaethedig yn Wylfa Newydd. Os nad oes newid ym mholisi’r Llywodraeth, a does dim wedi ei gynllunio, bydd ail res yn cael ei defnyddio i gyfiawnhau trydedd neu bedwaredd res. Mae’n bryd cael datrysiad i’r unfed ganrif ar hugain. Bydd peilonau ychwanegol yn niweidiol i’r diwydiant twristiaeth gan ddifa cefn gwlad a chreu tirwedd ddiwydiannol. Bydd peilonau’n effeithio ar amaethyddiaeth trwy achosi diffyg defnydd parhaol i dir a chyfyngu ar ddefnydd ohono. Bydd peilonau’n cael effaith negyddol ar bris eiddo, elfen mae’r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi ei diystyru’n llwyr. Bydd peilonau ychwanegol yn niweidiol i brif amcan Ofgem “i ddiogelu buddiannau defnyddwyr trydan presennol a’r dyfodol”. Annheg ac anemoctrataidd – mae Ynys Môn a Chymru yn hunangynhaliol mewn egni. Bydd y peilonau yn bodoli’n bennaf i ddarparu p?er i dde ddwyrain Lloegr, yn groes i ddymuniad poblogaeth Ynys Môn a phob cynrychiolaeth ddemocrataidd yma. Mae technolegau eraill ar gael megis tanddaearu a mynd o dan y môr, ac nid oes effeithiau negyddol o ddefnyddio’r dulliau hyn. "

Gwenda Thompson
"I feel that another row of pylons blemishng the landscape of our beautiful island would affect tourism upon which we depend and may have health implications for people living near to them ."

Harold Williams
"Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”."

Hugh Williams
"Bydd peilonau ychwanegol yn niweidiol i’r diwydiant twristiaeth gan ddifa cefn gwlad a chreu tirwedd ddiwydiannol. Bydd peilonau’n effeithio ar amaethyddiaeth trwy achosi diffyg defnydd parhaol i dir a chyfyngu ar ddefnydd ohono. Bydd peilonau’n cael effaith negyddol ar bris eiddo, elfen mae’r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi ei diystyru’n llwyr. Bydd peilonau ychwanegol yn niweidiol i brif amcan Ofgem “i ddiogelu buddiannau defnyddwyr trydan presennol a’r dyfodol”."

Idris Jones
"A oes wir angen ail lein i gario'r trydan? Pam ddim rhoi gwifrau newydd ar yr hen beilons? Pwy sydd wedi penderfynnu pa bryd mae angen lein sbar? Ffigyrau plis. Mae Trosglwyddiad Trydan y Grid Cenedlaethol yn defnyddio presenoldeb un llinell o beilonau i gyfiawnhau un arall. Mae’n wybyddus fod y Gweinidog Gwladol yn trafod y posibilrwydd o adweithyddion ychwanegol yn yr Wylfa i’r rhai arfaethedig yn Wylfa Newydd. Os nad oes newid ym mholisi’r Llywodraeth, a does dim wedi ei gynllunio, bydd ail res yn cael ei defnyddio i gyfiawnhau trydedd neu bedwaredd res. Mae’n bryd cael datrysiad i’r unfed ganrif ar hugain. Mae yna wybodaeth eang am effaith peilonau ar iechyd, gyda gwahaniaethau barn, fel yr ymchwil i dybaco yn y 1950’au a’r 60’au. Mae pryderon gwirioneddol, a barnau gwrthgyferbyniol, am yr effaith ar bobl ac anifeiliaid. Mae’n well bod yn ddiogel nag edifarhau a dweud na wrth beilonau."

John Baker
"I own a holiday cottage on Anglesey and am concerned about the effect the new pylons will have on the tourist industry, therefore my concerns are as follows: 1 - the spoiling of Anglesey's natural beauty, particularly when viewed from the AONBs 2 - the permanent damage to the tourism industry and 3 - There are other options available e.g underground would result in a minuscule increase in cost (11 p/year) per account holder/consumer. "

John Owen
"Mae Trosglwyddiad Trydan y Grid Cenedlaethol yn defnyddio presenoldeb un llinell o beilonau i gyfiawnhau un arall. Mae’n wybyddus fod y Gweinidog Gwladol yn trafod y posibilrwydd o adweithyddion ychwanegol yn yr Wylfa i’r rhai arfaethedig yn Wylfa Newydd. Os nad oes newid ym mholisi’r Llywodraeth, a does dim wedi ei gynllunio, bydd ail res yn cael ei defnyddio i gyfiawnhau trydedd neu bedwaredd res. Mae’n bryd cael datrysiad i’r unfed ganrif ar hugain. Bydd peilonau yn niweidiol i olygfeydd cefn gwlad ddilychwin, yn arbennig golygfeydd mewnol, a golygfeydd o, Ardaloedd o Harddwch Arbennig Neilltuol. Bydd peilonau ychwanegol yn niweidiol i’r diwydiant twristiaeth gan ddifa cefn gwlad a chreu tirwedd ddiwydiannol. Bydd peilonau’n effeithio ar amaethyddiaeth trwy achosi diffyg defnydd parhaol i dir a chyfyngu ar ddefnydd ohono. Bydd peilonau’n cael effaith negyddol ar bris eiddo, elfen mae’r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi ei diystyru’n llwyr. Bydd peilonau ychwanegol yn niweidiol i brif amcan Ofgem “i ddiogelu buddiannau defnyddwyr trydan presennol a’r dyfodol”. Mae yna wybodaeth eang am effaith peilonau ar iechyd, gyda gwahaniaethau barn, fel yr ymchwil i dybaco yn y 1950’au a’r 60’au. Mae pryderon gwirioneddol, a barnau gwrthgyferbyniol, am yr effaith ar bobl ac anifeiliaid. Mae’n well bod yn ddiogel nag edifarhau a dweud na wrth beilonau. Annheg ac anemoctrataidd – mae Ynys Môn a Chymru yn hunangynhaliol mewn egni. Bydd y peilonau yn bodoli’n bennaf i ddarparu p?er i dde ddwyrain Lloegr, yn groes i ddymuniad poblogaeth Ynys Môn a phob cynrychiolaeth ddemocrataidd yma. Mae Cymru’n unigryw am fod ganddi Ddeddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau’r Dyfodol; er nad yw’r Grid Cenedlaethol yn ymrwymedig i gymryd sylw ohoni y mae Cyngor Sir ynys Môn, a gallai'r Cyngor fod yn agored i her gyfreithiol. Mae peilonau’n gymynrodd gwael i’r dyfodol. Mae technolegau eraill ar gael megis tanddaearu a mynd o dan y môr, ac nid oes effeithiau negyddol o ddefnyddio’r dulliau hyn. Roedd yr ymgynghoriad yn aneffeithiol ac annheg gan fod y Grid Cenedlaethol wedi cyhoeddi eu cynlluniau cyn cychwyn y broses ac nid oedd yr ymgynghoriad statudol yn ystyried unrhyw ddewisiadau eraill. Mae nifer sylweddol o enghreifftiau ble nad yw’r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi dilyn polisïau’r Llywodraeth fel y disgrifir yn EN-1 ac EN-5 Nid yw’r Grid Cenedlaethol na Horizon wedi dilyn yr arweiniad yn Neddf Cynllunio 2008, ac nid oes asesiad digonol nac ymgynghori wedi bod am effaith cronnus peilonau "

John Roberts
"We have suffered pylons for over 50 years and we don't want any more. They will spoil the scenery and affect tourism. They may also affect the use of land and affect the prices in rural areas. I also concerned about the effect on health. I am also concerned about the Grid's attitude to democracy as they have consistently ignored the representations of locally elected councillors at county and community level as well as the elected representatives at Cardiff and Westminster. I favour an underground solution and modern technology should facilitate this. "

John Thompson
"The line of new and larger pylons will have a major impact on the aesthetics of the countryside of the island and will have a negative impact on both residents and tourists alike. The major economy on the island is tourism and should be considered and supported. There are other feasible alternatives."

Josephine Baker
"I object to the proposal because 1 - the spoiling of Anglesey's natural beauty, particularly when viewed from the AONBs 2 - the permanent damage to the tourism industry 3 - other options are available at only a miniscule increase in cost (11 p/year)"

Kevin Jones
"It will be detrimental to scenic beauty, tourism, farming, house values and health Better solutions exist - underground or subsea "

Lowri Roberts
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Nerys Owen
" Mae Trosglwyddiad Trydan y Grid Cenedlaethol yn defnyddio presenoldeb un llinell o beilonau i gyfiawnhau un arall. Mae’n wybyddus fod y Gweinidog Gwladol yn trafod y posibilrwydd o adweithyddion ychwanegol yn yr Wylfa i’r rhai arfaethedig yn Wylfa Newydd. Os nad oes newid ym mholisi’r Llywodraeth, a does dim wedi ei gynllunio, bydd ail res yn cael ei defnyddio i gyfiawnhau trydedd neu bedwaredd res. Mae’n bryd cael datrysiad i’r unfed ganrif ar hugain. Bydd peilonau yn niweidiol i olygfeydd cefn gwlad ddilychwin, yn arbennig golygfeydd mewnol, a golygfeydd o, Ardaloedd o Harddwch Arbennig Neilltuol. Bydd peilonau ychwanegol yn niweidiol i’r diwydiant twristiaeth gan ddifa cefn gwlad a chreu tirwedd ddiwydiannol. Bydd peilonau’n effeithio ar amaethyddiaeth trwy achosi diffyg defnydd parhaol i dir a chyfyngu ar ddefnydd ohono. Bydd peilonau’n cael effaith negyddol ar bris eiddo, elfen mae’r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi ei diystyru’n llwyr. Bydd peilonau ychwanegol yn niweidiol i brif amcan Ofgem “i ddiogelu buddiannau defnyddwyr trydan presennol a’r dyfodol”. Mae yna wybodaeth eang am effaith peilonau ar iechyd, gyda gwahaniaethau barn, fel yr ymchwil i dybaco yn y 1950’au a’r 60’au. Mae pryderon gwirioneddol, a barnau gwrthgyferbyniol, am yr effaith ar bobl ac anifeiliaid. Mae’n well bod yn ddiogel nag edifarhau a dweud na wrth beilonau. Annheg ac anemoctrataidd – mae Ynys Môn a Chymru yn hunangynhaliol mewn egni. Bydd y peilonau yn bodoli’n bennaf i ddarparu p?er i dde ddwyrain Lloegr, yn groes i ddymuniad poblogaeth Ynys Môn a phob cynrychiolaeth ddemocrataidd yma. Mae Cymru’n unigryw am fod ganddi Ddeddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau’r Dyfodol; er nad yw’r Grid Cenedlaethol yn ymrwymedig i gymryd sylw ohoni y mae Cyngor Sir ynys Môn, a gallai'r Cyngor fod yn agored i her gyfreithiol. Mae peilonau’n gymynrodd gwael i’r dyfodol. Mae technolegau eraill ar gael megis tanddaearu a mynd o dan y môr, ac nid oes effeithiau negyddol o ddefnyddio’r dulliau hyn. Roedd yr ymgynghoriad yn aneffeithiol ac annheg gan fod y Grid Cenedlaethol wedi cyhoeddi eu cynlluniau cyn cychwyn y broses ac nid oedd yr ymgynghoriad statudol yn ystyried unrhyw ddewisiadau eraill. Mae nifer sylweddol o enghreifftiau ble nad yw’r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi dilyn polisïau’r Llywodraeth fel y disgrifir yn EN-1 ac EN-5 Nid yw’r Grid Cenedlaethol na Horizon wedi dilyn yr arweiniad yn Neddf Cynllunio 2008, ac nid oes asesiad digonol nac ymgynghori wedi bod am effaith cronnus peilonau "

Peter Llewellyn
"other technology exists like undergrounding and subsea which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The additional costs can be absorbed in the multi billion investment in the power station and represents a miniscule impact on the UK taxpayer. "

Rebecca Louise Davies
"I wish to object, because: 1 - the proposal makes our home virtually unsalable, and no compensation has been suggested 2 - the road access to our property will be severely effected during construction and may cause issues for emergency vehicles 3 - the final view will be terrible, the visual outlook ruined 4 - concerns about the impact on health from EMFs 5 - compromised privacy, safety and security during construction and operational maintenance 6 - potential damage to property utilities during construction 7 - damage and disturbance to property and vehicles during operational maintenance from dust and paint spray 8 - impacts on the tourist industry (important to the local economy) 9 - concerns that this would be the first of several more pylon lines "

Veronica Jones
"It will be detrimental to scenic beauty, tourism, farming, house values and health Better solutions exist - underground or subsea "

Aled Williams
"I believe that National Grid Electricity Transmission are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second row It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd.   Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. There will be a negative impact on the rural landscape. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons and protect the next generations by not running the risk. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge.  Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. "

Caroline Johnson
"I wish to point out the failure of successive planning applications for wind turbines and associated infrastructure to take into account the cumulative effect to the environment in a relatively small area. I understand that looking at the cumulative effect of such projects is a requirement under current EU legislation."

Hugh Griffith
"1)Scientific evidence confirms the serious hazards/dangers of these electricity cables on health eg childhood leaukaemia. 2)Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry. 3)Pylons have been promoted only on the grounds of cost to consumers BUT at what cost to the people of Anglesey ,who will bear the whole cost of this disgraceful project. 4)National Grid's decisions are undemocratic and unfair considering the objections and opposition from the people of Anglesey and ALL elected representatives(MP,AM,County Council and Community Councils) 5)National Grid's consultation process for the first Phase ie Mode of Transmission was not adequate - the decision was presented as a FAIT ACCOMPLI with National Grid being intransigent and dismissive to the point of ridicule.The discussion regarding the Route of transmission was more personal but again one was in no doubt that National Grid made ALL the decissions. 6)Wales has a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act.Although National Grid may not be strictly Legally bound by this,as this project is in WALES ,it should,out of respect and decency, accept and follow the Act - and not ignore it and treat the legitimate objections of the people of Anglesey with disdainful intransigence. 7)Alternative technology exists now.National Grid is imposing 1950's technology in the 2000's. 8)Have National Grid followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008?I do not think that at any point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. 9)I would also question whether National Grid have followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 EN-5. "

Jane Griffith
"1-Serious concerns about the significant damage to health which National Grid (NG) have tried to ignore. 2-Detrimental effect of pylons on House prices . 3-NG decisions are contrary to the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act 4-Technology other than pylons exists but have been dismissed out of hand by NG solely on the grounds of cost"

Jane Williams
"I believe that National Grid Electricity Transmission are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second row It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd.  If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line.  It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge.  Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. "

John Griffith
"1-Significant risk to health,particularly children 2-Unfair and undemocratic decisions aainst all the people of Anglesey and their elected representaives. 3-Totally against the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act.THESE PYLONS ARE ERECTED IN WALES. 4-Other technology exists.Undergrounding was excluded by National Grid purely on the grounds of cost 5-Severe effect on the value of Houses near pylons which National Grid is IGNORING - THE PLANNING INSPECTORATE SHOULD NOT."

Kathryn Jones
"I object to the proposals because ... 1 - Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 2 - There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. 3 - Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. 4 - Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. 5 - Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. 6 - The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. 7 - There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. 8 - NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Margaret Litherland
"I do not want any more pylons on Anglesey. For the following reasons. There is growing evidence that the presence of pylons and overhead cables is related to and increase in serious health problems. This includes childhood leukaemia. On Anglesey there is plenty of annicdotal cases of cancer in areas where people are living next to or near overhead cables. If allowed the pylons will be transmitting power to England with little or no benefit to the people of Anglesey. It is ,therefore, unfair to ask the people of Anglesey to bear the cost in terms of destruction of landscape, and devaluation of property prices. It is time that outdated technology was replaced by other technology such as subsea or undergrounding. These more acceptable technologies are now being widely used in other countries so why not on Anglesey. The manor in which National Grid have conducted the consultation and their treatment of the people is unacceptable. I myself have felt intimidated by representatives of National Grid. This should not be allowed. "

Miss M Griffiths
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Mrs S Edwards
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Ms S Roffe
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Nigel Youd
"I believe that now other technology is available, such as subsea and ondergrounding is available there is no need to use pylons to transmit the electricity. All the people of Anglesey, the County Council, the Community Councils, the MP and the AM are totally against a second row of pylons. Therefore,if this goes ahead it would be undemocratic. There is evidence that overhead cables are connected to serious health issues and therefore should not be allowed. In addition a second row of pylons with be detrimental to the rural landscape and visible from the AONB"

Public Health England
"Thank you for your consultation regarding the above development. Public Health England (PHE) would like to be included as an interested party. We have no further comments to make since our last communication with yourselves and look forward to being copied in on future correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or concerns. "

Irfon Price Morris
"Rwyf yn bryderus iawn y bydd adeiladu cyfres o beilonau newydd i gario gwifrau o safle Wylfa Newydd ar draws yr ynys yn hynod niweidiol i drigolion, gweithwyr ac ymwelwyr Ynys Môn. Mae effaith gweledol y set bresennol o beilonau yn sicr yn ddychrynllyd o hyll gan hagru a difetha golygfeydd i drigolion ac ymwelwyr. Byddai ychwanegu at hyn yn gwbl waradwyddus gan beryglu bywoliaeth gweithwyr y sector twristiaeth, cyfyngu ar ddatblygiad amaethyddiaeth, gostwng gwerth eiddo personol nifer o bobl yn nibrisiad eu heiddo gydag effaith cael peilonau hyll. Diystyrwyd y dadleuon hyn pan adeiladwyd y set cyntaf o beilonnau- byddai adeiladu ail set , a hynny pan fo opsiynnau eraill ar gael, yn ddirmyg llwyr- gormes Prydain o Lundain yn anwybyddu democratiaeth lleol Cyngor Ynys Môn a Llywodraeth Cymru. Pa hawl sydd gan y grid i ddiystyrru Deddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau'r Dyfodol - mae gennym ddyletswydd i'n plant a'n wyrion i ddiogelu'n gwlad . Rhowch y ceblau dan ddaear neu dan y môr a pheidiwch a bod mor farus i warchod eich buddiannau cyfalafol. Sut y gall y Grid Cenedlaethol ddweud fod rhoi'r ceblau dan y môr rhy gostus ac eto defnyddio yr un dechnoleg i brynu a ddod a thrydan o Ffrainc?"

Vanessa Jones
"As we visit Anglesey frequently to visit friends the thought of pylons down such wonderful countryside is terrible, it will seriously hinder the tourism & affect all that live on the island Farming & farmers will have their livelihoods put into jeopardy along with house prices"

Christine Webster
"The consultations carried out at the beginning dismissed under ground technologies , the only options in question was which path do we wish the pylons to take. Pylons are dated and have a huge negative effect on our landscape. We have a responsibility for future generations to give them a quality of life, if the duration of Wylfa is long and possibly extended I feel we should give this matter serious consideration. At what point do the British Government decide to stop Pylons obliterating our countryside. There will come a time and I think the time is already here now. I am not thinking what is quicker or cheaper but what is in the interest of the people of Anglesey Tourism and farming are very important to Anglesey. The island has turned a corner after the Royal Family enjoying their stay here. Large numbers of tourist visit during the summer months to experience our wonderful landscape. We are flooded with day trippers from England throughout the year. This industry is important to us and we have spectacular beaches and breathtaking views towards Snowdonia National Grid propose to run parallel to the old pylons ,then split in Star I consider this too close to the populated South of the island. I object strongly to these two set of pylons placed in different direction. I object to a second larger set of pylons travelling across this small island. We need tourism our greatest assets are the views. and many beaches which thousands enjoy. The proposals are shocking we have alternatives , lets adopt them and show the people of Anglesey the same respect as other projects in the UK by utilizing other means of transporting Electric we deserve the same consideration "

Mervyn Lloyd Jones
"Impact on the environment Impact on tourism Impact on the Welsh language"

Alice Jones
"I am against the proposal because: There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. The current line of pylons would not be allowed under current regulations - the presence of them should NOT be used to justify a second line Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations."

Carys Pritchard
"I don't want pylons because of the health affect on people also for the future generations. Pylons will devalue my property which we have worked hard for. The consultation has been flawed we have not been listened to we want under grounding not pylons it will have a visual impact on the landscape It will affect tourism on Anglesey which we rely on for incomes. "

Edith Jones
"I am against the proposal because: National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5"

Gwilym Morris
"Nid wyf o blaid ail res o beilonau. Rwy'n gwrthwynebu am y rhesymau canlynol: * Bydd dwy res o beilonau yn cael effaith eithriadol ar welediad. Byddant yn anharddu'r golygfeydd am 60 mlynedd a mwy. Yn ei dro, bydd hynny yn cael effaith bendant ar y diwydiant twristiaeth a'r boblogaeth leol. * Mae yna le i gredu y gall byw yn agos at beilonau gael effaith ar iechyd, er bod yna ddwy ddadl yma. Roedd dwy ddadl ynglyn ag ysmygu hanner can mlynedd yn ol ac fe wyddom y gwir am hynny rwan. Mae'r risg yn rhy enfawr i fentro codi mwy o beilonau uwchben y ddaear. * Mae lle cryf i gredu y bydd yna effaith ar yr iaith Gymraeg. "

Jasmin Jones
"I really am against this! National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. Effaith ar iechyd Darparu power I Loegr, yn erbyn ein dymuniadau ac ddim yn deg Difetha golygfeydd a rhinwedd cefn gwlad Datblygiad economaidd Farchnad tai - poblogaeth bach Anifaeliad cefngwlad - gwartheg yn gallu gweld UV light sydd yn dwad o ceblau power fotedd uchel. ofn ac ymddygiad yn newid. "

Jean Marshall
"Rydw i'n gwrthwynebu'n gryf y bwriad i osod peilonau ychwanegol ar draws Ynys Mon am y rhesymau canlynol: * Mae tystilaeth a gwybodaeth eang am effaith peilonau ar iechyd yn enwedig iechyd plant. Yn fuan wedi agor Wylfa a gosod y peilonau presennol yn nechrau 70au y ganrif ddiwethaf, bu fy merch fach, oedd ond yn 6 mis oed ar y pryd [redacted]. Roedd hi ar y pryd yn un o nifer o blant o Ynys Mon oedd yn cael triniaeth [redacted]. Ni fyddwn yn hoffi gweld unrhyw riant yn mynd trwy'r hyn ddioddefon ni fel teulu am flynyddoedd i ddod. * Nid oes asesiad digonol nac ymgynghori wedi bod am effaith y peilonau ac felly nid yw'r Grid Cenedlaethol na Horizon wedi dilyn yr arweiniad yn Neddf Cynllunio 2008. *Bydd peilonau ychwanegol yn niweidiol i olygfeydd cefn gwlad. Mae Ynys Mon yn Ardal o Harddwch Arbennig Neilltuol a byddai'n drychinebus difetha hyn. * Yn dilyn y pwynt uchod, bydd peilonau ychwanegol yn niweidio iawn i'r diwydiant twristiaeth ar yr ynys. Mae diweithdra yn uchel iawn yma ac mae llawer o'r boblogaeth yn dibynnu ar dwristiaeth er mwyn ennill bywoliaeth. * Mae'r bwriad i godi mwy o beilonau yn annheg ac yn anemocrataidd. Cynhaliwyd nifer o gyfarfodydd ymgynghori ac fe fynychais pob un ohonynt. ym mhob achos roedd aelodau'r gymuned, cynghorwyr lleol ac Aelodau Seneddol i gyd yn gwrthwynebu'r peilonau. Dylid parchu barn trigolion a'r Senedd sy'n unfrydol y dylid tanddaearu yn hytrach na chodi mwy o beilonau. * Roedd y Grid Cenedlaethol wedi cyhoeddi eu cynlluniau cyn cychwyn y broses ymgynghori ac felly roedd yr holl broses yn aneffeithiol ac annheg. * Mae yna ddulliau eraill ar gael megis tanddaearu a mynd o dan y mor ac nid oes effeithiau negyddol o ddefnyddio'r rhain. * Y ddadl gan y Grid Cenedlaethol yw'r gost o danddaearu. Ni ddylid rhoi unrhyw ystyriaeth o gwbl i hyn gan y bydd y GC yn gwneud elw sylweddol o Wylfa Newydd. Dylid edrych ar hyn fel cost y pen ar gyfer pob dinesydd y Deyrnas Unedig dros gyfnod o tua 60 mlynedd. Gellid gweld mai bychan iawn yw'r gost wrth wneud hyn. "

Jennifer Edwards
"1 - Pylons will make Anglesey ugly and spoil beautiful areas. 2 - Pylons will be detrimental to tourism. 3 - High Tension cables have known health risks. 4 - ALL of this is unnecessary when other options such as undergrounding/subsea are available."

Marie Wilson
"I am against the NGET proposal because National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on."

Marilyn Maloney on behalf of Meleta Theresa Goodier
"A piece of land owned by Meleta adjacent to her home is marked as affected as is the roadway outside the house. I have seen the plans in Llangefni on her behalf and there is no indication what this is for. We suspect that the piece of land may be used for access to the tunnel head building. How can anyone know whether to agree or object when the detail is so difficult to ascertain."

Miss Heather Thomas
" "

Mr Jim Marshall
"I oppose erecting more pylons because This is an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty; There is a huge amount of research into the health effects of pylons which shows that they can have a detrimental effect especially on the health of children: This is a terrible legacy to leave to our children and grandchildren and future generations; The consultations from the beginning appear to have been very one sided as decisions were made before hand and no consideration was given to the opinions of Anglesey people and our official representatives. "

Mr Robert Jones
"I am against the proposal because: The pylons would go through my land which will disrupt farming National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. "

Owain Hughes
"Safeguarding the future of Tourism on the Island. Economic damage of a second row of pylons Flawed consultation process Health concerns of a second row of pylons Westminster deciding the fate of the Island The legacy of a second row of pylons "

Richard Jones
"I am strongly against this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. Effaith ar iechyd Darparu pwer i Loegr - yn erbyn ein dymuniadau ac ddim yn deg Difetha golygfeydd cefn gwlad Datblygiad economaidd Farchnad tai - poblogaeth bach Anifaeliaid cefngwlad - gwartheg yn gallu gweld UV light sydd yn dwad o ceblau pwer foltedd uchel (ofn ac ymddygiad yn newid) Fy Ngwrthwynebiadau: - Effaith ar iechyd - Darparu pwer i Loegr - yn erbyn ein dymuniadai ac ddim yn deg - Difetha golygfeydd cefn gwlad - Datblygiad ecenomaidd - Farchnad tai - poblogaeth bach Anifeiliaid cefn gwlad - gwartheg yn gallygweld uv light sydd yn dwad o ceblau pwer foltedd uchel (ofn ac ymddygiad yn newid) "

The Coal Authority
"I have reviewed the proposals and confirm that as per red line boundary: Figure 14.2 a small part of the site to the east of Llanfair falls within the defined Development High Risk Area; therefore within this specific part of the site there are coal mining features and hazards which need to be considered in relation to development taking place within this part of the project. We are pleased to note that the Environmental Statement, Chapter 11: Geology, Hydrogeology and Ground Conditions identifies the potential effects of coal mining legacy on the development including integrity and stability of the pylon and safety of the construction workers. Appropriate recommendations have been made that intrusive site investigations will be undertaken to determine the presence, if any, of shallow mine workings and a Coal Mining Risk Assessment Report will be completed once the ground investigation has taken place. "

Tim Pritchard
"Rwyf yn gwrthwynebu'n gryf iawn y bwriad i godi ail res o beilonau ar draws Ynys Mon i gludo trydan o Wylfa newydd a hynny am y rhesymau canlynol: 1. Er nad yw wedi ei brofi'n llwyr a bod dwy farn, mae gen i bryderon gwirioneddol am effaith ar iechyd y boblogaeth. Mae Ynys Mon yn boblog a bydd llawer iawn o anneddau yn agos, neu hyd yn oed yn uniongyrchol o dan beilonau a gwifrau a bydd sawl cartref rhwng dwy res. Nid yw hyn yn sefyllfa iach. 2. Mae un rhes o beilonau yn cael effaith eithriadol ar welediad; byddai dwy yn hollol anioddefol. Byddai modd gweld rhain o AHNA ac o bob congl o'r Ynys o'r bron. 3. Bydd yr effaith a gaiff adeiladu gorsaf gynhyrchu trydan yn Ynys Mon yn effeithio'n sylweddol ar ein Sir. Mae'n anfaddeuol fod y Grid yn mynd i ychwanegu at hynny trwy fynnu gosod yr ail res uwchben y ddaear. Mae'r boblogaeth wedi datgan o'r cychwyn eu bod eisiau rhain o dan y ddaear neu yn danfor ond mae'r Grid wedi ein hanwybyddu. Mae'r ymgynhoriad wedi bod yn ffals iawn oherwydd hyn. "

William Edwards
"1 - Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside,particularly views from within and views of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 2 - Pylons will be detrimental to Tourism on Anglesey. 3 - There are confirmed risks to health with High Tension cables on pylons with particular reference to CHILDHOOD LEAUKAEMIA. 4 - National Grid's decision to opt for pylons is both unfair and undemocratic.It is contrary to the clearly expressed wishes of all the democratically elected representatives of the people of Anglesey, and the WELSH ASSEMBLY. 5 - WALES has a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act - which National Grid has ignored completely.THIS IS AN INSULT TO THE PEOPLE OF WALES AND THE PEOPLE OF ANGLESEY IN PARTICULAR. 6 - Alternative options such as undergrounding or subsea are available but at minimal extra cost.National Grid have chosen pylons purely on the ground of costs to their customers and their shareholders.ANGLESEY IS FORCED TO BEAR THE TOTAL COST. 7 - Have National Grid followed Government Policy as described in EN-1 and EN-2. 8 - The consultation was ineffective .National Grid presented pylons as their prefered option after they had already made the decision but without any prior honest, open and meaningful consultation.Their idea of' consultation'consisted of their people presenting their decision as a done deal.THIS PHASE, REGARDING THE MODE OF TRANSMISSION, WAS NOT REMOTELY CONSISTENT WITH THE TERM CONSULTATION."

Catherine Beman
"I object to the plans to put overhead pylons across Anglesey. The planned pylons are unnecessary because they could be placed underground. Overground pylons degrade the environment. They are the lazy uncaring option. Anglesey is a unique and fragile environment and its history is important to Wales. the geology alone is special, let alone its ecosystems."

Elen Clode
"Rwy'n gwthwynebu'n gryf y syniad o roi rhagor o beilonau ar draws Ynys Môn - mae modd eu claddu ac felly dylid gwneud hyn wrth gwrs. Mae difetha'r tir lle rydym ni wedi cael ein geni neu wedi dewis byw ynddi yn anfaddeuol. Byddai hagrwch 100 o beilonau ar hyd Ynys Môn yn difrodi harddwch, ffermio, gwerth tai ac ein iechyd ni a chenheloedd i ddod. Mae trigolion Môn, ein cynhorau cymuned, cynghorwyr sir, Aelod Cynulliad ac Aelod Seneddol yn gwrthwynebu - gwrandewch arnom ni - mae Ynys Môn yn haeddu gwell."

Morgan Evans & Co Ltd on behalf of G H Denham
"We agree with the need to undertake the necessary electricity transmission works but do not agree that the applicants are including within their application for a DCO the use of land over which no statutory works are taking place i.e. no permanent structures either above ground or below ground will be constructed on the land. We are of the view that this is an abuse of power as it allows the applicant to occupy any land for any purpose other than for the construction of pylons and cables. We therefore contend that any parcels of land identified for non-electricity purposes should be excluded from the DCO, if granted."

Gareth Morgan
"1. Cynllun y Grid Cenedlaethol yn seiliedig at ddefnyddio presenoldeb in rhes o beilonau fel cyfiawnhad dros gosi rhes(i) ychwanegol. Nid yw yn reswm digonol sy'n berthnasol i'r oes hon. 2. Bydd y peilonau yn amharu at olygfeydd godidog mewn ardaloedd o harddwch naturiol. 3. Bydd y peiolonau yn cael effaith niweidiol at gefn gwlad ac at dwristiaeth. 4. Byddai gorfodi peilonau ychwanegol yn anheg o safbwynt democratiaeth lleol, ym Mon ac yng Nghymru."

Gillian Foulkes
"I am objecting to the proposed new 400kv electricity transmission line across Anglesey. This will cause yet more industrialisation of the landscape. If another electricity transmission line is really needed then we should be planning to put this underground or under the sea where it is not visible. We are a small, over-crowded island and we need to value our land and landscapes much more."

Jennifer Saboor
"I firmly object to the installation of a second row of pylons across our beautiful island of Ynys Mon. I was born and brought up on this Island and am immensely proud of it's people, communities,history, welsh culture and wonderful and unique views. I am very worried as follows: - negative visual impact which will adversely affect our sense of belonging and well-being - a sad legacy for our children - I want our children to be proud and protective of the Island. - other technologies should be used e.g. under-grounding and sub-sea - I do not accept that it is too expensive for such a rich global company such s the National Grid, who have made billions and billions f profit from Anglesey over the years, they should now have more respect for us and do the right thing. - Although there was consultation, National Grid did not take our concerns seriously - I believe it was just paying lip service and had no intention of listening - it's all about making money for shareholders with little regard for the people living on this Island. - I also worry about health implications for those living near the pylons, I do not think that enough research has gone into this to justify installing a second and bigger row of pylons. "

Judith Hedges
"This line of pylons will be visible from the ANOB. I think they will be an eye sore and I object that bringing energy across the land should spoil the beauty of the countryside which means so much to us."

National Trust
"Introduction NATIONAL TRUST AND PLAS NEWYDD National Trust is a leading conservation charity with 4 million members. Established over 115 years ago, our primary statutory purpose is to promote the preservation of special places for the benefit of the nation. To achieve this aim we manage over a quarter of a million hectares of land, more than 700 miles of unspoilt coastline and estuary, several hundred historic houses, gardens and parks, and 6 World Heritage Sites. More than 100 million visits are made every year to the properties in our care. National Trust owns, cares for and provides public access to land and buildings on both sides of the Menai Straits. The Straits have a unique and highly significant combination of historic, scenic and ecological interests. Plas Newydd and Faenol represent a very important part of the tourism offer for North Wales and recognised as a highly significant environmental, heritage and economic asset. Plas Newydd was given to the National Trust by its owner, the 7th Marquis of Anglesey, in 1976, an occupied family home of some four hundred years. Plas Newydd is a special place that has become, and will continue to be, the ‘special place’ of many. We welcome the opportunity for critical examination and scrutiny of the proposals through the Examination of the submitted Development Consent Order (DCO). National Trust comments are specific to its land ownership interests primarily relating to land in North Anglesey and in the Menai Strait at Plas Newydd and Faenol. The Trust’s concerns are summarised below: Principle of tunnel for the Menai crossing The National Trust welcomes the tunnel solution as the preferred technology to cross the Menai Strait. The National Trust recognises the benefits to the landscape and setting of the AONB, and to Plas Newydd and the Faenol estates in bringing forward this solution. Vibration The National Trust would note that the mansion at Plas Newydd is 300m horizontal distance from the maximum Limit of Deviation of the proposed tunnel, and in accordance with the submitted assessment, significant vibration is not expected at a distance greater than 100m from the Limit of Deviation. We would note that whilst an assessment based on distance may be appropriate for ground borne vibration from surface vibration sources, some qualification is required as to why the chosen distances of 50m for a Tunnel Boring Machine or 100m for Drill and Blast methods are appropriate. The National Trust considers that either a quantitative assessment should be carried out which determines the likely range of vibration levels at nearby buildings, or the method of the qualitative method used should be stated and justified. If, as appears to be the case, the assessment has been based purely on distance from the tunnel, then this should be justified by reference to vibration measurements taken during other tunnelling projects carried out in geologically similar areas. It should also be determined whether any buildings within the assessment are structurally unsound, or may be difficult to repair, in which case the vibration damage criteria ought to be reduced on a case-by-case basis (as per BS 5228) to reflect this. The National Trust thus considers that at the current time, vibration issues associated with tunnel construction are not resolved, and specific issues for Plas Newydd, including the stability of the Whistler painting, remains outstanding. Construction Transport The main point of access for all tourism to Plas Newydd is via Brynseincyn Road. Brynsiencyn Road will be used by construction traffic during Enabling and Reinstatement Works at the start and end of the project. Brynsiencyn Road will be used for Abnormal Indivisible Loads (AIL’s). It is anticipated that the cable for the tunnel would be delivered as AILs to either the T? Fodol or Braint Construction Compound. The Transport Assessment (TA) suggests that there may be 72 cable drum AIL’s. Up to 8 AILs are anticipated to/from Braint Tunnel Head House (THH) for delivery of Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) in tunnel scenario 1 prior to tunnelling commencing or for extraction of TBM in tunnel scenario 2 following main tunnel drive. The preferred route for TBMs, cable drums and mobile cranes to Braint is via Brynsiencyn Road. In terms of minimising and managing the impact of construction traffic on Plas Newydd, the use of the primary construction traffic route that avoids Brynsiencyn Road is welcomed by The National Trust. However, Brynsiencyn Road has been identified as a contingency construction traffic route if the primary route becomes unavailable. The National Trust remains concerned about the implications for Plas Newydd and tourism visitor access should the primary route be unusable. The commitment to onsite storage of excavated material for 4 weeks (or longer) needs to be incorporated into the scheme. In the event that the contingency access is used construction traffic will not be permitted to use Brynsiencyn Road during peak times. The submitted DCO considers that peak times are limited to 0800-0900 and 1630-1730. Consideration should be given to extending these periods to cover Plas Newydd’s peak periods and any significant events being held at Plas Newydd. In terms of AIL’s it is recommended that all AIL’s that are able to use the Star Bridge should do so in order to minimise impact on Brynsiencyn Road. The TBM and Cable deliveries cannot cross the Star Bridge and so must use Brynsiencyn Road. With up to 72 Cable deliveries for the scheme there is potential for regular disruption because of this. The National Trust welcomes the proposal within The Outline Construction Traffic Management Plan for a Transport Review Group being in place and that a Traffic Safety and Control Officer will be appointed. However, National Trust require further assurances in terms of how these movements will be managed so as to avoid conflict with Plas Newydd visitors, and avoidance of traffic disruption. Tourism Construction of the overhead line and tunnel could have significant implications for tourism in Anglesey. The combined effect of Wylfa Newydd construction and the associated grid connection construction could have a detrimental effect on tourism and visitor numbers to Anglesey. The National Trust remains concerned about the potential effect of construction workers reducing the availability of tourist accommodation, delays caused by construction traffic and the perception of Anglesey as a tourist destination affected by the construction works. Potential delays could impact seriously on the National Trust business model with loss of income to the property at Plas Newydd. Income loss and traffic disruption would have a significant impact on the local economy as National Trust employ seasonal staff at the property. Any drop in income, also means less money to spend on conservation at Plas Newydd. The National Trust thus remains concerned about the tourism implications of the scheme, and the consequent impact on visitor numbers at Plas Newydd. Conclusion The National Trust welcomes the opportunity for critical scrutiny of the proposals through the Examination of the DCO. National Trust comments are specific to its land ownership interests primarily affecting land at Plas Newydd and Faenol. The National Trust welcomes the tunnel solution as the preferred technology to cross the Menai Strait and consequent benefits to the landscape. We have remaining concerns in relation to construction vibration, construction traffic and overarching concerns in relation to tourism from construction of the project. "

Peter Foulkes
"Sir/Madam I have joined in with earlier stages of this planning application from National Grid Electricity Transmission Plc and throughout my objection to this scheme has been based upon it being a "land" connection. Here is the perfect opportunity for a seabed connection to the major substation at Connaghs Key. Not only would it provide a HV connection from Wylfa B but also other electricity generating plants could "plug" into it, here I am minded of the off-shore wind farms off the N. Wales coast. Every time I have voiced this option to National Grid they have come back to me with the argument "too expensive." But what price the rich tapestry of landscapes that is Ynys Mon! Neither is the argument that the route across the Isle parallels an existing pylon line so its effect on the landscape and visual amenity is diminished, with a seabed connection across Liverpool Bay there would be no need for either the proposed land connection or the existing line - it could be dismantled. Shortly after receiving the last newsletter from National Grid about the progress of this scheme I read in the National Press, and on National TV, of the new seabed inter-connector being installed between Norway and the north of England - my question remains - why is such a transmission line not the way ahead in N. Wales? "

R Williams
"The landscape of Anglesey is a gentle and beautiful one that has already been damaged by pylons and would be utterly brutalised by adding more. The existing ones and any proeoective new ones should be replaced by underground networks. Landscapes, and particularly AONBs, are priceless. Cheap power is for cheap thinkers who care not a jot about the wellbeing of any present or future generation."

Sion Pritchard
"I oppose the pylons for the following reasons: 1 - Health issues 2 - Detrimental to views and therefore local economy 3 - The consultation is flawed 4 - There is no reason not to put the cables underground or under the sea.The extra costs involved are,on a grand scale,very minimal."

Toeni Jones
"Hello , Thank you for your time in reading this The idea of further pylons across Anglesey concerns me for a number of reasons : 1. Health - On reviewing scientific research data “ Extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields are classified by the International Authority on Research in Cancer as possibly carcinogenic to humans based on limited evidence for childhood leukaemia at relatively high exposure levels “. [redacted] 2.Tourism -the visual impact of the pylons are going to detract from the natural beauty of the island , risking a drop in the number of visitors with a potential knock on to the economy .some data from Anglesey council - has shown “ accomodation & food services “ to be the 4 th highest employment sector on the island , these numbers have been demonstrated to be dropping from 2011-2012 . However , Anglesey was shown to have the highest number of small businesses employing 1-4 employees in North Wales , but the lowest in higher figures . In order to sustain and grow the economy , conditions need to prevail to support new businesses , to attract a dynamic , possible younger work force , here , which in turn , will have a more positive knock on to the islands economy . ( “a data analysis of the Island -Anglesey County Council ). [redacted] Tourism info - more : “ over period 2014-2016 north wales received an average of 3,626,000 domestic GB trips per year - these trips have been calculated to make £ 639million to the Welsh economy. Similarly , North Wales received 247,000 international visitors , contributing £88 million to the Welsh economy. Anglesey has been shown to be - the 3rd highest internationally visited in North Wales - a number of 48,000 international visitors , The natural beauty of the island , beaches , farm holidays must be the major attraction . 3 . Well being of Anglesey population , particularly those who live in proximity to the pylons . The knock on to the visual impact on the environment and community around rthese areas . There is a very strong , historical community feeling in the smaller , more rural villages on the island. The villages have already had closure of some schools , with a longer term knock on change in population statistics , less community activity , lowering of well being for some people - potential health problems secondary to this . We need public bodies to be more ambitious , aware , adventurous and resourceful to promote the Well Being for future generations . 4 . Preservation of Welsh culture and Language .. by a worrying knock on the islands natural beauty , tourism , employment prospects , the effect on community activity , employment opportunities , a flux of younger population from the island is occurring to areas with brighter opportunities , the long term preservation of skills , culture , language are rapidly diminishing , sadly . Again , to mention the Well-being of Future Generations Act , that bodies need to be putting long term sustainability at fore front of their thinking . Organisations would be ideally collababorating and working well together with a common goal . Cohesive communities , a vibrant feeling of preservation of the Welsh culture and language are 2 of those Well being goals 5 Alternative technology. There are numbers of increasingly educated , trained engineers , and other professionally trained work force to bring this about . surely this should be embraced . This is the 21 st century . Why use such an archaic , aged method to deliver power transport . Why not let this be an opportunity for a more pioneering , project - an underground , under water tunnel transmission . Long term gain for many people Just to mention , hopefully not a risk with larger power lines but - 6 Electrocution. Risk -storm conditions caused A fallen power line into a waterlogged field on a farm adjacent to us caused significant loss of livestock , 2 months ago luckily no loss of human life . "

William Piers Beeland
"National Grid and Welsh and UK Governments need to listen to Anglesey and open serious dialogue. the extra costs of underground or subsea need to be borne by the whole country and written off over the projected lifetime of the Power Plant and subsequent plants. Please also investigate and publish the scope of the construction corridor required so that all are fully aware of the implications of all options. above all, recognise the nature of Anglesey and the wish of the residents, representatives and our “industry” which at present is tourism."

Carol Ann McGregor
"I object to the erection of a second row of pylons for the following reason: * There will be a marked effect on the tourist industry which is vital for the economy of the island. * Even though there are opposite views on the effect of pylons on health, there is a serious cause to worry. EMF is believed to have a detrimental effect on health. Fifty years ago, the population believed that smoking and using DDT was harmless but we know now that they were not. It is wise to take heed of the warnings. * A second row of pylons will have a detrimental effect on farming, visual aspect and the environment. It is too high a price to pay. "

Davis Meade Property Consultants
"We act as Agents for a number of affected parties whom are being approached by the applicant to seek voluntary agreements whom are concerned as to the adverse impact of the proposed scheme on their properties. We are wanting to have the opportunity to make representations, as appropriate on the evolving draft Development Consent Order , Land Plans and the Construction Environmental Management Plan ( CEMP) as well as the process being adopted to seek voluntary agreements. "

Dr J C Madoc-Jones
"Pylons are unsightly and therefore harmful to tourism. The alternatives of underground and undersea cables have not been considered. A precedent for more lines of pylons will have been created. The county council and local population are against it."

Elisabeth Williams
"Why does the landscape of Anglesey have to be ruined to carry electricity to England, especially the south East. One line of pylons is not a reason for the second. Concern too about the health of those near the pylons and the negative effect on Tourism. "

Keith John Gene Toy
"Anglesey is a natural choice for placing some wind turbines, but installing too many will destroy the natural environment, spoiling the amenity of residents and visitors. Tourism is a major source of revenue for the Angesey population. "

Mr H H Williams
"I strongly object to these proposals because: 1 - A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line 2 - Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB 3 - Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value 4 - Detrimental to health 5 - Unfair and undemocratic 6 - Wellbeing of future generations 7 - Underground or subsea is better 8 - Consultation was flawed 9 - Not correctly followed Government policy 10 - No cumulative impact assessment "

Mrs E Williams
"I live in a community which will be surrounded by pylons if this proposal goes ahead, so obviously I am against it, but specifically 1 - it will damage the housing market 2 - it will be bad for tourism 3 - it will be bad for farming 4 - it will ruin the beautiful views we have of Snowdonia National Park I would urge the Examining Authority to visit Star, as well as Rhosybol, Rhosgoch, Capel Coch, Bachau and Cemaes to see for themselves what we have to put up with Climb Mynydd Bodafon, inside the AONB, and count the pylons you can see NOW, then ask yourselves, was it really the intention of Government policy (EN-5) to add more pylons to this view. National Grid should be taking pylons DOWN, not putting more up!"

Paul Higginson
"Impact on tourism industry Impact on communications due to increased RF interference Disregarding public opinion just to do a cheap job."

Robert Evans
"More pylons will further degrade Anglesey's particular landscape, which is one of Wales's distinctive assets, and will be especially detrimental to the views of and from within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. This will diminish the island's appeal for tourism and consequently be damaging to its economy."

Susan Heywood
"Tourism is of huge value to the economy of Anglesey. I have made a good living for thirty three years from tourists to this beautiful island. I do not want this incredible place to be blighted by a second run of pylons. The health risks of pylons also need to be considered. Why gamble with peoples lives when better alternatives are available."

Beaumaris Town Council
"USE OF NEW BRIDGE A tunnel under the Menai Strait is welcome. However plans for a third road crossing of the strait have progressed. The option to save costs by using the new bridge must be kept open. ECONOMIC IMPACT (ON TOURISM) Beaumaris Town Council must consider the well being of the town which depends on tourism. Tourism is important for Anglesey and its importance will grow. Anglesey has a quiet and undeveloped character. This contributes to a sense of ‘getting away from it all’. The tourist industry is not just restricted to the coast. A double line of pylons on the doorstep of an inland holiday cottage will erode the sense of ‘getting away from it all’. Support of one industry (power generation) must not be at the expense of another (tourism). UNDERGROUND CABLING Placing the new line close to the old line will reduce the area visually effected. However a double line has an intense impact on particular locations. Placing the new line underground better protects the visual landscape. Underground cables are more expensive but National Grid have not placed enough weight on the economic impact of a visible pylon line. A small negative impact on the £250 million per year tourism industry of Anglesey runs to many tens of millions of pounds over the lifetime of the new power station. National Grid have been willing to put other connectors underground. National Grid’s assertions about the cost of underground cables will be challenged. An independent report noted that the National Grid’s estimated costs are greater than those incurred by other distributors. Transmission operators in Europe have found that the investment cost ratio is 2-5 to 1 rather than the 10-20 to 1 quoted by National Grid. Underground cables are more reliable, National Grid have ignored this long term economic benefit. PYLON DESIGN The use of a few low profile pylons is welcome. A low profile design should be used throughout. A double line of dissimilar pylons will be no more intrusive than a double line of similar pylons. A low profile design will reduce the visual impact of the new line. The recently approved ‘T’ design would be ideal. Alternatively a low profile lattice design could be used. UNDERSEA OPTION The Town Council believe that a sub-sea cable is the best option. The Western Link project provides a 385km link through the Irish Sea. An offshore link along the North Wales coast would be around a third of the length and therefore cheaper. Sub-sea links elsewhere appear to be even cheaper than the Western Link. National Grid’s assertion that sub-sea would cost ‘many hundreds of millions of pounds more’ will be challenged. A sub-sea connection would be no less resilient than an on-land option. The existing pylon line will provide back-up transmission capacity should the sub-sea cable fail. The decision to route the new pylon line close to the existing line means that they are both vulnerable to a single incident. "

Daniel Bamford
"Dear Sir/Madam, NORTH WALES CONNECTION PROJECT: I refer to the above referenced document and specifically to Section E (Ceint to Afon Braint, previously referred to as section 5) to make it known that I object to the erection of Pylons and new overhead transmission along this route. I have outlined my objections below and trust that they will be given the consideration and attention that they deserve. Section E. Ceint to Afon Braint Adopting any overhead route other than along the line of the existing pylons would be unacceptable and it must be concluded that careful routing would not be capable of adequately reducing the effect of structures of this size in this area. Adopting the proposed route identified as Section E would have serious impacts including: • Placement of new pylons in a previously unspoilt part of Anglesey. • ‘Boxing in’ the village of Star with pylons and wires, destroying far reaching views to the South and West. • Dominating isolated farms and small scale settlements in direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN-5. • Passing unacceptably close properties including [redacted]. • Doubling the visual impact to both residents and visitors by crossing the primary access roads (A55 and A5) onto the island by with two series of pylons spaced 2km apart. • Change the character of the settlements of Llanddaniel Fab and Star. A defining feature of these villages are their elevated position and broad reaching views over open, unspoilt countryside to the Snowdonia mountain range. • The identified area is largely low lying and open land that can be viewed from many directions, this would highlight the over-bearing nature and adverse visual impact of any proposed pylons or sealing end compound located in this area. Alternatives to Section E Due consideration must be given to re-routing Section E alongside the existing transmission lines or placing this section underground. Routing this section along the existing lines would: • Address a number of the objections raised above. • Allow any new line to follow the existing route right up to the existing A55 crossing point before potentially deviating from this route. • Reduce visual impact by limiting the number of pylons standing alone in the landscape to approximately three (between the A55 crossing and a sealing compound). • Have a negative effect on a number of properties, but no more so than those located along the proposed Section E. Placing the proposed Section E underground would address a large number of concerns and is through open countryside. I have serious objections to the proposed scheme and in particular the area highlighted above on of Social, Economic and Health grounds. A subsea connection would be appropriate mitigation of these risks. Subsea routes are viable as the installation of new subsea routes are proposed between Caithness and Moray and also for the 385km Western Link between Hunterston and Deeside. I believe the current Consultation process is flawed as the central and key decision (to route cables overland or Subsea) has not been given sufficient consideration. "

John Alexander
"1) The democratic and consultation process is flawed as the Ynys Mon County Council and all the Community Councils and the majority of the population are against another set of pylons marching across our island due to the adverse effects it will have on health, environment, tourist industry and the AONB etc.etc. 2)The technology exists for the cables to transmit power sub sea or buried underground .I understand that in Cumbria they are being buried underground as it is a National Park and in in Morcambe Bay they are being laid sub sea . Anglesey is a special island as the AONB is all round our coastline and the island is a designated UNESCO Geopark . Why should we be treated differently when virtually all the power is going to England ? 3)The larger pylons will result in an industrialised landscape and create a precedent for additional rows of pylons when future supplies of energy need to be trasported to England . 4)The structures will blight our valuable landscape and have an adverse effect on our most important industy ; tourism .They will also also have an adverse visual impact as they will be seen from the AONB and the coastal path . 5)The Welsh Government Future Generations Act needs to be addressed . The cables and supports will hardly improve the economic and environmental conditions . 6)The security risks need addressing with an overhead line and this includes acts of terrorism . If there is an attack there is no industry on the island that can use the surplus energy . 7) The costs saved by not tunnelling under the Menai Straits and using the supports of the third bridge ( this may be constructed before any power station ) should definitely be used to bury the cables underground . "

Kay Bamford
"Dear Sir/Madam, I write to let it be known that I have severe concerns regarding the routing of the proposed North Wales Connection, specifically to Section E (Ceint to Afon Braint, previously referred to as section 5) and I object to the erection of Pylons and new overhead transmission along this route. I have outlined my objections below and trust that they will be given the consideration and attention that they deserve. Section E. Ceint to Afon Braint Adopting any overhead route other than along the line of the existing pylons would be unacceptable and it must be concluded that careful routing would not be capable of adequately reducing the effect of structures of this size in this area. Adopting the proposed route identified as Section E would have serious impacts including: • Placement of new pylons in a previously unspoilt part of Anglesey. • ‘Boxing in’ the village of Star with pylons and wires, destroying far reaching views to the South and West. • Dominating isolated farms and small scale settlements in direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN-5. • Passing unacceptably close properties including [redacted]. • Doubling the visual impact to both residents and visitors by crossing the primary access roads (A55 and A5) onto the island by with two series of pylons spaced 2km apart. • Change the character of the settlements of Llanddaniel Fab and Star. A defining feature of these villages are their elevated position and broad reaching views over open, unspoilt countryside to the Snowdonia mountain range. • The identified area is largely low lying and open land that can be viewed from many directions, this would highlight the over-bearing nature and adverse visual impact of any proposed pylons or sealing end compound located in this area. Alternatives to Section E Due consideration must be given to re-routing Section E alongside the existing transmission lines or placing this section underground. Routing this section along the existing lines would: • Address a number of the objections raised above. • Allow any new line to follow the existing route right up to the existing A55 crossing point before potentially deviating from this route. • Reduce visual impact by limiting the number of pylons standing alone in the landscape to approximately three (between the A55 crossing and a sealing compound). • Have a negative effect on a number of properties, but no more so than those located along the proposed Section E. Placing the proposed Section E underground would address a large number of concerns and is through open countryside. I have serious objections to the proposed scheme and in particular the area highlighted above on of Social, Economic and Health grounds. A subsea connection would be appropriate mitigation of these risks. Subsea routes are viable as the installation of new subsea routes are proposed between Caithness and Moray and also for the 385km Western Link between Hunterston and Deeside. I believe the current Consultation process is flawed as the central and key decision (to route cables overland or Subsea) has not been given sufficient consideration. "

Leah Jones
"I live on Anglesey and object to the pythons planned for the island thay are and will be an eye sore on the landscape. I say no to pythons. "

Dafydd I Jones BSc MRICS on behalf of Mr John Pierce
"The area of [redacted] land identified as being necessarily required for the scheme is unreasonable and without merit. "

Dafydd I Jones BSc MRICS on behalf of Mrs Linda Pierce
"The area of [redacted] land identified as being necessarily required for the scheme is unreasonable and without merit."

Peter Robinson
"Just because there is already one row of pylons doesn't mean another would be acceptable. Would then the same argument apply to a third or fourth row? I don't really see large numbers of tourists going to Anglesey to visit the pylons - but they may go elsewhere for less restricted views of the countryside. Like the A55 which is largely used to take traffic through Anglesey and the rest of North Wales, these pylons would mainly be carrying electricity over Wales to parts of England. What about the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act? These would hardly be of benefit to future generations. "

A M Bean
"Please PINS, do not approve this development. It will be bad for tourism, bad for farming, bad for residents, bad for health and bad for the local economy. Do the right thing - reject it"

Ann Jones
"I do not want a second row of pylons or any other rows to follow because they will be detrimental to the countryside, tourism and to the health of the people of Ynys Mon. They will devalue the properties. Anglesey as a whole does not want these pylons, the electricity they carry is of no benefit to us. We are being railroaded to accept them, they are taking no notice of the voice of the community. Is this democracy? Undersea cables carry electricity between different countries eg, Norway to England why can't they be used between Ynys Mon and Merseyside? Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. "

Bet Ashton
"This should be refused. This is not the type of place that even more pylons should be built. Get up to date! Bury them "

Betty Hughes
"Please don't let this happen. There are precious few places like Anglesey left. Please, just don't let it happen "

Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales, Caernarfonshire Bra
"North Wales Connection – second Row of Pylons across Anglesey Response from Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales (CPRW) Caernarfonshire Branch CPRW Caernarfonshire Branch objects to National Grid’s (NG) proposed routing of a second overhead high voltage transmission line across Anglesey for the following reasons: 1. This solution would have a significant, permanent and damaging impact on the landscape of Anglesey, in particular the nationally designated landscape of the Anglesey Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). While some mitigation is proposed by placing cables underground when crossing the section of AONB close to the Menai Strait, the pylons would damage views into and out of many sections of the AONB which border other coasts of the island. The approach ignores the guiding principle of the European Landscape Convention that ‘All landscapes matter’ 2. We maintain that NG has not adequately considered alternative options of full undergrounding of cables or a sub-sea route. National policy guidance does not accept that the additional costs of implementing a more expensive but environmentally less damaging solution should be the primary or determining factor. NG’s preferred solution here sits oddly alongside its current £500mn visual impact programme to bury sections of existing overhead lines affecting designated landscapes. In the 21st century we should not still be erecting new pylons when cables are being buried elsewhere in acknowledgement of the uniquely devastating landscape damage caused by 50m high pylons. We maintain that energy infrastructure decisions affecting the next 50-100 years should not be based on short-term budgetary constraints 3. We have long advocated a sub-sea route for the cables direct from Wylfa to Deeside. NG now has extensive experience of constructing and using long-distance subsea transmission and we do not accept that it has been adequately demonstrated that unique technical factors relating to connection of a nuclear power plant rule this option out. 4. We are concerned that NG implicitly seems to use the existing overhead line of pylons to justify a second. Will further expansion of generating capacity lead in the future to a third or a fourth line? We reject this approach. 5. The proposals do not fully account for the negative economic impact on the areas the lines would pass through. Tourism largely based on landscape and heritage is now the principal economic activity of the region. Any development which threatens the integrity of these landscapes runs the risk of undermining local economic prosperity. The additional costs of a subsea or underground route are trivial compared to the economic harm which an overland route would have on the tourism and leisure industries which depend on the quality of the landscape for their survival. 6. There is almost universal local opposition in Anglesey to these proposals and we consider it contrary to democratic principles as well as the intentions of the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act to press on with this proposal, riding roughshod over these views. "

G Bean
"I am against the proposed development 1 - the current line of pylons would NOT be permitted under EN-5 (AONB) and the Holford Rules, so should not be used for the new power station unless this is requested in the DCO (which it isn't), and the offending areas remedied. It's existence SHOULD NOT be used to justify a second line 2 - socio-economic impacts will out-weight the extra cost of undergrounding 3 - the key asset of Anglesey, it's fantastic countryside, would be further ruined when it could have the errors of the past rectified Do the right thing PINS - reject this proposal "

J Bean
"I object to this proposal 1 - the current pylons are bad enough and should be removed, not used to justify more 2 - Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB 3 - Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value 4 - Detrimental to health "

John Wyn Jones
"Gwrthwynebaf ar sail: - byddai peilonau a gwifrau yn difwyno’r tirwedd ac anharddu’r golygfeydd, - nid oes reswm digonol dros beidio â gosod y ceblau dan y môr, gan ei bod yn wybyddus fod y deyrnas gyfunol yn prynu trydan o Ffrainc [70Km o wifrau tanfor] ac o’r Iseldiroedd [260Km o wifrau tanfor] ac wedi ymrwymo i brynu o Norwy [drwy 730 Km o wifrau tanfor]. - Iechyd, mae fy nghartref o fewn 0.5Km i'r gwifrau osodwyd yn y 60'au, ac rwy'n bryderus fod meysydd electromagnetig a gynhyrchir gan foltedd uchel yn cael effaith andwyol ar iechyd y teulu a'r gymuned ehangach. "

Joyce Gregory
"A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health "

Mair Parry
"No, no, no A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health Unfair and undemocratic Wellbeing of future generations Underground or subsea is better Consultation was flawed Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment "

Maisie Eveson
"A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health Unfair and undemocratic Wellbeing of future generations Underground or subsea is better Consultation was flawed Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment "

Merfyn Lloyd Jones
"Obstruction upheaval to farming and the safety of animals. EMF'S of Health implications - at the moment my daughter is [redacted] and more pylons near the house is a worry. Drop in property value - which will make her unable to sell the house and move to a safer environment. "

Nicola Miller
"National Grid have not considered the impact on 'Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty'. National Grid have not considered the impact on tourism. National Grid have not considered the impact to human or animal health. National Grid have not considered the impact on property values. I fail to see any benefit to Anglesey residents. National Grid are not thinking in the 21st century, or considering future generations. National Grid are railroading the residents of Anglesey to comply with THEIR wishes. THIS IS NOT DEMOCRACY AS I KNOW IT!"

Richard New
"I object to this proposal 1 - an undersea connection direct from Wylfa to the Wirral or Deeside would cost £1 per domestic user for 40 years and £2.50 a business user for 40 years. This option, revealed during the public consultation process, has never been seriously considered by NGET plc (eg they NEVER consulted on the Wirral or Deeside) 2 - Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 3 - Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. 4 - Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. 5 - More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. 6 - There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. 7 - Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. 8 - NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

William Derek Williams
"This really should NOT be allowed. There is SO much wrong with the very idea I don't know where to start. Let's keep it simple ... NO, NO, NO Bad for farmers Bad for residents Bad for tourists Bad for young Bad for old Bad for the yet to be born ... our future generations Please don't let it happen "

Elaine Wain
"Please do not spoil our beautifully island and expose our children to the hazards of pylons"

Mrs Margaret Anne Ayliffe
"There are many reasons for objecting to another row of pylons crossing our island, including spoiling the countryside, causing health problems to those living in the vicinity, allowing future pylons to be built alongside the existing ones as protocol in the future development of the power station. One of my main reasons for objecting is that we are providing this power for the country and then being punished by the ‘big powers’ who are just putting up these pylons over our island, because as long as they get their power, they are not bothered about a small community that relies on tourism for their livelihood. They are ignoring our wishes and I object to this."

Byron Lee
"First and foremost I consider A new row of pylons to have a terrible visual impact on the north Anglesey coast which is formally classed as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. I can't see how the North Wales coast can be classified in the same way after an extra row of larger pylons. This in turn can only have terrible consequences for the people of Anglesey in terms of health and tourism. Electromagnetic Fields that power lines such as these have been proven to create have been proven to have negative effects on fish. If this is so I don't think that it is acceptable to situate High voltage power lines close to people and livestock. Further to this there can only be a detrimental effect on people of Anglesey, I and I'm sure many like me who have holidayed there for years will no longer want to holiday there when more dangerous unsightly pylons are sited across the island. I think this will be a terrible thing for the tourism of Anglesey. There are other ways of carrying power such as sub-sea why is this not being put in place here? This has been good enough to breach the channel, straights between remote Scottish isle's and even the entirety of the north sea. Why is this not good enough for Anglesey? "

Cyngorf Penmynydd a Star on behalf of GRAHAM OWEN (Clerc) (GRAHAM OWEN (Clerc))
"Bydd Plwyf Penmynydd a Star, fel sawl ardal arall ym Môn, yn cael ei effeithio’n sylweddol, ac yn uniongyrchol, gan y bwriad i godi ail res o beilonau i drosglwyddo trydan o Wylfa Newydd i Bentir. Fel Cyngor, rydym yn gwrthwynebu’r bwriad hwn a hynny am y rhesymau canlynol: • Mae’r ardal yn un wledig, wedi ei lleoli yn Ne’r sir, ac yn brydferth ryfeddol, ac fel mae’r enw’n awgrymu, mewn man lled uchel. Mae’r golygfeydd oddi yno’n drawiadol. Byddai ychwanegu rhes arall o beilonau yn cael effaith sylweddol iawn ar y golygfeydd o’r fro ac i mewn i’r fro. Nid yw’r ffaith bod peilonau yn bodoli’n barod yn rheswm digonol dros osod ail res. Y cam rhesymol fyddai tan ddaearu’r rhes bresennol hefyd pan fo cyfle i wneud hyn. Mae’r aberth sylweddol a wneir gan drigolion Ynys Môn yn lletya gorsaf gynhyrchu anferthol yn cael ei hanwybyddu yn y broses o ystyried sut i drosglwyddo’r p?er ohoni; mae gwir farn y trigolion yn cael ei anwybyddu a’i ddiystyru. • Ardal amaethyddol yw Penmynydd a Star sydd hefyd yn ddibynnol ar dwristiaeth. Byddai gosod ail res yn cael effaith ar y ddau ddiwydiant yma: mae amaethyddiaeth yn bwysig iawn i economi’r ardal hon ac Ynys Môn a byddai anawsterau sylweddol yn codi o osod ail res drwy dir ffermydd. Yn yr un modd, mae twristiaeth yn dod a dros chwarter biliwn, a mwy, o incwm i mewn i’r Sir hon yn flynyddol a byddai’r effaith ar y darpariaethau ar gyfer y diwydiant hwn eto’n ddifäol. Byddai’n un hir dymor, yn effeithio’n wael ar incwm y rhai sy’n dibynnu ar y ddau ddiwydiant am eu bywoliaeth dros drigain mlynedd a mwy. Nid yw defnydd y Grid Cenedlaethol o’r ddadl bod tan ddaearu’n rhy gostus yn rheswm dilys dros wrthod yr opsiynau eraill o’r cychwyn. Nid ydynt wedi ystyried, nac yn cydnabod, yr effaith cronnus tymor hir ar ein heconomi. • Cred y Cyngor hwn yw bod ymgynghoriad y Grid Cenedlaethol wedi bod yn ddiffygiol gan nad ydynt wedi gwir ystyried yr opsiynau eraill, sef tan ddaearu a mynd o dan y d?r; o’r cychwyn cyntaf, maen nhw wedi datgan mai ei ‘dewis opsiwn’ yw ail res. Mae pob sylw a datganiad gennym i’r gwrthwyneb wedi cael ei anwybyddu ganddynt. • Er nad yw’n orfodol iddynt wneud hynny, mae’r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi dewis anwybyddu’n llwyr yr arweiniad a geir yn Neddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau’r Dyfodol (2015) sydd yn cynnig arweiniad clir ar ystyried datblygiadau all gael effaith ar boblogaeth Cymru yn y blynyddoedd i ddod. • Mae ein hymchwil trylwyr yn arddangos nad yw’r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi dilyn polisïau’r Llywodraeth fel y’i hamlinellir yn EN-1 ac EN-2. Yn yr un modd, mae Deddf Cynllunio 2008 yn gofyn am ymgynghoriad manwl parthed effaith cronnus peilonau ar yr ardal a’r boblogaeth. Arian sydd wedi gyrru’r agenda yn yr achos hwn nid buddiannau pobl ein plwyf ni nac Ynys Môn. Bydd y Cyngor hwn yn dymuno cyflwyno tystiolaeth bellach mewn unrhyw wrandawiad cynllunio maes o law. "

Llangoed & Penmon Community Council
"It is considered that the additional pylons will have a detrimental effects on the countryside, especially AONB's around the Island, tourist and farming industry. Other ideas and technology exists now with burying the cables underground and even under sea. It is also considered, that National Grid have not carried out an effective consultation by publishing plans before consultation has taken place."

Peter Saunders
"Pylons are unsightly and have a detrimental affect in areas where the economy is dependent upon tourism. Here the pylons will be seen from an AONB and therefore affect the enjoyment of that area. One line of pylons already exists but the aim must be to remove those, and certainly not add another line. Pylons are not a 21st century solution and alternatives exist. There is a cost consideration, of course, but there are hidden costs to communities and local economies of the pylon option. I understand also that the consultation was flawed as other options were not considered."

Brenda Dimbleby
"Anglesey is a beautiful place and your proposals will make it less attractive. Why not put the electricity underground across Anglesey & the Menai Straits?"

Brenda Mansell
"Nation Grid's plans are just so unacceptable. You MUST NOT let this proposal be approved Health, farming, tourism, house values will all be effected Again - YOU MUST NOT LET THIS BE APPROVED!"

Brian Lee
"The second row of Pylons will create a negative impact on the landscape of Anglesey and will industrialise the present rural aspect. This will have a detrimental effect on both the tourist industry, farming and property prices. These factors will cause great harm to the economic prosperity of the island. A situation the people of Anglesey will have to live with for decades. The serious impact of EMFs emissions from overhead transmissions cables has not been completely proven but there are indications in scientific research that there is a definite causal link between the two. It would, therefore be wiser to err on the side of caution and use other methods of transmission until the case is proven. If this project is allowed to proceed future generations will be forced to live with the consequences i.e:- an economic downturn because of the effect on tourism, agriculture etc, plus possible health problems and a blight and industrialisation of the landscape. All this contravenes the Welsh “Wellbeing of Future Generations Act” 2015 Lastly but very importantly National Grid’s consultations have been flawed from the very beginning. The people of Anglesey were not given any option except that of Pylons. No alternative technologies were presented as choices. National Grid had already decided on their preferred option so there was no choice. Therefore , the consultation was flawed. "

Carole Roberts
"Yn erbyn peilonau ar resyma iechyd "

Ceris Hawksworth
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second.  It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd.  If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line.  It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The landscape and views with wide skies are particularl to Anglesey and are highly valued by residents and tourists. Pylons will cause a negative visual impact which will deter tourist. More importantly residents will have to tolerate this for generations to come. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. The Wales “Wellbeing of Future Generations Act” 2015 requires environment and health issues to take priority for the protection of future generations. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. "

Cyngor Gwynedd
"Safbwynt Cyngor Gwynedd (CG) yw y dylai'r twnnel gael ei ymestyn yr holl ffordd i Bentir gan osgoi'r angen am beilonau ychwanegol yng Ngwynedd. Er gwaetha'r safbwynt hwn, mae CG yn cytuno gydag Opsiwn 3 fel Opsiwn Strategol a ffefrir gan NG. Bydd y prif bwyntiau y mae CG yn bwriadu eu cyflwyno yn ymwneud â'r penawdau sydd wedi'u nodi isod. Ymhellach, ar hyn o bryd nid yw'r holl faterion wedi'u cytuno drwy Ddatganiad o Dir Cyffredin (SoCG) (y mae trafodaeth yn ei gylch yn parhau) ac mae hi'n amlwg hefyd bod angen sicrhau arian er mwyn hwyluso ymgysylltu, sicrhau monitro a chydymffurfio drwy gydol cyfnod gweithredu'r datblygiad. Tirwedd a Gweledol Yn nhermau Effeithiau Tirwedd a Gweledol bydd yn hanfodol sicrhau dyluniad priodol, dulliau lliniaru a gwella yn cynnwys y mecanwaith i ariannu a'r angen i sicrhau gweithredu a chynnal a chadw cynlluniau o'r fath. Ansawdd aer, s?n a niwsans Mae CG yn ystyried ei bod hi'n hanfodol bod y wybodaeth angenrheidiol ar gael i'w hasesu a bod mesurau lliniaru a/neu rheoli yn eu lle i ymdrin ag unrhyw effeithiau o'r fath. Traffig a thrafnidiaeth Mae CG angen dealltwriaeth ac eglurhad digonol o'r cynigion yn nhermau yr holl agweddau/mathau o draffig a thrafnidiaeth a'r cynigion lliniaru dilynol. Deunyddiau a gwastraff Mae CG yn annog defnydd effeithlon a phriodol o agregau crai gan uchafu'r potensial i ailddefnyddio agregau eilaidd ac wedi'u hailgylchu yn unol ag arfer dda. Mae CG angen hyder y gellir lliniaru unrhyw effeithiau cysylltiedig neu gronnus a bod mecanwaith yn ei le i fonitro ac adolygu cydymffurfiaeth. Yr amgylchedd hanesyddol Effeithiau Compownd Adeiladu Ty Fodol a'r OHL i Bentir sy'n parhau'n feysydd o brif bryder. Mae'r effeithiau ar leoliad asedau hanesyddol (sy'n gysylltiedig ag adeiladu a gweithredu) ac o dan y ddaear (effeithiau uniongyrchol sy'n gysylltiedig yn bennaf ag adeiladu) hefyd yn bryder. Hefyd, mae effeithiau ehangach ar y dirwedd yn debygol o gael effaith ar yr amgylchedd hanesyddol. Mae angen adnoddau digonol ar gyfer monitro. Yr amgylchedd naturiol a bioamrywiaeth Mae CG yn dymuno ymgysylltu ymhellach yng nghyswllt pa mor ddigonol yw'r Strategaeth Lliniaru a'r Strategaeth Gwella a ph'un a oes unrhyw faterion amlwg y mae angen eu hegluro a mynd i'r afael â nhw. Hefyd, bydd CG angen hyder yng nghyflawni mesurau lliniaru a gwella. Effeithiau Lleol Bydd gan y pwyntiau y sonnir amdanynt uchod effeithiau lleol ac ehangach ac mae CG angen sicrwydd y gellir rheoli/lliniaru'r rhain yn ddigonol neu eu gwneud yn dderbyniol. Y farchnad lafur a'r economi Dymuna CG weld yr ardaloedd a ganlyn yn cael eu datblygu ymhellach: effaith ar dwristiaeth, cyflogaeth a sgiliau; cyfleoedd a materion cadwyn cyflenwi; monitro, rheoli a lliniaru defnydd o lety; ac eglurder ar effeithiau uniongyrchol, anuniongyrchol a chymhellol. Dylai'r buddion posib gael eu huchafu a'r effeithiau negyddol eu hisafu. Effeithiau Cronnus Ystyria CG fod angen trafodaeth bellach yng nghyswllt effeithiau cronnus o fewn y prosiect megis rhwng yr Amgylchedd Hanesyddol a Thirwedd/Gweledol ac effeithiau cronnus rhwng y prosiect megis y rheini sy'n codi o ddatblygiad Horizon Nuclear Power a'r Drydedd Bont bosib dros y Fenai a rhaglen yr A55. Mae'n hanfodol hefyd asesu a rhoi sylw i effeithiau ar yr iaith Gymraeg a'r diwylliant Cymreig ac ystyried effeithiau cronnus posib eraill. The stated position of Gwynedd Council (GC) is that the tunnel should be extended all the way to Pentir thereby eliminating the need for additional pylons in Gwynedd. Notwithstanding this stance GC agree with Option 3 as NG’s preferred Strategic Option. The main points that GC intend to present will relate to the headings set out below. Furthermore, at present not all matters have been agreed through a SoCG (for which discussions are ongoing) and it is also evident that funding needs to be secured in order to facilitate engagement, ensure monitoring and compliance throughout implementation of the development. Landscape and Visual In terms of Landscape and Visual Impacts it will be essential to ensure appropriate design, methods of mitigation and enhancement including the mechanism for funding and requirement for ensuring implementation and maintenance of such schemes. Air quality, noise and nuisance GC consider it essential that the required information is available for assessment and that appropriate mitigation and/or control measures are in place to deal with any such impacts. Traffic and transport GC require adequate understanding and clarification of the proposals in terms of all aspects/types of traffic and transport and subsequent mitigation proposals. Materials and waste GC encourages the efficient and appropriate use of primary aggregates while maximising the potential to re-use recycled and secondary aggregates in accordance with best practice. GC require confidence that any associated or cumulative impacts can be mitigated and that a mechanism is in place to monitor and review compliance. Historic environment The impacts of the Ty Fodol Construction Compound and the OHL to Pentir remain the areas of principal concern. Also of concern are both impacts on the setting of historic assets (associated with construction and operation) and below ground (direct impacts mostly associated with construction). Also wider landscape impacts are likely to have a historic environment impact. Adequate resourcing required for monitoring. Natural environment and biodiversity GC wishes to engage further with regard to the adequacy of the Mitigation Strategy and the Enhancement Strategy and whether there are any matters outstanding that need to be clarified and addressed. GC will also require confidence in the delivery of mitigation and enhancement. Local Impacts The aforementioned points will have local and wider impacts and GC requires certainty that these can be adequately controlled/mitigated or made acceptable. Labour market and economy GC wishes to see the following areas developed further: impact on tourism; employment and skills; supply chain opportunities and issues; accommodation take-up monitoring, management and mitigation; and clarity on direct, indirect and induced effects. Potential benefits should be maximised and negative effect minimised. Cumulative Impacts GC consider that further discussion is required with regard to both intra-project cumulative effects such as between the Historic Environment and Landscape/Visual and inter-project cumulative effects such as those arising from the Horizon Nuclear Power development and the potential Third Crossing of the Menai and A55 programme. It’s also vital to assess and address effects on the Welsh language and culture and consider other potential cumulative effects. "

Delyth Jones
"Please register me as an Interested Party as I am against pylons due to health concerns"

Dwynwen Williams
"Tourism is vital to the economy of Anglesey. Industrialising the landscape will do nothing to help tourism grow, and it may even reduce tourism. Please DO NOT recommend this proposal is approved"

Dyfed Pritchard
"Yn erbyn peilonau ar resyma iechyd "

Dylan Roberts
"Angen bod o dan y ddaear. Pryderon iechyd difrifol Prisiau tai yn gostwng Effaith economaidd/twristiaeth - ddim yn dod i ardal hefo peilonau anferth. ---------------------- Angen bod o dan y ddaear! - Pryderon iechyd difrifol - Niwed i 'r economi a twristiaeth - Prisiau tai yn gostwng Dim dod i ardal hefo peilonau anferth. "

Elaine Greenall
"The natural beauty of the area should be maintained. Health and wellbeing evidence on safety of pylons remains inconclusive. Invest in other options which do not destroy the landscape and cannot be undone"

Frank Bridgland
"Tourism is an important part of the economy of Anglesey/Sir Ynys Mon. The presence of Pylons and above ground cabling has a negative impact on tourists and some feel that Pylons detract from the 'wildness' and scenic appeal of the island. Because of the negative impact on tourism for Anglesey I will recommend there should be no further construction of Pylons on Anglesey."

Gary Stanfield
"DO NOT recommend this is approved. It is SO wrong, pylons are bad for health, bad for tourism, bad for farmers, bad for house prices, in fact I cannot think of anything good about them"

Geoffrey Harry Lincoln
"I wish to refuse the building of pylons across Anglesey and to place power lines below ground. Anglesey is a beautiful island and extremely popular with holiday makers. Another stretch of hideous pylons will not only destroy this beauty but will also means the loss of revenue from tourists and holiday makers. I understand that power lines have been placed underground in the Lake District, so why not in Anglesey? "

Gordon Hawksworth
"  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. The people on Anglesey need to be protected from these potential harmful effects. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge.  Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. "

Gwennan Roberts
"Dufetha tirwedd ac effaith ar dwristiaeth Pryderon iechyd hir dymor Angen bod o dan y ddaear -------- Fy nhwrthwynebiadau: - Dyfetha tirwedd - Effaith ar dwristraid - Pryderon iechyd hir dymor - Angen bod o dan y ddaear"

Huw Jones
"Please register me I am very concerned about the health effects"

Ian Mossop
"Anglesey is dependant on tourism and has a unique landscape which needs to be protected. The presence of more pylons will damage this environment and significantly degrade the value of the island for residence and tourists for the foreseeable future. The additional investment to change to underground cabling would be an investment in the future of this unique island and would be an insignificant cost to consumers over the decades. At a time when protecting our environment has become such a significant issue we should be ensuring that the developments of today do not become an issue for future generations. I fully understand that a new power station needs to be connected to the grid, but pylons are not the way to do it. The connection should be buried to prevent impacts on visual amenity, impacts on house values, impacts on farming and impacts on health "

Jackie Williams
"I don't live near the existing pylon line, but it can be seen for miles and miles, so everyone on Anglesey has to put up with it. Really, this project should be about getting rid of pylons, not adding more. Creating an industrial landscape out of a beautiful island is the wring thing to do - we already have an old power station, might be getting a second power station, have masses of wind turbines as well as endless poles for electric, phone and fibre. One line of pylons is a line too many, so please do not let this happen"

Jeanette Macwhinnie
"I agree that any power station needs to be connected to the national grid, but NOT using pylons. There will be hugely detrimental to the tourism sector on Anglesey by creating an industrialised landscape Please DO NOT recommend this proposal is approved"

Jessica Greenall
"I have concerns about the health impacts on children, adults and farm animals. They should invest in technology that does not destroy the beautiful landscape"

Jonathan Garratt
"I think the planning application for pylons across Anglesey should be turned down. It was quite clear from the original survey that the vast majority of respondents were against the case for a route of ANY pylons and that they preferred an underground/ undersea route. This was rejected outright. I think planning for the proposed route should be turned down because most respondents prefer not to have that route and it would be very disruptive and an eyesore to locals and tourists."

Llinos Roberts
"Gwrthwynebiad oherwydd difetha tirwedd. Pam mae angen ail lwybr o beilonnau? Amharu ar werth carterfi ac yr economi dwristiaeth Predyron iechyd. Fy nhwrthwynebiadau: Difetha tirwedd. Pam mae angen ail twybr ohonnynt? Amharu ar gartrefi, gwerth tai, economi twristiaeth; Goblygiadau iechyd. "

Louise Richards
"PLEASE do not recommend this is approved. The people on Anglesey HATE pylons and wish the existing ones could be got rid of. The last thing we need is more on this beautiful island"

Lucy Sproston
"I am against more pylons as they will ruin the countryside, might be harmful to health and will be bad for farming and tourism"

Malcolm Williams
"I am totally against a second row of pylons across Anglesey because 1. They will ruin the landscape with industrial structures which have no place in a rural landscape 2. Anglesey relies on tourists visiting in large numbers for its main income. Tourist don’t want to see metal in the landscape they come here because of the beauty. 3. Why use pylons when other methods are available 4. The people of Anglesey have said No but no one will listen 5. 3,500 people have signed a petition saying No. you should listen to their voice. 6. It is unfair that we are not being listened to. "

Mark Langford Jones
" National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second.  It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd.  If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line.  It is time for a 21st century solution such as micro boring Pylons will be create a damaging effect on the visual aspect of the unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Tourism will be damaged because of the spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  Pylons will effect farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will also be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. "

Mavis Brown
"Large parts of Anglesey are Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Tourism is a major source of income for the Island. The proposed pylons would have an adverse effect on Tourism as a lot of our beautiful scenery would be ruined. The Island’s wild life is another attraction for tourists and more pylons would mean less wildlife."

Mike Goodman
"I agree the power station needs a connection, if it is built, but this should not be done using pylons Pylons are: bad for the landscape bad for tourism bad for health bad for house values National Grid say they will create minimal jobs on Anglesey, so there isn't even an argument in favour of them there. However, if they buried the connection, there would be many more local jobs created National Grid have consistently ignored the people of Anglesey PLEASE make them listen"

Mike Monger
"Tourism has been hugely important for the economy of Anglesey since the 1930's, and there are ambitious plans to grow tourism by 10% pa in line with the Welsh Government strategy The current line of pylons is bad enough, a second line leaves me speechless. Please DO NO recommend this proposal is approved"

Mr David Jones
"I am totally against the erection of more 400KVa Pylons across Anglesey due to the environmental impact these will have across our countryside. The additional pylons will also increase the fields of EMF's and reduce property prices within the vicinity. "

Mr Hawksworth
"I am against pylons so please register me as an Interested Party"

Mr S Jones
"I am against the pylons for many reasons and would like to be an Interested Party"

Mrs Hawksworth
"Please register me as an Interested Party as I am against pylons"

Mrs S Jones
"I am against pylons and want to be an Interested Party"

Nigel DAllison
"Hello, I am writing to confirm my objection to further pylons on Ynys Mon. We already have a major line of pylons, and would ask why can these not bet modified to take the extra lines ? We all live in a beautiful part of Wale ,much of which is an area of outstanding natural beauty. It seems to me that our voices over the past years, have fell on deaf ears, with regard to the pylon issue. We have said all along that the new lines should be underground, including across the Menai Straits. I can not understand, why, when a similar problem was going to arise in Cumbria, but the extent of the public outcry, forced the Power suppliers to put the cables underground. Is it because this is Wales, and not England, where, it would seem all the decisions on this matter are made. Why should the final decision be made in a country that has nothing to do with Wales. Most of the power generated will not stay in Wales, so will not benefit the population of Ynys Mona at all, yet we shall have all the inconvenience, and have to live with the unsightly structures for many years. What effect will this have on Tourism, I wonder. We have enough Windmills now, and yet there is talk of more. Enough is Enough I would love to see enough people protest about his matter, lets us hope it happens, because I feel, along with many others, that we are being treated very unfairly. "

Pam Lee
"I wish to register my objections to the proposed second row of pylons across Anglesey:- 1. The residents of Anglesey were never given any alternative options - just pylons. This makes all the consultations flawed 2. The consultations carried out by National Grid did not consider other methods of transmission such as microboring, laser guided auger boring or directional drilling all of which are possible and far less intrusive than constructing pylons. After construction using any of these methods the landscape would be unaffected. 3. More pylons would create an unacceptable major intrusion in the landscape. Although the transmission line will not run through the AONB it will be visible from within it. This will adversely effect the tourist industry which is the main economic factor on Anglesey. 4.The entire island is a UNESCO Geo Park with rocks from 4 Eras and 12 Geological Periods. As such it is unique and should be protected. 5. There are conflicting views regarding the health implications of overhead power lines some medical research points to serious concerns regarding the level of impact on health. 6. The Welsh “Well-being of Future Generations Act” 2015requires “a society in which people’s physical and mental wellbeing is maximised and in which choices and behaviours that benefit future health are understood “ This clause is being ignored. Medical research is being disregarded. 7. National Grid’ proposals are undemocratic and are ignoring the voice of Anglesey has thus far been ignored. 13,500 people have signed a petition opposing the building of a new line of pylons. That is almost half the eligible voting population of the island. 8. The County Council, all the Community Councills, the MP Albert Owen and the Assembly Member Rhun ap Iorwerth are united in opposition to a second row of pylons In conclusion for all the above reasons there should be a better and more acceptable solution to transmission across Anglesey"

Robin Barlow
"I object to the new additional high voltage pylon line across Anglesea as it will significantly reduce the beauty of the island to visitors, and thus detrimentally affect its major source of income and employment - tourism of which I am one. More effort and money needs to be put into further undergrounding of the connection, or possibly undergrounding parts of the existing pylon line. So that perhaps the total visible length of pylons remains unchanged."

Cheryl Weaver on behalf of Sally Wally
"Tourism and farming is the mainstay for the economy of Anglesey. I do not want pylons on Anglesey it will blight our Island having a negative affect on tourism which we rely upon heavily for work/incomes. Who would want to holiday or live within the vicinity of these monstrous things. Research has proved that Pylons are a danger to health with leukemia rising in children living close to power lines and increase in adult cancer also related to power lines.Pylons will have a negative affect to the value and sale ability of our properties Pylons will seriously affect our farm land causuing great loss of land in some cases loss of complete farms and live stock. I do not want pylons for the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act. Technology exists Like undergrounding and subsea which would not have a negative affect. Pylons will blight our open views across the Island and blight the Island I would like under grounding of the cables or sub sea."

Samantha J Tudor
"I am against this proposal because of health effects, visual impacts and it is unfair on Anglesey"

Sara Mai Jones
"I am against pylons die to health concerns"

Sion Roberts
"Gwrthwynwbiad oherwydd 1.difetha tirwedd 2. Pam mae angen ail lwybr ohonnynt? 3. Amharu ar gartrefi, gwerth tai a'r economi twristiaeth. 4. Goblygiadau Iechyd ------------ Fy ngwrthwynebiadau: Difetha tirwedd. Pam mae angen ail twybr ohonnynt. Amharu ar gartrebi, gwerth tai, economi twristiaeth; Goblygiadau iechyd."

Thomas Callan
"National Grid should invest in methods that do not destroy the natural beauty of the landscape"

Yvonne Mossop
"I am totally against more pylons on Anglesey. The current ones should be got rid of and new ones not allowed. It is not the type of countryside where pylons should be seen as it is a major holiday destination as well as there being health issues PLEASE do not recommend this is approved"

Ann Jones
"Another row of pylons will have a terrible effect on farmers on the island. They will loose acres of valuable land without which their profits will decrease and the farm will be unviable. NGET have not considered the reduction in land and property values to be important enough to be included in the application. It might not be important to them but it is massively important to the residents of Anglesey. The Welsh Government have said that the future of the following generations should be protected. They have even passed an Act - the Wellbeing of Future Generations. These plans proposed by National Grid ignore the spirit and the letter of this Act. Finally from the beginning of this process National Grid have never given the people of Anglesey an option of how the electricity should be transmitted. In 2012 they had already decided on pylons. Therefore, that consultation and all that followed were flawed. "

Ann Owen
"Pylons will Ruin the beauty of the landscape. Large amounts of scientific research into the health affects of pylons, Pylons will have a negative affect on tourism. Our farms will suffer greatly. I do not want pylons for our future generation when we can have sub sea connections or underground cables. "

Chris Johnston
"The scientific research into the health effects of pylons is inconclusive a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are, therefore, conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  It is better to be cautious until solid proof is available. The use of pylons should be shelved in favour of more up to date technology as it has been in other countries. Overhead cables should not be permitted close to areas inhabited by people. 3,500 people have signed a petition opposing pylons across Anglesey. That is almost hThey should be listened to. "

David Frankland
"My wife and I have not completed the Consultation Feedback Form that we were given at a consultative meeting in Llanfairpwll because we felt that completing the form implied acceptance of the over-land routing option which we certainly do not. We do not accept this option for the following reasons: 1. The economy of Anglesey is largely dependent on tourism, any development that prominently undermines the attractive nature of the island is bound to reduce visitor numbers and any income derived from that source. An additional over-land connection, on towers, clearly would present an unattractive sight; even if the very sensitive area of the Menai Strait was dealt with sympathetically by undergrounding at this point. 2. Two BWR generating plants are proposed at the Wylfa site and although the present 400kV double circuit connection is capable of carrying the output from both plants, prudently the proposed additional circuit is required for system safety considerations. Surely in addition to reinforcing the present system spur (Wylfa-Pentir) safety considerations should demand a diverse routing to cope with both natural and potential terrorist interference with supplies to the proposed plants. The best and cheapest NGC proposal that meets this requirement is that of the Hybrid undersea option that provides a connection back into the grid network at point remote from the grid substation at Pentir thus removing the physical vulnerability, as well as electrical, of the present spur connection from the main grid network. In consulting with other Anglesey residents and various local representative bodies the consensus opinion seems to be that of total opposition to siting any further pylons on land in Anglesey, instead to place the cables under the sea. This is the only option acceptable to us and the residents of Anglesey and beyond. In summary: • The consultation process seems to us to be flawed by NGC not providing an opportunity to consult properly between all options - the consultation was largely confined to a discussion of over-land routing. • We oppose any new over-land connection on towers • We support the diverse route hybrid subsea cable option "

Emma Bennett
"I believe that NG’s consultations were flawed. Questions went unanswered and the literature was uninformative. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. These alternatives were never offered to people. Despite Anglesey residents asking for other methods to be considered this was never done. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on."

Gareth Cemlyn Jones
"Fel Peiriannydd Siartredig, dyma fy sylwadau a phryderon: • Anghyfiawnder cymdeithasol o anwybyddu adborth a buddiannau poblogaeth Môn drwy barhau i gynllunio cynllun peilonau sy’n gorfodi trigolion difreintiedig Môn i sybsideiddio arbedion/elw y Grid a defnyddwyr trydan gweddill y DG • Diffyg manylder yng nglyn a’r cynlluniau i groesi’r Fenai sydd yn hollol allweddol i’r datblygiad. Os mai twnel dan y Fenai yw’r dewis terfynol nid oes unrhyw wybodaeth ar drafnidiaeth yn ystod y cyfnod adeiladu na sut i waredu y spwriel o ganlyniad i’r gwaith • Fel ardal sydd yn ddibynnol ar Dwristiaeth, yn fwy nag unrhyw ardal arall yn y DG, mae yn amlwg bydd y peilonau ychwanegol arafethedig yn niweidiol iawn i'r diwydiant yma gan ymharu ar olygfeydd ac Ardaloedd o Harddwch Arbennig Naturiol. • Dim ystyriaeth ar effaith y prosiect ar werth tir ac asedau trigolion yr Ynys • Diffyg ystyriaeth o effaith iechyd tymor hir o beilonau yn gyfagos a chartrefi gan gynnwys EMF ac yn y blaen. Ar egwyddor, dylir polisi rhagofal gael ei ddefnyddio os oes unrhyw ansicrwydd yng nglyn a ffactorau a gall gael effaith dwys ar genedlaethau y dyfodol • Dim ystyriaeth o gydlunio gyda Deddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau'r Dyfodol (Cymru) 2015 sydd yn holl bwysig gyda’r bwriad, gan ystyried: -edrych ar bethau yn yr hirdymor yn ogystal â chanolbwyntio ar y sefyllfa ar hyn o bryd - cymryd camau i geisio rhwystro problemau rhag gwaethygu - neu hyd yn oed eu hatal rhag digwydd yn y lle cyntaf. Mae yn amlwg bod hyn yn cynnwys mabwysiadu polisi rhagofal yn hytrach na symyd ymlaen gyda syniadau sydd yn ddi ddychymyg ac yn deillio o oes llai oleuedig a gwybodus. • Mae tecnoleg Trosgwyddo Trydan wedi symyd ymlaen gyda opsiynau fel tanddaeru a thanfor ar gael. Er bod hyn yn fwy gostus i'r defnyddwyr yn gyffredinol mae rhaid gofyn os yw yn deg i drigolion Ynys Mon sybsideiddio ardaloedd Lloegr ar drail asedau ein hunain • Mae’r Grid yn defnyddio presenoldeb un llinell o beilonau i gyfiawnhau un arall. Gan fod posibilrwydd tymor hir o ystyried adweithyddion bellach ar safle Wylfa mae yna wir debygrwydd o’r ail res fod yn gyfiawnhad am drydedd neu bedwerydd res yn y dyfodol Mae gennyf bryder hefyd am y diffyg sylw i’r broses democratiaeth gyda ymgynghoriadau hollol gamarweiniol ac annidwyll. Y canlyniad yw bod barn pob aelod etholedig y Sir gan gynnwys Cynghorwyr Sir, ein Aelod Seneddol, Aelod y Cynulliad, yn ogystal a Chyngorau Bro a Chymuned a thrigolion Môn, wedi eu hanwybyddu yn llwyr. "

Graham Date
"I believe that pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. This is the most valuable asset of Anglesey. If this goes ahead it will put me off visiting Anglesey in the future. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  "

Gwen Hughes
"I feel very strongly that pylons will make a negative impact on the Anglesey Landscape. This will deter tourists which will in turn affect many small businesses which rely solely on tourism for their survival. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Visitors do not want to see industrial structures across Anglesey. The size and nature of the pylons mean they will be seen for miles around including from areas within theAONB and the Snowdonia National Park. This is so unnecessary and against the wishes of the people of Anglesey. Technology exists to underground the cables where they cannot be seen. "

Holly Date
"The proposal by National Grid to erect a second row of pylons will effect the health of people living close to the transmission lines. The prosperity of future generations will be adversely effected due to the downturn in tourists because of the pylons. People on holiday do not wish to travel and then look at a row of pylons. I believe farmers will also be effected by pylons because of the loss of acreage. All these things will effect the generations to come and this contravenes the Welsh Weellbeing of Future Generations Act. "

Hugh Candler
"This is typical of the lack of democracy that is becoming prevalent. Consultation must be transparent and stick to the letter and intention of the law. Big companies must be forced to do the right thing. Government should be protecting the electorate not colluding with these companies. Wales does not want these out moded blots on the landscape or the planning blight this will inflict on what should be a great tourist area. There is fairly well substantiated evidence that pylons pose a health risk. People are already reluctant to buy houses near them or build schools under them. If England is so keen to have this form of electricity they should have it on their own land. The nation should be forging ahead with new innovative solutions not cluttering up the countryside with obsolete unnecessary dangerous things of this sort. "

Jane Ashman
"I feel that as a resident I have not been given the information on other options. I understand National Grid must firstly look at the cheapest option to keep costs down, however not at the expense of Anglesey. I have never received any information about the underground option, undersea option or even the over ground with the pylons, being more pleasing to the eye, such as in Scandinavian countries. The whole process has been a railroading effect saying there is no other option and the feeling is if we don’t go with the second line then Wylfa Newydd can’t go ahead. I am fully backing Wylfa Newydd just not the pylons. I have attended events where National Grid were present but never received answers to the above questions. I really do feel as I put in my letter to them that this is Anglesey being railroaded while other areas in the UK are taking them down. Thank you for your time, it is appreciated."

Janet Knight
"I believe that pylons are a negative visual impact on a rural landscape. These proposed structures will be visible for miles around and will change the view for decades. Taking this into account and the possible health risks associated with overhead power lines I believe the cables should be laid underground. This is being done in other parts of the UK. Indeed in Europe some countries have decided to burry cables. If that is the correct procedure for other people then why not on Anglesey? The people of Anglesey do not want pylons. If their voice was listened to, as it should be,other technologies would be employed. If this project proceedes then the money used on the consultation was a waste. If people are asked what they want then the answer should be acknowledged and acted upon. "

Len Hill
"Pylons will ruin the landscape by making Anglesey an industrial rather than a rural landscape. Farmers will loose large tracts of land which will affect their ability to farm profitably. Tourist will not visit in such numbers as they do now. Anglesey depends on tourism as it the largest source of income. It isn’t necessary to use pylons for transmission there are other methods available now which weren’t around in the 60’s when the first row was erected. National Grid are not listening to the people. They have ignored a petition with 3,500 signatures, the MP, the AM, the County Councillors and the Community Councillors who have all asked for Subsae or Undergrounding. This application is both unfair and undemocratic "

Lesley Date
"Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons."

Lynne Hill
"I am very concerned that there seems to be serious health issues associated with the precedes of overhead power lines and pylons. Serious research should be undertaken before anymore pylons are constructed. It isn’t necessary to use pylons for transmission there are other methods available now which weren’t around in the 60’s when the first row was erected. National Grid are not listening to the people. They have ignored a petition with 3,500 signatures, the MP, the AM, the County Councillors and the Community Councillors who have all asked for Subsae or Undergrounding. This application is both unfair and undemocratic "

Mark Evans
"It is time for a 21st century solution to the issue of electricity transmission. Subsea or undergrounding would erase the terrible visual effects on the landscape. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will create a negative impact on the Anglesey tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  This will last for many years to come. Anglesey depends on tour of for its economic wellbeing. If tourism decreases, as it will be, then the incomes of many people will be drastically effected. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons."

Mr Andrew Jones
"I believe that another row of pylons across Anglesey will impose an unacceptable visual impact on the landscape. Even though they will not be in the AONB they will certainly be visible from the AONB and from iconic places such as Parys Mountain, the Menai Strait and Snowdonia. These are unique places which should be protected. If this project is allowed to go ahead these places will be irrevocably damaged. Not only will this proposed row effect people living nearby it will deter tourist who visit the island to escape the industrial views where they live and to enjoy the peace and beauty. They will not visit to gaze at another row of overhead power lines and towers. If the number of tourists decreases this will cause a huge impact on the economy of the island. Anglesey is already one of the poorest areas in the UK. We cannot afford to loose any income. If this is allowed it will demonstrate how unfair and undemocratic the system is. 3,5000 people have signed a petition opposing the pylons. Every layer of elected representatives have also opposed the project. Every voice says NO TO PYLONS. As an alternative use other technologies- Subsea or undergrounding. "

Mr E Owen
"I do not want pylons on Anglesey they will have a negative affect on tourism which we rely on, they will also greatly effect our farming, causing permanent loss of land, restricting our practices. Their is lots of evidence of the effect pylons have on health, leukemia and other cancers. The housing market will be affected. Their is no need for Pylons when we can have under-grounding or sub-sea which will not have a negative affect on Anglesey. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, which I want to promote. Pylons are a poor legacy for the future."

Mrs J Owen
"My reasons for not wanting Pylons are the health worries, the total lack of regard for the natural beauty of the Island, which supports a tourism industry that so many local families depend on. As a parent of a welsh speaking child I feel very strongly about the future of our children. National Grids proposals contravenes the spirit and the letter of the law contained in The Wellbeing of the future generations act 2015 "

Myrddyn Hughes
"I feel very strongly that National Grid are ignoring the wishes of the people of Anglesey. The people have said very strongly - No to Pylons. 13,500 have signed a petition that effect. That is almost half of the eligible voting population. It is undemocratic to ignore this. Although there is conflicting evidence Pylons are linked to serious health risks. These risks should be eliminated until proven facts are available. Cables should be undergrounded for the Wellbeing of Future Generations. "

Paul Bennett
"Long term pylons across Anglesey will create a negative impact on the landscape. They will be visible from the AONB which should be protected from this visual intrusion. This will have a knock on effect on the tourist industry. Tourism is provided the largest income on the island. As such the many businesses/ people who rely on tourism will be hugely effected. The long term cost to the future wellbeing of the islands popula will be incalculable. The cost to the health of the people living in close proximity to the overhead cables is also unknown. Until more research is carried out to prove or disprove this caution should be the most important consideration. No more overhead cables should be used. In 2015 The Welsh Government passed the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act. The ruination of the landscape and the toll on tourism, plus the unknown health effects attributed to overhead cables all contravene the 2015 Act. "

Paul Knight
"National Grid ‘s behaviour throughout this process has been misleading and people have not been given answers to their questions. Although the pylons will not be sited within the AONB they will be visible from within the AONB and from many of the beauty spots across the island. Pylons will intrude on the rural landscape and as such will negatively affect tourism. Future residents of Anglesey will be adversely effected Economicly for generations to come. I believe this contravenes the Welsh Wellbeing of Future Generations Act. "

Samantha Webb
"I believe that alternative technology to pylons is available and should be used instead of overhead cables and pylons. It is possible for cables to be laid underground with minimal disturbance to the surface. Any disturbance would quickly be repaired by natural means. The earth disturbed would quickly recover, as it did when the Shell pipeline from Amlwch was installed. "

Shaun Almond
"National Grid justify the building of another row of pylons because there is already a row of pylons in existence. Instead I believe they should be taking down the exiting line down and putting all necessary cables underground thereby returning the landscape to the way it originally looked. If this goes ahead the landscape will be further scared putting tourists off visiting the island. The islands economy depends on tourists. They bring with them income for the many businesses and workers who rely on them. Anglesey is already one of the poorest places in the UK and so cannot afford to loose this income. It is wrong that the financial wellbeing of the island should be sacrificed in order to transmit power to England. The people of Anglesey oppose anymore pylons. 3500 people signed a petition saying that. These pylons will be against the wishes of the people and a burden on future generations "

Victoria Butcher
"I object to the construction overground of a second line of pylons across Anglesey because: 1. I believe the health effects on the local population due to the large amounts of electricity passing within close proximity to homes and work places has not been fully researched. Until that has been done the second line of pylons should not be allowed. 2. Electricity and power should be created for the area in which it is made. It is unfair that most of this energy will be exported to the rest of Britain and the people of Anglesey have to put up with the detrimental impact it will have on our lives. 3. Anglesey is a special and truly wonderful island and the mix of its natural environment, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and tourism with its economic benefits and this possible industrialised landscape does not mix. A second pylon line will be hugely detrimental to the ever growing tourism livelihoods of many residents of Anglesey. Our house prices (which only in the last 10/20 years have become level with the rest of the country) will be impacted. 4. I want to leave my home/island in a better place for the next generation. Wales is governed by a wellbeing for Future Generations Act, if the NGET fall foul to this it will be our local Council who will be responsible for paying and clearing up the problem. They already suffer from an every decreasing budget. Underground or undersea is a far better solution. If a second line goes ahead what will prevent further planning permission for similar projects. I know in other areas of the country where there were no pre-existing pylons, the line was immediately planned to go underground. Just because we are a small, rural population our views should still be taken into consideration. "

Adrian Hislop
"I would like undergrounding or subsea, not Pylons as they will ruin the open countryside, obscure the views of the areas of outstanding natural beauty and will greatly affect tourism. Pylons will blight our Island affecting the value of our properties. Pylons are a health hazard I don't want pylons for the future generation."

Allana Ede
"The construction of a new set of pylons across Anglesey will destroy the landscape. The economic wellbeing of the island relies on tourism. This project will discourage visitors which will damage the tourism industry. That in turn will limit the financial wellbeing of all those involved in the tourist industry. This should be STOPPED!"

Ann Roberts
"Underground and subsea technology already exists -would be much better for the environment and for the general look of the landscape. Plans have been put forward as a fait accompli We seem to have no choice in the matter. Definately detrimental for tourism and for the local communities."

Caryl Hughes
"I am against National Grid's proposals because National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals "

Cheryl Appleton-Owen
"I am TOTALLY against National Grid's plans to build more pylons near my village - we have to look at the existing ones every day, we don't want to see more ... you should come to Llanfechell and see for yourself They are PROVEN to be bad for the health of both people and farm animals They are PROVEN to devalue houses They will REDUCE the local tourism economy PLEASE - don't let this happen"

Collin Whalley
"The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on."

David Gilford
"I believe that pylons are detrimental to the landscape especially in a beautiful area such as Anglesey. Anglesey is a place which relies on tourists for its economy. If tourist numbers fall the impact on numerous businesses will be enormous, thereby damaging the islands economy. There is also much evidence linking serious health issues with the presence of overhead power cables. The Wellbeing of Future Generations Act sets out to guard and protect generations of people yet to come. This project will destroy the spirit of the act and contravene the law. "

Dilys Francis Davies
"It is time for new technology to be employed instead of using pylons to transmit electricity across the island. Other technology does exist such as undergrounding and subsea. The eyesore created by anymore pylons will adversely effect tourism on the island. Tourism is the largest economic factor for the islands income. We need to encourage tourism not deter it. No-where in the consultations has National Grid considered the cumulative impact on the landscape. They have not followed the guidance in the Planning Act 2008"

Donna Doyle
"Putting a second run of a 100 Pylons across Anglesey will ruin the country side. We share our lanes and countryside with horse riders, walkers and ramblers, cyclist, dog walkers and holiday makers/tourists. The farms where the route is proposed will have permanent loss of land and it will affect the running of their farm. Pylons will have negative affects on health and well being. They will not bring work to our local people but will loose us work through the negative affect that they will have on the Island. Pylons have been linked with leukemia in children with accepted reports in the scientific literature. I do not want Pylons on Anglesey for the Future Generations Act. I would like Under Grounding or Sub Sea"

Donna Muirhead
"Putting a second row of Pylons will have a detrimental affect and blight Anglesey on the whole. Pylons will negatively affect tourism which supplies us with work and incomes. Who will want to come here to holiday, fields will be dug up roads will be blocked for approximately 8 years while the pylons are hauled in , Pylons will ruin our open view of countryside I am aware that they have under grounded in other areas If they can do it in other areas Anglesey should be able to have under grounding. Pylons will not bring work in for local people quite the opposite they will loose us work by affecting tourism. Farming will be heavily affected with perminent loss of land to put 100 pylons across Anglesey this will reduce the price of our homes/properties. Not to mention the health affect. I want under grounding or sub sea. For the future generation of Wales"

Duncan Smith
"As a former member of the armed forces, I am totally against this proposal - main reasons desecration of the countryside impact on local economy impact on local house values air safety Pylons are 20th century technology - get with the times and bury the connection"

Dylan Appleton-Owen
"Please don't let this happen PLEASE We don't want even more pylons on Anglesey, in fact we want the existing ones to be got rid of and the cables either buried or put in the sea"

E. Gilford
"There are many reasons why Pylons are not appropriate on the island of Anglesey:- they will ruin the beautiful landscape Deter tourist, who are a valuable source of income Deprive farmers of valuable acreage Depress house prices Create a dangerous environment- full of health risks It against the wishes of the residents and therefore undemocratic Better less invasive technology is available"

Elizabeth Jones
"I am totally opprossed to a second set of pylons being constructed across the island. There is already a row of pylons which negatively impact on the landscape a second row will cause further blight. The worry is that if this is allowed there will be more rows applied for in the future. The environment should be protected. The first row should be taken down and anymore cables should be laid underground where they cannot be seen. This is happening in other countries so it should happen here. The suspected health risks associated with pylons area great danger to the people who live on Anglesey now and the generations to come. Why should we suffer this just so people in England can boil a kettle. 13,500 people on this island have loudly said NO TO PYLONS Why is no one listening?"

Ffion Williams
"Please don't let them do this. Pylons spoil the countryside and are bad for farmers"

Glyn Jones
"Putting pylons on Anglesey will have a negative affect on the value of our homes. Putting Pylons on Anglesey will not provide local people with work opportunities. Putting a second row of Pylons on Anglesey will affect tourism, tourism being a big provider of work for local people (See ONS report ) Putting a second row of pylons on Anglesey will seriously affect our farming industry and the health and well being of the people"

Gwen Williams
"Pylons lines are a thing of the past. This project should be getting rid of pylons, not building new ones. Put the cables in the sea, or underground They get in the way of farming activities, they are harmful to the health of sheep and cows (and people), they stop the tourists coming, and all so that England can keep using electricity but not building the power stations they need"

Gwenno Pugh
"I am against National Grid's proposals because National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals "

Gwion Pugh
"I am against National Grid's proposals because National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals "

Hefin Aelwyn Davies
"I am totally against the building of a second row of pylons because:- They will spoil the countryside and will be visible from the AONB They will create an industrial landscape in a rural setting Health issues are linked closely to overhead power lines. In other countries in Europe cables are being buried to prevent any adverse health issues. If it is deemed necessary to take this precaution in Europe why is that not happening here? Consultations carried out by National Grid have been flawed from the beginning. National Grid had already decided on their favoured method of transmission - PYLONS- at no time were the public given the opportunity to choose alternative methods. "

Ioan Davies
"Please don't let this happen! Pylons are bad for the local people, bad for health, bad for farming and will make Anglesey less attractive for visitors"

Jo Green
"As There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy.  The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. This project contravenes this Act. "

John Irlam
"It appears that National Grid are using the presence of the existing line of Pylons to justify a second row. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. This structure will still be standing in 70 to 100 years. We need transmission of power to recognise 21st Century and the longer term. The Technology is available to underground and or undersea these cables. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly from within, and views of surrounding areas of natural beauty & national Park. We are living in an era where we are regretting previous decisions ie use of plastics, polluting fuels, ozone deterioration. We shouldn't make the same mistake with opportunity we have now to get it right by undergrounding these cables.Whilst the initial cost clearly would be at a premium, the long term costs in terms of environment, health etc should be recognised. The additional cost spread over all the millions of customers is minute. Pylons will have a severe and significant effect on Angleseys tourism industry, visitors do not want to see spoilt and industrialised countryside. Tourism and the knock on effects to local businesses provide much needed employment both directly and indirectly, these would be seriously affected. Angleseys tourism relies strongly on its landscape identity which encourages visitors who admire uninterrupted views of the adjacent National Park, Wales's highest Mountain Snowdon itself along with many areas of outstanding natural beauty. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of overhead high voltage cables. There are clearly concerns for both humans and animals that are in close proximity to these structures. Other proven technology exists like underground and undersea which do not have the negative affect of pylons and overground cables. The consultation process has bee flawed, ineffective and not carried out in good faith. The statutory consultation at its outset did not consider wider options for consideration. National Grid are already providing substantial funding to replace existing overhead lines with underground cables in England It appears that Anglesey will be the poor neighbour and treated differently."

Keith Green
"The construction of more pylons with overhead lines will devastate the landscape of the island. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 13,500 people have signed a petition opposing pylons. However, their voice is being ignored. This is Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy.  The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. It is time to listen to the fact that NO MEANS NO. "

Keith Hemming
"The new pylons will: i) Take up agricultural land ii) Will impact adversely on tourism by: a) Causing disruption during implementation b) Detracting from the views across the island iii) Require a huge amount of raw materials for their construction"

Liam Davies
"Please don't let them build any more pylons on Anglesey - ugly, get in the way of farming, dangerous to health, no one wants to live near them. Bury the cables"

Lowri Williams
"Please do all you can to support the people of Anglesey. Us, our MP, our AM, all our Councillors are totally against more pylons Bury the cables or put them in the sea"

Lynfa Davies
"I am TOTALLY against this proposal I frequently fly from Cardiff to Anglesey and the scenic beauty is already spoiled by the existing line - a second would just be TOO MUCH Wales already generate twice the electricity is uses, so ALL the power these lines will carry is just EXPORT TO ENGLAND I understand the UK needs new forms of power generation, but to scar the Anglesey landscape for FUTURE GENERATIONS should not be allowed - burry the connection!"

M. Gilford
"I am against Pylons because they will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy.  The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. It is time for the voice of Anglesey to be heard. "

Mari Williams
"I am totally against this. Pylons are dangerous in the fields and the radiation is bad for farm animals. They are also EXTREMELY ugly"

Maria Hands
"I totally understand that the UK needs new power stations I know that Wales is self sufficient in electricity Wylfa Newydd is being built so that England can have more electricity Anglesey is "hosting" the new power station, so why does Anglesey have to have pylons as well, when other technologies could be used? Putting the cables underground where no one would see them, planes could not hit them, the wind would not damage them and terrorists could not blow them up would be FAR BETTER. And bury the existing ones as well!"

Martin A Duxbury-Hibbert
"Totally against! National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Mike Doyle
"We live on a beautiful Island which we/you should be looking after. Pylons are not a way forward for the future. Their are more advanced methods of carrying electricity off the Island like under grounding or Sub Sea which have been used in other areas. We have the highest rate ever recorded of holiday makers who come to Anglesey thus providing employment for local people. Putting 100 more pylons on Anglesey will not provide employment for local people it will have a negative impact on Tourism, house value and our Farming Industry . Scientific studies have proved that Pylons will affect the Health and Well Being of people and animals. "

Miss Beca Haf Bown
"We are a farming family and we are against these plans for more pylons National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second - they should be getting rid of the first line Pylons will be bad for views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be bad for farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and animal health and behaviour. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals Best would be to put the connection under the sea, but buried cables are better than pylons "

Miss Cari H.Bown
"As a farming family I am totally against these proposals National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and possible health and behaviour effects on livestock PLUS - they are just plain ugly! "

Miss Elen M Bown
"As a farming family I am totally against these proposals Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and possible health and behaviour effects on livestock "

Miss Mair A. Bown
"As a farming family I am totally against these proposals National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and possible health and behaviour effects on livestock PLUS - they are just plain ugly! "

Miss Mari R. Bown
"We are a farming family and we are against these plans for more pylons National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second - they should be getting rid of the first line not building a second Pylons will be bad for farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and animal health and behaviour. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals Pylons will be bad for views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Best would be to put the connection under the sea, but buried cables are better than pylons "

Miss Megan W Bown
"As a farming family I am totally against these proposals National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and possible health and behaviour effects on livestock PLUS - they are just plain ugly! "

Miss Sian O.Bown
"As a farming family I am totally against these proposals National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and possible health and behaviour effects on livestock PLUS - they are just plain ugly! "

Mr Aron E. Bown
"We are a farming family and we are against these plans for more pylons National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second - they should be getting rid of the first line not building a second Pylons will be bad for farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and animal health and behaviour. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals Pylons will be bad for views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Best would be to put the connection under the sea, but buried cables are better than pylons "

Mr Brian T Bown
"As a farming family I am totally against these proposals National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and possible health and behaviour effects on livestock The easement payments for pylons are too low - a buried cable has a far higher easement payment AND leaves nothing in the fields to get in the way of equipment "

Mr John Roberts
"It spoils the landscape by creating a detrimental visual impact. Pylons will put visitors off visiting the island. There is other technology available - particularly subsea - which will will stop the island being spoilt. If it cannot go subsea it could and should go undersea as was proved by the Shell pipeline years ago. For these reason I believe that there should not be a second row of pylons "

Mr R Emlyn Bown
"We are a farming family and we are against these plans for more pylons National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second - they should be getting rid of the first line Pylons will be bad for views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be bad for farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and animal health and behaviour. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals Best would be to put the connection under the sea, but buried cables are better than pylons "

Mr Thomas S. Bown
"As a farmer I am totally against these proposals National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. "

Mr William T.P.Bown
"We are a farming family and we are against these plans for more pylons National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second - they should be getting rid of the first line not building a second Pylons will be bad for farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and animal health and behaviour. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals Pylons will be bad for views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Best would be to put the connection under the sea, but buried cables are better than pylons "

Dr Jonathan F Dean on behalf of Mrs Avril Williams
"I am totally against these proposals Pylons are: ugly in the countryside not needed by people in Anglesey or Wales bad for farmers bad for tourists Please reject this proposal and make them bury the cables "

Mrs Jane Bown
"As a farmer I am totally against these proposals National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. "

Mrs Leah Hughes Bown
"We are a farming family and we are against these plans for more pylons National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second - they should be getting rid of the first line not building a second Pylons will be bad for farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and animal health and behaviour. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals Pylons will be bad for views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Best would be to put the connection under the sea, but buried cables are better than pylons "

Mrs Nia Bown
"As a farming family I am totally against these proposals National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and possible health and behaviour effects on livestock The easement payments for pylons are too low - a buried cable has a far higher easement payment AND leaves nothing in the fields to get in the way of equipment "

Mrs Nia Williams Bown
"We are a farming family and we are against these plans for more pylons National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second - they should be getting rid of the first line Pylons will be bad for views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be bad for farming due to permanent land loss, restricted practices and animal health and behaviour. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals Best would be to put the connection under the sea, but buried cables are better than pylons "

Norma Ede
"The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on."

Olwen Roberts
"I am against these proposals National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Pauline Whalley
"Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. For these reasons this project must not be allowed to go ahead. "

Philippa Rees
"Wales is unique in having The Future Generations Act. I would like The Future Generations Act to be taken into account in regards to the proposed plan by The National Grid of putting 100 Pylons across Anglesey. Pylons will blight our Island, it will negatively affect our tourism causing loss of employment for local people. They will devalue of our homes. Under grounding and sub-sea have been used in other areas to carry electricity. Anglesey should be offered the same. They say it will cost more, it will cost 11 pence a year on each house holders electricity bill for Anglesey to have under-grounding, It is a small sum of money to ensure our Health, well-being, future employment and prosperity of the Islands comunity"

Rhodd Bulkeley Price
"Please DO NOT let this happen! I currently have to look at the existing line of pylons EVERY DAY when I open my front door. The new line of pylons will be EVEN CLOSER! We don't want them, we don't need them! The power station will only be exporting power to England as Wales is self sufficient in power Pylons: ruin house prices get in the way of farming are ugly are bad for human and animal health Just SAY NO!"

Rob Muirhead
"The consultation has been flawed. We have not been listened to I do not want pylons on Anglesey they are a thing of the past, old technology. I know that under grounding has been used in other areas and subsea has been used. I want under grounding or subsea. Pylons will devalue our homes. Our heath and our children's health will be compromised. Pylons will not bring work onto Anglesey they will blight is"

Robin Hughes
"I am against National Grid's proposals because National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals "

Scott Beck
"All tiers of the population on Anglesey have said NO TO PYLONS. 13,500 people have signed a petition saying NO. It Unfair and undemocratic that they are being ignored. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy.  The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. This project contravenes Wales’s unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge.  Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. "

Selwyn Hughes
"I am against National Grid's proposals because National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals "

Susan A Duxbury-Hibbert
"I am against this proposal A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health Unfair and undemocratic Wellbeing of future generations Underground or subsea is better Consultation was flawed Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment "

Win Roberts
"I am totally against this A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health Unfair and undemocratic Wellbeing of future generations Underground or subsea is better Consultation was flawed Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment "

Wyn Willaims
"I am against this proposal A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health Unfair and undemocratic Wellbeing of future generations Underground or subsea is better Consultation was flawed Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment "

Yvonne Cooper
"As a holiday property owner who visits the usland every weekend with my children and grandchildren I am against overhead pylons and the threat of illness caused by Radon .Anglesey is a beautiful Island and it is well known that cables can be buried ..in times when we as a country and worldwide nations are trying to preserve the NHS and make the world a better place ..putting up another row of pylons does not make sense and I personally have read all the dors and agains cannot understand why in this day and age this method of transporting electeicity would be used and the disruption and blight on the landscape and health pro lems all this will cause needs to be considered ..Its all good a well people making decision who do not live here on our helth and well being listen to the people. My family originated on the Island and that is why I am so against the pylons as i want to preserve a safe healthy environment for my family to live in"

Beverly Wood
"Pylons are not necessary to transmit power across Anglesey. Despite what National Grid tell us it is perfectly possible to put the cables underground and burry them where they cannot be seen. This was accomplished decades ago when the Shell pipeline was laid from Amlwch to Stanlow. If it could be done then successfully through the geology on Anglesey why is it impossible for it to be carried out in the 21st Century? Today technology has moved on and modern techniques exists, like underground and subsea, which do not have the negative effects of pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy.  The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. 13,500 people have signed a petition to oppose more pylons. Why are they being ignored?"

Daeise Fidler
"Pylons will ruin the landscape. The very reason that I visit the island. If there is another row of pylons I will not visit again. Many other tourists will also vote with their feet and not return. Why not put the cables underground??????? That is what is happening in other parts of the UK so why not on Anglesey?......... It would be even better if the old pylons were taken down and the landscape returned to its former glory. "

David Evans
"Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. There are many iconic sites on Anglesey and the island is rich in both aerchological and geological treasures. Many of these will be destroyed by this plan. They are why tourists travell to Anglesey. So Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. All in all more pylons will adversely effect the population of Anglesey. "

David G. Thomas
"I wish to say:- 1. The additional cost of under-grounding new cables to serve the new power-station at Wylfa to millions of individual customers will be miniscule compared to the cost to the all-important tourist industry of Ynys Mon of the blemish of an additional line of pylons. 2. The cost of laying cables under-ground across the Island can be discounted, probably entirely, if, when those cables cross the Menai Strait, they are located underneath, incorporated in into the structure of the new Bridge for the A55 and not in a tunnel drilled under the internationally recognised and protected Menai Strait. 3. The new cables are not required for use until the completion and coming on stream of the new Wylfa power-station,if and only when,it does.The present forecasts are that that will be some years after the completion of the new bridge leaving ample time for the cables to be installed underground across Anglesey and through the pipes incorporated in the new Bridge. "

John Pierce Jones
"Value of property in the affected areas will drop. Obstruction upheaval to the farming community. EMF's health implications, my sister is already in remission from leukaemia and having another pylon so near to her home is a worry for all the family. "

Leanne Sara Gadsby
"My elderly parents live in Rhosgoch within 100 meters of the proposed new National Grid Line. With the new line going through the southern end and at the highest point in the village the result of the visual impact looking south into the suns path and the noise of the two lines being carried by the south westerly prevailing wind will be unbearable for them and the majority of villagers. These issues with suggestions to remedy the problem( which would actually REDUCE the overall cost of build of this section!) have been presented to the National Grid during the consultation period, with an acknowledgement from the grid of the virtues of the suggestions. But nothing was changed, perhaps because the grid had purchased a house on its route through the village during the consultation period!and then did not want to change the route? With other regions of the UK having pylons taken down and cables routed underground and also in two areas on Anglesey. Going through a community when alternatives were available I believe was a breach of one of the Holborn( not sure if correct name) principles that construction of pylon systems were supposed to follow in the UK. The Rhosgoch community is being treated like second class citizens and the decision does not following Human Rights principles. Thank You, Leanne Gadsby "

Davis Meade Property Consultants on behalf of Mrs RA Posnett
"I am the owner of a property [redacted] which is proposed to be adversely affected by the above scheme and I'm concerned with the route of the line and the disturbance that will result to my property from the construction and access route ."

Neil Brown
"Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge.  Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations."

Pam Brown
"Pylons crate a significant health risk as they carry overhead cable which emit EMFs. Across the island there are many anicdotal cases of cancer amongst populations living close to the pylons. There is also a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  If there is even the smallest chance that there is a link the construction of pylons should be banned as it is in other countries. The Wellbeing of Future Generations must be a priority. "

Paul Wesemael
"There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge.  Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations."

Philip Mayer
"PTHE ENTIRE ISAND of Anglesey is an international Geo Park with UNESCO status. This is highly important and something which should be celebrated and protected. There are more that 100 rock types on the island. The eminent geologist [redacted] recently stated that she doesn’t know of anywhere in the world where such diversity is present in such a small area.This invaluable asset should bring in visitors from across the globe but pylons will detract from this resource and deter visitors. The Welsh Government is currently looking to include Goeparks in Planning Policy Wales and states that:- “Planning Authorities should protect the features and qualities for which Geoparks and RIGS HAVE BEEN DESIGNATED, and are encouraged to promote opportunities for the incorporation of geological features within the design and development, particularly where relevant evidence emerges as part of Green Infrastructure Assessment “ I believe that National Grid’s proposal will destroy parts of the Geopark. Once it has gone millions of years of geological heritage will be gone for ever. "

Alan Hughes
"I am against this proposal! Consultation was flawed Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Underground or subsea is better Unfair and undemocratic Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Wellbeing of future generations "

Barry Davies
"I am against this proposal! Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Unfair and undemocratic Wellbeing of future generations Underground or subsea is better Consultation was flawed Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health "

carolyn williams
"should be underground if needed but totally against Wylfa which will destroy the north east of the island even more especially with another line of pylons as well"

David Sanpher
"I am against this proposal! A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health Unfair and undemocratic Wellbeing of future generations Underground or subsea is better Consultation was flawed Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment "

Jamie Davies
"I am against this proposal! Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Unfair and undemocratic Wellbeing of future generations Underground or subsea is better Consultation was flawed Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health "

Jamie Sanpher
"I am against this proposal! A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health Unfair and undemocratic Wellbeing of future generations Underground or subsea is better Consultation was flawed Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment "

Janet Sanpher
"I am against this proposal! A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health Unfair and undemocratic Wellbeing of future generations Underground or subsea is better Consultation was flawed Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment "

Jordan Sanpher
"I am against this proposal! A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health Unfair and undemocratic Wellbeing of future generations Underground or subsea is better Consultation was flawed Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment "

Lynwen Hughes
"I am against this proposal! Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Wellbeing of future generations Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment Underground or subsea is better Unfair and undemocratic Consultation was flawed "

Marian Hughes
"I am against this proposal! Underground or subsea is better Unfair and undemocratic Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Wellbeing of future generations Consultation was flawed Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line "

Mary Jones
"RHOID NHW O DAN DDAEAR "

Menna Lloyd Griffiths
"I am against this proposal! Wellbeing of future generations Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment Underground or subsea is better A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Unfair and undemocratic Consultation was flawed Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health "

Mr D Martin Snow
"Dear Sir / Madam, Horizon propose the export of power generated at Wylfa Newydd to the National Grid by overhead lines supported on a second line of 100 pylons across Anglesey, thus creating an extremely unsightly corridor of 200 pylons. Anglesey's Member of Parliament, Assembly Member, MEP, all Anglesey County Councillors, Anglesey Planning Dept., and 95% of the population are opposed this intrusion upon our island ! The chosen route is absolutely the most environmentally offensive, socially disruptive and difficult in engineering terms it is possible to choose. The proposed crossing of the Menai Strait is at the aesthetically worst possible place being very close (under) to the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Plas Newydd and Vaynol Hall are two of the finest beauty spots on the Menai Strait. Siting the cable end enclosure in this area is stupid - crass ! While the disturbance caused during construction would be of the very greatest inconvenience and as such unacceptable The only reason to use this route / method is that it might be the cheapest – but in what terms ? Once an area has been wrecked it is unlikely, ever, to be reinstated ! We, as an island (population 70,000), ask that this Planning Application be sent back – for further consideration. After some research there appears to be no reason why this interconnector should not terminate at the Bodellwyddan National Grid substation, is it technically within the capacity of the Grid substation ? Has the undersea route been thoroughly examined? Is there any technical reason why power generated at Wylfa Newydd should not go to Bodellwyddan as all logic points to it being routed there, also other connections come ashore there from several offshore wind farms. It appears little is published about the National Grids substation at Bodellwyddan perhaps in an attempt to avoid giving it prominence whereby it is hidden from the minds of objectors protective of Anglesey. The undersea route is direct and relatively uncomplicated in that a single technology is used throughout its major length. Under sea cables will be secure (from terrorists) compared to this the most difficult and disruptive route it is possible to find across Anglesey and the Menai Strait. Terminal buildings for AC undersea links are less conspicuous, in the case of Wylfa Newydd can be placed safely within the grounds of the new power station. Use of undersea cables is very common in this age. The use of pylons and overhead cables is an old technology and totally insecure, a subject worthy of strong criticism in its self. It is proposed two interconnectors from Greenwire Wind Farm and The Codling Bank Irish wind farms are to connect to the UK National Grid at Pentir. Would they also cross Anglesey and be carried on yet another 100 pylons thus making a corridor of 300 pylons ? Anglesey as an island relies heavily upon socio-economics for its income and the efficacy of the tourist trade being able to enjoy the natural visual amenity for employment. Our research confirms tourists are not in favour of more pylons. I suggest the vastly superior under sea route to Bodelwyddan should be used. Apparently there is no sign of any technical reason for this substation not being used, it appears to have the capacity being on the UK National Grid system and has several other major inputs connected there also. Mr D M Snow [redacted] "

North Wales Fire & Rescue Service
"The volume of documentation submitted, by National Grid, to support the DCO application is extensive in nature but lacks any detail or clarity on the issues that have been raised by North Wales Fire & Rescue Service (NWFRS) throughout the pre-consultation stages. NWFRS is submitting a considered representation of the key issues which it believes will impact upon the services it delivers to the communities of North Wales. North Wales Fire and Rescue Authority (“the Authority”)(NWFRA) is required to make provision to meet “normal” requirements in the area it serves (Part 2 Section 7(1)(2), 8(1)(2) of the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004). In addition to this the Authority must also comply with the requirements of The Well-being of Future Generation (Wales) Act 2015. In discharging its duties the Authority must do so in a context of severe medium to long-term pressures on public finances. The functions of the Authority are discharged by North Wales Fire and Rescue Service (“the Service”)(NWFRS). The Service understands that it is Welsh Government’s view that Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects, such as the North Wales Connection, should not have any adverse impact on the public purse. On the basis of current available information, NWFRS believes that the main works involved in the North Wales Connection development go beyond the “normal” requirements of its statutory obligations and raises risks that will place additional demands on the Service. The Service is of the opinion that the scale is such that, unless the developer provides additional funding and/or mitigation, that there will be a cost implication passed on to the Council Tax payer. The identified risks include: Operational Response • An increase in traffic including large vehicles that will have an adverse impact on response times and mobilisation of resources to incidents across North Wales. • An increase in the number of incidents attended as a direct result of the development. • Additional risks that NWFRS personnel may require training for, such as rescue from height and incidents associated with working underground. Staffing • A significant impact on time and resources in order to provide liaison with National Grid and respond appropriately to the consultation process and beyond. Organisation • An increase in fire safety audit/enforcement activity primarily associated with workforce accommodation which includes the use of camping and caravan sites. • An increase in prevention work with the existing community, some of whom may be displaced in favour of construction workers, and the migrant workforce. • Communication systems currently include Airwave and mobile telephony. This is due to be replaced by a new system and assurance will be required that this will include coverage for the site both during construction and operation. Operational response, protection and prevention activities are the key focus for the Service. The development will inevitably have an impact on the Service which, without the provision of additional resources, will impact on the current service to all sectors of the community and/or have a financial impact. "

Olwen Davies
"I am against this proposal! Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Unfair and undemocratic Wellbeing of future generations Underground or subsea is better Consultation was flawed Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health "

Owen Jones
"rhoid nhw o dan ddaear "

Patrick Davies
"I am against this proposal! Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Unfair and undemocratic Wellbeing of future generations Underground or subsea is better Consultation was flawed Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health "

Sarah Irlam
"The 2012 consultation was flawed Bill payers were not given underground or subsea as an option to take the power from Wylfa The first pylons were used outside Edinburgh in the 1920’s Surely technology has moved on since then That’s nearly 100 years ago and we are still using this outdated method. Power stations have had major changes in that time so why cannot the way electricity is transported also be subject to similar changes The Isle of Anglesey Council has to abide by a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act The erecting of pylons may have a detrimental effect on the health of those living with them Surely the council have a duty of care for future generations and err on the side of caution . Future research may show the devastating effect these structures will have. Pylons will be deleterious for tourism and currently this is the islands main industry. They will interrupt views towards and within Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and National Parks This electricity supply carried by these pylons will go into the National Grid for UK use But the small island of Anglesey is bearing the brunt of the impact of these offensive structures ."

Sion Griffiths
"I am against this proposal! Detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB Wellbeing of future generations A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line Underground or subsea is better Unfair and undemocratic Consultation was flawed Not followed Government policy No cumulative impact assessment Detrimental to tourism, farming and house value Detrimental to health "

SP Energy Networks on behalf of SP Manweb
"SP Manweb has no objections or points of disagreement with National Grid in relation to the application. SP Manweb has the following interests in the Project: a) diversions of lower voltage overhead lines, and b) Protective provisions which are still to be agreed between the parties. "

ALan Hesson
"The13,500 people of Anglesey Pylons have signed a petition to say they are against any more pylons on the island because they will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will also be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.   Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons."

Ann Hesson
"Pylons adversely effect health, tourism and the environment. All of which will have a terrible effect on the population of the island. Alternative transmission methods should be used. "

Bronwen Thomas
"From the very beginning the consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. We were never given an opportunity to influence the method of transmission. National Grid had already taken that decision. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on."

David Thomas
"There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. The proposal to construct more pylons across Anglesey is against the spirit of Wales’ unique Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge.  Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Future generations must be protected from having to live with the consequences of decisions made now. "

Debbie Wilson
"From the very beginning the consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. At no time were Anglesey residents given any choic over the method of transmission. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”."

Goergina Smith
"Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons.these alternative methods would be acceptable to the people of Anglesey. It would protect the landscape which in turn would allow the tourist industry to continue to thrive. Suspected health risks would also be prevented. "

Holy Watkinson
"Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  There are many cases of many properties which are already unsalable due to the possibility that there will be more pylons. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”."

Irene Bossom
"There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. "Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy.  The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation." Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge.  Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons."

Jack Henry
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second.  It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd.  If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line.  It is time for a 21st century solution. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. These alternatives should be employed to protect the people of Anglesey from a downturn in the economy due to smaller numbers of people visiting the island bringing valuable income with them. "

Karen Roberts
"I wish to register my interest in this matter as a resident of Anglesey who is becoming increasingly concerned by the implications for the people of Anglesey should the overhead pylon proposal go ahead. My concerns centre around the following : 1. Impact on individual house prices sited ner pylon route. 2. Impact on health for current and future generations from living near pylons. 3. Impact on tourism and potential economic losses in terms of tourism."

Kathleen Parry
"Tourism is the largest income on the island. More pylons will deter tourist from visiting. This will be disaster for the people who run tourist businesses and the many people employed in the industry. 13,500 people have signed a petition saying no to pylons. If this is ignored it will be undemocratic. All the elected representatives including the Welsh Government have spoken with one voice - NO TO PYLONS. other technologies exist such as undergrounding. This would prevent the visual intrusion in the landscape which would be the result of more pylons. "

Lance Bossom
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second.  It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd.  If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line.  It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside.  Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices.  Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered.  More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”."

Lena Henry
"The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on."

Margaret Wilson
"I am extremely worry about the link between overhead cables and health problems. Cables emit EMFs which can, and do, cause cancer. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals.  Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge.  Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Either of these are far more acceptable to the people of Anglesey"

Pauline Desch
"The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on."

Stephen Parry-Williams
"The route currently being considered includes a parcel of land which we own. I believe the route in Section E should be reconsidered, especially in light of the preferred route of the 3rd crossing for a road bridge across the Menai Straits. The current route should be followed for a greater length before reaching the new road crossing. I believe the existing pylons should be utilized along with a 'heat sink' run out to the sea near the power station for dissipation of emergency loads, which would negate the requirement for a second run of pylons across Anglesey and save the Government/the Country a great deal of money, given that the output of the Power Station is now less than was originally envisaged. Failing that, the underground option should still be considered as the long-term preferred option. We expect to be recompensed for any value lost on our property should the 'National Grids' prefered option eventually be adopted."

Vaughan Roberts
"Anglesey already has too many pylons. They are a negative visual intrusion on the landscape. The people of Anglesey have said no to more pylons. It is undemocratic to ignore the voice of the people. There is better technology today this should be used so the cables can be undergrounded. This is happening in England so why not in Wales?"

Amanda Huddleston
"Tourism is a primary source of income to the island. Additional pylons would blight the AONB and impact on visitors and the landscape. They will also reduce the land value "

Anglesey Says No to Pylons
"Thank you for giving “Anglesey Says No to Pylons” the opportunity for giving our views on the National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET) proposal for the North Wales Connection. The key themes are: impact on tourism, impact on farming, impact on house valuation, impact on visual amenity, impact on designated landscapes, unacceptable social costs, flawed consultation, poor public engagement, failure to follow Government Policy, failure to the follow the Holford Rules, historically and culturally inappropriate Our views on the Wylfa Newydd DCO are irrelevant for this proposal, but it goes without saying that any generator needs to be connected to the power demand, so we fully agree with a connection existing for Wylfa Newydd, Orthios and any future generators, however, we totally disagree with all other aspects of the proposed development 1. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact of the development in total (ie Wylfa Newydd and the North Wales Connection) been assessed or consulted on 2. There are numerous instances where NGET have not followed the advice in Government policy (EN-1 and EN-5) 3. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith. NGET had already published plans in 2009 three years before it commenced and the only statutory consultation in 2016 did not consider any other options Although NGET pretended to evaluate other options in 2012, the people of Pembrokeshire and the Wirral were not consulted 4. While hundreds of people responded to the consultation, over 13,000 have signed our petition against the proposals 5. Engagement since the consultation has felt patronising and some landowners report feeling intimidated 6. The tenth edition of Planning Policy Wales is quite clear that the preference of the Welsh Government is for all new connections to be underground. This will have no impact on the feasibility of the power station 7. The additional costs are estimated at some 11p/year on an average UK electricity bill of £554 – an increase of 0.02%, affordable even to vulnerable households suffering fuel poverty 8. Despite frequent requests, NGET have refused to consider modifications to the existing line to reduce visual disamenity, and comply with current routing guidance, yet have included modifications to facilitate the new line 9. Of the seven “Holford Rules”, NGET ignore all of them for the modifications to the existing line, and follow only one of them for the new line 10. NGET have not planned for the use of the third Menai crossing which could reduce costs by £200 million 11. While NGET are not bound by The Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, pylons are a poor legacy for future generations 12. Other technology exists (underground and subsea), which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Underground is acceptable to Horizon 13. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England. While hosting a power station the island should not have to bear the visual intrusion of pylons 14. All levels of democratic representation (Council, AM, MP) have spoken against the proposals 15. NGET are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second, on the (false) assumption that people are now used to the presence of these towers. It is well known that further reactors are likely at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy (EN-5) a second row will be used to justify even more lines 16. Had the AONB designation been in place earlier, it is unlikely that much of the existing line could have used pylons. As NGET propose significant modification to this line, current design guidance should be followed 17. Pylons will be detrimental to views of the countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the AONB, iconic views of Snowdonia National Park and the landscape setting of numerous historic features 18. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through a spoilt, blighted, stigmatised and “industrial”, landscape 19. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices 20. Pylons will be detrimental to house value due to loss of visual amenity, blight and stigma 21. The “social costs” of this proposal, estimated at £500 million, outweigh the additional cost of undergrounding 22. NGET ignore the social costs in their evaluation methodology, despite UK Government and EU guidance 23. Pylons will hinder Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers” 24. The whole of the Anglesey landscape is recognised by UNESCO as a Geo Park for the geological and geomorphological features (not just the coast as NGET imply) 25. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons (EMFs) on people and farm animals. There are different views, but learning from early research into tobacco in the 1950’s, the precautionary principle should be followed We would urge the Examining Authority to visit Cemaes, Llanfechell, Rhosgoch, Rhosybol, Llandyfrydog, Maenaddwyn, Capel Coch, Talwrn and Star, to see for themselves the current blight and try to imagine the view with a second line "

Antony Mann
"The proposed new pylons will negatively effect the natural beauty of the island, possibly affecting tourism, and spoiling the quality of life of the residents. House prices would be expected to fall if located in sight of the new pylons."

Bethan Wyn Jones
"Rwy'n gwrthwynebu'r cynlluniau i roi rhagor o beilonau ar draws Ynys Môn. Mae'r rhai sydd yma'n barod yn ddigon hyll. Ni chredaf fod angen rhagor ac maent yn difwyno ardal hardd. Ni chredaf fod yn rhaid i ni fel trigolion orfod dioddef hyn. Mewn rhannau eraill o'r wlad, maent wedi cael eu rhoi dan ddaear. Dylai hyn ddigwydd ym Môn hefyd."

Dr Jonathan F Dean
"Thank you for the opportunity for giving my views on the National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET) proposal for the North Wales Connection (NWC). I apologise for the length of this Relevant Representation so have provided key themes below Key themes: impact on tourism, impact on farming, impact on house valuation, flawed “consultation”, failure to follow Government Policy, failure to the follow the Holford Rules, historically and culturally inappropriate My views on the Wylfa Newydd DCO are irrelevant for this proposal, but it goes without saying that any generator needs to be connected to the demand, so I fully agree with a connection existing, however, I totally disagree with all other aspects of this proposal The current line of pylons was built in 1963-66, just before the Anglesey Area of Outstanding Beauty (AONB) was designated in 1967 (and coincidentally when I came to Anglesey as a child so my late father could run Wylfa). Had the designation been in place earlier, it is unlikely that significant portions of this line could have used pylons, but would have been placed underground/under the Menai. I urge you to stand on the shore of Menai, or the summit of Mynydd Bodafon, both popular with residents and tourists and see for yourselves. Opposition to the line in 1962/3 is documented in the Anglesey Archives. This line is now largely redundant, so should not be used for the Wylfa Newydd export, should not be significantly modified to facilitate the new line and should not be used to justify a second (third or fourth) line. I hated pylons as a child, and still hate them now. Don’t believe the myth that people get used to them NGET will tell you that there are very few studies into the effect of high voltage overhead transmission lines on tourism, and state that the impact of this proposal will be minimal. However, only a few minutes of on-line searching yields multiple, peer-reviewed studies in respected journals showing that this is simply not true. Anglesey, designated by the Office of National Statistics as a “holiday hotspot”, is hugely dependant on the tourism economy. This proposal, both during construction and operation, will deprive the local tourism industry of revenue, market share and growth. Only a few minutes more of on-line searching will provide further evidence that agriculture and housing will be similarly impacted. The socio-economic evaluation provided in the DCO is simply inadequate, primarily as the economic/financial impact (via NGET’s flawed methodology) has not been estimated. The “social costs” of this proposal, estimated at £500 million, outweigh the additional cost of undergrounding Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and a vehicle for putting this into practice is the tenth edition of Planning Policy Wales (PPW10). Should this proposal be granted, it would be in direct contravention of Welsh planning policy (as well as Ofgem’s principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”). PPW10 is clear in that new grid connections should be placed underground, allowing for cost considerations if this would jeopardise the viability of an otherwise feasible development. With the current regulatory and price control regime, where the power station developer cannot invest in a grid connection, and NGET pass all costs on to consumers, the additional cost of undergrounding this connection cannot impact the viability of the power station. The additional costs are estimated at some 11p/year on an average UK electricity bill of £554 – an increase of 0.02%, affordable even to those vulnerable households suffering fuel poverty The so called “consultation” that preceded the application contained significant flaws – NGET had published details and costs of their desired solution a full three years before the “consultation”, which claimed to look at options such as underground and subsea, commenced. While claiming to consult on a subsea option in 2012, no consultation was conducted on the Wirral or in Pembrokeshire, the destinations of the subsea options. At no point was a “cumulative consultation” (for the entire power station/grid connection development, as suggested by The Planning Act 2008) conducted, and the cumulative impact assessment in the DCO is severely lacking Of the seven “Holford Rules”, NGET ignore all of them for the modifications to the existing line, and follow only one of them for the new line. NGET’s CEO John Pettigrew told me at the National Grid AGM in 2017 “… they are only guidelines, we don’t have to follow them”, although the principles of the rules are enshrined in UK Government Policy (EN-5). There are numerous other examples where Government Policy has been simply swept aside, such as rationalisation of existing assets. To be fair to NGET, many of the rules are difficult to follow on Anglesey due to the underlying geology and geomorphology, resulting from glacial flow in the last ice age (and recognised by UNESCO). The residential settlement pattern on Anglesey, which NGET could easily have used as justification for undergrounding, are in part due to the ninth century inheritance laws of Hywel Dda. In such an ancient landscape, that is simply “at odds” with the “rules”, the case for undergrounding becomes overwhelming I am sure you have heard the saying Môn, Mam Cymru (Anglesey, the mother of Wales), first documented in the 1100’s by Gerald of Wales, who recounts the tale of Anglesey being able to feed all of Wales due to the fertile land. Gerald states this only shortly after saying much of the land is marshy, rocky and poor. It was probably Gerald who created this “Christian propaganda” to hide the fact that the locals used the pre-Christian name. Mon/Mona was a female Celtic deity, and mona is still used in Irish Gaelic to denote “the earth”. It would simply be culturally/historically/spiritually wrong to decorate/desecrate this “sacred” landscape with a second line of pylons, destroying the ample visual amenity, enjoyed by many, for generations to come In closing, I would urge the Examining Authority to visit Star, Rhosybol, Rhosgoch, Capel Coch, Cemaes, or even my garden in Bachau, to see for themselves the current blight "

Gwyn Jones
"As someone who has lived on Anglesey all my life . I have worked as a dairy farmer , and now in construction management . I can understand the need for change and delivery of a service . However , with regard this I am concerned about the impact on the locality , for reasons of adverse effects on people’s health and well being . The health impact is published and well known as showing a significant risk on increased cases of childhood leukaemia . The visual , health impact will affect tourism here. Tourism is a major financial , employment generator for Anglesey . This has a further knock on to further services , employment generated . Anglesey is an area of National outstanding Beauty , to impact on this is to chip away at the already lowering recognition and understanding of the great contribution nature has to our well being , health , general sanity really , as the whole world is busy expanding , becoming more consumerist , and forgetting those lovely things like a breath of fresh air , a walk in the woods , the sight of rolling green fields dotted with cows ,or sheep , rolling to the sky line. Alongside this is preservation of this for Welsh culture and the future of further generations ahead . As a farmer , I have concerns on well being of farm stock . We have recent stock losses from electrocution from a fallen pole from a power line. Thank you for your time . If an underground delivery of these power lines in an option . We would be so grateful for your strong consideration of this "

Meg Roberts
"Spoil a vast area of Anglesey by ANOTHER pylon line crossing it. Not visually pleasant for those LIVING on Anglesey to have to look at. Will affect TOURISM. Will lead to people LOSING HOMES. Will affect VALUE of property. Will affect HEALTH of those living in close proximity. All of these issues can be avoided by placing lines UNDERGROUND, irrespective of the increased cost. Otherwise the PRICE Anglesey will pay is far higher than that COST. It is imperative that your organisation bears this in mind and fully understands the difference. "

Mrs Valerie Wilson
"I am concerned about the health implications for people who live adjacent or close to the original pylons. National Grid cannot give a definitive answer to the possible cancer links. I live adjacent to a pylon on Anglesey and a strip light is held up towards the lines it will light up???. Surely this can’t be right. How can they consider erecting more. We need more answers. "

Peter Murphy
"New Overhead Pylons through a region of AONB is no longer tolerated in England or Scotland so why is it acceptable in Wales, are we a lower class of UK citizen? Our village of Rhosgoch has been disregarded by National Grid as a population of Human Beings, the proposed route runs through the southern part of the village at the highest point resulting in a visual impact in the southerly aspect of pylons and wires and very little skyline! together with the sound produced by two sets of cables being carried into the village by the prevailing south westerlies producing an unacceptable living environment. National grid were provided two alternative routes following the Holford Rules which would reduce the impact and at a "Lower Cost", but decided although agreeing they had good points to ignore them? Why perhaps because they had already purchased a house under the Proposed Route! Prior to the end of the consultation period!! how dishonest can an organisation be? what was the point of the consultation period? The Grid states that Undergrounding would cost more, they could save money by re routing through Rhosgoch! The Grid staes that Extra costs would end up being past on to energy consumers in other regions! Basic Human Rights legislation states that you must not disadvantage a community for the Benefit of others! Exactly what National grid is doing! The line through Rhosgoch will destroy lives and make their homes a lot less valuable. Thank You Peter Murphy. "

Reece Catlow
"Any change for any place needs to have viable benefits for all, balanced by the cost not just in money but the effects on the local population of Anglesey. There are viable alternatives to the direction of travel (Pylons), which would not impact the land, people, economy, and the turmall that would be caused. I would ask the inspectorate to review closely the perceived benefits as apposed to alternative less disruptive/destructive means by which the objective of providing power can be achieved. One of Anglesey's main income streams is Tourism, if this was to be affected it would have large impact on the Island economy, Farming is also an income and a way of life that has been here for generations to this island; all will be affected. This is not just "not in my back yard" but a real issue with real impacts for all. Thank you. "

Alwyn Jones
"Rqyf yn gwrthwynebu gosod ail res o beilonau ar draws Ynys Mon am y rhesymau canlynol: Bydd yn amharu ar welediad mewn AHNA. Yn yr un modd, fe fyddai'n cael effaith ar y diwydiant twristiaeth sydd yn cynhyrchu dros chwarter biliwn o incwm i'r ynys hon yn flynyddol. Fe fydd effaith tymor hir i'w weld hefyd ar amaethyddiaeth. Mae'r ddau ddiwydiant yma'n eithrio bwysig yma ym Mon.adol Mae gen i bryder mawr am effaith peilonau ar iechyd. Mae yna wybodaeth gyhoeddus am engreifftiau o garfan uwch o bobl yn dioddef afiechyd pan yn yw ger peilonau. Mae'r Grid yn gwadu hyn ond yr oedd pawb yn credu fod ysmygu'n llesol i'r iechyd flynyddoedd yn ol. Mae'n well bod yn saff a tan ddaearu. Rwyf o'r farn fod yr ymgynghoriad wedi bod yn wallus ac yn annheg gan nad yw'r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi gwrando ar farn y bobl, barn sydd bron a bod yn unfryd yn erbyn ail res uwch ben y ddaear. Rwy'n erfyn arnoch i gymryd y sylwadau uchod i ystyriaeth yn eich trafodaethau. "

Ann Tooze
"Anglesey is an area of ANOB with about 150 miles of coastal paths, I believe is was designated ANOB in the 1960’s. Time has moved forward very quickly since then, Anglesey is a top destination for tourists who walk the coastal paths and stay in our towns & villages bringing revenue to 1000’s of businesses. I would say many businesses would not survive on the Island without tourists. With today technology news travels fast regarding the “in places to visit” and it also travels fast regarding areas that have had the landscape blotted by pylons. What company is it’s right mind who wanted to work “with” islanders and those that visit would want to erect another row of huge ugly pylons across our beautiful Island, an Island that does depend on tourism. There is an alternative- to burry these cables- so tourists & those that live here wouldn’t even know they were there, it would have no effect on the environment, on the beautiful landscape or on future visitors. I’ve read in recent polls that Anglesey is fast becoming the place to visit- we want to continue to increase this trend- not decrease it just for the sake of extra revenue needed to put these cables underground- the long term effect this will have on Anglesey is horrendous to say the least. If cables can be buried elsewhere- why do we have to be short-changed and have the pylons looming down on his residents and those who visit. "

Anthony Williams
"I am very concerned about National Grid's intention to construct a second high voltage power line across the Isle of Anglesey. The detrimental impact such a line will have on the island's well being is very worrying. It will no doubt have a negative effect on the tourism, as the view within, and of, the Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty will be spoilt. Another negative impact of high voltage cables will be the generation of electro-magnetic fields, the detrimental impact of which on human health is a concern that must not be ignored. Another concern which has not been addressed by National Grid's application is the detrimental effect a second power line will have on property values. It reflects the National Grid’s lack of engagement with relevant stakeholders, in particular the Isle of Anglesey County Council and the island population. Undergrounding of cables or a subsea connection must therefore be considered as a viable solution and not be rejected out of hand due on the basis of cost. It appears that the people's voice has been completely ignored by National Grid in favour of financial considerations. "

Anwen Williams
"Rwy'n gwrthwynebu gosod ail res o beilonau ar draws Ynys Mon. Byddai'n andwyol i olygfeydd o gefn gwlad ac mewn AHNA ac rwyf yn bendant y byddai'r effaith ar dwristiaeth, amaethyddiaeth a gwerth eiddo yn hollol afresymol. Yn fy marn i, er y byddai y Grid yn anghytuno, mae peilonau yn achosi gwaeledd. Rwy'n benmdant fod yna risgiau uchel i iechyd y boblogaeth oddi wrth beilonau. Mae'r risg yn llawer iawn yn rhy fawr. Byddai ei gosod o dan y ddaear neu o dan y dwr yn sicrhau na fyddai'r risg honno'n bodoli. Credaf hefyd fod yr ymgynghoriad wedi bod yn annheg ac annemocrataidd; pa fath o ymgyngoriad sydd yn anwybyddu barn pob corff ac unigolyn ar y sir hon? Ni wnaethpwyd asesiad o effaith cronnus gan y Grid Cenedlaethol ac mae hynny'n gwbl afresymol. "

Bethan Jones
"Rwyf yn gwrthwynebu’n chwyrn i leoli mwy o beilonau ar Ynys Mon. Mae ymgyrch y Grid Cenedlaethol wedi bod yn un ochrog o’r cychwyn cyntaf! Wrth ‘ymgynghori’ gyda’r cyhoedd roeddynt yn arwain y cyhoedd i’w ffordd nhw o feddwl. Nid oes ystyriaeth wedi ei wneud o ran effaith ar yr amgylchedd weledol! Mae harddwch naturiol yr Ynys yn cael ei ddyfetha’n llwyr wrth groesi’r bont a gweld rhes o beilonau yn ein gwynebu! Mae effaith peilonau yn acho o bryder mawr i ni yn Llanfairpwll gan fod llawer o drigolion sy’n byw o dan y peilonau ar y stryd fawr wedi cael canser . Mae’n rhaid cael ymchwiluad annibynnol trylwyr i’r effaith ar iechyd. Rydym yn gwrthwynebu’n chwyrn ond yn amlwg does neb yn gwrando! Mae son fod cost enfawr ynghlwm i roi y ceblau dan y ddaear. Costau ychwanegol ir Grid? Costau ychwanegol i drigolion Ynys Mon? Yntau cost ychwanegol i ddefnyddwyr yn Lloegr?! Hoffwn wybod beth fydd y gost y hwanegol hyn a beth fydd y canlyniad ar y defnyddwyr! "

Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales Montgomeryshire
"CPRW Mntgomeryshire wish to make a single and simple point that the imposition of parallel transmission infrastructure is totally unacceptable in terms of landscape impact and should not be constructed on these grounds alone quite aside from other significant factors already enumerated by local people and organisations. Over the last few years Ofgem has committed funding to the REMOVAL of some of the most unsightly pylon lines in the UK which will have a hugely beneficial landscape and visual impact. One can only conjecture why serious consideration is being given to erecting more such structures when elsewhere these are being removed at considerable expense to the public purse. This seems one of the most perverse decisions that could possibly be made. CPRW Montgomeryshire is supportive of the construction of Wylfa B and of both the secure, reliable and carbon neutral base load it will provide to the Grid for many years as well as the local employment it will provide in both construction and operation. The opportunity is now available to underground both the existing and the new lines simultaneously and this should be grasped and welcomed for the tremendous landscape amelioration that will result. The costs of undergrounding are stated to be some 7 times that of overhead lines but the generators consider undergrounding to be safer and more reliable in the long term thus reducing maintenance costs. It will also obviate the need for the costs of future undergrounding when Ofgem resolves to remove further of these unnecessary intrusions in some of our loveliest landscapes. Thank you for considering our representation."

Carol Bown Williams
"Y prif reswm dros fy ngwthwynebida ydi diogelu harddwch yr Ynys. Mi fydd y peilonau mawrion yma yn dyfetha prydferthwch ein Ynys. Hefyd yn bendant mae yna gysylltiad rhwng y niferoedd uchel o gancr sydd ar yr Ynys i gymharu ac ardaloedd eraill Cymru. Yn olaf dwi methu deall pam na fuasai cwmni mor fawr a'r Grid Cenedlaethol yn gwagio'i pocedi er mwyn rhoi ceblau tanddaearol. Maent siwr o gael eu pres yn ol mewn blynyddoedd ond mae rhai pethau yn bwysicach na phres-prydferthwch cefn gwlad, iechyd a lles plant y dyfodol. "

Carol Coates
"I am against pylons on Anglesey and would request that underground cables are laid in their place. Pylons detract from the natural beauty of the island affecting our wellbeing, the tourist industry and our ability to attract inward investment."

Christina Williams
"I am very concerned about National Grid’s intention to construct second high voltage overhead power line across the Isle of Anglesey, as this will have a detrimental impact on the island, its inhabitants, farm animals. It will spoil the views within, and of, its Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and thus have a detrimental impact on the island's tourism industry. I strongly believe that National Grid’s intention to go ahead with a second line of pylons ignores the voice of the people who live here. Many are deeply concerned about the negative effects a second line of monster pylons will have on people's and farm animals' health and well being, as it will generate electromagnetic fields. This will also negatively affect property prices, an aspect that has been completely omitted from the National Grid's application. "

David Hall
"The Planning Inspectorate should reject the application. More pylons would be dreadful for Anglesey. It would be bad for natural beauty, bad for tourism, bad for farming, bad for local house prices. Anglesey's number one asset is its coastal paths and natural beauty especially the long distance views. The existing pylons are already awful - just visit the Carreg Mon hotel (Llanfairpwllgwyngyll) and look upwards. So why do we need a second row. Why cant the existing ones be upgraded or better still remove these and put ALL the cables underground. The exported electricity is NOT for the residents of this Island so why should we have to put up with its eyesore and economic consequences. Regards [redacted]"

David Harding
"more pylons will effect the House prices and beauty of the Isle of Anglesey and where they can should be under ground at all times"

David Jones
"I am writing with regard to the North Wales Connection project, as I am very concerned about the detrimental impact National Grid’s intention to construct second high voltage overhead power line will have on the island, its inhabitants and farm animals. The electromagnetic fields two lines of monster pylons will create a 'no go' corridor across the island. Another concern is the negative impact on the tourism industry, as two lines of pylons will spoil the views within, and of, areas of outstanding natural beauty. Another concern which has not been addressed by National Grid's application is the detrimental effect a second power line will have on property values. It reflects the National Grid’s deplorable lack of engagement with relevant stakeholders, in particular the Isle of Anglesey County Council and the island population. Why is the voice of the people of Anglesey being ignored?"

David Kones
" If this project is allowed it will leave a terrible legacy for future generations. Our children and our children’s children will have to live with the consequences for decades The consequences would be:- Devaluation of property prices Loss of argricultural land Downfall in tourists , therefore a depression in income from this valuable asset. Irreparable scaring of the landscape Probable serious health problems caused by overhead cables emissions of EMFs All these could be avoided if the cables were undergrounded. "

David Roberts
"Bad for tourism. Unsightly. Bad for Natural beauty."

David Roy
"I object to the plan by the National Grid to build 100 pylons across Anglesey because: Environmentally it would have a negative impact. Tourism would be affected. In an ANOB the 100 pylons would be an eyesore. Farming would be adversely affected. They National Grid has an alternative way to do this and should concentrate on delivering that and not on its bottom line."

David Wareing
"I object to The North Wales Connection on the following grounds: 1 It will blight the natural beauty of the Island Environment. 2 It will impact negatively on tourism, a major source of income and employment. 3 It should not be necessary as there is already a line of pylons from Wylfa to the mainland."

Dilys Shaw
"Anglesey has suffered long enough with hideous pylons across the island enough is enough! Not only do they spoil the environment but they present a potential health hazard for humans and animals alike. Why are the present pylons still there when Wylfa is no longer producing electricity. Also, why cannot the present pylons be re-used instead of adding to the eyesore. At the very least the redundant pylons should be removed.It would appear that using underqround means of transporting electricity is not cost effective but nobody is counting the cost to the Anglesey residents and it's about time this happened."

Eric Chambers
"I wish to object to the proposal for the use of pylons because they would detract from house prices,farming and employment prospects of islanders. Anglesey is an area of outstanding natural beauty, is steeped in history and has a large number of SSSI. I cannot accept that the extra cost incurred in laying cables underground is prohibitive when amortised over the life of the working life of the proposed wylfa newydd. "

Gareth Wiilliams
"Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing with regard to the North Wales Connection project, as I am deeply concerned about National Grid’s intention to construct second high voltage overhead power line in addition to the existing one. The negative impacts such a power line will have on Anglesey and its inhabitants cause grave concern for a number of reasons: I am particularly worried about the health impact on people and farm animals due to the strong electro-magnetic fields generated by two lines of high voltage power lines. More pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry as they will have a negative impact on vie, not only within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Visitors who come to enjoy Anglesey's Areas of Natural Outstanding Beauty do so to escape the industrial environments of Manchester and Liverpool, for example, not to be confronted with monster pylons. This island is unique in terms of its stunning coastline and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and I therefore believe that National Grid’s intention to go ahead with a second line of pylons ignores the voice of the people who live here.I am very proud of my Welsh heritage and therefore strongly object to National Grid going ahead with this proposed development, as it will ruining parts of this beautiful island. Another concern which has not been addressed by National Grid's application is the detrimental effect a second power line will have on property values. It reflects the National Grid’s deplorable lack of engagement with relevant stakeholders, in particular the Isle of Anglesey County Council and the island population. The option of undergrounding of cables or a subsea connection must therefore be adopted as a viable solution. "

Gillian Wilson
"If you were to build more pylons on Anglesey it would be So bad for a lot of reasons the natural beauty of the place, for farming and the animals, for tourism and also for the housing prices. There’s more negative reasons than positive If you do. Please say no to pylons. "

Guy Jones
"I object to the erection of a second row of pylons across Anglesey for the following reasons: There is no valid reason apart from financial ones that the cable for transferring power across the Isle of Anglesey cannot be placed underground. Overhead lines will have a detrimental effect on tourism by stopping people from spending time her. It will have an effect on the farming industry too. I have great reservations about the safety of overhead cables and their effect on the health and well being of residences within the area and those who live directly under them. I feel that the consultation has been flawed as the National Grid has not really listened to the cry for cables to be under-grounded.The long term effect on property prices and businesses will be huge. "

Gwenda Jones
"I am extremely concerned about National Grid's intention to construct a second high voltage power line across the Isle of Anglesey. The detrimental impact of such a line is very worrying. Not only will it have a negative impact on views of areas of outstanding natural beauty, it will also create a no-go corridor of electromagnetic fields. The impact of this on people's and farm animals' health is very worrying. It is also doubtful whether visitors who have come to Anglesey to enjoy the stunning coastline and the beautiful unspoilt beaches will continue to do so. Two lines of monster pylons is the last thing they wish to see. Another issue which has been omitted completely in National Grid's application is the detrimental effect a second power line will have on property values. This clearly is evidence of National Grid’s lack of engagement with relevant stakeholders, in particular the Isle of Anglesey County Council and the island population. I therefore urge you to consider undergrounding of cables or a subsea connection as a viable option and not allow financial arguments to influence the final decision at the expense of the people of Anglesey."

Gwyneth Kitching
" 1 - Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside 1 - Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside. 2 - Pylons will reduce house prices. 3 - Eletrical and electromagnetic fields generated by the cables on the pylons are a serious hazard to health. 4 - Pylons will be detrimental to tourism. "

Heather Roy
"I object to Horizon wishing to build new pylon structures across Anglesey from Wylfa on several grounds: Environmental impact Harm it will cause to Tourism Aesthetically Negative impact on Farming Negative impact on house prices There is an alternative to this - put the workings under the sea."

Jackie Craddock
"Angleseys beauty is already scarred by enormous pylons, no one should have to put up with even more eyesores. Angleseys economy from tourists depends on it's beauty. House prices will be affected. New electricity cables can be buried ,they are in other beautiful areas such as Lake District. "

Janet jones
"These second pylon will spoil the natural beauty of Anglesey. They will affect camp sites and tourism. They will affect people property, there life’s, as just on my property l will be looking at them across the side and back, there is also the health risks, It will affect value of property. "

Jenifer Jones
"Nid wyf yn credu y dylai'r Grid Cenedlaethol gael caniatad i godi ail res o beilonau ar draws Ynys Mon. Bydd ail res o beilonau yn cael effaith eithriadol ar y sir hon. Fe fydd yn effeithio ar dwristiaeth; ni fydd bobol yn yn dod i'r ynys ar eu gwyliau yn y niferoedd y maen nhw'n dod rwan. Mae tystiolaeth fod hyn yn digwydd mewn mannau ble mae nifer fawr o beilonau. Bydd yna effaith ar werth eiddo hefyd ac nid oes ystryriaeth yn cael ei roddi i hyn. Bydd yna effaith ar amaethyddiaeth hefyd a hynny dros gyfnod hir. Nid yw'r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi bod yn deg gyda'r cyhoedd. Nid ydynt wedi gwir wrando ar lais y bobol, yr Aelod Senedddol, yr Aelod Cynulliad, Un Llais Mon, Y Cyngor Sir a'r mwyafrif o'r preswylwyr sydd yn dweud nad yw peilonau'r dderbyniol ganddynt. Pa fath o ymgynghoriad yw un sydd ddim yn gwrando? Mae nhw'n dweud eu bod wedi gwneud hynny ond dim ond trwy wneud newidiadau bychain mewn gwirionedd. Mae nhw'n taflu llwch i'n llygaid. Bydd gwelediad yr Ynys yn newid hefyd gyda dwy res o beilonau i'w gweld o AHNA. Rwy'n erfyn arnoch i wrthod eu cais."

Jo Stringer
"I reject any plans for the installation of pylons on Anglesey. The countryside is slowly being destroyed by bad planning decisions which impact wide life, landscapes and housing. The tourism industry will be comprimised leaving little or no income for the island. It should be protected but instead it’s being ruined bit by bit. House prices will drop drastically like it will if the nuclear power station is built, we should be looking at preserving what we have and reducing the impacts by reversing bad planning decisions. Remove old monstrous buildings/structures that blot the landscape not adding more!"

John Huw Jones
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. My home is located in Llanfechell and the second line of pylons will create an industrial landscape to the detriment of my property and community. The issue of cumulative effects has been neglected in consideration of this area. The total effects of the adjacent power station AND the pylons are intolerable and not taken into account. NG have not responded to reasonable requests for lines to be undergrounded in this area."

John Owen
"I do not want to see a second line of pylons erected across Anglesey as I fear a second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line in time. A second line would be detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB The effect would be devastating to tourism, farming and property values. Despite what the Grid says, there is a risk to health The Grid has decided to ignore the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act and this would have an effect on people in Anglesey for over sixty years. I believe that underground or a subsea version is better for all. "

Laura Owen
"I do not ant a second row of pylons across Anglesey. The consultation has been unfair and flawed. The erection of a second row would without doubt have an effect on tourism, farming and the lives of the residents of Anglesey. There are alternatives but the Grid has chosen to ignore them for financial reasons alone. A second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line: one extra would be detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB for me, there is a high health risk though this would be denied by the National Grid. I strongly believe that the whole consultation process was flawed and very unfair. The whole process is a travesty. "

Libby Jones
"I strongly object to the erection of a second row of pylons over Anglesey. It would be detrimental to tourism, farming and to property values. It would also be visible from AONB. I believe that overhead pylons are a danger to health. I strongly believe that they should be undergrounded. I also fear that erecting a second row will justify a third in time. The consultation was very unfair because the Grid ignored the opinion of the vast majority of people on Anglesey and beyond and insisting on going over-ground and no cumulative impact assessment has been undertaken. "

Mark Evans
"The lasting impact in ones memory of huge ugly brightly coated pylons that will be seen for generations to come. People will wonder in disbelief at why a sensible alternative was not used and will bewilder the people who live on Anglesey and tourists alike. How the planning inspectorate could be so insensitive and instruct such a spoiling and lasting carbuncle to upset and destroy the beauty of Anglesey will wholly be the wrong decision. OK we are dubbed energy island and embrace new forms of electrical energy and employment but DO NOT spoil the beauty and huge tourism industry by not embracing technology that will harness wasted heat to power local amenities - that is the smart option that will be happily talked about by everyone as opposed to the terrible decision to stay with old and ugly pylon option. It is time to think smart - for our future!"

Matthew Roberts
"I would like to express my deepest concern about National grid's intention to construct a second line of high voltage power cables across the Isle of Anglesey. This is an island renowned for its beautiful landscape and seascape and is a popular holiday destination for many families. It is not difficult to imagine the detrimental impact a second line of monster pylons will have on the tourism industry, as they spoil the view within, and of, the areas of natural outstanding beauty. I am also very worried about the negative impact a second high voltage power line will have on the health and well being of people and farm animals due to the electromagnetic fields generated. Finally, I am concerned that property prices will be negatively affected, an aspect that has not been at all addressed in National Grid's planning application. In view of these concerns I urge you to consider alternative solution, such as a subsea connection or undergrounding of cables. "

Maureen Williams
"I am writing with regard to the North Wales Connection project, as I am very concerned. The National Grid’s intention to construct second high voltage overhead power line will have a detrimental impact on the island, its inhabitants, farm animals and its Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. It will spoil the views from within, and of, these areas and therefore have a detrimental impact on the island's tourism industry. This island is unique in terms of its stunning coastline and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and I therefore believe that National Grid’s intention to go ahead with a second line of pylons ignores the voice of the people who live here. I am also very worried about the pylon's negative impact on people's health due to the electro-magnetic fields generated by two rows of pylons. Another concern which has not been addressed by National Grid's application is the detrimental effect a second power line will have on property values. It reflects the National Grid’s deplorable lack of engagement with relevant stakeholders, in particular the Isle of Anglesey County Council and the island population. The option of undergrounding of cables or a subsea connection must therefore be considered as a viable solution. "

Me Roderic Jeremy Nicholas Marlow
"I wish to protest in the strongest possible way regarding the suggestion to introduce more pylons to Anglesey, this appears to me to be just a cost cutting exercise by a power company looking to make even more profits. Without doubt the beautiful coast and countryside of Wales as a whole is being ruined by the large amounts of windfarms and more than enough pylons. It is being raped and pillaged to provide power for Merseyside and its environs at great expense to the Principality in the loss of tourism, visitors, investments and the like. Then of course there are the effects on the farming community, the list could go on and on. When my wife and I first moved to North Wales we could look out and see the lights of Colwyn Bay twinkling in the distance, nothing else. Now look at it, it's more like Blackpool Illuminations. You do not need an Englishman to tell you that Anglesey is a unique, beautiful and ancient island, magnificent in so many ways from charming old fashioned country lanes reminiscent of the good old days to rugged coastline. You, our representatives, shoulder a great burden on our behalf, to look after this heritage, its wildlife, flora and fauna. I am not against progress but these proposals for more pylons should be treated with the contempt that they deserve and filed away in the nearest trash bin. If more cables are needed put them underground where they belong. Perhaps they should have thought of this before planning a new powers station. "

Mike Hawkes
"I object to this application on the following grounds: 1. The data used for background information relating to the viability of sub-sea connections is now out of data and erroneous. New long-distance sub-sea connections are now in place, negating technical arguments presented; 2. I have received no information relating to additional roads and / or service routes required to support the pylons - the documentation provided to local residents is incomplete; 3. The costs associated with decommissioning pylons has not been considered as part of the overall project accounting. This skews the costs massively in favour of pylons when other options have minimal decommissioning costs. This makes the current application inaccurate and biased. 4. RAF Vally has increased activities, now undertaking additional training - in particular for inexperienced pilots. The pylons provide another risk to RAF students. This risk was not assessed during the preparations for this planning application. The application, therefore, has not considered all current risks."

Mrs A-M Le Gall
"I would like to submit my concerns about the proposal by the National Grid to transmit the electricity by an overhead pylon line across the island and the impact this will have. National Grid (NG) appear to work on the premise that as we already have one line of pylons, building a second line will only have a minimal effect on the environment. Opposition to the overhead scheme expressed by: Anglesey Council, our Member of Parliament, our Member of The Welsh Assembly, all the Community and Town Councils, the two Farmers’ Unions and the people themselves (by a 13,000 signature petition) have all been rejected or ignored by NG. All we want is for the NG to run the cables underground, not by over-ground. This option is rejected on cost grounds. In comparison to the overall project cost, currently £12billion (historical evidence indicates this is likely to double and be years late!) this is small change. What price our landscape, economy, culture? Anglesey is a lovely island, green rolling hills, its own natural beauty and a superb coastline and a favourite holiday spot for many. We already have more than enough pylons and wind farms. The visual impact of another set of pylons, over a wide area, will permanently compromise the landscape of our island. The National Grid is in the process of removing pylons and undergrounding power lines in AONBs and National Parks, why not do this in the first place on Anglesey? Pylons will be detrimental to tourism, which the island’s economy relies on to a large extent, NG have ignored a report on this aspect. Farmers, landowners and householders close to the pylons will all suffer a reduction in land and house values, not considered as a long-term impact by NG. The public consultation carried out by NG was cynical to say the least; it had already published the transmission proposal before it started the process. The cumulative long-term visual and environmental impact of pylons has not been seriously assessed or considered. Wales has a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, not considered by National Grid. This impact of pylons will affect future generations. National Grid has not abided by Government Policy, as prescribed in EN-1 and EN-5. National Grid has not followed the spirit of the guidance in The Planning Act 2008. The Holford Rules provide guidance on routing over-ground cables. Of the 7 rules, National Grid has only followed one. Whilst being guidance only the Holford Rules should be followed in sensitive locations such as Anglesey. Scientific research into electromagnetic fields generated by power lines and the effects on human and animal health close to power lines indicates that there are risks to health. Not considered by NG. The National Grid is riding roughshod over the views of residents and local government, is intransigent and determined to push forward with overhead cables. This is our island; surely we have the right to determine our future? "

Mrs Barbara Hulme
"That it will detract from the natural beauty of the island"

Mrs Beryl Harding
"Anglesey is a stunning place of natural beauty and we need to ensure we do all we can to make sure we protect it for future generations. We should not be erecting above ground pylons on this incredible island. "

Mrs Gillian Coates
"I am writing to object to planning application ENO20015. My first point is that as a provider of holiday accommodation I am acutely aware that the unspoilt nature of Anglesey's scenery is one of the main levers for my guests' visits. They comment frequently about how natural and beautiful the Island is. If we continue to allow industrial development of the landscape by the introduction of more pylons, this beauty and attraction will be destroyed. Equally, as a member of the North Wales Wildlife Trust, I am concious of the risks to bats, birds and migrating flocks caused by aerial impediments. Thus, I wish to add my voice to objections of this plan."

Nia Owen
"I do not wish to see a second row of pylons across Anglesey to be erected by the National Grid. A second row would be detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB. This would be very apparent in the Llanfairpwll area. I also believe that a second line will be used to justify and third and fourth line in time and we cannot allow that to happen. The effect on tourism, farming and house values would be immense. There are numerous cases of ill health in this village and many believe that this is due to the present row of pylons directly above houses and very near to property. The National Grid has not really listened properly to the people. No one wants a second row when they could be easily be put underground or sub sea. The process has been unfair and undemocratic "

Patricia CoulterPritchard
"Dear Sir/Madam, I write to submit my views on the proposed North Wales Connection project (NWC) as put forward by the National Grid (NG). First and foremost, it is no understatement that I have suffered greatly at the hands of NG, which has employed bullying tactics ([Redacted]) to scaremonger me into submission in respect of the enormous pylons it plans to erect next to the boundary of my home. In April 2016, I wrote to NG in response to a deeply alarming letter I received threatening me with legal action of a criminal nature should I not comply with their demands for access to my home. This was not the last time NG threatened me with such spurious claims of legal power, either. NG were misleading in their correspondence, to the point of [Redacted]; declaring themselves to have legal powers over me when they did not. I have kept the letters should you wish to inspect them. The people of Anglesey and their representatives in local government, with the support from Assembly Members have been entirely clear in their objections to a second (or future third, fourth, fifth!) row of pylons being constructed alongside the existing line running across the island from Wylfa. We have urged NG to consider burying the lines or opting for a sub-sea connection instead, but to no avail. They simply refuse to entertain the notion. The additional costs would be, on average, 11 pence per year to UK electricity bill payers should the lines be buried, or a mere 3% increase in budget were Horizon to pick up the tab. Instead, NG is happy to decimate the landscape of our beautiful island in the name of profiteering, not to mention the detrimental effect this project as it stands will have on the tourism and agricultural industries which are the lifeblood of our very modest local economy. I am personally concerned over the effect on Anglesey’s wildlife, specifically in respect of my own plot of land which is home to acres of wildflower meadow, a natural pond where various waterfowl nest as well as the presence of endangered great crested newts. NG commissioned wildlife surveys on my land some years ago, when I was still naïve in thinking they were honestly doing so for the good of the environment and so allowed them access. But despite confirming the presence of the endangered species, they refused to formalise their findings and share them will me in writing; proving their contempt for openness and transparency. It is uncertain what impact this construction will have on the flora and fauna of Anglesey, not the mention that I stand to lose £100,000 in the valuation of my home (a figure confirmed with NG in a valuation survey) a fact which remains unanswered by NG. Why should the people and Anglesey bear the brunt of NG’s unchecked powers and refusal to consult openly and fairly? Why not listen, and bury the lines?"

Richard Jones
"I object to the erection of a second row of pylons across Anglesey. They would be detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB they would be devastating to tourism, farming and house values If I lived near them, I would worry about my health: underground or subsea would be better for all. In my opinion, the Grid's consultation was unfair and undemocratic and flawed because they ignored this call for an alternate ways. No cumulative impact assessment has been made. "

Rob Bassett
"Although I am classed as a "tourist" I have been travelling to Anglesey for nearly 50 years; at New Year,for most weekends and for my annual holiday every summer. I have therefore contributed many thousands of pounds to the Welsh economy and regard every penny as well spent. Although this does not make me a "local" it would be nice to think that when we retire there in two years time we will be able to see the same beautiful landscapes that we have had the privilege to look upon for many decades. An increase in the number of pylons would be an absolute eye sore and if at all possible avoided. "

Robert Edwards
"We already have one line of supergrid pylons across the island and they are a major blot on the landscape of this otherwise beautiful place. They need to be seen at close quarters to appreciate the extent to which they dominate the landscape. When they were constructed in the 1960's, people's attitudes to preserving the natural environment were far less developed than they are today. We have better technologies available today to protect rural areas from being visually destroyed by such large un- natural structures. A second line of pylons (slightly taller than the existing ones) would have a disastrous effect on the natural beauty of this island. At our present level of awareness of the need to protect our natural environment, there is absolutely no excuse or credible reason to accept this plan to build further pylons on this island. The conductors should be buried underground, out of sight, wherever possible."

Ronald C Hughes
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL NO PYLONS! "

Sarah Gray
"The North Wales coast line has already been ruined by The monstrosity of the sea wind turbines. Anglesey does not need nor want Pilons blotting our unspoilt landscape. We have thousands of visitors a year coming here to enjoy our area of outstanding natural beauty. Do not allow the national grid to ruin this unspoilt island. "

Sue Bream
"I feel very strongly that more pylons on Anglesey would be hugely detrimental to the environment and its habitat, it is an area of great natural beauty already scarred by pylons and I would like to see the existing ones removed not more installed. In our current times we should be doing all we can to protect our environment and encourage tourism to the island, supporting our communities and the economy of the island. We need to be mindful of the impact more pylons would have on our farming communities and do all in our power to improve and extend farming on Anglesey. More pylons would have a negative effect on house prices and this in turn affects whole communities, we want to encourage people to make their homes and livelihoods on Anglesey. Please do not allow any more pylons and strive to replace those already in existence with underground cables. Thank you. "

Sue Watkinson
"I am registering my opposition to a second row of pylons on Anglesey. I strongly believe that it will be very detrimental to views of the countryside and the AONB. The effect on tourism, farming and property value will be enormous. Health is a big issue here in Llanfairpwll where a much higher number than usual have suffered various cancer ailments. The pylons are above or very close to houses for much of the road I live on. The risk to the population is very high indeed. I also believe that the whole process has been unfair and undemocratic. The National Grid has not really listened to our views and concerns. The vast majority have stated clearly that underground or subsea is better. Because they have ignored the population the consultation was flawed. "

Susan Williams
"I believe that the pylons would not only blight the beautiful scenic landscape, it would impact negatively on the beautiful islands economy and totally cause chaos to the nature and wild life. Please do not allow this....."

Trevor Steele
"There should be no more pylons added onto Anglesey as this will ruin the countryside & possible ruin the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. We have been informed that larger pylons are required, however as Wilfa is being decommissioned, surely the existing pylons aren't being used so the can be rebuilt. Other places are underground so why can't ours be underground. Please come to Anglesey so that you can here our objections first hand."

UN LLAIS CYMRU on behalf of UN LLAIS CYMRU / ONE VOICE WALES - CANGEN YNYS MON
"UNLLAIS yw’r corff sy’n cynrychioli Cynghorau Tref a Bro Ynys Môn. Bydd nifer yn cael eu heffeithio’n uniongyrchol gan y bwriad i godi ail res o beilonau ond bydd holl gynghorau eraill y Sir yn dioddef o effeithiau’r cam hwn. Buom yn unfrydol ein gwrthwynebiad i godi peilonau newydd o’r cychwyn: ein dewis opsiwn yw tan ddaearu neu fynd tanfor. Mae’r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi gwrthod ystyried y ddau opsiwn yma ac yr ydym yn ystyried hynny’n anghyfansoddiadol mewn proses sy’n cael ei galw’n ymgynghoriad. Rydym yn bendant ein barn na fu’r broses yma’n deg gan na fu’r Grid yn gwrando gan anwybyddu barn bendant y boblogaeth nad ail res yw dewis y bobl. Bydd peilonau ychwanegol yn anharddu rhannau helaeth o’r Sir am drigain mlynedd a mwy, gyda’r effaith ar welediad yn syfrdanol; ni fydd modd osgoi eu heffaith. Byddent yn cael ei gweld o sawl AHNE. Mae’r Grid Cenedlaethol yn bwriadu tynnu rhai peilonau i lawr ar draws Prydain am eu bod yn anharddu’r dirwedd (yn ardal Penrhyndeudraeth yng Ngwynedd er enghraifft) tra ar yr un pryd yn codi rhai newydd. Nid oes synnwyr yn hyn. Gan fod Ynys Môn yn ddibynnol iawn ar dwristiaeth rydym o’r farn y bydd ail res yn cael effaith sylweddol ar incwm trigolion y Sir. Bydd ymdrechion i gynyddu a gwella’r ddarpariaeth ar gyfer ymwelwyr yn dioddef a bydd sawl ardal yn colli eu hapêl ac effaith sylweddol ar incwm y darparwyr. Bydd y golled i’r diwydiant dros gyfnod bodolaeth dwy res o beilonau yn llawer iawn mwy na’r gost ychwanegol i dan ddaearu neu osod cebl yn danddwr. Mae bwriad y Grid Cenedlaethol yn amharchu hawliau trigolion ein cymunedau. Bydd effaith ar amaethyddiaeth, yr amgylchedd, iechyd corfforol a meddyliol y boblogaeth ac ar werth eiddo. Byddwn yn ehangu ar hyn maes o law. Mewn cyflwyniadau i’r Grid yn ystod yr ymgynghoriad, rydym wedi datgan ein barn a’n gwrthwynebiad yn glir ac yn gryf. Cafodd hynny ei anwybyddu, fel hefyd y cafodd barn ein AS, AC, y Cyngor Sir, cynghorau unigol ac unigolion. Anwybyddwyd hyn ganddynt, yn bennaf ar sail ariannol. Rydym yn llwyr o’r farn na fu’r broses ymgynghori yn deg; mae ymgynghori’n golygu gwrando, ystyried barn yn deg a gweithredu ar farn y mwyafrif. Methwyd gwneud hyn gan y Grid ar sail cost yn unig ac felly rydym yn hollol bendant na roddwyd clust i lais y bobol yr ydym yn eu cynrychioli. Fel corff, rydym yn ymrwymedig i gynnwys Deddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau’r Dyfodol (2015). Nid yw hyn yn wir yn achos y Grid Cenedlaethol ond fe gredwn y dylent ystyried hyn yn eu trafodaethau. Ni wnaed hynny, a thrwy anwybyddu’r gofynion, dangoswyd amarch mawr i drigolion Ynys Môn a Chymru. Mynegodd sawl unigolyn a chyrff fod y Grid Cenedlaethol yn ymddwyn fel bwli sy’n mynnu cael ei ffordd ei hunan. Mae annhegwch y sefyllfa’n syfrdanol a’r rhwystredigaeth yn enfawr. Mae gan UNLLAIS sylwadau perthnasol i’w cyflwyno mewn unrhyw wrandawiad cynllunio yn y dyfodol ac yn dymuno cyfle i wneud hynny. "

valerie Chambers
"I believe that a second line of pylons will be bad for tourism, bad for farming, bad for house prices especially along the line of the proposed new pylons. Our island is a wonderful place for people to visit and walk, without tourism many, many people will be out of work."

Vanessa Owen
"My main objections to the pylons are: Health issues - various studies have pointed to a possible association between living near electric power lines and childhood leukemia. Until this is disproved why would we take a risk with our children? There is another option - under-grounding which is neither as expensive, nor as unfeasible as reported. The effect on the environment of unspoiled and undeveloped areas is clear. They will devalue properties and have a great impact on the tourist industry. The people of Ynys Mon don't want the pylons and public opinion should be taken into consideration. "

W G Roberts
"I accept the fact that we are likely to have a new nuclear power station imposed on us, despite our opposition to the intention. My submission concerns only one aspect, namely, the proposal by the National Grid to transmit he electricity by an overhead pylon line across the island and the impact this will have. The points I wish to make are set out below. 1. National Grid (NG) appear to work on the premise that as we already have one line of pylons, constructing a second adjacent line will only have a marginal impact on the environment. 2. The public consultation carried out by NG was disingenuous to say the least; it had already published the proposal before it started the process. 3. Opposition to the overhead scheme expressed by: Anglesey Council, our Member of Parliament, our Member of The Welsh Assembly, all the Community and Town Councils, the two Farmers’ Unions and the people themselves (by a 13,000 signature petition) have all been rejected or ignored by NG. 4. All we want is for the NG to run the cables underground, not by over-ground. This option is rejected on cost grounds. What price our landscape, economy, culture? 5. Pylons will be detrimental to tourism, which the island’s economy relies on to a large extent, NG have ignored a report on this aspect. 6. Farmers, landowners and householders close to the pylons will all suffer a reduction in land and house values, not considered as a long-term impact by NG. 7. The scientific research done into electromagnetic fields generated by power lines and the effects on human and animal health indicates that there are risks to health. Not considered by NG. 8. Wales has a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, not considered by NG. This impact of pylons will affect future generations. 9. The Holford Rules provide guidance on routing over-ground cables. Of the 7 rules, NG have only followed one. 10. NG has not abided by Government Policy, as prescribed in EN-1 and EN-5. 11. NG has not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008. 12. The cumulative long-term impact of pylons has not been seriously assessed, considered and acted upon. The mitigation is trivial and inconsequential. 13. Anglesey is an island, green rolling hills, its own natural beauty and a superb coastline; a favourite holiday spot for many. The visual impact of another set of pylons, over a wide area, will permanently devalue the face of our island. 14. The NG is in the process of removing pylons and undergrounding power lines in AONBs and National Parks, why not do this in the first instance on Anglesey? 15. This is our island, our voices need to be heard and the decision must surely be ours to make; ynys ni, ein dewis ni. "

Wendy Steele
"Anymore pilons on this tiny, beautiful island will absolutely ruin the stunning countryside. There are already dozens of pilons in situ that aren’t being used and I believe the very strange arguements are that a) they aren’t big enough. Well in that case either enlarge them or pull those down and rebuild on the same footprint. And b) they need spare pilons incase the new ones fail. What a ridiculous idea! The pilons that have been there since the 60’s have never needed a spare set, and surely as all things technical have progressed phenomenally since Wylfa was built why need a spare!? In the Lake District you have put them all underground so why can’t you on Anglesey? Is this rascism against the Welsh? Are you prepared to be sued by communities for ruining the island both for us locals and the tourism economy? I also object to the fact that you have so far refused to visit the island to attend any meetings with the people of Anglesey. Why? What are you afraid of? I am absolutely disgusted and pray that you don’t get your own way."

Wil Rowlands
"I strongly object to another line of pylons being built on our beautiful landscape. The beauty of our landscape does not begin and end on either side of the Menai Straits. It continues across the entire island. There is no doubt that it also impacts on the quality of people's lives, their homes and value of their homes. It ravages the land and the vista. What right has a company from outside to come and impose this on local people? If the planning committee allow this, they are not serving the people they represent."

Yvonne Cooper
"It would be really damaging so the landscape .bad for tourism and bad for farming and peoples health in this day and age we should be reducing cancer not instigating it. There are healthier options which would not blot the landscape and would not cause health problems and the detremental effect on peoples lives and businesses and that is why I am against the pylons go underground or sub sear "

A Allan
"Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and substantially and negatively impact tourism on Anglesey Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in generating its own energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons, National Grid have never properly considered the negative impacts to the local community There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Is it not better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons, why have National Grid dismissed this continued feedback from local residents and politicians"

A Hughes
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Anna Ray
"As there is an overwhelming amount of public opposition to the proposal, it may be wise to take the community's opinion into consideration. It is a third party who will suffer as a consequence of the construction and use of the pylons. The proposed financial benefits, in my opinion, will not outweigh the environmental costs. In the current times, future generations should be considered. "

Anwen Williams
"I strongly disagree with more pylons on Anglesey, we already have too many. I am worried about the impact on the environment, health, farming and tourism. Anglesey is an Island of outstanding natural beauty and we want to keep it that way. I have lived on the Island for over 35 years and every time I cross the Britannia bridge the pylons are an eyesore,they should be underground regardless of financial cost."

Barbara Gall
"I wish to object to the installation of more pylons here on Anglesey, one of the main ‘industries’ here on the Island is tourism and the installation of more pylons will be a severe impact on the natural beauty of the Island, and could well lead to a depletion of tourists. In addition residents here are on the Island will, in all probability, find that house prices will suffer, as well as having to live with something that detracts from, what are currently, pleasant surroundings, and there are still fears that living near pylons can have a detrimental effect on health. The disruption to farming should also be taken into consideration, we need farmers and the food they put on our tables. There should not be any question of installing pylons until it is beyond doubt that Wylfa will definitely be up and running and providing electricity. One final point, it was considered possible for cables to be laid underground in the Lake District, given that Anglesey is an AONB why can the same not be done here?"

Bernard Moran
"I wish to register my objection to National Grid's proposal for a second line of pylons running across Anglesey. My views are as follows: I my opinion the proposed pylon line will have a detrimental affect on tourism, one of the main sources of income for the local economy. If you take a look at the many and various glossy photographs on the website for the Anglesey Tourist Board there is not a single pylon in site. Could it be that prospective tourists would be put off visiting Anglesey if they could clearly seen the line of 100 or so pylons already installed on the island? It does make you wonder what their opinion would be if they could see two lines of pylons side by side. The proposed pylons will also be a significant blot on the rural landscape. The residents of Anglesey have had to put up with looking at ugly pylons for the past 50 years. As a local resident I do not want to look at any more ugly pylons. I am sure I am not alone in this point of view. The proposed pylons also present a significant risk to the health of local residents who have the misfortune of living in close to the proposed pylon route. Public perception of the detrimental affects to health in living in close proximity to pylons and high voltage overhead power lines is real. It is real for a good reason. The proposed route will also "blight" many residential properties in close proximity. Many of these buildings are hundreds of years old and are part of the very fabric of the landscape. Many properties, including my own, will be rendered "unmortgageable" as a result of National Grid's proposals. If people are unable to raise mortgages on such properties the buildings will ultimately fall into ruin. Consequently the very heritage of Anglesey will be further eroded for ever. I would strongly urge the Planning Inspectorate not permit National Grid to litter this beautiful countryside with industrial relics from the 1950's. As a community we need to look after our environment for the generations to come. A second line of pylons appears, to my mind, to be a cheap and nasty quick fix primarily for the benefit of National Grid's shareholders. Investing in an underground or under sea connection would appear the best long term solution for the economy, the environment and for those people who will hopefully live, work and holiday on Anglesey long after we are all gone. "

Brenda May webster
"My objections to the use of pylons and electric lines are as follows: The use of the above can cause cancer to persons living in the vicinity. We have found that the use of these lines has caused people whom we know living in their vicinity to have been struck down with this terrible disease. Electric power lines should be sited underground. Anglesey is a beautiful island and a line of pylons with electric lines will be horribly detrimental. This island also relies to a large extent on tourists and it is quite obvious that these electric lines and pylons have a negative effect on countryside beauty to say the least. Anglesey is very special to us and to a lot of our friends being only a two hour journey from our home to this lovely holiday island. Please do not allow this travesty to go ahead. "

Brian Davies
"I am writing to express my objection to National grid's plan to construct a second line of high voltage power pylons across our beautiful island. Anglesey is unique in its stunning coastline and areas of outstanding natural beauty, which is why it has been a tourist attraction for many decades. The detrimental impact on views a second line of monster pylons will pose to this aspect of the island's economy is deeply concerning. I am also very worried about the negative impact of electromagnetic fields, generated by the corridor of high voltage cables, on people's health and well being. There is conflicting opinion about the health risks such lines pose and in light of this National Grid's planning application should not gain approval. What is of particularly worrying is the lack of respect paid to the voice of the people and the County Council in National Grid's consultation exercise. The presentation of a second overhead line dissecting the island was presented as the only viable solution without paying due attention to the people's preferred options, i.e. undergrounding of cables and/or a subsea connection. Another aspect which has been completely ignored in the consultation exercise is the negative impact of a second line of pylons on property values. In view of these issues, I believe that the consultation exercise has been deeply flawed in that it has been undemocratic, unfair and ineffective. "

C Roberts
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Chris Barrie
"Devastating for our environment on Anglesey "

Christine Battye
"Pylons across the Isle of Anglesey will spoil the natural beauty of the area which will have a detrimental effect on tourism and the well being of the residents. Pylons would not be allowed in other areas of natural beauty such as the Lake District and the same standards should apply on Anglesey. "

Councillor Carwyn Elias Jones
"Dear PINS, I write this relevant representation on the North Wales Connection Project. I am of the opinion that the connection from Wylfa to the mainland should be fully undergrounded as opposed to being transmitted on overhead cables. This technology was used to transport the electricity from the original Wylfa Power Station with construction in the 60’s and operational in the 70’s. We can put people on the moon, robots on Mars, and turn to technology to disrupt almost every single industry, construct the most complex major tunnelling works all around the world, and protect National parks, yet again on an Island of Outstanding Natural Beauty turn to outdated pylons. It baffles me as to why in 2018 it is still pylons and overhead cables which is being proposed, I believe this method is no longer acceptable due to my reasoning below. I am of the opinion that the Planning Act 2008, together with its secondary legislation and guidance including National Policy Statements, is out of date and not fit for purpose in Wales, as the Act does not take account of current Welsh legislation including the Well-being of Future Generations Act 2015 nor the Active Travel Wales Act 2013. I also believe that in respect of overhead transmission lines, the Holford Rules of 1959 and amended in the 1990’s along with the Horlock Rules are also considered to be significantly out of date and not compatible with current Welsh legislation. The Well-being of Future Generations Act 2015 provides a clear definition of sustainable development and the North Wales Connection Project must be constructed in a manner which seeks to ensure that the needs of the present are met without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Undergrounding would mean more short term upheaval, however would place future generations in a much better place under each heading and requirement of the Act as per below. A prosperous Wales A resilient Wales A healthier Wales A more equal Wales A Wales of cohesive communities A Wales of vibrant culture and thriving Welsh language A globally responsible Wales Yours faithfully, Cllr Carwyn Elias Jones "

Danny Griffiths
"1 - HT electricity cables carried on pylons expose people to increased health risks such as for example CHILDHOOD LEAUKAEMIA and LUNG CANCER. 2 -Pylons will be detrimental to tourism . 3 - Pylons will have a detrimental effect on beautiful ANGLESEY landscape. 4 - National Grid's decision to opt for pylons is based only on MONETARY COST to them and their shareholders with NO heed to the cost to the people of ANGLESEY. 5 - As per above, National Grid's decision is unfair and totally undemocratic.The people of ANGLESEY will have to bear the TOTAL COST of this project for decades and generations to come.The people of ANGLESEY are against the pylons as are ALL the elected local representatives and THE WELSH ASSEMBLY "

Delyth Hughes
"1 - Electrical and electromagnetic fields generated by the cables carried on the pylons carry a significant risk to health. 2 - Pylons will have a detrimental effect on tourism. 3 - Pylons will devalue houses and property in their vicinity. 4 - The pylon option by National Grid is UNFAIR AND UNDEMOCRATIC. 5 - Technology other than pylons exists such as undergrounding on subsea cables."

Dennis A Jones
"Anglesey is already cursed by the modern day blight of Grid Pylons, there is no need to duplicate the current line as there are ALTERNATIVES. It sticks in the craw when an underwater cable is being laid on the sea floor from Scotland to the Wirral, to avoid putting pylons up in an English National Park(Lake District), that cable could do a landfall at Wylfa and pick up more power, and continue across Liverpool Bay to the Wirral. I also note that the whole 35kms of power cable will be BURIED down the Wirral. Another alternative is that a 1mtr diameter pipe, that was once used to convey oil from Rhosgoch on Anglesey to the refineries in Stanlow Cheshire, this is still in place and disused, if even the pipe had to be dug up and replaced with the cable, the hard work has already been done to get the pipe in place under the Straits and other obstacles along the entire North Wales coast. Anglesey is very much dependant on tourism, the present pylons are an eyesore and also have a serious visual impact on the vistas seen from Anglesey onto the mainland ands Snowdonia, as well as the countryside along the North Wales coast. Also there are health issues with overhead cables. It may not be fully proven but there is growing(for many years) concern about the amount of EMR that radiates from overhead power cables. A radical rethink is required of the plan for transmitting the power from the various sources on the island to the mainland, as it's not all required here. A radical plan and its implementation could see even the removal of the current pylons."

Derek Larton
"To whom it may concern. I strongly object to the erection of a parallel row of pylons across Anglesey. My reasons for doing so are noted below. With the increase in power generation in Anglesey needs greater transmission. A second row of overhead pylons will pave the way for a third and perhaps a fourth. Undergrounding or going subsea would prevent that happening. Placing a second row above ground would devastate views from areas of AONB and the countryside in general. No serious consideration has been paid by the National Grid to this aspect. The effect on tourism will be immense. this is an important industry that brings in much needed revenue into Anglesey. Tourism and pylons are not compatible. There will also be a long term effect on farming, another important, indeed, vital industry on Anglesey. Common sense also tells us that pylons lead to a loss of property value. No sane person will seek to buy a house near pylons! Not only do they have an effect on visual amenity but I also fear the health implications. Not enough research has been done on this but I do know that undergrounding is a safer option. these are all common sense issues but the National Grid has chosen to ignore my views together with the views of the vast majority residents of this county. I ask you to deny planning permission for this option."

Dr P R Thomas
"The proposal to further degrade the environment in this major tourist area is claimed to be based on the need to avoid increases in the cost of electricity for UK households as a whole, since the provision of an underground route is more expensive than a second row of extremely unsightly pylons. Electricity bills are already being inflated by the misguided, totally ineffective, smart meter rollout and the subsidies for alternative forms of energy. It is also possible to save substantial sums by simply regularly switching supplier. The amortised additional cost of an underground route to UK consumers would be smaller than these factors. National Grid state that they have consulted landowners and householders on the placing of pylons along the proposed route. The proposed route halves the distance between our home and the overhead line, but we have never been consulted by National Grid. I see that the effect on our home has been rated MODERATE ADVERSE by the company, without either drawing this to our attention or asking for our opinion. This just about sums up the arrogance of this process from people who come here, draw up plans to ruin the island, ignore the opinions of elected representatives at all levels, and claim to have ‘consulted’. "

Elaine Kitching
"1 - HT Electricity cables carried on pylons pose a significant risk to health,for example in the form of CHILDHOOD LEAUKAEMIA AND LUNG CANCER. 2 - Pylons will have a detrimental effect on tourism. 3 - Pylons will have a detrimental effect on views of the Anglesey countryside. 4 - National Grid's unilateral decision to opt for pylons is unfair,undemocratic and a slight on the people of Anglesey and all our elected representatives - from our local councils to the WELSH ASSEMBLY. 5 - The value of properties near and/or in view of the pylons will be significantly decreased.This is ridiculous in an already poor area when National Grid as a company,their consumers and their shareholders could easily afford the supposed extra cost of undergrounding or putting the cables subsea. "

Eve Larton
"I wish to express my total opposition to the erection of a second row of pylons. Pylons are a 20th century answer to a 21 century problem. Undergrounding or subsea is the only sensible way to deal with this issue. they will be seen from AONB's which are numerous on Anglesey. They will lead to a depreciation of property values from one end of the run to the other. Tourism will suffer greatly and this is an important, vital industry for this county and it's people. The effect on wildlife habitat, the environment and farming will be incalculable. These will be long term problems; the National Grid has conveniently chosen to ignore the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act as they know full well that their plans would contravene it. They have also chosen to ignore the views of the Assembly Member, the MP and the County Council. We look to you as the planning authority to right this wrong."

Gareth Luke
"Anglesey is an Island of outstanding beauty that I would want to preserve for my own children and grandchildren for generations to come. It is an Island that is developing into being a tourist haven, thus boosting the economy for its local people. There will be a need for the building of new homes; people will want to live in areas that have not been blighted by the erection of electricit pylons, interfering with the outstanding views of the National Park across the straits. Electricit lines can be buried underground or laid in the sea that surrounds us. This option may well be more expensive but with a recent announcement that cables will be buried in Penrhyndaedraeth, Gwynedd; a town in the National Park, then the same consideration should be afforded Anglesey. We owe it to future generations to refuse any planning application to erect electric pylons and to encourage the applicants to use the alternative route, underground, under sea."

Georgina Gregory-Thornham
"The current line of pylons runs to the rear of our property. Should the second set of pylons go ahead, from our garden, we will go from seeing 4 pylons to 7 or 8. One of the current pylons is to be brought closer to our property by 60 meters, we be!ieve within 250 meters of the house. Anglesey will be blighted if the second set of pylons go ahead, affecting tourism which Anglesey needs. The 'consultation' has been flawed at best. We are still awaiting a written response to some of our concerms."

Helen Davies
"National Grid's plan to construct a second line of high voltage power cables across Anglesey poses a number of issues which of are of great concern to me. For example, the consultation exercise was ineffective in that it only paid lip service to the democratic principle by ignoring the people's voice. Our preference for the undergrounding of cables and/or a subsea connection was completely ignored on the basis of cost. Instead, we were presented with the foregone conclusion of a second row of pylons. I fail to accept that exporting electricity to most of England should be done at the expense of the people of Anglesey. This is grossly unfair. Another concern is the detrimental impact a second line of monster pylons will pose to the health and well being of people and farm animals. There is no proof that the electromagnetic fields generated by a corridor of pylons is safe. I therefore object to National Grid's plan. I am also very concerned about the damage a second line of pylons will do to the tourism industry due to the negative impact of views. This will put Anglesey's status as a popular tourist destination at risk resulting in loss of revenue and jobs. In view of the concerns raised I appeal to you pay due attention to the people's voice by not approving plans for a second line of pylons dissecting this beautiful island. "

Hilary Cooke
"The negative health consequences in the area of the proposed pylons. Detrimental effects to the farmland and livestock kept there. Knock on effects to the livelihood of farmers working this land. The disruption and destruction of the beauty of the island which has a high reliance on tourism. No significant evidence to show any advantages to the area or economy by allowing this. No significant evidence to prove a pressing or genuine need for the pylons. "

J Roberts
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

James Todd
"It's unacceptable to ruin our landscape to increase your profits!!"

Jean Twist Twist
"My interest in this application is two fold. Firstly, that of an individual who wishes to see the beauty of the Isle of Anglesey remain unspoiled. Secondly, that of the owner of self catering holiday accommodation. The number and dimensions of these proposed pylons is sufficient to scar the appearance of the island, making it much less attractive for residents. A situation is highly likely to be created making it difficult to sell a property that may be within the vicinity of any of these proposed pylons. There is also the issue of a potential health risk for residents living within close proximity to the pylons. This is an issue which needs further research. As an accommodation provider, I worry that custom could be lost as visitors see the scarring that these pylons would create. Many of my guests have expressed their concerns to me regarding the potential spoiling of large parts of the island. I am a supporter of the need for clean, reliable energy but, the erection of pylons is taking away, in a sense, the cleanliness of the proposed energy source. The residents of the Isle of Anglesey deserve to have there concerns heard. They and future generations have to live with the eventual outcome. From a business point of view, I am joint proprietor of a self catering holiday accommodation "

Jo Powell
"I am objecting on health reasons Protecting the countryside for our children Families loosing there homes And farmers loosing land Lost tourism "

John Duffy
"I am of a view that this initiative would be a total blight on the beautiful landscape of Anglesey, bad for tourism and is not sufficiently future-proofed. I strongly object to the planning application."

John Jones
"The consultation was ineffective and not carried fully considering the views of the Anglesey residents, National Grid had already published their plans before consultation commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. Impact to tourism is ignored by National Grid and no attempt to value the cost in jobs and revenue which will impact Anglesey as a result of the installation of over a hundred huge steel towers has been considered NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views. However there are serious concerns, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. This needs to be fully evaluated before considering pylons ,, it has not! Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons will leave the authority open to legal challenge should for example health issues surface in the future. "

K Williams
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Kerry Roberts
"I would like to express my deepest concern over National Grid's intention to construct a second high voltage power line across our island. There is no doubt that a second line of pylons in addition to an already existing one will have a detrimental impact on Anglesey. The growing number of visitors who come to the island to enjoy its areas of outstanding natural beauty make a significant contribution to the island economy. However, a second line of monster pylons will inevitably have a very negative impact on views and thus threaten Anglesey's status as a popular tourist destination. I am also very worried about the negative impact the electromagnetic fields generated by two lines of high voltage power pylons on people and farm animals. In view of the inconclusive evidence currently available on the negative health impact on humans and animals, any potential risks must be avoided at all cost. There is no mention in National Grid's planning application how a second line of pylons will affect property values. This is a serious omission which has very negative consequences for those living in the vicinity of their properties unable to sell their homes. All in all National Grid's consultation exercise has been very flawed in that the people's concerns have not been taken seriously and have not been accommodated in their planning. This is very undemocratic and unfair. "

L Hughes
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

L Williams
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Linda Jones
"Nids wyf yn dymuno gweld ail res o beilonau ar draws ein sir. Bydd hyn yn anharddu y dirwedd am ddegawdau gan y byddant yn cael eu gweld o bob ardal o'r bron ac o AHNA. Rwy'n gwybod y bydd pris eiddo yn dioddef gan na fydd bobl eisiau prynu tai sydd o dan neu wrth ymyl o peilonau. Fe fydd hyn yn anheg iawn ar breswylwyr a bydd hefyd yn cael effaith ar y diwydiant twrisrtiaid. Mae Ynys Mon yn dibynnu ar yr arian hwn; mae'n ddiwydiant o bwys. Mae gennyf bryderon am effaith eilonau ar iechyd hefyd er fod y grid yn gwadu fod yna unrhyw broblem. O dan y ddaear mae lle rhain yn yr unfed ganrif ar hugain. Mae'n eironig fod y Grid yn dewis tynnu sawl peilon i lawr ar draws Prydain am y rhesymau hyn ac ar y llaw arall yn gosod degau o rai newydd wrth ochr rhai sydd yma'n barod,. Mae'n anodd credu hyn. Rwy'n erfyn arnioch i wrando ar lais cyrff cyhoeddus y sir, ein haeloidau etholedig ac ar y boblogaeth gyfan sy'n gwrthwynebu hyn yn chwyrn."

M Ewing
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

M Jones
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

maire hoyland
"National Grid are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. This is not a 21st century solution and industrialises a beautiful landscape Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered in their simplistic approach to cheapest solution. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers” it simply ignores cost to individual family property values. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options other than pylons and resulted in extremely low levels of public attendance at any consultation events NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on, the resultant cumulative reduction in tourism has been ignored There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco and asbestos in the last century. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. National Grid need to respect the health of the community. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons, none of which have been properly evaluated in a true install cost v coats to the local community Impact to tourism is ignored by National Grid and no attempt to value the cost in jobs and revenue which will impact Anglesey as a result of the installation of over a hundred huge steel towers has been considered "

Margaret Roberts
"I am writing to you in regard to National Grid's intention to construct a second line of high voltage power cables across Anglesey, which is causing me deep concern. I am very worried about the detrimental impact a second line of pylons will have on the island's economy and the well being the people who live here. Anglesey is unique in terms of its areas of outstanding beauty, its stunning coastlines and magnificent beaches, which we have a moral duty to preserve, not just for now but also as legacy to future generations. A second row of monster pylons will have a negative impact on views and consequently deter the many visitors who wish to enjoy the beauty of this island from coming. This will have a negative impact on tourism, which makes a substantial contribution to the island's economy. I am also very worried about the negative health impact two rows of monster pylons will have on people and farm animals. There is no convincing evidence that the electromagnetic fields generated by high voltage power cables do not involve any health risk. Another point that has been omitted in National Grid's planning application is the negative impact a corridor of pylons will inevitably have on property values. This is completely ignoring the concerns of many people. Undergrounding of cables or a subsea connection would therefore be a solution, that reflects due respect for the concerns of the people who live on this island and allows their voice to be heard. Transporting electricity from Anglesey to England must not be done at the expense of the island's inhabitants. "

Medwyn Roberts
"I am very concerned about National Grid's intention to build a second line of pylons across the Isle of Anglesey and would like to state my objections for the following reasons: A second row of pylons will be detrimental to the tourist industry through creating a wider corridor of spoilt and industrialised countryside. It will also be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Furthermore, it will have a negative impact on property value, an aspect which has been completely ignored by National Grid. Another concern is the negative health impact of electromagnetic fields generated by two lines of pylons on humans and farm animals. In their consultation exercise National Grid ignored the wishes of the people of Anglesey by only presenting one option, when alternative solutions, such as undergrounding and/or a subsea connection are possible and therefore need to be considered. After all, transporting and exporting electricity to England must not happen at the expense of the people of Anglesey. This would be very unfair and ignoring the voice of the people."

Meiwir Roberts
"I am writing to you to express my concern over National Grid's intention to construct a second line of high voltage power cables across our island. I fail to understand that such an option is being considered in view of the detrimental impact this will have on the island's economy, people and farm animals. Tourism is one of Anglesey's key industries which needs to be protected. Visitors come to this island to enjoy the magnificent beaches for a family holiday and/or to escape the urban, industrialised environments of Manchester, Liverpool and Warrington, for example, not to be confronted by a corridor of monster pylons dissecting the island and having a detrimental impact on views within, and of, areas of outstanding beauty. This is a very serious concern! I am also very worried about the negative health impact of the electromagnetic fields generated by two rows of high voltage power cables on humans and farm animals. There is no convincing evidence that they do not pose a health risk and they must therefore be avoided at all cost. One aspect which is of great concern, but which has been omitted in National Grid's application, is the negative impact a second row of pylons will have on property prices. This is a serious omission, which deserves urgent attention. Overall, National Grid's consultation exercise was not carried out in good faith. The plans for a second line of pylons was already published before the consultation began. Any alternative solutions such as undergrounding of cables or a subsea connection, preferred by the people of Anglesey and Anglesey County Council, were not given due attention. This reflects a lack of respect for the inhabitants of this island and the legacy left to future generations. The export of electricity mainly to England must not be done at the expense of the people of Anglesey. "

Miss Catherine Cunnah
"I would like to pt forward my concerns about the plan for an additional 100 pylons on Anglesey. Our Island is sacred and is visited by people who wish to enjoy the beautiful and untouched environment. Pylons are vast and ugly. We are meant to be offering an AONB around the coast. Anglesey has just been found by the rest of the World and is enjoying prosperity from the tourism trade. Despite the costs, we owe it to the future generations and to our tourism economy to find an alternative mode of transport for electricity. I vehemently oppose the pylons application"

Mr T McCarthy
"My objections to the planning application are that : It goes against the clearly expressed wishes of the impacted residents of Ynys Mon & North Wales. It does not address the damage caused to the inherent beauty of the landscape. It damages the tourism industry & therefore impacts on longterm employment in a poor area but does not offer compensatory longterm prospects. It will damage the visual effects environment for all who live in the area."

Mrs Marian Hughes
"I disagree of having a overhead line for the north Wales connection project. The line would be over my garden, which I consider it would be a health hazard. Also the visual impact. De valuation of my property"

N Owen
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Pam Roberts
"As a resident of Anglesey, an island of outstanding natural beauty, I find it heartbreaking that people who don’t live here are proposing to burden us with yet more pylons. These companies now have the money, machinery et al to enable the cables to be put underground thereby preserving our island and tourist industry. Putting cables underground is the way forward in the 21st century especially on Anglesey which is only a small island. I truly hope that we don’t ever have to see another pylon on our beautiful island. "

Peter Gillett
"Estimated Costs of Offshore HVAC Connection, Strategic Option 6 National Grid appear to have used out-dated cost metrics on which to base the estimates for the offshore options. This is unacceptable at this stage of the project. There are a number of examples throughout the world where high power rated HVAC submarine cables have been successfully installed at 400kV and above. The cable manufacturers are now able to produce HVAC power cables with a conductor cross section area of 2500sqmm The NG subsea HVAC strategic option report does not state how many submarine cables are specified and hence costed. Based on the latest technology, a double circuit connection can be achieved with 12 cables whereas, until recently, 18 cables would have been laid to handle the required power rating. Over the last few years there has been a massive growth in the use of offshore HVAC cables. Most windfarm cables use HVAC technology and the power rating of recent and planned windfarms require cables of greatly increased capacity. It is recognised that HVDC is unsuitable for the North Wales Connection although HVDC is extensively used for submarine interconnectors. Indeed the first subsea interconnector between Britain and France was commissioned in 1961 NG state that the cost of HVAC offshore for Wylfa Pentir Hybrid is £1145m. Wylfa Pentir undergrounding is stated as £905m however this excludes the cost of the Menai tunnel estimated at £200m which brings the total to £1105m. Undergrounding is very intrusive to the farming community and the landscape never fully recovers. At this stage, it cannot be guaranteed that the third Menai bridge will go ahead. National Grid should be tasked with producing a detailed estimate of the Pentir hybrid option based on manufacturers’ cable and installation quotes. Until this work has been completed and published the offshore HVAC option cannot be rejected. Horizon has made known their opposition to offshore connections possibly on reliability grounds. It should be remembered that NGET under SQSS regulations are required to build four circuits, any one of which can take the full output of Wylfa, two of these circuits use the existing pylons across Anglesey. The location of the beach head on SO6 clearly has not been surveyed and reported. NGET simply say that the beach landing will be “south of Caernarfon.” This amounts to level of detail of a “back of the envelope desk study”. At this stage of the DCO, NGET should have conducted and reported the results of a detailed survey of the landfall and maps showing the route to the grid. The DCO should be rejected until NGET has conducted and reported a detailed up to date cost estimate for S06 P E Gillett B.Eng., MA, DipMarTech "

Philip Thornham
"The current line of pylons runs to the rear of our property. Should the second set of pylons go ahead, from our garden, we will go from seeing 4 pylons to 7 or 8. One of the current pylons is to be brought closer to our property by 60 meters, we believe within 250 meters of the house. Anglesey will be blighted if the second set of pylons go ahead, affecting tourism which Anglesey relies on. The 'consultation' has been flawed at best. No consideration has been given to the residents of Anglesey and it was evident at the 'consultations' that they had already made up their minds. We are still awaiting a written response to concerns we raised."

Robert Allman
"I am a frequent visitor to Anglesea,being attracted by it,s natural beauty.It angers me when I see the pylons and wind farms (electricity generators) which already exist there. I appreciate that we need electricity and a distribution system,but I know that there are alternative and less obtrusive methods of doing it.Keep making these scars on the landscape and you will ruin the tourist industry in that area"

Rowan Arkwright
"I believe that since an alternative is available, albeit more expensive, additional pylons should not be erected across the beautiful Anglesey countryside. If the existence of the 1960s monstrosities is being used as the reason more should be built, why do we bother to have laws in place to protect the countryside at all? A county which depends so heavily on tourism and the charm of its unspoiled landscape to attract said tourists should be better supported to maintain it. "

S Hughes
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

S Kitchin
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

S Williams
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Sharon Owen
"Llygru'r tirwedd am genedlaethau i ddod. Y posibilrwydd y gall effeithio ar y diwydiant twristiaeth ac felly ar economi leol Sgil effeithiau andwyol ceblau trydan ar iechyd cymuned "

Sian Bradshaw
"I am totally against pylons being used when burying them is possible and the cost of doing so is not insurmountable. It is an AOB and extra pylons will only plight the landscape more affecting the natural beauty of the island and therefore tourism. "

Sian Williams
"I object on the basis that pylons will destroy the landscape of Anglesey for generations to come. Anglesey is known worldwide for its stunning landscape and this is a,huge draw for tourism and therefore the local economy. Cables should be diverted via the sea. Cost to the developer seems to be the only reason for the pylons. But at what cost to the landscape and people of Anglesey "

Susan Fogarty
"I wish to express my opposition to erecting a second line of electricity pylons on Anglesey/ Ynsy Mon,and my preference for setting the elelctricity supply cables below ground. This is taking into consideration environmental impact and economic considerations. "

Tamara Jones
"When I heard that National Grid intend to construct a second line of high voltage power cables across Anglesey, I was shocked. A second line of monster pylons in addition to the already existing one will have a detrimental impact on the island and its inhabitants. I am deeply concerned that this will damage the island's status as a very popular tourist destination, as it will negatively impact on views and deter visitors who come to enjoy Anglesey's beautiful coastline, its magnificent beaches and stunning views of Snowdonia. As such, it will have a detrimental impact on the island's tourism industry, which makes a substantial contribution to the island's economy as a whole. I am also very worried about the negative health impact a corridor of electromagnetic fields will have on the island's population and farm animals. So far, there is no conclusive evidence that there are no risks involved. One aspect that has been completely omitted in National Grid's application, but which is of great concern to the island's inhabitants, is the negative impact a second line of monster pylons will have on property values. It has caused great distress and reflects National Grid's lack of respect for the people who live here. I appeal to the Planning Inspectorate to give due attention to these concerns and allow the people's voice to be heard. After all, the pylons will serve mainly to transport electricity to England. It would therefore be undemocratic and unfair to go ahead with this project against the wishes of the people of Anglesey and at their expense. "

A Ewing
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Albert Owen MP
"As the Member of Parliament for Ynys Môn I wish to register as an interested party. I welcome the opportunity to make this submission and further representation as part of the National Grid’s application for its North Wales connection, including the connection for Wylfa Newydd in my constituency. I have since 2012 been engaged with the local community and with local stakeholders and in each of the consultation stages I have articulated the views of the locality. In addition, I have met and facilitated meetings with National Grid on concerns and issues raised. The Planning Inquiry allows me to consolidate these concerns to an independent body prior to development consent. A Flawed Consultation Process: Originally the North Wales Connection was a comprehensive package in three sectors: Wylfa and Pentir, as well as West Gwynedd and the Glasfryn Estuary. There was great emphasis on giving careful consideration to reducing any effects on the environment including visual impact. A wide range of options were put forward. I will concentrate my remarks on the connection from Wylfa. Different Options Proposed: Originally the connection between Wylfa was to accommodate Offshore Wind (2GW) and Horizon Nuclear Power (3.2GW). Subsea / Overhead (Pylons) and underground were proposed with connections to Pentir (Subsea / Overground) as well as subsea to Pembroke and Deeside. Deeside was seen as a major hub for Irish Sea subsea connections. It was clear from the opening consultations that no meaningful consultation or consideration was given to the Deeside or Pembroke connection. These were misleading ‘red herrings’. If these were serious why was no consultation done beyond approaches to local authorities? Quickly the preferred National Grid option was to have an overhead / pylons connection across Anglesey to Pentir. The Menai Straits is an AONB and on the instruction of the regulator, an alternative arrangement had to be sought. This was never a concession as Grid claim. An alternative Wylfa to Pentir hybrid was immediately dismissed but no full costings were provided despite cost being the reason sighted for refusal. In short Grid wanted to pursue its preferred option. It cited the developer Horizon as the main reason for not pursuing subsea. Undergrounding became a consensual option, the developer was not opposed, but again Grid resisted on cost. Undergrounding would have the least impact on the sensitive environment / tourism. Menai Crossing: This element of the connection was done much later and an expensive tunnel was required according to Grid. A 3rd Menai Bridge crossing by the Government offers an alternative. Conclusions: I am unable to advance full arguments but I am convinced Grid have conducted flawed consultations and despite reasonable attempts to suggest alternatives that fit the UK Government’s criteria, Grid feel the need to follow its outdated pylon connection against the wishes of the local community, stakeholders and both the County Council and Welsh Government policies. This is not in the interest of anyone and sets a poor precedent. I hope to develop these issues at the hearings. "

Alun Hughes
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Alwen Moore
"There are numerous examples where NG have not followed Government policy as described in EN-1 and EN-5"

Alwyn Williams
"I am against the erection of more pylons on Anglesey, they are already the first thing you see when crossing the Britannia Bridge - we do not want more, the cables should go underground across the Island. Two (more or less) parallel lines of pylons across the Island will industrialise the natural landscape, one of the Area's most valuable assets for the tourist industry. They will be detrimental to farming incomes and potential health dangers are not fully understood. NG's consultation was superficial and not carried out in good faith as NG had already decided what they were going to do before the consultation started. The people of Anglesey were not listened to. NG's approach was arrogant and dismissive of local people's views."

Andy Basham
"Llanfair has more than it's fair share of pylons, we do not need any more, put the cables underground across the whole of the Island and save our environment and tourist industry. The adverse effects of pylons on health is not know, lets not experiment with our children."

Ann E Owen
"1 - Hollol wrthwynebol i'r holl beth. 2 - Dim angen i Wylfa Newydd o gwbwl. 3 - Health and Safety issues' 4 - Pylons will be detrimental to tourism. 5 - House prices will br adversally affected. 6 - The consultations were flawed. 7 - National Grid's decisions are unfair and undemocratic. "

Ann Hugh
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

ann jones
"Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons, Anglesey is an island with no need for the power generated by the new station a subsea connection down the cost to England where the power is needed would seem a much more logical solution."

Ann Jones
"Rwy'n croesawu'r cyfle I fynegi fy ngwrthwynebiad I ail res o beilonau ar draws Ynys Mon. Mae'r ymgynghoriad wedi bod yn ddiffygiol o'r cychwyn cyntaf. Fe ddywedodd y Grid Cenedlaethol mai ei dewis hwy yw peilonau. Fe ddywedodd yr Aelod Seneddol, yr Aelod Cynulliad, Y Cyngor Sir, Un Llais Cymru Mon (sy'n cynrychioli'r holl gynghorau eraill) a mwyafrif llethol bobol yr Ynys hon mai o dan y ddaear neu o dan y mor y dylai'r ceblau fynd. Cafodd pawb ei anwybyddu yn llwyr gan y Gri. Ai dyma yw ystyr ymgynghori teg ym marn yr Arolygaeth Gynllunio? Byddai ail res o beilonau yn ddinistriol i'r diwydiant twristiaeth. Pwy yn ei lawn bwyll sydd eisiau dod ar wyliau i ganol peilonau? Fe fydd gwerth eiddo gwyliau, yn ogystal ag eiddo arall o fewn cyrraedd y peilonau, yn gostwng, sefyllfa gwbl annerbyniol. Bydd y golled ariannol i economi'r Sir lawer gwaith yn fwy na'r gwahaniaeth rhwng cost peilonai a than ddaearu rwan. Byddent yn cael effaith ar amaethyddiaeth am gyfnod estynedig. Yn yr un modd, rwy'n credu eu bod yn cael effaith ar iechyd dros yr hir dymor. MAE yna broblem gyda EMF. Nid yw pawb yn gytun ar hyn o bryd ond gallaf eich sicrhau fel yr a'r blynyddoedd heibio y cawn ni ein coelio a'n cael yn gywir pan fydd trigolion yn dioddef afiechydon. Nid oes asesiad o effaith cronnus wedi ei wneud ac mae hynny'n gwbl annheg a ni fel trigolion. Rwy'n erfyn o waelod calon i chi wrthod y cais beiddgar hwn ar ran y Grid Cenedlaethol."

Anna L Williams
"I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Ariane
"Thank you for the opportunity for giving my views on the National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET) proposal for the North Wales Connection (NWC). I apologise for the length of this Relevant Representation so have provided key themes below Key themes: impact on tourism, impact on farming, impact on house valuation, flawed “consultation”, failure to follow Government Policy, failure to the follow the Holford Rules, historically and culturally inappropriate My views on the Wylfa Newydd DCO are irrelevant for this proposal, but it goes without saying that any generator needs to be connected to the demand, so I fully agree with a connection existing, however, I totally disagree with all other aspects of this proposal The current line of pylons was built in 1963-66, just before the Anglesey Area of Outstanding Beauty (AONB) was designated in 1967 (and coincidentally when I came to Anglesey as a child so my late father could run Wylfa). Had the designation been in place earlier, it is unlikely that significant portions of this line could have used pylons, but would have been placed underground/under the Menai. I urge you to stand on the shore of Menai, or the summit of Mynydd Bodafon, both popular with residents and tourists and see for yourselves. Opposition to the line in 1962/3 is documented in the Anglesey Archives. This line is now largely redundant, so should not be used for the Wylfa Newydd export, should not be significantly modified to facilitate the new line and should not be used to justify a second (third or fourth) line. I hated pylons as a child, and still hate them now. Don’t believe the myth that people get used to them NGET will tell you that there are very few studies into the effect of high voltage overhead transmission lines on tourism, and state that the impact of this proposal will be minimal. However, only a few minutes of on-line searching yields multiple, peer-reviewed studies in respected journals showing that this is simply not true. Anglesey, designated by the Office of National Statistics as a “holiday hotspot”, is hugely dependant on the tourism economy. This proposal, both during construction and operation, will deprive the local tourism industry of revenue, market share and growth. Only a few minutes more of on-line searching will provide further evidence that agriculture and housing will be similarly impacted. The socio-economic evaluation provided in the DCO is simply inadequate, primarily as the economic/financial impact (via NGET’s flawed methodology) has not been estimated. The “social costs” of this proposal, estimated at £500 million, outweigh the additional cost of undergrounding Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and a vehicle for putting this into practice is the tenth edition of Planning Policy Wales (PPW10). Should this proposal be granted, it would be in direct contravention of Welsh planning policy (as well as Ofgem’s principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”). PPW10 is clear in that new grid connections should be placed underground, allowing for cost considerations if this would jeopardise the viability of an otherwise feasible development. With the current regulatory and price control regime, where the power station developer cannot invest in a grid connection, and NGET pass all 2 costs on to consumers, the additional cost of undergrounding this connection cannot impact the viability of the power station. The additional costs are estimated at some 11p/year on an average UK electricity bill of £554 – an increase of 0.02%, affordable even to those vulnerable households suffering fuel poverty The so-called “consultation” that preceded the application contained significant flaws – NGET had published details and costs of their desired solution a full three years before the “consultation”, which claimed to look at options such as underground and subsea, commenced. While claiming to consult on a subsea option in 2012, no consultation was conducted on the Wirral or in Pembrokeshire, the destinations of the subsea options. At no point was a “cumulative consultation” (for the entire power station/grid connection development, as suggested by The Planning Act 2008) conducted, and the cumulative impact assessment in the DCO is severely lacking Of the seven “Holford Rules”, NGET ignore all of them for the modifications to the existing line and follow only one of them for the new line. NGET’s CEO John Pettigrew told me at the National Grid AGM in 2017 “… they are only guidelines, we don’t have to follow them”, although the principles of the rules are enshrined in UK Government Policy (EN-5). There are numerous other examples where Government Policy has been simply swept aside, such as rationalisation of existing assets. To be fair to NGET, many of the rules are difficult to follow on Anglesey due to the underlying geology and geomorphology, resulting from glacial flow in the last ice age (and recognised by UNESCO). The residential settlement pattern on Anglesey, which NGET could easily have used as justification for undergrounding, is in part due to the ninth century inheritance laws of Hywel Dda. In such an ancient landscape, that is simply “at odds” with the “rules”, the case for undergrounding becomes overwhelming I am sure you have heard the saying Môn, Mam Cymru (Anglesey, the mother of Wales), first documented in the 1100s by Gerald of Wales, who recounts the tale of Anglesey being able to feed all of Wales due to the fertile land. Gerald states this only shortly after saying much of the land is marshy, rocky and poor. It was probably Gerald who created this “Christian propaganda” to hide the fact that the locals used the pre-Christian name. Mon/Mona was a female Celtic deity, and mona is still used in Irish Gaelic to denote “the earth”. It would simply be culturally/historically/spiritually wrong to decorate/desecrate this “sacred” landscape with the second line of pylons, destroying the ample visual amenity, enjoyed by many, for generations to come In closing, I would urge the Examining Authority to visit Star, Rhosybol, Rhosgoch, Capel Coch, Cemaes, or even my garden in Bachau, to see for themselves the current blight"

Barbara Ware
"I OBJECT TO THIS PROPOSAL FOR MORE UNSIGHTLY PYLONS National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Bedwyr Matthews Jones
"I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Berenice robbins
"I am concerned that no one is looking at taking these cables underground . it's not just about the cost you should be thinking along the lines of not causing a impact on the surround areas in either people losing their homes or having their properties devalued..also you need to look at health issue of having a second set of pylons and also the effect these will have on tourism on the island . There are other parts of the UK that you are placing your pylons underground and Anglesey should not be over looked "

Bev Isherwood
"I OBJECT TO THIS PROPOSAL FOR MORE PYLONS Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. "

Brent Webb
"I utterly reject this proposal Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Bryn Hughes Williams
"I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

C E Hughes
" I strongly oppose the proposal of erecting any more pylons on Anglesey. It would have a detrimental impact on tourism, impact on farming, impact on house valuation, flawed “consultation”, failure to follow Government Policy, failure to the follow the Holford Rules, historically and culturally inappropriate I also object to the existing pylons, which are now largely redundant, being used for the Wylfa Newydd export; they should not be significantly modified to facilitate the new line and should not be used to justify a second (third or fourth) line. Anglesey is an Area of Outstanding Beauty, please please lets keep it that way for our generation and our children's generation as well. "

Carol Horne
"I passionately reject this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Chris Kent
" National Grid are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. This will destroy a very large part of the islands beautiful countryside Pylons will be damaging to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be hugely impact the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will similarly impact farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which National Grid have not considered. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco 60-70 years ago. There are serious concerns, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Much more sensible to to avoid pylons and avoid the risks. Unfair treatment as Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while National Grid are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as National Grid had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Claire Rees
"I don't want pylons on Anglesey as it will negatively impact thus Island by affecting tourism, jobs property values and research has also shown it can affect health in a massive way. It will also destroy our farming."

Cyngor Cymuned Mechell Community Council
"Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the South East of England, Anglesey will bear the brunt against the wishes of its people and all levels of democratic representation. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. After petitions and objections against a second row of pylons overland, NGET would not consider or discuss any other option. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views that NGET chose to disregard and there are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals and future generations. It would be safer without pylons or do the people of Anglesey not count? Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, many are being done now in less populated areas much larger than Anglesey therefore it does not have the negative effects of pylons above ground. We believe that NGET and the Wylfa Newydd project have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on for the people of Anglesey particularly in the North of the Island."

dafydd jones
"Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, a particularly sought after tourist attraction, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which National Grid have not considered. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, and subsea in particular would be a sensible solution for an island connection as it avoids all of the negative financial impact in both individual house prices and anglesey's business sectors. "

Daron Lodge
" National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Dave Cope
"I am so against this! National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

David Neal
"National Grid are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. We need a more modern innovative solution to the connection in North Wales. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Tourists reaction will be negative to the permanent scarring of the landscape and the tourism sector will suffer badly as a consequence. Pylons will be detrimental to may business sectors on Anglesey, to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised” countryside, to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices, to house values, which Nation Grid have not considered, overall both business and personal economies will decline through the effects of installing huge metal towers across the island. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a significant amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, which differs from those which prevailed in the middle part of the last century when the existing pylon run was installed. There are serious concerns, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. There are real concerns around the route of the pylons over areas very high in Radon Gas and how EMF's affect Radons dangerous decay products. This is a very good reason to avoid installing pylons in favour of a more innovative solution to avoid these risks to health. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation, this treatment of the islands officials is completely unfair in light of their position in being the collective voice of the islands electorate. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while National Grid state they are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons will be an ugly and legacy for future generations. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as National Grid had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. Anglesey is not an industrialised area but National Grid want to make it one. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which National Grid have not considered. National Grid refuse to recognise the financial impact to individuals and businesses as a result of the introduction of further pylons and overhead lines. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. It would be wise to avoid the risks and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

David W Jones
"1 - Pylons will be detrimental to beautiful views over Anglesey 2 - Pylons will be detrimental to tourism. 3 - HT cables on pylons are a danger to HEALTH. 4 - Property prices will be seriously reduced in the vicinity and/or in the line of sight of pylons. 5 - The consultation process was flawed."

Dee Webb
"I utterly reject this proposal Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Derrick Williams
"Pylons are unsightly in an iconic location, a potential danger to health and not environmentally friendly"

Dylan Wyn Rees
"As an Elected Member of the Isle of Anglesey County Council, representing the Ward of Canolbarth Mon I wish to register as an interested party in respect of the Examination of the North Wales Connection Project Development Consent Order application. I object to National Grid’s proposal for constructing a second overhead power lines across Anglesey as I feel it will potentially have significant adverse impacts on visual amenity, the well-being of residents and communities as well as to business interests, particularly tourism businesses which are of vital long term importance to the Island’s economy. I have lived on the island for over 30 years and like the everyone who lives here, or comes to visit, I treasure it’s unique beauty. I feel that the only acceptable solution to connecting the Wylfa Newydd development to the National Grid at Pentir is by an undergrounded cable. Whilst accepting that the construction of such a connection will, in itself, result in significant short-term inconvenience and disruption to residents of, and visitors to Anglesey, this is far outweighed by the longer term benefit of not having a second overhead power-line spanning the length of the Island. The bottom line is that the National Grid has only chosen this option because it is the cheapest but the loss to our precious environment is priceless. "

Eirlys Tudor
"I object to the construction of more pylons across Anglesey because: 1. they are unsightly and will blight the landscape changing our beautiful Island into an industrial landscape 2. they will have a negative effect on the tourist industry and the housing market as well as farming. 3. effects on Health are not known but might exist 4. there are no benefits to Anglesey regarding electricity supply. the electricity will be exported to other part of the Country. 5. NG treated the local people with contempt and did not listen to their views. The consultation was a sham. Cables should go underground, NG should be made to think long term."

Elaine Dean
"I OBJECT TO THIS PROPOSAL FOR MORE PYLONS National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Eleanor Williams
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I am against this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

elen jones
"Pylons are ugly and will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside jobs will be lost in this sector. Pylons will be devalue house value, and make the residents of Anglesey poorer, NGET have not considered this in their proposals There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. National Grid simply ignore the growing evidence of the dangers of EMF's The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options their own documentation shows a continued message from the local community to adopt a subsea or buried cable option,, just ignored NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are damaging legacy for future generations. National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in directive from the UK government, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a less damaging more innovative solution."

Elin Angarad Williams
"Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. NGET refused to listen to the continued voice of the local residents to adopt another solution for the connection other than Pylons. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Surely it would be beneficial to avoid the risks and not install pylons. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. Anglesey, and the views of residents regards the financial risks to both personal and business sectors are not being considered by National Grid. National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. We need a modern technology solution for Anglesey. "

Gafyn Hughes
"Ddim yn cytuno o gwbwl hefo nhw. Rhy agos at fy nhy fi a ddim yn edrych yn neis iawn "

Gill Russum
" I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Gwenda Williams
"I am against the erection of more pylons on Anglesey, they are already the first thing you see when crossing the Britannia Bridge - we do not want more, the cables should go underground across the Island. Two (more or less) parallel lines of pylons across the Island will industrialise the natural landscape, one of the Area's most valuable assets for the tourist industry. They will be detrimental to farming incomes and potential health dangers are not fully understood. NG's consultation was superficial and not carried out in good faith as NG had already decided what they were going to do before the consultation started. The people of Anglesey were not listened to. NG's approach was arrogant and dismissive of local people's views."

Gwenfair Matthews Jones
"I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Gwenno Williams
"Please write to me as I am borrowing an email address for this form I object to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Hazel Shufflebottom
"My home and business overlook the existing row of pylons as they cross Cors Erddreiniog nature reserve. It is proposed to build a second row of pylons closer to my home and business (holiday cottages). My livelihood depends on the tourist industry, visitors choose to holiday in Anglesey because of the stunning countryside and beaches and the tranquility. The industrialisation of the landscape, which will be the consequense of a second row of pylons, will deter tourists from visiting Anglesey. They might visit once but not return. With regard to National Grid's attitude to the views of local people they have treated us with contempt. The consultation has been a farce, a box ticking excersize. It has felt as if we are being laughed at. Anglesey is not an affluent Island and can not afford to loose income from the local tourist industry. National grid will not add value to our community or economy. We have to think of the future, once the pylons have been built they will be seen forever where as if the cables were put underground no-one would know they were there. National Grid have refused to consider this option and have not consulted on it. "

Hefin Williams
"Rwy'n gwrthwynebu codi ail res o beilonau. Bydd yn andwyol i olygfeydd o gefn gwlad ac mewn AHNA. Mae hyn yn anfaddeuol ar Ynys Mon. Bydd ail res o beilonau yn andwyol iawn i dwristiaeth, amaethyddiaeth a gwerth eiddo. Mae hyn yn arbennig o wir yn Star ble y bydd posibl i ni fod rhwng dwy res! Er na fydd y Grid fyth yn cydnabod yn agored, mae yna dystiolaeth fod EMF yn cael effaith ar iechyd. O dan y ddaear yw'r ateb gan y byddai'n dileu'r broblem hon. Mae'n well bod yn saff o gofio fod llawer o feddygol hyn yn oed yn meddwl nad oedd drwg mewn ysmygu hanner canrif yn ol! Nid yw'r Grid wedi gwrando go iawn arnom. Mae pawb o'r bron yn datgan eu barn yn glir mai o dan y dwr neu'r ddaear y dylai'r ceblau redeg ond nid yw'r Grid wedi cymryd unrhyw sylw o'r elfen hanfodol yma o'r ymgynghoriad. Mae nhw'n brolio iddyn nhw wneud 5000 o newidiadau ond BYCHAN yw rheini ac ar eu telerau hwy! Anfoesol. Mae synnwyr cyffredin yn dweud wrthym nad yw hyn yn deg. Rwy'n erfyn arnoch i wrthod y cais cynllunio hwn er lles holl drigolion Ynys Mon."

Ian Ware
"I OBJECT to this proposal Others options are available"

Ieuan Williams
"I wish to make a representation regarding the following: The effects of the project on the landscape. The effects of the project on the well-being of local communities. The effects of the project on the tourism industry and economy in Anglesey. The effects of the project on the cultural heritage of Anglesey. The effects of the project on the Welsh language. The lack of detail in the consultation documentation. The lack of information on mitigation measures."

Ioan Matthews Jones
"I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Iona Williams
"Rwy'n bryderus iawn am fwriad y Grid Cenedlaethol i osod ail res o beilonau ar draws Ynys Mon. Bydd yn effeitho'n fawr arnom ni yn Star gan y byddwn rhwng y ddwy res ond rwy'n bryderus iawn am weddill yr Ynys hefyd. Rwyf yn bendant o'r farn nad yw'r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi gwrando ar lais bobol Ynys Mon o'r cychwyn cyntaf. Mae nhw wedi datgan o'r dechrau mai ei dewis hwy yw ail res pan fo mwyafrif llethol trigolion y Sir yn glir iawn mai ei lle yw o dan y ddaear neu o dan y mor. Fe ddywedwyd celwydd wrthym nad oedd y dewis gyda mynd o dan y dwr ond mae nhw wedi cydnabod bellach fod hyn yn bosibl. Mae beth a ddywedwyd gan y Grid yn gelwydd ac mae sawl enghraifft aral o geisio taflu llwch i lygaid. Mae gennyf bryder mawr ynglyn a'r effaith ar y diwydiant twristiaeth sydd mor bwysig i ni yma. Mae'r incwm blynyddol i'r Sir yn anferthol ac mae bywioliaeth llawer un yn dibynnu arno. Yn yr un modd, fe fydd effaith ar y diwydiant amaeth am drigain mlynedd a mwy. Er fod y Grid Cenedlaethol yn gwadu hynny, mae tystiolaeth gref yn yr ardal hon o effaith EMF ar iechyd y boblogaeth. Mae hyn yn fy mhoeni i. O roddi'r ceblau o dan y ddaear, fe fyddai'r risg i iechyd yn llawer llai. Rwy'n byw mewn ardal hardd iawn ac mae llawer AHNA yn ymyl. Fe fydd gosod ail res yn difetha'r golygfeydd hyn oddi wrthynt. Gyda'r rhagolygon y bydd yna fwy o gynhyrchu trydan ar yr Ynys, mae yna bosibilrwydd mawr y gellid gosod trydedd rhes. Rwan ydi'n amser i daclo'r broblem debygol trwy fynd o dan y ddaear. Clywais yn ddiweddar fod y Grid yn tynnu rhai peilonau i lawr a hynny ohewrydd rhai o'r rhesymau sydd wedi ei nodi gennyf. Mae hyn yn eironig iawn. Mae nhw'n gwrthod edrych i'r dyfodol ac yn bwrw ymlaen gyda'r hen ddull o drosglwyddo trydan. Fe fydd gwerth eiddo yn gostwmg. Mae hynny'n fwy na gwir ymhob man ond yn berthnasol iawn i Star fydd, fel y dywedais, rhwng y ddwy res. Mae'r ffaith fod y Grid wedi dewis anwybyddu Deddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau'r Dyfodol fel rhywbeth amherthnasol iddyn nhw yn dweud y cwbl am y cwmni hwn. Rwy'n erfyn arnoch i wrthod y cais a chyfeirio'r Grid Cenedlaethol i chwilio am opsiynau gwell. "

iWAN Jones
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I am against this! National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

J Hanks
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Jacky Cope
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Janet Hamilton-Evans
"Eight years ago I rented a property which had pylons in the back garden. Thinking of buying the property, as the landlord wanted to sell. I wrote to national grid for an honest opinion on the health issues. They wrote back to me with a report outlining the chances of children under the age of 16 developing Leukemia " as being " very high". In another instance I was on a train journey to Norfolk and got chatting to a lady who worked as a nurse at Alder hey hospital. When I told her I was from Wales she told me there is a ward at the hospital called little wales . Meaning there is a lot of children on the ward who have [REDACTED]. mm one wonders why. The environment in which we live in effects us all and there is increasing evidence that no longer is one in every three people going to develop cancer but every two. Anglesey is a beautiful island and if more pylons are erected tourist may decide not to visit the island. Money talks but so do people and if this is progress the those who give the go ahead must have it on there conscience all of these matters."

Janet Little
"I strongly object to a second row of pylons being erected across Anglesey and I wish to offer the following reasons: Firstly I am of the opinion that the consultation was flawed. From the outset, the National Grid stated that their preferred option was over grounding. They were told throughout the consultation by the people and all political representatives that this was not acceptable. They have ignored this clear view and have acted in accordance to their wishes alone. Undergrounding is the favoured option because that will not have a long term effect on tourism and farming. It will also lessen the chances of EMF having a detrimental effect on health. There is no doubt at all that a second row will be seen from AONB and many other places in Anglesey. It is truly ironic that the NG is seeking permission to erect dozens of new pylons while they are taken others down because of the reasons stated above. Pylons are not the 21st century answer to a 20th century problem. There will be a marked effect on property value. No cumulative impact assessment has been undertaken. We are being badly treated by the National Grid and cast aside as unimportant. They have, and do not, listen to our valid views and objections. I implore you to reject this planning application and compel the National Grid to seek alternative ways to transmit energy from Anglesey. "

Jim Middleton
"I live in Llanfairpwllgwygyll we are already surrounded by huge pylons and do not want any more. They will ruin our village and the second row will deface large areas of the Island forever. The cables should be underground, National Grid have not listened, they decided on pylons at the start. The consultation about routes was insulting to the local people - they treated us with contempt. The pylons will be detrimental to the local farming economy, the tourist industry and the natural environment. Property will be devalued."

John Arwel Edwards
"Fel y gwelwch o'm cyfeiriad rwyn byw ar Ynys Mon. Hyn yw fy niddordeb yn y mater yma. Hefyd o 2003 hyd at 2008 roeddwn yn Gynghorydd Sir dros henward Gwyngyll. Nid wyf yn hapus ar bwriad i adeiladu rhes ychwanegol o beilonau ochor ag ochor ar rhai presenol ar draws yr ynys am y rhesymau canlynol Mae un rhes yn anerbyniol ond byddai rhes ychwanegol yn difrodi un o asedau mwyaf Ynys Mon - sef ei harddwch naturiol Byddai hyn yn boendod i unigolion ond hefyd yn fater difrifol i economi yr ynys drwy effeithio yn negyddol ar y diwydiant ymwelwyr _ diwydiant i'w feithryn gyda gofal Mae arnaf bryder hefyd y gall hyn i gyd fod yn rhan o broses o greu corridor trosglwyddo ynni llawer mwy sylweddol ar draws yr ynys. Rydwyf hefyd yn codi'r cwestiwn yma. Paham na ellir ysyried yn ffafriol yr obsiynau ar gyfer cludo trydan ar draws Ynys Mon sydd ddim yn difrodi i'r fath raddau? "

John Ferrarese
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I am against this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

John Russum
"I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Joyce Hughes
"I am writing to express my strong opposition to a second line of pylons crossing Anglesey. The economy of Anglesey depends largely on tourism due to its beautiful scenery and a second line of even bigger pylons will endanger that, people do not go on holiday to see pylons. Anglesey already has a lower than average income and while Wylfa Newydd is a welcome boost to the economy it should not damage another part of the economy. There is growing resentment in Wales that our exquisite but fragile landscape and seascape are being destroyed to provide energy for the wealthier parts of UK. Wales is already self sufficient in energy. The technology of subsea transmission is well know with cables from Ireland and Scotland and a cable from Wylfa Newydd to the Wirral area, where there is a high demand for Liverpool and Manchester is the obvious solution. "

Julie Evans
"I utterly reject this proposal Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Julie Schofield
"I strongly oppose National Grid Electricity Transmission's (NGET) plans to build even more pylons across Anglesey The tenth edition of Planning Policy Wales is quite clear that the preference of the Welsh Government is for all new connections to be buried unless this would jeopardise the feasibility of the overall project. Putting this connection underground will have NO impact on the feasibility of the power station, so there is no reason why NGET should not bury the connection NGET are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second, on the (false) assumption that people are now used to the presence of these towers. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy (EN-5), and it has been confirmed that none is planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty eg Mynydd Bodafon Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through a spoilt, and “industrialised”, landscape - a landscape recognised by UNESCO for the geological and geomorphological features. There are numerous articles in peer reviewed journals confirming this Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered, due to loss of visual amenity, blight and stigma. Again, there are numerous articles in peer reviewed journals confirming this More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers” There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons (EMFs) on people and farm animals. There are, admittedly, quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, pylons are a poor legacy for future generations Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Underground is acceptable to Horizon, and while they are unfavourable towards subsea, they are only a consultee in the process, like the general public. They should not be allowed to "scupper" arguably the best option The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced in 2009, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options than the 2009 solution. Although NGET pretended to evaluate other options in 2012, the people of Pembrokeshire and the Wirral were not consulted, so the consultation was not genuine NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Kathryn Severn
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Katie Roberts
"PLEASE write to me as I have borrowed an email I OBJECT to this proposal by NGET National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

L Thomas
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

L. Hughes
"When I became aware of National Grid's plan to build a second line of high voltage power pylons across Anglesey, in addition to the one that is already there, I became extremely worried. What was of particular concern was the ineffective consultation exercise, which failed to take people's and the County Council's concerns seriously. I am particularly worried about the detrimental impact a second line of monster pylons will have on people's health, the tourism industry, which makes a substantial contribution to the island economy, and the devaluation of property, an aspect which has been completely omitted from National Grid's planning documentation, but which will have a devastating impact on individual people. I am also very upset at the thought that this beautiful, unique island could be industrialised further, and that this could be the sad legacy we would leave to future generation. Please allow the people's voice to be heard!! "

Lizzie Dean
"I object VERY STRONGLY to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Lynn Hanson
"A second line of pylons running through such a beautiful area would substantially damage its natural beauty, it would be bad for tourism and it would be bad for the farming community as it would reduce the amount of usable land when some are struggling with this already. It would also affect local house prices which are already low making some unsaleable. It would be much better to put these cables underground, although originally would cause more disruption to land it would be invisible after 3 or 4 years. This may be a slightly more expensive option but I'm sure the public would not complain about a few extra pence on their electricity bills."

Lynn Isherwood
"I am against this proposal Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. "

Mae Dorricott
"I really reject this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Mair Thomas
"I already look at one row of pylons as they cross Cors Erddreiniog Nature Reserve. The nature reserve is a beautiful natural resourse and should not be further scarred by a second row of pylons. Anglesey has already paid a high price in terms of ruining the beautiful countryside along the route of one row of pylons and should not be subjected to another when there is an alternative available to bury the cables underground. National Grid have treated local residents with contempt and rail roaded their plans through with a trivial 'consultation' which did not give consideradation to other transmission options, the only statutory consultation was on routes for pylons and that was meaningless because they had already made up their mind where the pylons were going regardless of what local people had to say. Please do not allow NG to ruin Anglesey's natural environment and as a result of that their tourist industry."

Mandy Williams
"Too close to where I live"

MARGARET NEAL
"National Grid are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. We need a more modern innovative solution to the connection in North Wales. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Tourists reaction will be negative to the permanent scarring of the landscape and the tourism sector will suffer badly as a consequence. Pylons will be detrimental to may business sectors on Anglesey, to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised” countryside, to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices, to house values, which Nation Grid have not considered, overall both business and personal economies will decline through the effects of installing huge metal towers across the island. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a significant amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, which differs from those which prevailed in the middle part of the last century when the existing pylon run was installed. There are serious concerns, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. There are real concerns around the route of the pylons over areas very high in Radon Gas and how EMF's affect Radons dangerous decay products. This is a very good reason to avoid installing pylons in favour of a more innovative solution to avoid these risks to health. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation, this treatment of the islands officials is completely unfair in light of their position in being the collective voice of the islands electorate. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while National Grid state they are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons will be an ugly and legacy for future generations. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as National Grid had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Margaret Roberts
"I object to a second row of pylons. The people have asked - from the beginning - NOT to have the pylons and to have the cables undergrounded. The additional ones planned are bigger and more unsightly and will spoil much of our countryside, as well as disrupting farming areas - the electricity generated will go straight to urban areas and over the border. The National Grid have not actually listened and therefore the 'consultation' is fundamentally flawed."

Margaret T Evans
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I am against this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Marion Jones
" I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Mark G T Rosenthal
"1 - I want the cables to go underground across Anglesey. 2 - Pylons are an eyesore. 3 - Health issues. 4 - Democratic Insolence."

Martina Edwards
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I am against this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Medwyn Williams
"I am against the erection of more pylons on Anglesey, they are already the first thing you see when crossing the Britannia Bridge - we do not want more, the cables should go underground across the Island. Two (more or less) parallel lines of pylons across the Island will industrialise the natural landscape, one of the Area's most valuable assets for the tourist industry. They will be detrimental to farming incomes and potential health dangers are not fully understood. NG's consultation was superficial and not carried out in good faith as NG had already decided what they were going to do before the consultation started. The people of Anglesey were not listened to. NG's approach was arrogant and dismissive of local people's views."

Menai Bridge and District Civic Society
" Key issues 1. The process was flawed as no detailed costings were given or chance given to select an all underground or undersea option during Consultation. 2. Plans for a third row of pylons, and continuation of the pylons from Pentir into the National Park are now coming to light. Landscape degradation by piecemeal applications, when a full project is known, is cynical exploitation. 3. Relating the overland pylon route, vis-à-vis undergrounding, to the future of Wylfa Newydd, as National Grid spokesmen have done, is irrelevant. 4. The economy of Anglesey is hugely dependent on tourism and farming. Many people come to get away from industrial landscapes to experience the beautiful unspoilt scenery. They do not want to see it disfigured with giant pylons and desecrated for future generations. Nor does the community wish to see the value of property, or businesses adversely impacted. 5. The overland route places the short term financial return to National Grid shareholders above the long term economic, cultural and landscape future of a whole community. One of the poorest communities in the country, Anglesey, would effectively be used to increase earnings per share of stockholders and I assume reflected in Directors’ Short or Long Term Performance Plans. 6. An Overhead Line (OHL) of much smaller pylons already exists along most of National Grid’s preferred route. National Grid believes that people will not object to additional pylons that are twice as high and more than twice as wide. They are wrong as evidenced by the continuing opposition by our Elected Representatives and many others. 7. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and a vehicle for putting this into practice is the tenth edition of Planning Policy Wales (PPW10). Should this proposal be granted, it would be in direct contravention of Welsh planning policy (as well as Ofgem’s principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. "

Michael Roberts
"I am registering my opposition to the erection of a second row of pylons across Anglesey. I do so for the following reasons: I strongly believe that this will have a detrimental effect on both the farming and tourism industries. Both are very important to the economy of Anglesey. If the cable was laid underground, this would not be the case. Laying the cable under the sea would be even better.There are no valid reasons why this cannot be done. The overhead option will mar the landscape for well over sixty years. The effect of a second row, and possibly a third in time, will have a serious effect on land and property values. This has not been considered by the National Grid. They cite cost as a reason for not doing considering other variants : the cost to the people of this Island will be far greater than the extra expense to the National Grid at this time. Overhead cabling will be visible from a number of AONB. indeed, they will be visible from many areas along the route. I also fear the pylons because of the probable health dangers. There are two trains of thought on this but it is far better to err on the safe side and underground the cable. This would greatly lessen any possible effects. By not taking note of the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, the Grid is ignoring the health and wellbeing of our present and future residents. I also believe that the consultation is flawed. Throughout the process the National Grid has ignored the wishes of the vast majority living here. It has acted like a bully. I ask you to reject this planning application. "

Michelle hughes
"There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been made available consulted on. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will damage farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be negatively impact house value, which NGET have not considered. National Grid are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a much more up to date practical solution for the island other than Pylons There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views. There are serious concerns, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to adopt a safer solution other than pylons. Unfair and undemocratic process, Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation, and no recognition to the hardship this installation will bring to to the existing industry sectors of Anglesey. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options."

Mr William Mervyn Hughes
" National Grid North Wales Connection Project The proposed final route, from the proposed Gwynedd end of the Menai Strait tunnel to Pentir sub-station, sited, approximately 1.6 kilometres distance within locality of the Fodolydd, Fodolydd Lane, Y Felinheli LL56 4QD The main points in relation to the application regarding the following impacts on this locality: Irreversible damage to people's health and well being Permanent visual scaring on the landscape Impact on the local environment Constant noise and disruption Indefinite difficulties to farming practices Devaluation of properties Decline in Tourism Affecting livelihoods to those that have invested in agriculture and diversified into tourism Threat to rare species of native flora The proposed construction works would involve movement of plant, materials and waste, requiring additional transport routes and temporary works, such as construction compounds, permanent access tracks, road access points and lay-down areas to store equipment and third party works required in the siting of 4 permanent overhead pylons with high voltage overhead power lines, a Ty Fodol Tunnel Head-house (containing ventilation fans), a permanent Vertical shaft (100m by 15m) and a Cable Sealing End Compound, Gantries, surrounded with a high security fence, all of this within a small area. The cost to this local community, causing irreversible damage to people's health and well being. Creating persistent intrusion and disruption, continual noise, with permanent obstacles on the land causing difficulties in farming practices, destruction and indefinite scarring to the scenic landscape, destruction of vegetation and rare plant species, such as the Galeopsis segentum, (the Downy Hemp-nettle), sighted in the fields of Hafodol. (Plantlife Cymru -Our vanishing flora 1975.24'). These rare wildflowers of earlier farming are of importance to the local heritage and need to be preserved for the current and next generation. In addition, creating a loss of property values, devastation and disruption to livelihoods to those that have invested heavily in agriculture and also diversified into tourism. This scenic landscape of cultural and natural importance, on the edge of Snowdon National Park and the Menai Straits and easily accessible to the North Wales coastline, is a magnet that continually attract tourists, will be scarred for ever, Extending the tunnel from the proposed Gwynedd end of the Menai Strait for the remaining approximately 1.6 kilometres distance to Pentir sub-station, would eliminate the need for an additional set of 4 permanent overhead pylons and 400 KV overhead electricity power lines and associated permanent structures being built, enclosing the inhabitants and properties in this vicinity between two high voltage electricity power lines, trapping them in the middle of a magnetic field, annoyance and noise. "

Mrs Gwynedd Jones
"I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Mrs Zoe Alexandra Rowson
"I strongly oppose the double row of pylons coming across the Island of Anglesey. I am a mother of ten year old twins living near to Wylfa Power Station with a successful thriving business. How can this proposal be allowed to happen? The destruction of the Island not to mention the health risks are phenomenal! 0 Brain Tumour 0 Cancer's 0Leukaemia 0 Negative effect on tourism 0 No Work 0 Electro magnetic field & Radon 0 Impact on farming 0 property prices will decrease 0 Island businesses affected This outrageous proposal just simply should be stopped,objected to & not go ahead!!!"

Christine Webster on behalf of Mrs. D. A. Pearce
"[REDACTED]. It has been difficult for Mrs Pearce to participate in all the consultations held by National Grid. She wishes to object to the proposed second row of pylons across Anglesey. The possibility of placing the cables underground has been rejected right at the early stages of consultation. Most people have not bothered to continue with further discussions as less risky options have been dismissed. The size of the new pylons are a concern and will be much more obtrusive and will certainly affect our landscape on a small island which in turn will destroy our tourism industry. Llanfairpwll is internationally renowned as the village with the longest name and many tourist from Europe, America and China visit to take photos of the name displayed at "Pringles". Large numbers of visitors arrive by coaches to visit the Retail Outlet. The proposed new pylon will take a second route from Star.The visual aspect of this is not acceptable.The view towards Snowdonia is one of the best on the island, from Star you will see two set of pylons. Mrs Pearce greatest concern is the impact of the pylons on health. She strongly believes that their magnetic field has an effect on our health, especially the increased risk of [REDACTED]. Llanfairpwll is locally described at the cancer corridor of Anglesey. This is her greatest worry. Mrs Pearce considers it unfair that other parts of the UK have cables underground and under the sea and their risk to health have been reduced and ours increased with the overhead pylons The Pylons will deeply effect her quality of life during construction as the access to her home will close, she is unsure of National Grid plans during this time. The final outcome will affect her quality of life as she will be living with pylons on both sides of her property. Again I stress that her deepest worry is the health issue. "

nicola parry
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. Anglesey is not an industrialised area but National Grid want to make it one. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which National Grid have not considered. National Grid refuse to recognise the financial impact to individuals and businesses as a result of the introduction of further pylons and overhead lines. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. It would be wise to avoid the risks and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on."

Nora Ferrarese
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I am against this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

GVA on behalf of Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) (Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA))
"Dear Sirs, The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) at Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, Herdus House, Ingwell Drive, Westlakes Science & Technology Park, Moor Row, Cumbria, CA24 3HU is identified within the Applicant’s submitted book of reference as both category 1 and category 2 land interests and is therefore an Affected Person as defined by the Planning Act 2008. The NDA therefore wishes to register its interest in respect of the application for development consent. NDA is a Non-Departmental Public Body created under the Energy Act 2004. Under this Act, a statutory responsibility is placed upon NDA to decommission and clean-up the UK's civil nuclear legacy in a safe and cost-effective manner, and where possible to accelerate programmes of work that reduce hazard. With respect to the proposed development, NDA is currently in discussions with the applicant to protect NDA's interests. Discussions are ongoing and NDA will endeavour to keep the Examining Authority informed of any developments and agreements reached between the Parties. Aspects of the development which could potentially impede NDA's statutory decommissioning obligations include: (a) access to NDA land both during construction of the development and following the start of operation. (b) other aspects of the development which may impede the safety and site licence obligations of the Wylfa site. Whilst NDA brings these matters of interest to the attention of the Examining Authority, it however emphasises the importance of cooperation between the parties. Discussions are therefore currently being undertaken in light of this recognition in order to preserve the primacy of nuclear safety and site licence obligations. In summary, NDA has no objection in principle to the application provided its legitimate interests are protected. NDA is willing to assist the Examining Authority further with respect to the above-mentioned issues and any other issues of relevance. On the basis of the above, we are therefore writing on behalf of the NDA to notify the Examining Authority that as an Affected Person the NDA wish to be considered as an Interested Party in the examination of the Application by National Grid Electricity Transmission for an Order Granting Development Consent for the North Wales Connection Project. The NDA is also notifying the Examining Authority that as an Affected Person it may wish to be heard at a compulsory acquisition hearing and to be heard at any Issue Specific Hearing on the Development Consent Order. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you require any further information on this matter. Yours faithfully Matt Verlander Director, GVA "

Osborne Jones
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I am against this! National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

patricia roberts
"the village of Star will have pylons on three sides why is this allowed to happen when there are perfectly acceptable alternative routes where dwellings are not impacted Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be damage farming revenues due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which National Grid have not considered, clearly both personal and community business economies are ignored by National Grid There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views. There are serious concerns, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. There are much better safer alternatives for the connection so why use pylons Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while National Grid are not bound by this law and are ignoring its requirements, the Isle of Anglesey County Council is bound to the act, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge, particularly in the areas of identified health risks The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as National Grid had already defined their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where National Grid have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. Unfair treatment, Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation."

Paul Matthews Jones
"I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Paul Severn
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Paula Taylor
"I strongly reject this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Pauline Basham
"There are too many pylons on Anglesey already we do not need any more, cables should go underground. NG never asked us what we wanted they just told us to choose where the pylons go and even that was predetermined by NG. They did not listen. The second row of pylons will be bad for farming, the tourist industry and the beautiful environment."

Phil Hynes
"Llanfair has pylons frighteningly close to the village, dwarfing the houses and other buildings - I do not want any more. I am concerned about potential health implications for future generations and the economic consequences for tourism and farming. NG have not listened to local people, they knew best!"

Pippa Hudson
"It will blight the beautiful landscape affect the health and well being of people. affect tourism which will loose anglesey income. "

Rachael McFarlane
"I really, really reject this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Rachel Wigley
"I am opposed to the erection of further pylons on Anglesey, ruining our countryside, wildlife included and forcing people out of their homes. Go under ground, i'm sure National Grid can afford it!"

Rhian Basham
"There are too many pylons across Anglesey already, the existing line runs far too close to my town. Another row of pylons will adversely effect the tourist industry, farming, the natural landscape and the housing market. NG should be made to think of the long term detrimental impact of pylons not just saving money at the expense of Anglesey."

rhys o edwards
"The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons this has seemingly been dismissed on very basic cost terms with no reference to the cost to the local community. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. Impact to tourism is ignored by National Grid and no attempt to value the cost in jobs and revenue which will impact Anglesey as a result of the industrialised landscape of huge steel towers scarring the island for ever. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation."

Richard Lewis Roberts
"I do not want a second row of unsightly pylons going across the beautiful island of Anglesey. I want cables to be put underground. National Grid have made no effort to consult with local people or consider the long term detrimental effects of pylons on Anglesey's landscape, population and economy (farming and tourism). "

Richard Meirion Jones
" Fel Aelod Etholedig o Gyngor Sir Ynys Môn, sy'n cynrychioli Ward Aethwy dymunaf gofrestru fel parti â diddordeb mewn perthynas â'r Archwiliad o gais Gorchymyn Caniatâd Datblygu Prosiect Cysylltiad Gogledd Cymru. Yr wyf yn gwrthwynebu cynnig y Grid Cenedlaethol i adeiladu ail linellau p?er ar beilonau ar draws Ynys Môn gan fy mod yn teimlo y gallai gael effeithiau andwyol sylweddol ar amwynderau gweledol, lles trigolion a’u hiechyd a’u cymunedau, yr amgylchedd a’r iaith Gymraeg, yn ogystal â buddiannau busnes, yn enwedig busnesau twristiaeth sydd o bwysigrwydd mawr hirdymor i economi'r Ynys a hefyd amaethyddiaeth. Rwy'n teimlo mai'r unig ateb derbyniol i gysylltu datblygiad Wylfa Newydd i'r Grid Cenedlaethol ym Mhentir yw trwy linell danddaearol. Er fy mod yn derbyn y bydd adeiladu cysylltiad o'r fath ynddo ‘i hun yn arwain at anghyfleuster ac anhwylustod tymor byr sylweddol i drigolion ac ymwelwyr i’r Ynys, mae'r budd hirdymor o beidio cael ail linell, a hwyrach drydedd, ar beilonau, yn ymestyn ar draws yr Ynys yn pell orbwyso hyn. "

robert david roberts
"the village of Star will have pylons on three sides why is this allowed to happen when there are perfectly acceptable alternative routes where dwellings are not impacted Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be damage farming revenues due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which National Grid have not considered, clearly both personal and community business economies are ignored by National Grid There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views. There are serious concerns, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. There are much better safer alternatives for the connection so why use pylons Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while National Grid are not bound by this law and are ignoring its requirements, the Isle of Anglesey County Council is bound to the act, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge, particularly in the areas of identified health risks The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as National Grid had already defined their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where National Grid have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. Unfair treatment, Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. "

Robin Williams
"I am a county councillor for the Aethwy Ward on Ynys Mon County Council, which this development directly affects. I wish to be noted as an interested party as I wish to comment on the impact of the development on my constituents relating in particular to the fact that pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Also the detrimental impact to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. "

Sandra Robinson-Clark
" I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Sara Lentini
"I totally, utterly and passionately reject this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Sharon Williams
"I am against the erection of more pylons on Anglesey, they are already the first thing you see when crossing the Britannia Bridge - we do not want more, the cables should go underground across the Island. Two (more or less) parallel lines of pylons across the Island will industrialise the natural landscape, one of the Area's most valuable assets for the tourist industry. They will be detrimental to farming incomes and potential health dangers are not fully understood. NG's consultation was superficial and not carried out in good faith as NG had already decided what they were going to do before the consultation started. The people of Anglesey were not listened to. NG's approach was arrogant and dismissive of local people's views."

Sian Eleri Hughes
" I am against this proposal There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. "

Sian Hughes
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I object to the pylons with how close they are and the health effects of them "

Stephen Tudor
"I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Steve Evans
"I utterly reject this proposal Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Susan Booth
"More overground pylons will be a disaster for Anglesey. They will be a blight on the landscape in an area of outstanding natural beauty. This is a small island that relies on tourism and visitors will be put off by this plan and the sight of these pylons. Although controversial there are also potential health risks for those who will end up living close to these pylons. There is also the negative impact on wildlife, disruption to residents and I have grave concerns for those residents whose property and businesses will be adversely affected. The pylons should not be built. "

Tom Hugh
"PLEASE WRITE AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I OBJECT to this proposal National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Trevor Hughes
"I strongly oppose the proposal of erecting any more pylons on Anglesey as it would have a detrimental impact on farming, tourism and failure to follow Government Policy. I also object to the existing pylons, which are now largely redundant, being used for the Wylfa Newydd export; they should not be significantly modified to facilitate the new line and should not be used to justify a second (third or fourth) line. Anglesey is an Area of Outstanding Beauty, please please lets keep it that way for our generation and our children's generation as well. "

Victoria Parry
"National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. Anglesey is not an industrialised area but National Grid want to make it one. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which National Grid have not considered. National Grid refuse to recognise the financial impact to individuals and businesses as a result of the introduction of further pylons and overhead lines. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. It would be wise to avoid the risks and not use pylons. Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation. Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on."

Victoria Roberts
"As a director of Anglesey Tourism Association and as a Managing Director of a tourist facility on Anglesey my views on the extra row of pylons are as follows;- They will have a negative Impact on tourism, negative impact on farming, negative impact on house valuation, there was a flawed “consultation”, there has been failure to follow Government Policy, they are historically and culturally inappropriate My views on the Wylfa Newydd DCO are irrelevant for this proposal, but it goes without saying that any generator needs to be connected to the demand, so I fully agree with a connection existing, however, I totally disagree with all other aspects of this proposal Anglesey is the flagship for tourism in Wales, our landscape needs to be protected for this generation and future ones. "

A C Williams
"1 - HT cables on pylons carry a significant risk to human health,especially children. 2 - Pylons will adversely affect views over beautiful Anglesey countryside. 3 - Pylons will reduce house prices of properties nearby and/or when pylons are visible. 4 - Pylons will be detrimental to tourisn. 5 - Alternative technology exists,such a undergrounding. 6 - National Grid's consultative process was ineffective,unfair and not carried out in good faith. 7 - A genuine cumulative impact assessment has not been done or consulted on."

A Drysdale
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

A Hughes
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Aberffraw Community Council
"The Aberffraw Community Council is of the opinion that an additional line of pylons would have a negative effect on views of unspoilt countryside. This would affect the tourist trade which is crucial to the economy of the island. Subsea or underground cables should be considered. The consultation was not carried out properly - alternative options were not considered. We are concerned that one additional line of pylons will lead to further lines. The possible health implications of pylons are a concern. "

Adrian Cervenak
"PLEASE WRITE TO ME AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I am against this and want to register as an Interested Party"

Amlwch Town Council
"Wylfa Newydd will be constructed within a neighbouring community boundary. We are concerned that the proposal for pylons is a low cost option that does not take account the impact upon the landscape in one of the most attractive parts of the British Isles amongst other concerns. We ask that full consideration be given to laying the cables sub sea. Amlwch Town Council reserves the right to raise further issues in (or by presenting) evidence and intends to take a full part in the examination process including, if required, attending and making oral representations at relevant hearings."

Amy Neal
"1. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact of the development in total (ie Wylfa Newydd and the North Wales Connection) been assessed or consulted on 2. There are numerous instances where NGET have not followed the advice in Government policy (EN-1 and EN-5) 3. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith. NGET had already published plans in 2009 three years before it commenced and the only statutory consultation in 2016 did not consider any other options Although NGET pretended to evaluate other options in 2012, the people of Pembrokeshire and the Wirral were not consulted 4. While hundreds of people responded to the consultation, over 13,000 have signed our petition against the proposals 5. Engagement since the consultation has felt patronising and some landowners report feeling intimidated 6. The tenth edition of Planning Policy Wales is quite clear that the preference of the Welsh Government is for all new connections to be underground. This will have no impact on the feasibility of the power station 7. The additional costs are estimated at some 11p/year on an average UK electricity bill of £554 – an increase of 0.02%, affordable even to vulnerable households suffering fuel poverty 8. Despite frequent requests, NGET have refused to consider modifications to the existing line to reduce visual disamenity, and comply with current routing guidance, yet have included modifications to facilitate the new line 9. Of the seven “Holford Rules”, NGET ignore all of them for the modifications to the existing line, and follow only one of them for the new line 10. NGET have not planned for the use of the third Menai crossing which could reduce costs by £200 million 11. While NGET are not bound by The Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, pylons are a poor legacy for future generations 12. Other technology exists (underground and subsea), which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Underground is acceptable to Horizon 13. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England. While hosting a power station the island should not have to bear the visual intrusion of pylons 14. All levels of democratic representation (Council, AM, MP) have spoken against the proposals 15. NGET are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second, on the (false) assumption that people are now used to the presence of these towers. It is well known that further reactors are likely at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy (EN-5) a second row will be used to justify even more lines 16. Had the AONB designation been in place earlier, it is unlikely that much of the existing line could have used pylons. As NGET propose significant modification to this line, current design guidance should be followed 17. Pylons will be detrimental to views of the countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the AONB, iconic views of Snowdonia National Park and the landscape setting of numerous historic features 18. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through a spoilt, blighted, stigmatised and “industrial”, landscape 19. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices 20. Pylons will be detrimental to house value due to loss of visual amenity, blight and stigma 21. The “social costs” of this proposal, estimated at £500 million, outweigh the additional cost of undergrounding 22. NGET ignore the social costs in their evaluation methodology, despite UK Government and EU guidance 23. Pylons will hinder Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers” 24. The whole of the Anglesey landscape is recognised by UNESCO as a Geo Park for the geological and geomorphological features (not just the coast as NGET imply) 25. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons (EMFs) on people and farm animals. There are different views, but learning from early research into tobacco in the 1950’s, the precautionary principle should be followed"

Andrea Cervenak
"PLEASE WRITE TO ME AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I am against this and want to register as an Interested Party"

Angela Gliddon
"One point I would like to raise is a criticism of National Grid's conclusion to their review of costs of laying cables underground compared to installing pylons and overhead lines. The National Grid stated that the cost of a line of pylons across Anglesey would be £550 million whereas the cost of "undergrounding" would be about £1 billion. They indicate that these costs will be paid by increased electricity bills to all UK customers over time. If they find it quite reasonable to share the cost of £550 million in this way it also seems reasonable to share less than twice that amount. The pylons may not run through the Anglesey AoNBs but will be seen by any local person or tourist travelling around the island to visit ancient monuments, beaches, art galleries etc. In general the people of Anglesey are happy to generate power for the whole of the UK and play a part in reducing the use of fossil fuels but they do not deserve to have their home environment damaged I would find a new line of pylons acceptable if that one line would be sufficient for Wylfa Newydd, Orthios and MORE, future, energy generators. Then, when that line is completed and functional, the old pylons could be demolished and the people of Anglesey suffer no extra visible damage in the future. "

Anglesey Branch, Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales
"1. National Grid have a conflict of financial interest, which means they cannot present a balanced view and planning application. 2. Despite having more than 10 years to consider this transmission connection, National Grid have failed to adequately prepare for this connection and have failed to fully explore all the viable technical, financial and environmental options available. 3. National Grid have not addressed the economic impact on Anglesey; individual residents and businesses. 4. National Grid have evaded the views, comments and genuine criticisms of the affected local people and Anglesey's political representatives. 5. National Grid has failed to take account of further power generation developments, which it is already aware of. 6. National Grid have not followed correct procedures; planning policy and other legislation. "

Ann Evans
"Rwy'n gwrthwynebu bwriad y Grid Cenedlaethol i wneud cais i osod rhes arall o beilonau ar draws Ynys Môn. Gwnaf hynny am y rhesymau canlynol - * Rwy'n bryderus iawn, gyda'r bwriad i gynyddu ymhellach gynhyrchu p?er trydan ar Ynys Môn, y bydd ail linell yn cael ei defnyddio i gadarnhau trydydd * Does yna ddim dadlau o gwbl na fyddai ychwanegu llinell arall yn andwyol iawn i olygfeydd o gefn gwlad ac mewn AHNA * Byddai'r effaith ar y diwydiant twristiaeth yn ddamniol. Nid yw peilonau a thwristiaeth yn cyd-fynd a'i gilydd. Mae hwn yn ddiwydiant allweddol i ffyniant y sir hon. * Rwy'n sicr fy marn y byddai ail res o beilonau yn cael effaith ar allu amaethwyr i ffermio'n effeithiol ac i wneud y gorau o'u heiddo. * Mae peilonau yn cael effaith negyddol ar bris eiddo boed hwnnw'n gartrefi neu'n dir amaethyddol. * Rwy'n bendant fy marn nad yw byw wrth ymyl neu o dan beilonau'n dda i iechyd. Nid yw'r Grid yn cymryd unrhyw sylw o'r ymchwil sy’n dangos hyn gan beryglu bywydau unigolion. * Bu'r ymgynghoriad maith yn annheg ac yn sicr yn annemocrataidd; ychydig iawn o sylw a wnaeth y Grid i wir lais trigolion ac aelodau etholedig y sir hon gan ddewis eu hanwybyddu yn eu cri am ddull arall o drosglwyddo trydan. Tan ddaearu neu'n danfor yw ein dewis ni. * Nid ymgymerodd y Grid Cenedlaethol ag asesiad o effaith cronnus. Byddai codi ail res o beilonau'n cael effaith negyddol iawn ar economi Ynys Môn am gyfnod maith. "

Anne Eastwood
"Our farm will have pylons on it. I want under grounding or subsea . Pylons will have a negetive affect on our farm permanently taking away acres of our land which we need for our cattle. The nock on affect of this will affect/reduce our income. This is not a safe way to transport electricity A cable has snapped and come down on our land and we have lost cattle due to this. I don't want pylons as we have to work under them when we work on the land. The affect on our health will be compromis as well as our lives. It is my understanding that sientific research has proved information that their is a connection with pylons and cancer, leukaemia in children. My grand children spend lots of time riding their ponies and playing outside, and their is no getting away from it, they are with in the lines of the pylons and overhead cables they are in the magnetic field. Our animal graze under the pylons. Farming is our only income , our way of life and this farm is our home. "

Anwen Williams
"1 - HT cables on pylons carry a significant health risk. 2 - Pylons will be detrimental to tourism. 3 - The sale value of houses near pylons will be seriously reduced. 4 - The consultation regarding pylons was ineffective and not carried out in good faith. 5 - Other technology exists,such as undergrounding. 6 -National Grid have totally ignored and disregarded THE WELLBEING OF FUTURE GENERATIONS ACT. 7 - National Grid have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008,and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on."

Arwel Humphreys
"1. Nid oes unrhyw synnwyr mewn adeiladu peilonau arall gan fod yna ffordd arall dan y ddaear a than y mor. Mae hynny'n fwy costus yn y lle cyntaf, ond yn y tymor hir, mae yn mynd i fod yn gostus i gynnal a chadw peilonau. Ni fydd y gost hon yn bod ar gebl. 2. Mi fuasai mwy o beilonau yn effeithio ar dwristiaeth ar Ynys Mon, ac felly yn ddrwg i economi'r ynys. 3. Mi fuasai mwy o beilonau yn effeithio ar iechyd pobl Ynys Mon, ac felly yn gost ychwanegol ar y gwasanaeth iechyd. 4. Mae'r Grid Cenedlaethol yn cydnabod na fuasai peilonau ychwanegol ar draws y Fenai yn dda i'r amgylchedd na harddwch naturiol, ond nid ydynt yn poeni am y Ynys Mon."

Bethan Wyn Hallsworth
"I am against this and want to register as an Interested Party"

Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board
"Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board (BCUHB) is responsible for the planning, provision and commissioning of health services for the permanent and temporary residents of North Wales. The issues as an organisation we want examined by the IPC are; 1. Health Impact Assessment-National Grid has not undertaken a Health Impact Assessment on the impacts of the workers coming from out of the area required to undertake the development. 2. Transport-The Health Board has concerns about a number of impacts the development will have on the transport network, including delays to emergency and non-emergency ambulance services responses, potential increase in road traffic accidents and delays for patients accessing routine appointments to primary, community and hospital base services. 3. The impact of the workforce from out of the area ,involved in the development phase on the provision and funding of primary, community, mental health, hospital and tertiary health services. 4. The cumulative impact of the Wylfa Newydd development on the above. 5. The arrangements for the ongoing monitoring of the health impacts during the development phases. "

Bob Parry
"Pylons will destroy tourism in anglesey"

Bryan Walley
"Today's technology will allow the electricity cables to be buried or taken subsea. Pylons are a thing of the past and carry health risks which is why Anglesey should be granted under grounding or subsea. Tourism is the highes it has ever been on Anglesey this will be greatly affected/blighted. Anglesey relies on tourism for employment for local people as does farming which will also be impacted. Property valuation will drop. Our countryside, landscape will be ruined and views of outstanding natural beauty will be obscured by the pylons. The consultation has not covered the whole of the Island but a second row of pylons on Anglesey will affect the whole of the Island. Pylons will be here for sixty years or more. To use under grounding or subsea on Anglesey would be positive and beneficial to the tourism, farming community and for the future generations "

C Barton
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

C Kitchin
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

C Williams
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Carys Roberts
"1 - HT electricity cables on pylons carry a significant risk to human health. 2 - Pylons are detrimental to tourism. 3 - Additional pylons will scar the beautiful Anglesey landscape even more. 4 - Properties close to pylons will see their value decrease substantialy. 5 - National Grid's consultation process was ineffective and not carried out in good faith. 6 - It is pure arrogance on National Grid's part to disregard THE WELLBEING OF FUTURE GENERATIONS ACT. 7 - Other technologies are available such as undergrounding. 8 - National Grid have not followed the guidance in the Planning Act 2008,and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on."

Cath Edge
"1 - Electric and electromagnetic fields around cables on pylons carry a significant risk to human health' 2 - House and property prices will be adversally affected by the proximity of pylons. 3 - Pylons will be detrimental to beautiful views of Anglesey. 4 - Pylons will be detrimental to tourism. 5 - Other technology exists - BURY the CABES' 6 - The consultation carried out by National Grid was ineffective and not carried out in good faith . 7 - National Grid has ignored THE WELLBEING OF FUTURE GENERATIOS ACT passed by the WELSH ASSEMBLY to protect the people of Wales and its beautiful countryside.This is arrogance beyond belief by a rich multinational."

Christine Hallsworth
"I am against this and want to register as an Interested Party"

Cliff Edge
"1 - Pylons will be detrimental to tourism. 2 - Pylons will significantly reduce property prices in their vicinity. 3 - Electric and Electromagnetic fields produced around cables on pylons cause a significant risk to human health. 4 - Consultation by National Grid was ineffective and not carried out in good faith. 5 - There appear to be examples where National Grid have not followed GOVERNMENT policy as described in EN-1 and EN-5 6 - National Grid have ignored the views of the people of Anglesey and their elected representatives and have even dismissed a vote against using pylons by THE WELSH ASSEMBLY.This crystalises the attitude of this arrogant multinational company which obviously feel it has the power to trample over local people,local councils and even the NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF WALES. 7 -I am not sure that National Grid have followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008,and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Cyng H Huws
"1. Sylwer, mae’r broses gofrestru yn annheg i siaradwyr Cymraeg gan nad yw mwyafrif llethol dogfennaeth y cais yn y Gymraeg. 2. Hoffwn gofrestru i ymateb i’r cais gan i mi fel cynghorydd bro fod yn dyst i holl gamau ‘ymgynghori’ NG a’u canfod yn wallus ac yn gamarweiniol i asesydd o UKGovtPINS. 3. Darperir esiampl fel adlewyrchiad o ba mor sinigaidd y bu’r cwmni wrth ymdrin â’r cyhoedd a chynrychiolwyr democrataidd Môn. Yn y cais dywedir: “The Stage 1 Consultation ran from the 3 October 2012 to the 18 January 2013 and consulted on strategic options, the preferred strategic connection option and route corridor options.” Roeddwn yn bresennol yn y cyflwyniad i gynghorau cymuned a thref 9/10/2012 pan esboniwyd yr opsiynau strategol, gyda’r casgliad parod gan NG mai’r llwybr peilonau oedd yr opsiwn dewisol ar sail cost. Gwelir eu ffurflen adborth o 10/2012 sy’n adlewyrchu’r ffaith mai dewis llwybr nid opsiwn strategol oedd yr ymgynghoriad o’r cychwyn cyntaf. Ymateb unfrydol y cynghorwyr ar y noson, ar sail buddiannau pobl Môn, oedd bod cost o gebl tanfor yn ffracsiwn y pris iddynt o gymharu â’r colledion o ran effaith ar incwm i’r sector dwristaidd ac amaeth, ansawdd bywyd, iechyd, gwerth asedau, prisiau tai, ac adnoddau amgylcheddol. Ymatebodd yr Uwch Reolwr Prosiect, Martin Kinsey: “It’s right for Anglesey to put it into the sea” … “If I was living on Anglesey I’d want undersea cables as well.” Ond fe atgoffodd y cynghorwyr mai yn Llundain gwneir y penderfyniad, hyd yn oed os yw cynghorwyr, AS a AC lleol yn gwrthwynebu. Anwybyddodd NG y ffaith mai ymgynghoriad LLEOL dylai hwn fod. 4. Er defnyddio cost fel sail i’r penderfyniad dros beilonau, yn ystod y 3 ymgynghoriad, er gofyn o’r cychwyn cyntaf, ni chyflwynodd NG asesiad cost benodol i Fôn o’r effaith ar Amaeth, Dwristiaeth, Gwerth Eiddo. Felly nid oes sail i’r honiad: “The Options Appraisal process considers environmental, socio-economic, technical and cost issues associated with each option being appraised.” Dengys y dystiolaeth nad oedd y data’n bodoli pan ddaethpwyd i gasgliad am y peilonau ar sail cost. 5. Gofynnwn i’r arolygwyr edrych yn fanwl ar yr honiadau o ymgynghori’n gymunedol, gan mai barn y cyhoedd oedd mai ticio bocs heb ymateb i fewnbwn oedd y cwmni. Ee Deallwn nad oedd NG yn cofnodi sylwadau llafar yn yr ymgynghoriad, felly tybiwn na fyddwch yn gweld yr adborth llafar am blentyn a gafodd leukemia ger y peilonau, a’r cais am astudiaeth iechyd ar stryd lleol ger peilonau a enwir yn ‘Cancer Row’. Mewn digwyddiadau o’r fath dangoswyd anwybodaeth ryfeddol gan gynrychiolwyr NG, ee am natur yr AHNE, effaith posib toriad y trydan ar orsaf Wylfa, gwerth y diwydiant twristaidd i’r Ynys. Yn ogystal, gwnaethpwyd sylwadau amhriodol gan staff, megis byddai gwrthwynebwyr peilonau Môn yn gyfrifol am dlodi ynni'r DG. (Gan gofio mai Môn yw’r ardal fwyaf dibynnol ar incwm twristiaeth y DG (ONS), a’i fod yn un o ardaloedd tlotaf Ewrop, tra bod y NG yn un o fonopolïau cyfoethocach y byd.) "

D Barton
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

D Evans
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

D Evans
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Dafydd Roberts
"Rwy’n dymuno cyflwyno fy ngwrthwynebiad i fwriad y Grid Cenedlaethol i osod ail res o beilonau ar draw Ynys Môn. Yn gyntaf oll, rwy’n gwbl anfodlon ar y ffordd y mae’r GC wedi cynnal yr ymgynghoriad. Pwrpas ymgynghoriad yw ceisio barn y boblogaeth. O’r cychwyn cyntaf, mae’r corff annemocrataidd hwn wedi dewis peidio gwrando. Fe wnaed newidiadau mân, ond ar eu telerau hwy. Mewn sawl cyswllt, maen nhw wedi datgan mai ei dewis opsiwn nhw yw peilonau newydd. Mewn un cyfarfod, cyn i’r bargyfreithiwr droi i fyny wedi iddo gael galwad, fe wnaeth un aelod o’r staff gydnabod yn agored i griw o wrthwynebwyr mai’r unig reswm dros y dewis hwn oedd y gost. Mae hyn yn annemocrataidd hollol ac rwyf wedi colli ffydd yn y GC dros y blynyddoedd diwethaf. Does dim amheuaeth mai'r dewis call yn yr achos hwn yw mynd o dan y ddaear neu’n danfor. Mae gosod ail res, ac o bosibl trydydd maes o law os bydd y galw am drosglwyddo'n cynyddu, yn mynd i gael effaith negyddol tymor hir ar nifer sylweddol o drigolion unigol, ar fusnesau amaethyddol ac yn bendant ar y diwydiant twristiaeth. Nid oes unrhyw asesiad o’r effaith hon wedi ei gwneud gan y GCl ac mae hynny’n annheg ac yn arddangos balchder sy’n ymylu ar fod yn achos o fwlio’r cyhoedd. Dyletswydd y GC yw i’r boblogaeth ac nid i gyfranddalwyr. Ar sail hyn rwy’n datgan fod yr ymgynghoriad wedi bod yn anfoesol ac yn anghyfreithiol. Mae’r Grid wedi dewis hefyd i beidio ystyried peryglon iechyd ceblau uwchben y ddaear. Er bod yna ddwy ochr i’r ddadl hon mae lle cryf i gredu fod EMF yn cael effaith ar fodau dynol. Mae hyn yn anghyfrifol dros ben ar eu rhan. Mae eu hamharodrwydd i gymryd unrhyw sylw o gynnwys Deddf Cenedlaethau’r Dyfodol yn dangos haerllugrwydd eithriadol ac amarch tuag at Lywodraeth Cymru. Mae yna ddeddfau cynllunio a chanllawiau sydd heb eu dilyn ac mae gofyn i chi fel Arolygaeth Gynllunio graffu ar hyn. Byddai gosod ail res yn cael effaith negyddol ar boblogaeth Ynys Môn am ddegawdau lawer. Nid yw’r gost gychwynnol, fyddai’n geiniogau ar filiau blynyddol defnyddwyr, yn cyfateb i’r gost i’r ardal hon dros y trigain mlynedd a mwy y bydd y peilonau'n brasgamu ar draws Ynys Môn. Mae’r achos hwn yn gofyn am ymchwiliad manwl i ddulliau’r GC o ymgynghori a chynnal ymgynghoriad, gan dalu sylw manwl i gymhelliant y GC ar draul y cyhoedd. "

Dafydd Thomas
"I live in Trearddur Bay and although the visual impact of the pylons will not be seen here .The pylons will have a very damaging effect on the North of the Island.its concerning that the pylons may affect the tourist industry which is so important to our economy. I am a supporter if the new Horizon nuclear station which itself will have a massive effect on the island. The National grid supplies electricity and gas to the whole of the Uk and I feel that Anglesey is having to take a disproportionate share of the upheaval disruption and scarring the our beautiful landscape for the benefit of the whole of the UK."

David Richard Morgan
"1. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact of the development in total (ie Wylfa Newydd and the North Wales Connection) been assessed or consulted on 2. There are numerous instances where NGET have not followed the advice in Government policy (EN-1 and EN-5) 3. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith. NGET had already published plans in 2009 three years before it commenced and the only statutory consultation in 2016 did not consider any other options Although NGET pretended to evaluate other options in 2012, the people of Pembrokeshire and the Wirral were not consulted 4. While hundreds of people responded to the consultation, over 13,000 have signed our petition against the proposals 5. Engagement since the consultation has felt patronising and some landowners report feeling intimidated 6. The tenth edition of Planning Policy Wales is quite clear that the preference of the Welsh Government is for all new connections to be underground. This will have no impact on the feasibility of the power station 7. The additional costs are estimated at some 11p/year on an average UK electricity bill of £554 – an increase of 0.02%, affordable even to vulnerable households suffering fuel poverty 8. Despite frequent requests, NGET have refused to consider modifications to the existing line to reduce visual disamenity, and comply with current routing guidance, yet have included modifications to facilitate the new line 9. Of the seven “Holford Rules”, NGET ignore all of them for the modifications to the existing line, and follow only one of them for the new line 10. NGET have not planned for the use of the third Menai crossing which could reduce costs by £200 million 11. While NGET are not bound by The Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, pylons are a poor legacy for future generations 12. Other technology exists (underground and subsea), which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Underground is acceptable to Horizon 13. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England. While hosting a power station the island should not have to bear the visual intrusion of pylons 14. All levels of democratic representation (Council, AM, MP) have spoken against the proposals 15. NGET are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second, on the (false) assumption that people are now used to the presence of these towers. It is well known that further reactors are likely at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy (EN-5) a second row will be used to justify even more lines 16. Had the AONB designation been in place earlier, it is unlikely that much of the existing line could have used pylons. As NGET propose significant modification to this line, current design guidance should be followed 17. Pylons will be detrimental to views of the countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the AONB, iconic views of Snowdonia National Park and the landscape setting of numerous historic features 18. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through a spoilt, blighted, stigmatised and “industrial”, landscape 19. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices 20. Pylons will be detrimental to house value due to loss of visual amenity, blight and stigma 21. The “social costs” of this proposal, estimated at £500 million, outweigh the additional cost of undergrounding 22. NGET ignore the social costs in their evaluation methodology, despite UK Government and EU guidance 23. Pylons will hinder Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers” 24. The whole of the Anglesey landscape is recognised by UNESCO as a Geo Park for the geological and geomorphological features (not just the coast as NGET imply) 25. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons (EMFs) on people and farm animals. There are different views, but learning from early research into tobacco in the 1950’s, the precautionary principle should be followed"

David Webb
"PLEASE WRITE TO ME AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I am against this and want to register as an Interested Party"

Debbie Romeo
"This should not be allowed. Anglesey is a huge tourist destination and the last thing people want to see is more pylons. It will also be dreadful for the local community"

Deborah Walls
"I would like to express my deepest concern over National Grid's intention to construct a second high voltage power line across our island. There is no doubt that a second line of pylons in addition to an already existing one will have a detrimental impact on Anglesey. Visitors who come to the island, from the large conurbations of the Northwest do so to enjoy its areas of outstanding natural beauty, not to be confronted by rows of monster pylons. There is no doubt, a second line of monster pylons will negatively impact views and deter those visitors who value the natural beauty of this island. Their contribution to the island's economy is substantial and should not be jeopardised. I am also very worried about the negative impact of the electromagnetic fields generated by two lines of high voltage power pylons on people and farm animals. In view of the inconclusive evidence currently available, any potential risks must be avoided at all cost. Another concern is to what extent a second line of pylons will affect property prices. This is an issue that has not be mentioned at all in National Grid's planning application. It is a serious omission which has very negative consequences for those living in the vicinity of pylons and consequently are unable to sell their homes. All in all National Grid's consultation exercise has been flawed in that the people's concerns have not been taken seriously and have not been accommodated in their planning. This is very undemocratic and unfair. I very much hope that you will pay due attention to all the concerns outlined above."

Defence Infrastructure Organisation (Ministry of Defence) (Defence Infrastructure Organisation (Ministry of Defence))
"The Ministry of Defence (MOD) has been notified by National Grid that the above development has been accepted by the Secretary of State for a Development Consent Order (DCO). The DCO is seeking permission to connect Wylfa Newydd nuclear power station to the extisting transmission network. The proposed transmission connection will begin at Wylfa Newydd nuclear power station on the Isle of Anglesey and will end at Pentir Substation in Gwynedd. The proposed route of the overhead powerlines and heights of the pylons has been reviewed by the MOD. The proposed route passes through the aerodrome height and birdstrike statutory safeguarding zones surrounding RAF Mona on the Isle of Anglesey. Our assessment has identified that the height of the pylons and the proposed route will cause no physical infringement of the protected airspace surrounding RAF Mona. However, RAF Mona is often used for night flying circuits by trainee pilots based at RAF Valley. Pylons 4AP044 to 4AP055 sit beneath RAF Mona’s Approach and Take Off Climb and the trainee pilots will fly at low altitudes within the vicinity of these pylons. Helicopters also frequently transit this area at low level. We therefore request, in the interests of air safety, that pylons 4AP044 to 4AP055 (12 in total) which sit beneath RAF Mona’s Approach and Take Off Climb are fitted with suitable aviation warning lighting. The 12 identified turbines should be fitted with a minimum intensity 25 candela omni directional flashing red light or equivalent infra-red light fitted at the highest practicable point of the structures. We also request that the height and positions of all the pylons is charted on aeronautical charts. I can confirm that the MOD has no safeguarding concerns with this proposed development subject to the inclusion of a suitably worded planning condition for aviation warning lighting to be installed to pylons 4AP044 – 4AP055 and we also request that, as a condition of any planning permission granted, the developer must notify UK DVOF & Powerlines at the Defence Geographic Centre with the following information prior to development commencing: a. Precise location of development. b. Date of commencement of construction. c. Date of completion of construction. d. The height above ground level of the tallest structure. e. The maximum extension height of any construction equipment. f. Details of aviation warning lighting fitted to the structure(s) You can e-mail this information to the Defence Geographic Centre to [email protected], or post it to: D-UKDVOF & Power Lines Geospatial Air Information Team Defence Geographic Centre DGIA Elmwood Avenue Feltham Middlesex TW13 7AH I trust this adequately explains our position on this matter, however should you have any questions regarding this matter please do not hesitate to contact me."

Dillian Jones
"I don't want the pylons because it will affect the tourism to Anglesey and health of the population of the people and there is a alternative to put the pylons underground. "

Dougie Nattan
" National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views, a bit like the research into tobacco in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are serious concerns, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to be safe than sorry and not use pylons. "Unfair and undemocratic – Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation." Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and more pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Other technology exists, like underground and subsea, which does not have the negative effects of pylons. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on."

Dr Thomas Conway
"Submission by Dr Thomas Conway - 19/11/2018:- I was the Senior Commissioning Engineer for Wylfa Nuclear Power Station - 1968-1972. I was also a member of th Commissioning Teams for Bradwell and Dungeness A Nuclear Power Stations. I am competent to address the project issues. At the start of the North Wales Connection Project at the stage where connection routes were being considered I wrote to the then Project Engineer Mr Martin Kinsey recommending my preferred route as the one running parallel to the existing 400 kV Supergrid line about 65m from it with the grid towers all aligned for maximum symmetry and minimum environmental impact. No other areas of Anglesey needed to be disturbed. This parallel route creates the minimum environmental impact and is aesthetically pleasing and acceptable. The route affects the minimum number of dwellings who have site of the grid line and costs the minimum capital investment required while solving the electricity transmission problem. The standard National Grid tower is a well established design with national application. the galvanised steel structure of the existing Supergrid Line has withstood the marine environment and served the electricity industry well. The mathematical formula for the transmission wire Catenary is an elegant solution to the minimum cost of the transmission line and this creates an elegant tracery on the skyline when a long distance run of towers becomes available to view. I find this very artistic and pleasing to the eye. The fact that the two transmission lines required to transmit the electrical energy generated by Wylfa Newydd run side by side over a distance of some 33 km on the island is not in itself an justified reason for objecting to the parallel grid lines. There are many areas of the UK where National Grid have found it necessary to run Supergrid lines in parallel over long distances in areas of natural beauty much more significant than Anglesey. e.g. Pembroke to Llanelli, Sizewell B across Suffolk, the UK Midlands, North Wales above Llanfairfechan. All these lines are now accepted. The estimated cost of the second grid line is £500M. The estimated cost of the cable tunnel under the Menai Straits is £300M. The tunnel is a method of minimising the environmental impact of a second grid line in a sensitive area. Observing the existing overhead grid line across the Menai Straits I conclude that it has minimal visual impact and what is there is pleasing to me because of the visual effect of the catenaries. I recommend that the tunnel project is replaced with a parallel overhead grid line. I find this practical, sensible, cheaper, and visually acceptable. It is important for everyone to realise that all the costs associated with the essential transmission of electricity from Wylfa Newydd to Pentir will be transferred to all electricity consumers over time. It is essential that this cost is minimised. The only justification I can see for putting the grid line under ground is that the Wayleave Payments to the Landowners would be much much larger. *This possibly explains the emotional public outcry of objection to the grid proposals. I support the National Grid Project proposals for the overhead grid line.* I wish to speak to this statement at the public enquiry.(540 words) TC/29/11/2018"

Dwr Cymru Welsh Water
"1. D?r Cymru Cyfyngedig (DCC) is a statutory undertaker responsible for providing over three million people with a continuous, high-quality supply of drinking water and for taking away, treating and disposing of wastewater. DCC owns, operates, maintains, improves and extends the system of public sewers, water mains and associated apparatus together with treatment works and pumping stations and has corresponding statutory duties to ensure effectual drainage and for making available supplies of water. DCC’s primary concern within the context of this application for Development Consent therefore is to ensure that statutory obligations are met and the environment is protected. 2. DCC has actively engaged with National Grid at pre-application stages in regard to its application for the North Wales Connection Project. This pre-application engagement has primarily related to the protection of existing assets that may be affected by the development proposals. 3. In this context, the specific concerns for DCC include, but are not limited to, the potential impact on: a. Llanfechell Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW) - The proximity of our WwTW to the proposed 400KV cable route and the potential risk/ compromise on our ability to alter, maintain or enhance the asset. b. DCC’s statutory rights of access to its apparatus c. DCC’s ability to fulfill its statutory obligations d. DCC’s land and associated rights 4. As part of ongoing dialogue with National Grid we continue to work towards a Statement of Common Ground that, once finalised, can be submitted to the Inspectorate as part of the examination. 5. DCC intends to make detailed representation on the draft DCO during the examination stage of this PA2008 process. "

E Evans
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

E Roberts
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Edmund Birchall
"Would spoil the landscape of a lovely Island, is it really necessary,also safety concerns from the effect from elf."

Edward Hammond
"1. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact of the development in total (ie Wylfa Newydd and the North Wales Connection) been assessed or consulted on 2. There are numerous instances where NGET have not followed the advice in Government policy (EN-1 and EN-5) 3. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith. NGET had already published plans in 2009 three years before it commenced and the only statutory consultation in 2016 did not consider any other options Although NGET pretended to evaluate other options in 2012, the people of Pembrokeshire and the Wirral were not consulted 4. While hundreds of people responded to the consultation, over 13,000 have signed our petition against the proposals 5. Engagement since the consultation has felt patronising and some landowners report feeling intimidated 6. The tenth edition of Planning Policy Wales is quite clear that the preference of the Welsh Government is for all new connections to be underground. This will have no impact on the feasibility of the power station 7. The additional costs are estimated at some 11p/year on an average UK electricity bill of £554 – an increase of 0.02%, affordable even to vulnerable households suffering fuel poverty 8. Despite frequent requests, NGET have refused to consider modifications to the existing line to reduce visual disamenity, and comply with current routing guidance, yet have included modifications to facilitate the new line 9. Of the seven “Holford Rules”, NGET ignore all of them for the modifications to the existing line, and follow only one of them for the new line 10. NGET have not planned for the use of the third Menai crossing which could reduce costs by £200 million 11. While NGET are not bound by The Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, pylons are a poor legacy for future generations 12. Other technology exists (underground and subsea), which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Underground is acceptable to Horizon 13. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England. While hosting a power station the island should not have to bear the visual intrusion of pylons 14. All levels of democratic representation (Council, AM, MP) have spoken against the proposals 15. NGET are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second, on the (false) assumption that people are now used to the presence of these towers. It is well known that further reactors are likely at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy (EN-5) a second row will be used to justify even more lines 16. Had the AONB designation been in place earlier, it is unlikely that much of the existing line could have used pylons. As NGET propose significant modification to this line, current design guidance should be followed 17. Pylons will be detrimental to views of the countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the AONB, iconic views of Snowdonia National Park and the landscape setting of numerous historic features 18. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through a spoilt, blighted, stigmatised and “industrial”, landscape 19. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices 20. Pylons will be detrimental to house value due to loss of visual amenity, blight and stigma 21. The “social costs” of this proposal, estimated at £500 million, outweigh the additional cost of undergrounding 22. NGET ignore the social costs in their evaluation methodology, despite UK Government and EU guidance 23. Pylons will hinder Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers” 24. The whole of the Anglesey landscape is recognised by UNESCO as a Geo Park for the geological and geomorphological features (not just the coast as NGET imply) 25. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons (EMFs) on people and farm animals. There are different views, but learning from early research into tobacco in the 1950’s, the precautionary principle should be followed"

Elaine Fell
"1 - Electric and electromagnetic fields surrounding cables on pylons carry a significant risk to human health. 2 - Pylons will be detrimental to the tourist industry on Angesey. 3 - More pylons will scar the countryside' 4 - There are other technologies,such as undergrounding,that would avoid the ugly scarring. 5 - IN WALES The National Grid should abide by THE WELLBEING OF FUTURE GENERATIONS ACT.IT IS PURE ARROGANCE IF THEY DO NOT. 6 - Have National Grid followed Westminster Government policy as described in EN-1 and EN-2? or have they ignored this also? "

ellien dabell
"please write to me as I needed to borrow an email address 1. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact of the development in total (ie Wylfa Newydd and the North Wales Connection) been assessed or consulted on 2. There are numerous instances where NGET have not followed the advice in Government policy (EN-1 and EN-5) 3. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith. NGET had already published plans in 2009 three years before it commenced and the only statutory consultation in 2016 did not consider any other options Although NGET pretended to evaluate other options in 2012, the people of Pembrokeshire and the Wirral were not consulted 4. While hundreds of people responded to the consultation, over 13,000 have signed our petition against the proposals 5. Engagement since the consultation has felt patronising and some landowners report feeling intimidated 6. The tenth edition of Planning Policy Wales is quite clear that the preference of the Welsh Government is for all new connections to be underground. This will have no impact on the feasibility of the power station 7. The additional costs are estimated at some 11p/year on an average UK electricity bill of £554 – an increase of 0.02%, affordable even to vulnerable households suffering fuel poverty 8. Despite frequent requests, NGET have refused to consider modifications to the existing line to reduce visual disamenity, and comply with current routing guidance, yet have included modifications to facilitate the new line 9. Of the seven “Holford Rules”, NGET ignore all of them for the modifications to the existing line, and follow only one of them for the new line 10. NGET have not planned for the use of the third Menai crossing which could reduce costs by £200 million 11. While NGET are not bound by The Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, pylons are a poor legacy for future generations 12. Other technology exists (underground and subsea), which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Underground is acceptable to Horizon 13. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England. While hosting a power station the island should not have to bear the visual intrusion of pylons 14. All levels of democratic representation (Council, AM, MP) have spoken against the proposals 15. NGET are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second, on the (false) assumption that people are now used to the presence of these towers. It is well known that further reactors are likely at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy (EN-5) a second row will be used to justify even more lines 16. Had the AONB designation been in place earlier, it is unlikely that much of the existing line could have used pylons. As NGET propose significant modification to this line, current design guidance should be followed 17. Pylons will be detrimental to views of the countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the AONB, iconic views of Snowdonia National Park and the landscape setting of numerous historic features 18. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through a spoilt, blighted, stigmatised and “industrial”, landscape 19. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices 20. Pylons will be detrimental to house value due to loss of visual amenity, blight and stigma 21. The “social costs” of this proposal, estimated at a minimum of £500 million, outweigh the additional cost of undergrounding 22. NGET ignore the social costs in their evaluation methodology, despite UK Government and EU guidance 23. Pylons will hinder Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers” 24. The whole of the Anglesey landscape is recognised by UNESCO as a Geo Park for the geological and geomorphological features (not just the coast as NGET imply) 25. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons (EMFs) on people and farm animals. There are different views, but learning from early research into tobacco in the 1950’s, the precautionary principle should be followed "

Enid Redvers Jones
"1- Bydd peilonau yn niweidiol i olygfeydd cefn gwlad. 2 - Bydd peilonau yn niweidiol i'r diwidiant twristieath. 3 - Mae pryderon gwirioneddol am effaith y trydan yn y gwfrennau ar yechyd oedolion a PHLANT . 4 - Mae penderfyniad y Grid Cenedlaethol am y peilonau yn annheg ac anemocrataidd - yn erbyn dymuniad poblogaeth YNYS MON. 5 - Mea penderfyniad y Grid Cenedlaethol am ddefnyddio peilonau yn hollol groes i DDEDDF LLESIANT CENEDLAETHAU'R DYFODOL.CYWILYDD A SARHAD. 6 - Mae technolegau eraill ar gael sef tanddaearu neu defnyddio'r drydydd bont. 7 - Roedd yr ymgynghoriad yn aneffeithiol ac annheg.Cyhoeddodd y Grid Cenedlaethol ei cynlluniau cyn cychwyn y broses. "

F Owen
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

G Owen
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Glenis Pritchard
"I am against the construction of a second row of pylons running alongside the existing pylons. I want the cables to be buried underground. The existing pylons already scar the beautiful natural landscape of Anglesey and to add a second row will industrialise our landscape, much of which has been designated an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Anglesey has a heavy reliance on the tourist industry for jobs and economic development. The main assets Anglesey has to sell to tourists are peace, tranquility and the beautiful natural environment - a second row of pylons will destroy this forever. If cables were buried then within a few years no-one would know they were there. National Grid's approach to the people of Anglesey has been derisory. The consultation was a tick box exercise. They had obviously decided that pylons were the only way forward and undertook a meaning less consultation on potential routes which was divisive within the community. We were not 'consulted' with, there was no interest on NG's part to engage with local people or give anything back to the community. We owe it to future generations to protect Ynys Mon. "

Glenys Roberts
"Rwy'n gwrthwynebu’n gryf bwriad y Grid Cenedlaethol i wneud cais i osod rhes arall o beilonau ar draws Ynys Môn am y rhesymau canlynol - 1. Byddai ychwanegu llinell arall yn andwyol iawn i olygfeydd o gefn gwlad ac o AHNA. 2. Byddai'r effaith ar y diwydiant twristiaeth yn enfawr. Nid yw peilonau a thwristiaeth yn cyd-fynd. Mae’r diwydiant hwn yn allweddol i ffyniant economaidd y sir hon. 3. Rwy'n poeni’n enfawr, gyda'r bwriad i gynyddu ymhellach gynhyrchu p?er trydan ar Ynys Môn, y bydd ail linell yn cael ei defnyddio i gyfiawnhau trydydd. 4. Byddai ail res o beilonau yn cael effaith ar allu amaethwyr i ffermio'n effeithiol am gyfnod maith gan gyfyngu ar y defnydd o dir. 5. Mae peilonau yn cael sicr o gael effaith negyddol ar bris eiddo. 6. Rwy'n bendant nad yw byw wrth ymyl neu o dan beilonau'n dda i iechyd. Nid yw'r GC wedi cymryd unrhyw sylw o'r ymchwil sy’n dangos hyn a thrwy hynny yn peryglu bywydau unigolion. 7. Bu'r ymgynghoriad yn annheg ac yn sicr yn annemocrataidd o’r cychwyn; ychydig o sylw a dalodd y GC i lais clir trigolion ac aelodau etholedig y sir mai o dan y ddaear neu o dan y môr y dylai’r ceblau fod. 8. Does dim asesiad o effaith cronnus wedi ei wneud gan y GC. Byddai codi ail res o beilonau'n cael effaith negyddol iawn ar economi’r Sir hon "

Glesni Pritchard
"I am against the construction of a second row of pylons running alongside the existing pylons. I want the cables to be buried underground. The existing pylons already scar the beautiful natural landscape of Anglesey and to add a second row will industrialise our landscape, much of which has been designated an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Anglesey has a heavy reliance on the tourist industry for jobs and economic development. The main assets Anglesey has to sell to tourists are peace, tranquility and the beautiful natural environment - a second row of pylons will destroy this forever. If cables were buried then within a few years no-one would know they were there. National Grid's approach to the people of Anglesey has been derisory. The consultation was a tick box exercise. They had obviously decided that pylons were the only way forward and undertook a meaning less consultation on potential routes which was divisive within the community. We were not 'consulted' with, there was no interest on NG's part to engage with local people or give anything back to the community. We owe it to future generations to protect Ynys Mon. "

Glyn Pritchard
"I am against the construction of a second row of pylons running alongside the existing pylons. I want the cables to be buried underground. The existing pylons already scar the beautiful natural landscape of Anglesey and to add a second row will industrialise our landscape, much of which has been designated an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Anglesey has a heavy reliance on the tourist industry for jobs and economic development. The main assets Anglesey has to sell to tourists are peace, tranquility and the beautiful natural environment - a second row of pylons will destroy this forever. If cables were buried then within a few years no-one would know they were there. National Grid's approach to the people of Anglesey has been derisory. The consultation was a tick box exercise. They had obviously decided that pylons were the only way forward and undertook a meaning less consultation on potential routes which was divisive within the community. We were not 'consulted' with, there was no interest on NG's part to engage with local people or give anything back to the community. "

Gwawr Griffiths
"I don't want a second row of pylons on Anglesey as they will be using our farm land to put some of the pylons on. They will affect the way we farm, taking away our grazing land permanently, thus reducing our herd. Which will decrease our income. Pylons will have a effect on our health and wellbeing. Farming is our life. The farm is our home. Our cattle are our income and all of this will be permanently blighted. Pylons are a thing of the past. I want underground ing or subsea for Anglesey"

Gwenda Lloyd Jones
"I am against a second row of pylons being built across the Isle of Anglesey. I would like the cables to be buried underground. The existing pylons already dominate the Anglesey landscape and to add a second row will industrialise the landscape, much of which has been designated an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The tourist industry is important to Anglesey. The main assets Anglesey has to sell to tourists are peace, tranquility and the beautiful natural environment - a second row of pylons will destroy this forever. If cables were buried then within a few years no-one would know they were there. National Grid have been arrogant and treated the local people with contempt. They have not been interested in engaging with local people. They had obviously decided that pylons were the only way forward and undertook a meaning less consultation on potential routes which was divisive within the community. We owe it to future generations to protect Ynys Mon. "

Hazel Walls
"I am writing to express my deepest concern in relation to National Grid's plan to construct a second line of high voltage power cables across Anglesey. The consultation exercise was deeply flawed in that it paid scant attention to the people's voice. It presented an already foregone conclusion, i.e. a second line of pylons, ignoring OUR preference for the undergrounding of cables and/or a subsea connection. The detrimental impact of a second line of monster pylons on the health and well being of people and farm animals is very worrying. There is no proof that the electromagnetic fields generated by a corridor of pylons are safe. I therefore object to National Grid's plan. Another concern is the negative impact of a second line of pylons to the tourism industry, as it will spoil views from within and of Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. This will put Anglesey's status as a popular tourist destination at risk resulting in loss of revenue and jobs. Finally, there is the devaluation of property which a second line of pylons will inevitably entail. This specific point has been completely omitted in the National Grid's planning application. In view of the fact that the second high voltage power line will serve to export electricity mostly to England, I fail to understand why this should be at the expense of our island and its people. This is grossly unfair and undemocratic and therefore it is imperative to adopt an alternative solution. I appeal to you pay due attention to the people's voice by not approving plans for a second line of pylons dissecting this beautiful island. "

Hazel Wright
"I am against a second row of pylons being built across the Isle of Anglesey. I would like the cables to be buried underground. My property overlooks Cors Erddreiniog and the existing row of pylons. The second row of pylons will be much closer to my house. The existing pylons already dominate the landscape and to add a second row will industrialise the natural landscape. The tourist industry is important to Anglesey. My family have holiday cottages and we are constantly told by guests that they visit Anglesey to escape from the busy towns and cities. They want peace, tranquility and to enjoy the magnificant views across open countryside - a second row of pylons will destroy this forever. If cables were buried then within a few years no-one would know they were there. National Grid have been arrogant and and made no attempt to communicate with us other than send threatening letters demanding access to our land. They have not been interested in engaging with local people and putting anything back into the community. They had obviously decided that pylons were the only way forward and undertook a meaning less consultation on potential routes which was divisive within the community. The Anglesey economy is fragile and heavily dependent on farming and tourism. Both sectors will be adversely affected by the pylons, we need help to build on what we have not destroy it. We owe it to future generations to protect Ynys Mon. "

Heck. Huws
"Please can you send me a paper reply as this is not my email address. We have only just found out about the proposed second run of pylons on Anglesey, which leads me believe that the consultation has not been carried out correctly it should have covered the whole Island, including all the people as they stand to be affected by this plan. The impact will be on the whole Island. Tourists being OUR main source of income will be blighted by a 100 more pylons that's been propose. Our open views will be permanently ruined as wil our Island. Walkers,ramblers, horse riders, sight seeing the list is endless will be affected. Roads will be blocked/closed for 8 years while they carry out this work and then they leave behind this chain of 100 pylons carrying electricity so people in land can have cheep electricity at our cost, our lives affected and our children's lives. For the Welsh future generations act I want a safer and cleaner way for the electricity to be carried of Anglesey like undergrounding or subsea"

Helen Jones
"I am against the construction of a second row of pylons running alongside the existing pylons. I want the cables to be buried underground. The existing pylons already scar the beautiful natural landscape of Anglesey and to add a second row will industrialise our landscape, much of which has been designated an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Anglesey has a heavy reliance on the tourist industry for jobs and economic development. The main assets Anglesey has to sell to tourists are peace, tranquility and the beautiful natural environment - a second row of pylons will destroy this forever. If cables were buried then within a few years no-one would know they were there. National Grid's approach to the people of Anglesey has been derisory. The consultation was a tick box exercise. They had obviously decided that pylons were the only way forward and undertook a meaning less consultation on potential routes which was divisive within the community. We were not 'consulted' with, there was no interest on NG's part to engage with local people or give anything back to the community. We owe it to future generations to protect Ynys Mon. "

Helen Mary Hughes
"Wales is unique in having a Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, and while NGET are not bound by this law, Isle of Anglesey County Council is, and having a second row of pylons may leave the authority open to legal challenge. Pylons are a poor legacy for future generations. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, Anglesey will bear the brunt against the wishes of it’s people and all levels of democratic representation. The consultation flawed as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options. After many objections against a second row of pylons overland NGET would not listen to the people of Anglesey Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry which the Island North with the cumulative effect impact not considered, assessed or consulted on. The North of Anglesey will become a spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, NGET chose to disregard this research, and conflicting views, about the health impacts on people and farm animals and future generations, or do the people of Anglesey views or concerns not count. Other technology widely exists, like underground and subsea, Anglesey’s wishes should be respected by undergrounding of cables "

Savills (c/o Horizon Nuclear Power) (Savills (c/o Horizon Nuclear Power)) on behalf of Horizon Nuclear Power - Mr Kieran Somers (Head of Planning) (Horizon Nuclear Power - Mr Kieran Somers (Head of Planning))
"NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED REPRESENTATION BY HORIZON NUCLEAR POWER WYLFA LIMITED TO THE “North Wales Connection Project”. Please accept this as Horizon Nuclear Power Wylfa Limited’s (Horizon) Relevant Representation on National Grid’s proposed North Wales Connection Project (the ‘Connection Project’). Horizon has submitted a Development Consent Order (DCO) to secure consent for the construction, operation and maintenance of an onshore generating station and other Associated Development, at Wylfa, Anglesey, Wales (Wylfa Newydd Nuclear Power Station). The Wylfa Newydd Nuclear Power Station application was “accepted” by the Planning Inspectorate for examination on 29th June 2018. The Preliminary Meeting was held on 23rd October 2018, with the examination phase commencing 24th October 2018. The examination is due to close on or before 23rd April 2019. The Wylfa Newydd Nuclear Power Station will be capable of generating up to 3.1GWe (3,100MWe), which will be exported to the national high voltage transmission network operated by National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (National Grid). National Grid and Horizon have entered into a Bilateral Connection Agreement and Construction Agreement. Under these agreements, National Grid is responsible for designing, gaining consent and building reinforcement works required to facilitate the connection of the Wylfa Newydd Nuclear Power Station. The proposed reinforcement works are essential to enable the export of sustainable, affordable, low carbon electricity from the proposed Wylfa Newydd Nuclear Power Station the need for which is identified as being urgent in National Planning Policy Statements. Horizon has previously engaged with the North Wales Connection Project through their consultation process and has had ongoing interaction with National Grid to ensure the proposals are delivered in a coordinated and timely manner that is acceptable in planning terms. This has included the development of a Statement of Common Ground with National Grid. As the construction of both projects will occur concurrently with works occurring in close proximity, it is essential that the delivery of the North Wales Project is planned, controlled and implemented in a manner that avoids disruption to the proposed Wylfa Newydd Nuclear Power Station development and the local communities. Horizon reserves the right to make further representations as part of the examination process, but in the meantime continue to engage constructively with National Grid to ensure both projects can be implemented in a co-ordinated manner. "

Ieuan Redvers Jones
"1 - Pam hagru ardal wych. 2 - Bydd peilonau yn niweidiol i olygfeydd cefn gelad. 3 - Bydd peilonau ychwanegol yn niweidiol i'r diwidiant twristiaeth. 4 - Mae pryderon gwirioneddol am effeithion y gwifrau ar iechyd pobl ac anifeiliaid. 5 - Mae'r penderfyniad am ddefnyddio peilonau yn anannheg ac anemocrataidd - yn groes i ddymuniad poblogaeth YNYS MON. 6 - Mae CYMRU'n unigryw am fod ganddi DDEDDF LLESIANT CENEDLAETHAU'R DYFODOL - mae'r Grid yn anwybyddu hyn yn gyfangwbwl.CYWILYDD A SARHAD I GYMRU A'I PHOBOL. 7 - Mae technolegau eraill ar gael, megis ee TANDDEUARU. 8 - Roedd yr ymgynghoriad yn aneffeithiol ac annheg gan fod y Grid Ceedlaethol wedi cyhoeddi eu cynlluniau cyn cychwyn y broses. 9 - A wnaeth y Grid Cenedlaethol ddilyn polisiau'r llywodraeth fel y disgrifir yn EN-! ac EN2.Meddyliwn na wnaetho nhw ddim. 10 - Nid yw'r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi dilyn yr arweiniad yn Neddf Cynllunio 2008,ac nid oes asesiad digonol nac ymgynghori wedi bod am effaith cronnus peilonau "

Isle of Anglesey County Council
"Mae Sylwadau Perthnasol Cyngor Sir Ynys Môn wedi eu hanfon mewn e-bost i [email protected] ar 29ain o Dachwedd 2018 Isle of Anglesey County Council's Relevant Representation has been sent by e-mail to [email protected] on 29th November 2018 "

Ivan Cervenak
"PLEASE WRITE TO ME AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I am against this and want to register as an Interested Party"

J Barley
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

J Barton
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

James Wyn Owen
"I strongly object to National Grid's plan to construct a second line of high voltage power pylons across our island for a number of reasons. First, I am very concerned that this will create a 'no go' corridor of electromagnetic fields the impact of which will be detrimental to people's and farm animals' health and well being. There is no convincing evidence to date that there is no such risk. Another reason why I am deeply worried is the negative impact a second line of pylons will have on the island economy, in particular the tourism industry. With its stunning coastline and beautiful views within, and of, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty the island has become a very popular destination for family holidays and visitors who value the tranquillity and the island's countryside and seascape. Another line of monster pylons will inevitably have a detrimental effect. An aspect which is deeply worrying, but which is not addressed in National Grid's planning documentation, is the negative impact of a second line of pylons on property values. This is a serious omission. Finally, I feel that in conducting a consultation exercise National Grid's has only paid lip service to the democratic principle, but has not taken people's and the County Councils' objections seriously. Their preferred option of undergrounding of cables or a subsea connection was not even considered as a viable option. In view of this the consultation exercise was deeply flawed. "

Janeen Meadows
"Anglesey is a beautiful island that relies very much on tourism. The beauty of Anglesey is exactly what attracts so many visitors, the beauty of the coast but also the inland countryside; open fields, rock formations and spectacular views. A second row of pylons across the island will affect exactly the reasons tourists come to our island, the views will be spoilt and the countryside will be devastated. My understanding is the cables could go underground and I think this needs to be investigated as a priority. I also understand there would be additional costs for underground cables but the per capita charge for this is minimal I am lead to believe. Please take the time to make sure the right thing is done for the island, for both the residents and vistors - we cannot and must not spoil this beautiful island and in years to come say 'why did they put that second row of pylons across Anglesey'"

Jeremy Taylor
"I own a caravan park in the path of the pylons. We already have the existing 400kv power lines oversailing the caravan park. The existing lines have caused many problems in the past. Being the only caravan park on the island with them has in the past put us at a disadvantage to others, another set of 400kv lines would not help our situation at all. My objections to National Grid’s project are because of the adverse effects it will have on the Caravan Park, health and safety, local economy, tourism in general and the property. "

John Griffith
"Fel aelod etholedig o Gyngor Sir Ynys Môn sy'n cynrychioli Ward Talybolion, sef ardal â effeithwyd yn sylweddol o'r datblygiad yma, hoffwn gofrestru fel partiâ diddordeb mewn perthynas â'r Archwiliad o gais Gorchymyn Caniatâd Datblygu Prosiect Cysylltiad Gogledd Cymru. Oherwydd y fath bwried, r'wyf yn gwrthwynebu cais y Grid Cenedlaethol i godi ail llinellau pwêr ar beilonau ar draws harddwch Ynys Môn. Teimlaf bydd hyn yn cael effaith andwyol sylweddol ar amwynderau gweledol, lles trigolion a chymunedau ac hefyd buddianau busnes, yn enwedig rhai twristiaeth sydd o bwysigrwydd hirdymor i economi yr ynys. Credaf yr unig ateb derbyniol yw i osod y llinell o'r Wylfa Newydd i'r tir mawr o dan y ddaear. Er bydd hyn yn arwain at angyfleuster ac anhwyldod tymor byr i bawb ar yr Ynys a'i ymwelwyr, mae'r budd hirdymor o dirlun yr Ynys heb llinell hyll o beilonau ar ei thraws yn pell orbwyso hyn."

John Jones
"I am against the construction of a second row of pylons running alongside the existing pylons. I want the cables to be buried underground. The existing pylons already scar the beautiful natural landscape of Anglesey and to add a second row will industrialise our landscape, much of which has been designated an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Anglesey has a heavy reliance on the tourist industry for jobs and economic development. The main assets Anglesey has to sell to tourists are peace, tranquility and the beautiful natural environment - a second row of pylons will destroy this forever. If cables were buried then within a few years no-one would know they were there. National Grid's approach to the people of Anglesey has been derisory. The consultation was a tick box exercise. They had obviously decided that pylons were the only way forward and undertook a meaning less consultation on potential routes which was divisive within the community. We were not 'consulted' with, there was no interest on NG's part to engage with local people or give anything back to the community. We owe it to future generations to protect Ynys Mon. "

John Shufflebottom
"I am against a second row of pylons being built across the Isle of Anglesey. I would like the cables to be buried underground. My property overlooks Cors Erddreiniog and the existing row of pylons. The second row of pylons will be much closer to my house. The existing pylons already dominate the landscape and to add a second row will industrialise the natural landscape. The tourist industry is important to Anglesey. We have holiday cottages and our guests visit Anglesey to escape from the towns and cities. They want peace, tranquility and to enjoy the magnificant views across open countryside - a second row of pylons will destroy this forever. If cables were buried then within a few years no-one would know they were there. National Grid have been arrogant and and made no attempt to communicate with us other than send threatening letters demanding access to our land. They have not been interested in engaging with local people and putting anything back into the community. They had obviously decided that pylons were the only way forward and undertook a meaning less consultation on potential routes which was divisive within the community. The Anglesey economy is fragile and heavily dependent on farming and tourism. Both sectors will be adversely affected by the pylons, we need help to build on what we have not destroy it. We owe it to future generations to protect Ynys Mon. "

K Jones
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Karen Nattan
"I object due to concerns regarding health risks - not enough evidence to reassure that no risk to health Devaluation of property in proximity to pylons Defacing natural landscape"

Laura Robinson
"it will affect the tourism in Anglesey and the health of the population, it will also have an effect on the environment, there is an alternative to have them underground."

Lee Owen
"I am against this and want to register as an Interested Party"

Linda Crompton
"I would like the council to fully consider the impact of more pylons on this beautiful island with its designation as an area of outstanding natural beauty. The island is very dependant upon tourism and this is increasing year on year and bringing much financial benefit to the area both with jobs and improved amenities for the locals. We have ourselves had two holiday properties in the area and noticed the increase in demand year on year. Our guests have been families who love the natural habitat and the stunning coastal paths. Pylons would destroy the island's most treasured possession, it's glorious coastal views and calming, tranquil landscape. Once destroyed it is gone for ever. It was not allowed in the Lake District. Please do not sell your beautiful island short. "

Linda Margaret Williams
"National Grid's plan to construct a second line of high voltage power cables across Anglesey is causing deep concern amongst the people who live here as well as the County Council. I accept that exporting electricity from Anglesey to England forms part of a significant national infrastructure project, but I fail to understand why this has to happen at the expense of the people of Anglesey. A second line of pylons in addition to an already existing line would create a 'no go' corridor, and there is deep concern that this would have a detrimental on the health of people and farm animals. To date there is conflicting evidence about the health impact of electromagnetic fields on humans and animals. Another concern is the negative impact a second row of pylons would have on tourism, one of the island's key economies. It goes without saying that a second line of monster pylons will spoil views and lead to further industrialisation of Anglesey. This in turn would put the island's status as a popular holiday destination in jeopardy, as Visitors come to enjoy the natural beauty of the island's seascape and countryside, not to be confronted by rows of monster pylons. Finally there is the concern that another row of pylons will affect house prices. Why has this point not been given any attention in the National grid's application documentation? In a similar vein, why did National Grid's consultation exercise not include alternative solutions, such as undergrounding of cables and/or a subsea connection, which would be the people's and the County Council's preferred option. In light of these omissions, I have come to the conclusion that the consultation exercise was ineffective and undemocratic. In view of the issues raised, I appeal to you that the unanimous voice and concerns raised by the people of Anglesey and the County Council will be given due attention in the approval process of National Grid's planning application. "

Llanbadrig Community Council
"Wylfa Newydd will be constructed within our Parish Boundary and the Connection will originate on our land. We are concerned that the proposal for pylons is a low cost option that does not take account the impact upon the landscape in one of the most attractive parts of the British Isles amongst other concerns. Llanbadrig Community Council reserves the right to raise further issues in (or by presenting) evidence and intends to take a full part in the examination process including, if required, attending and making oral representations at relevant hearings."

Louise Ralph
"PLEASE WRITE TO ME AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I am against this and want to register as an Interested Party"

M Hughes
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Madeline Marshall
"Much of the island's economy relies on tourism and a further row of pylons parallel to the first would severely blight the beauty of the countryside, industrialising a huge swathe accross the island. A further row, not parallel to the first would blend into the scenery more subtly. National Grid intend to put cables underground at Menai, stating that it is an AONB, most of the island is an AONB and tourists only pass through Menai when they arrive to explore the ENTIRE island. Industrialising the landscape would have a devastating affect on the island's economy. The health of residents (both physical and mental) living close to the proposed new pylons, could be severely affected by the pylon's electro magnetic fields. Values of properties would plummet, making many houses along the intended route totally unsaleable. Surely the initial costs of concealing the cables underground, as repeatedly requested by the island's residents, would be more than recouped over the many decades that the power station will be in operation. "

Margaret Birchall
"To erect another chain of pylons across the island would spoil the whole beauty of the island, affecting the generation to come. Our children will never forgive us if we don't do something to prevent this atrocity!"

margaret hammond
"1. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact of the development in total (ie Wylfa Newydd and the North Wales Connection) been assessed or consulted on 2. There are numerous instances where NGET have not followed the advice in Government policy (EN-1 and EN-5) 3. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith. NGET had already published plans in 2009 three years before it commenced and the only statutory consultation in 2016 did not consider any other options Although NGET pretended to evaluate other options in 2012, the people of Pembrokeshire and the Wirral were not consulted 4. While hundreds of people responded to the consultation, over 13,000 have signed our petition against the proposals 5. Engagement since the consultation has felt patronising and some landowners report feeling intimidated 6. The tenth edition of Planning Policy Wales is quite clear that the preference of the Welsh Government is for all new connections to be underground. This will have no impact on the feasibility of the power station 7. The additional costs are estimated at some 11p/year on an average UK electricity bill of £554 – an increase of 0.02%, affordable even to vulnerable households suffering fuel poverty 8. Despite frequent requests, NGET have refused to consider modifications to the existing line to reduce visual disamenity, and comply with current routing guidance, yet have included modifications to facilitate the new line 9. Of the seven “Holford Rules”, NGET ignore all of them for the modifications to the existing line, and follow only one of them for the new line 10. NGET have not planned for the use of the third Menai crossing which could reduce costs by £200 million 11. While NGET are not bound by The Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, pylons are a poor legacy for future generations 12. Other technology exists (underground and subsea), which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Underground is acceptable to Horizon 13. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England. While hosting a power station the island should not have to bear the visual intrusion of pylons 14. All levels of democratic representation (Council, AM, MP) have spoken against the proposals 15. NGET are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second, on the (false) assumption that people are now used to the presence of these towers. It is well known that further reactors are likely at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy (EN-5) a second row will be used to justify even more lines 16. Had the AONB designation been in place earlier, it is unlikely that much of the existing line could have used pylons. As NGET propose significant modification to this line, current design guidance should be followed 17. Pylons will be detrimental to views of the countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the AONB, iconic views of Snowdonia National Park and the landscape setting of numerous historic features 18. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through a spoilt, blighted, stigmatised and “industrial”, landscape 19. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices 20. Pylons will be detrimental to house value due to loss of visual amenity, blight and stigma 21. The “social costs” of this proposal, estimated at £500 million, outweigh the additional cost of undergrounding 22. NGET ignore the social costs in their evaluation methodology, despite UK Government and EU guidance 23. Pylons will hinder Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers” 24. The whole of the Anglesey landscape is recognised by UNESCO as a Geo Park for the geological and geomorphological features (not just the coast as NGET imply) 25. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons (EMFs) on people and farm animals. There are different views, but learning from early research into tobacco in the 1950’s, the precautionary principle should be followed"

margaret kim neal
"1. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact of the development in total (ie Wylfa Newydd and the North Wales Connection) been assessed or consulted on 2. There are numerous instances where NGET have not followed the advice in Government policy (EN-1 and EN-5) 3. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith. NGET had already published plans in 2009 three years before it commenced and the only statutory consultation in 2016 did not consider any other options Although NGET pretended to evaluate other options in 2012, the people of Pembrokeshire and the Wirral were not consulted 4. While hundreds of people responded to the consultation, over 13,000 have signed our petition against the proposals 5. Engagement since the consultation has felt patronising and some landowners report feeling intimidated 6. The tenth edition of Planning Policy Wales is quite clear that the preference of the Welsh Government is for all new connections to be underground. This will have no impact on the feasibility of the power station 7. The additional costs are estimated at some 11p/year on an average UK electricity bill of £554 – an increase of 0.02%, affordable even to vulnerable households suffering fuel poverty 8. Despite frequent requests, NGET have refused to consider modifications to the existing line to reduce visual disamenity, and comply with current routing guidance, yet have included modifications to facilitate the new line 9. Of the seven “Holford Rules”, NGET ignore all of them for the modifications to the existing line, and follow only one of them for the new line 10. NGET have not planned for the use of the third Menai crossing which could reduce costs by £200 million 11. While NGET are not bound by The Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, pylons are a poor legacy for future generations 12. Other technology exists (underground and subsea), which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Underground is acceptable to Horizon 13. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England. While hosting a power station the island should not have to bear the visual intrusion of pylons 14. All levels of democratic representation (Council, AM, MP) have spoken against the proposals 15. NGET are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second, on the (false) assumption that people are now used to the presence of these towers. It is well known that further reactors are likely at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy (EN-5) a second row will be used to justify even more lines 16. Had the AONB designation been in place earlier, it is unlikely that much of the existing line could have used pylons. As NGET propose significant modification to this line, current design guidance should be followed 17. Pylons will be detrimental to views of the countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the AONB, iconic views of Snowdonia National Park and the landscape setting of numerous historic features 18. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through a spoilt, blighted, stigmatised and “industrial”, landscape 19. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices 20. Pylons will be detrimental to house value due to loss of visual amenity, blight and stigma 21. The “social costs” of this proposal, estimated at £500 million, outweigh the additional cost of undergrounding 22. NGET ignore the social costs in their evaluation methodology, despite UK Government and EU guidance 23. Pylons will hinder Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers” 24. The whole of the Anglesey landscape is recognised by UNESCO as a Geo Park for the geological and geomorphological features (not just the coast as NGET imply) 25. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons (EMFs) on people and farm animals. There are different views, but learning from early research into tobacco in the 1950’s, the precautionary principle should be followed"

Mark Hanson
"I object to a second line of pylons for the following reasons : - They would be an eyesore blighting a beautiful landscape. They would have a negative effect on tourism, an important commodity for the prosperity of Anglesey. They would have a negative effect on house prices which are already quite low compared to other areas. They would compromise the amount of usable land for farmers. The Welsh government has advocated that all new connections should be underground which is far preferable and at minimum cost to households. This is even more important to the people on Anglesey seeing as the electricity being produced here is to be transported to the rest of the UK, not used on the island."

Maureen Parry Williams
"PLEASE WRITE TO ME AS I HAVE HAD TO BORROW AN EMAIL TO REGISTER I object to these proposals due to: 1 - economic impact on house value and tourism 2 - impact on the environment and loss of visual amenity 3 - lack of proper consultation - the process is flawed, Chinese democracy! 4 - health impacts of EMFs"

Mavis Ellen Jones
"We, the residents of Anglesey, and the tourists have looked at one line of pylons for 40years. How can the National Grid justify forcing another line onto us? Our families and grandchildren live below these pylons and there is still uncertainty about the health issues, which is a serious concern for future generations. "

Menter Iaith Môn
"Mae Menter Iaith Môn yn gymwys i dystio na fydd effaith datblygiad y Grid Cenedlaethol ar yr iaith Gymraeg yn niwtral. Ymatebwn fel y prif gorff hyrwyddo defnydd y Gymraeg ym Môn. Ymrwymwn i gyflawni amcanion Cymraeg 2050 y Llywodraeth ac ystyriaethau Deddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau’r Dyfodol (2015). Hoffwn felly gofrestru fel parti â buddiant oherwydd ein harbenigedd ar effaith y datblygiad ar yr Iaith Gymraeg. Dylai’r Datblygwr gydnabod effaith cronnus y datblygiad a’r canrannau sy’n datgelu pa mor agos i’r newid andwyol (‘tipping point’) ieithyddol yr ydym ym Môn. 1. Mae uchafswm gweithlu posib y Grid o 447 yn ychwanegu at effaith cronnus hyd at 9,000 o weithwyr Horizon, fydd yn golygu fwy na 10% mwy o siaradwyr di-Gymraeg ar ynys ble mae ond 57% o siaradwyr Cymraeg. Mae angen adnoddau i gynnal iaith yn rhagweithiol mewn cymuned gyda llai na 70% o siaradwyr Cymraeg. 2. O ystyried y pryderon lleol am yr uchod, rhyfeddwn nad oes unrhyw gamau lliniaru. Dengys y Datblygwr anwybodaeth am effaith canran uchel o bobl ddi-gymraeg i gymuned heb y gefnogaeth ac adnoddau i’w integreiddio’n ieithyddol, hyd yn oed mewn achosion byrdymor. 3. Yn ogystal rhaid asesu’r effaith ar dwf siaradwyr Cymraeg, gan ystyried y buddsoddiad yn y Cymraeg 2050, Deddf Llesiant, polisïau addysg CSYM, gwaith cynllunio a hyrwyddo iaith asiantaethau megis Menter Iaith Môn/Mudiad Meithrin/yr Urdd ayb. 4. Yn eisiau hefyd yw’r data ar effaith y datblygiad ar siaradwyr Cymraeg yng nghyd-destun ymchwil defnydd a throsglwyddo iaith. 5. Heb le i fanylu yma, pryderwn am ansawdd y dystiolaeth ar gyfer C5 Iechyd, C7 Troseddu, C11 Incwm, C13 Ysgolion, C14 Gofal Iechyd, C15 Gwasanaethau Lleol, C16 Tensiynau/Gwrthdaro, C17 Diwylliant a Thraddodiadau, a C18 Grwpiau Ieuenctid a Gwirfoddol. Fel enghraifft cymerer Cwestiwn C13 – Mae’r dadansoddiad cwta 16 llinell i agwedd mor bwysig yn annigonol. Dengys y gosodiad o effaith niwtral nad yw’r datblygwr wedi ymateb i adborth blaenorol fod un plentyn di-Gymraeg yn unig mewn dosbarth yn medru chwalu ymdrechion yr ysgol i drochi disgyblion yn y Gymraeg a’u cefnogi i fod yn rhugl ddwyieithog erbyn 11 oed. O ganlyniad mae Unedau Iaith ar yr ynys i gefnogi plant 7-11 gyda lle i 32 plentyn y tymor. Eisoes mae cynllunio ar gyfer datblygiadau’r ynys yn arwain at mewnlifiant ac mae tua 45 o ddisgyblion ar y rhestr aros am lefydd. Nid oes capasiti i ddelio gyda hyd yn oed 1 plentyn arall tan dymor yr Haf 2019. O ganlyniad nifer bychan iawn o blant di-Gymraeg sydd eu hangen i newid iaith yr iard neu gyfeillgarwch. 6. Monitro – nid oes camau monitro, gan adael y gymuned i ddelio â’r holl risg ag effaith. O ran proses, noder nad ydi’r ddogfen gais wedi ei gyfieithu’n llawn, sy’n tanseilio hawliau ieithyddol siaradwyr Cymraeg i gael mynediad cyfartal at wybodaeth. Er i’r Grid mewn cyfarod gyda chi 17/9/12 (EN020015 ) gydnabod “that 70% of identified key stakeholders for this project are Welsh speakers” nid yw’r siaradwyr yna yn cael cyfle cyfartal i ymateb i’r ddogfen cais yma yn eu hiaith. "

Mr Hughes
"I am writing to you to object to National Grid's plan to construct a second line of high voltage power pylons across Anglesey, as I am deeply concerned that this would have a very negative impact on the island as a whole, not only those areas in the vicinity of the line. Anglesey is a very popular destination for family holidays and for visitors who come to enjoy the unspoilt, natural beauty of this islands and the magnificent views it offers. A corridor of monster pylons will no doubt have a detrimental impact. The negative impact on people's and farm animals' health and well being is another very serious concern. Finally, I would like to point out that National Grid's consultation exercise was deeply flawed and undemocratic in that it presented an already foregone conclusion, i.e. overhead cables, failing to take the people's and the County Council's preference of alternative solutions, such as a subsea connection or undergrounding of cables seriously. Neither did the planning documentation include reference to any negative impact a second row of pylons would have on property values. I very much hope that you will give my concerns due attention. "

mr j a williams
"National Grid are using the point that there is a set of pylons existing then this is good reason to run further rows of pylons, further rows will industrialize the landscape and ruin the Islands tourist proposition of a peace tranquil landscape. The tourist economy is vital to the island and provides a growing level of revenue and increasing visitor numbers as this successful local initiative continues to create jobs, National Grid's approach to installing pylons will see jobs and revenue decline as a result of the proposed pylon installation House prices too will fall on the island as the introduction of very large steel towers change the rural landscape to an industrial zone. The original set of pylons was installed almost 70 years ago when options for alternatives were not available , in 2018 there are many alternatives such as sub sea which are better suited for a connection to an island such as Anglesey National Grids approach to the local community and business sectors alike has been to ignore the continued message for alternative solutions to pylons and ignored or dismissed the impacts to both personal and business economies National Grid never brought forward any options other than pylons into the statutory consultation they had developed their solution and told the public what they were getting rather than taking feedback from the public and working the consultation process collaboratively with the community. There are real health concerns regards EMF's which need to be considered fully in light of the Welsh Legislation of the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act , pylons are a poor legacy to leave for the generations to come."

Mr John Griffiths
"My farm will be seriously and permanently blighted if a second row of pylons were to be passed. I have already lost cattle due to a power line coming down in my fields. I will loose acres of grazing land which means I will have to reduce my heard and this will reduce my income. Mine and my families life and my health will be compromised living and working under the lines and around the pylons. I want under grounding or subsea. The consultation has been flawed. We asked for a different way for the electricity too be taken of the Island and have been ignored. Anglesey,s main income is in farming and tourism, Pylons will ruin/blight both of these and many more of our assets."

Mrs B A Williams
"National Grid are using the point that there is a set of pylons existing then this is good reason to run further rows of pylons, further rows will industrialize the landscape and ruin the Islands tourist proposition of a peace tranquil landscape. The tourist economy is vital to the island and provides a growing level of revenue and increasing visitor numbers as this successful local initiative continues to create jobs, National Grid's approach to installing pylons will see jobs and revenue decline as a result of the proposed pylon installation House prices too will fall on the island as the introduction of very large steel towers change the rural landscape to an industrial zone. The original set of pylons was installed almost 70 years ago when options for alternatives were not available , in 2018 there are many alternatives such as sub sea which are better suited for a connection to an island such as Anglesey National Grids approach to the local community and business sectors alike has been to ignore the continued message for alternative solutions to pylons and ignored or dismissed the impacts to both personal and business economies National Grid never brought forward any options other than pylons into the statutory consultation they had developed their solution and told the public what they were getting rather than taking feedback from the public and working the consultation process collaboratively with the community. There are real health concerns regards EMF's which need to be considered fully in light of the Welsh Legislation of the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act , pylons are a poor legacy to leave for the generations to come."

Myrddin John Roberts
"1. Mae’r broses yn wallus o’r cychwyn gan nad oedd yr holiadur cyntaf yn cynnwys pob dewis posib fel dull o gario’r trydan o Wylfa. Nid oedd yr holiadur yn ddiduedd. 2. Nid yw Nat. Grid wedi gwrando dim ar y sylwadau mae poblogaeth Môn wedi ei wneud. 3. Dylai Nat Grid gynhyrchu adroddiad fedr argyhoeddi pobl Môn fod y ceblau trydan yn berffaith saff ac nad oes siawns I neb Datblygu cancr, yn enwedig cancr yr ymennydd. Dywedaf hyn oherwydd bod o leiaf chwech o ddynion wedi datblygu cancr yr ymennydd yn fy ardal I allan o boblogaeth o tua dwy fil. Mae pump ohonynt wedi marw. 4. Nid oes modd cuddio’r peilonau mawr yma. Byddant yn llygru’r Ynys ar ei thraws. 5. Mae elw blynyddol Nat Grid mor enfawr, ni fuasai’r gost o danddaearu’r ceblau yn ei brifo o gwbl. Mae’r gost i genedlaethau o drigolion Môn yn mynd i fod yn enfawr o ran iechyd, poendod meddwl, gwelededd a phrisiau eiddo yn gostwng."

Natural Resources Wales
"PROPOSED NORTH WALES CONNECTION PLANNING INSPECTORATE REFERENCE: EN020015 RELEVANT REPRESENTATION FROM NATURAL RESOURCES WALES (NRW) 1. Introduction 1.1. Our comments are made without prejudice to any further comments we may wish to make in relation to this application and examination, whether in relation to the Environmental Statement (ES), provisions of the draft Development Consent Order (‘DCO’) and its Requirements, Statements of Common Ground (SoCG) or other evidence and documents provided by National Grid (‘the Applicant’), the Examining Body or other interested parties. The following paragraphs comprise our relevant representation as a Statutory Party under the Planning Act 2008 and Infrastructure Planning (Interested Parties) Regulations 2015 and as an ‘interested party’ under s102(1) of the Planning Act 2008. 1.2. We shall continue to provide advice to the applicant through correspondence and meetings with the aim of reaching as many positions of agreement and common ground as possible prior to the examination of the proposals. Our relevant representation is based solely on the information provided within the application documents. Any changes in our position will be reflected in our full written representation and SoCG. 1.3. In addition to being an interested party under the Planning Act 2008, NRW exercises functions under distinct legislation including (but not limited to) the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations (EPR) 2016 (as amended), Water Resources Act 1991 and Marine and Coastal Access Act (MACAA) 2009. For the purpose of clarity, comments from NRW Marine Licensing are titled as such and are produced in Annex A; all other comments pertain to NRW’s advisory role. 1.4. NRW provide the comments below structured according to topic, referencing relevant sections of the Environmental Statement and on NRW’s general purpose in section 16. 2. Flood Risk 2.1. NRW’s principal concern with regard to flood risk is the management of groundwater to be pumped from tunnelling operations. The anticipated volumes have increased substantially with the addition of the drill and blast methodology to the ES. This matter is covered primarily in document 5.12.2.3 and partially in the CEMP (7.4). 2.2. With regard to document 5.12.2.3 NRW have concerns that the features to be created to attenuate ground water pumped from the tunnelling operations are not described in detail. These features will need to be designed to accommodate the maximum potential volume from either of the tunnelling methods proposed (in addition to surface water runoff etc.), not only to prevent the receiving watercourses being overloaded but also to ensure sufficient treatment space for saline/ turbid water (up to 900m3/day for dewatering the tunnel has now been quoted for drill and blast). NRW seek confirmation during the examination that there will be sufficient space within the DCO boundary to accommodate these features. Subsequent to this, the Flood Management plan to be produced as per (schedule 3) Requirement 7. (1) (j) of the draft DCO must also detail that the receiving watercourses will not be overloaded. 2.3. This matter is also partially regulated by the CEMP (doc 7.4, para 8.4.3, WE42) which acknowledges the need to agree a rate of discharge. NRW will discuss this matter with the applicant to attempt to reach an agreed position as part of a SoCG. Reference is also made here to ceasing any discharge upon receiving a flood alert from NRW. This situation will not occur since NRW do not operate a fluvial flood warning scheme for any areas downstream of the discharge points. The CEMP does go further to state “...Where settlement or filtering is not practicable or effective and hence discharge to watercourse is not possible, alternative disposal options will be used...” which NRW welcomes, but as above, we would request confirmation that there would be a practical alternative for the maximum expected volumes. 2.4. With regard to the other flood consequence assessments assessing matters not related to the above (presented in the ES documents 5.12, 5.12.2.1, 5.12.2.2 and 5.12.2.4), while we have some points of clarification to discuss with the applicant, NRW is satisfied with the assessments and conclusions drawn with regard to flood risk. 3. Ornithology 3.1. NRW is concerned that the potential impact on whooper swan has been underestimated in the ES (document 5.9, Ecology) resulting in inadequate mitigation being proposed. One of the key measures in determining the potential effect of collision for this species is the ‘Severity’ (Chapter 5.9 – paragraph 9.7.13) which is measured here against the UK wintering population of 11,000 individuals. Paragraph 9.7.15 goes on to conclude that the development is likely to have a “Minor Adverse effect (not significant)” which is an acceptable conclusion in this context. 3.2. Further on in the chapter when assessing Llyn Alaw SSSI (Paragraph 9.7.407) Reference to the collision effects during operation are again stated as “Minor Adverse effect (not significant)”. However, it is not clear how the ES has a reached this conclusion based on the wintering populations of the SSSI rather than the whole of the UK. There is no assessment made in the context of the Welsh wintering population in either section. NRW consider that assessments made in the context referenced above are likely to indicate a much higher ‘Severity’ and therefore a higher potential collision risk during operation. With a higher collision risk, high visibility markers are likely to be required to appropriately mitigate any such risk in the key areas of higher use in close proximity to Llyn Alaw. 4. European and Nationally Fully Protected Species 4.1. NRW has concerns regarding the temporary severance of Great Crested Newt habitats during construction and that this may adversely affect the Favourable Conservation Status of this species. We consider that this has not been adequately evaluated to date. NRW will attempt to reach an agreed position on an acceptable form of mitigation as part of a SoCG. 4.2. Providing the above concern can be addressed (and matters regarding Cetaceans in section 5. are resolved), NRW is satisfied with the survey effort, assessment, avoidance and mitigation measures identified for the project for European and Nationally Protected Species. NRW is satisfied that providing these measures are appropriately secured through the DCO (and where necessary through derogation licencing) the proposal is not likely to be detrimental to the maintenance of the Favourable Conservation Status of each local population of these species. 5. Marine Mammals 5.1. NRW advises that the baseline data for this topic in ES chapter 5.9 should draw from additional sources (Atlas of Marine Mammals of Wales and CCW Monitoring Report no.68) and be updated, as some species have not been identified as present. Notably a pod of common dolphins (approximately 50 individuals) was present in the Menai Straits over a number of days in 2018. Risso’s dolphin should also be assessed in more detail. 5.2. We would advise that for completeness additional protected sites (Pembrokeshire SAC and Bristol Channel approaches SAC) should be screened in the HRA document 5.23 and referenced in document 5.9. 5.3. Further detail with regards to some of the specifics of the mitigation measures (document 7.7) will need to be defined and appropriately secured to ensure the risks to marine mammals are minimised. Notwithstanding the above, NRW agrees in principle with the potential impact pathways, the likely magnitude of effects and the mitigation measures outlined in the ES with regard to Marine Mammals. 6. Habitat Regulations Assessment 6.1. NRW is concerned that the drainage situation along the boundary of and within Cors Erddreiniog has been misunderstood/ inadequately explained within the environmental statement. A detailed assessment of the hydrological situation on the ground will be required to inform the detailed drainage plan to be produced by the applicant in this location. NRW welcomes the commitment to produce a specific plan for this location and is satisfied that the guiding principles detailed in section 8 of the CEMP (doc 7.4) are sufficient to ensure a suitable plan can be produced. 6.2. Please refer to the Marine Mammals section (5.2) for NRW’s recommendation on the inclusion of two additional sites in the assessment for completeness. 6.3. With regards to other HRA matters (ES document 5.23 Habitat Regulations Assessment Report) NRW is satisfied with the assessment principles and the conclusions reached with regard to potential effects upon protected sites. 7. Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) 7.1. Llyn Alaw NRW has identified in the Ornithology section (3.) matters of concern with regard to this protected site. 7.2. Tre’r Gof NRW is satisfied that providing the measures defined within the CEMP are strictly adhered to, the proposals are unlikely to impact upon Tre’r Gof SSSI. NRW would note that it will be crucial to ensure phasing of the works appropriately with Wylfa Newydd works to ensure these measures are implemented in strict accordance with the CEMP. 7.3. NRW is satisfied with the remainder of the assessments and conclusions reached within the ES regarding the SSSI’s. 8. Fish 8.1. NRW has points to clarify with the developer regarding the specifics of mitigation measures to be used to avoid and minimise potential impacts on fish species which may be affected by the development. Particularly regarding the type and timings of use of the required deterrent in the Menai Straits which will need to offset direct impacts while minimising any disturbance effect. 8.2. NRW welcome the commitments made by the developer to utilise clear span bridges for watercourse crossings where there are known populations of fish. The watercourse specific surveys, which will inform some of the crossing methods, will have to appropriately characterise the habitats for all fish species which may use the watercourse for any stage of their lifecycle including foraging and migrating. The absence of historic records must not be used to infer that fish are not present in a watercourse and clear justification must be provided where culverting is proposed. 9. Water Framework Directive (WFD) 9.1. The document of primary relevance to WFD is 5.12.2.5, while many of the other chapters also have a bearing on the significance of potential effects on certain receptors. NRW is satisfied with the assessment methodology utilised. However, Until the applicant has appropriately addressed all topic specific issues which relate to the water environment, NRW cannot confirm the WFD assessment in its entirety is appropriate. 10. Invasive Non Native Species (INNS) 10.1. NRW welcomes many of the broad measures presented to date and the commitment to agreeing a specific method statement with regard to INNS. NRW has some matters to discuss with the applicant regarding specific control measures for some INNS species and we will attempt to reach an agreed position as part of a SoCG to ensure the specific method statement to be drawn up will be appropriate to avoid and mitigate any potential effects of INNS. 11. Waste and Materials 11.1. NRW is satisfied with the principles to be adhered to with regards to waste and materials which are to be produced and used onsite. NRW has some points of clarification with regards to document 7.11 of the ES and we will attempt to reach an agreed position as part of a SoCG. Some of the information within this chapter also requires updating to ensure accuracy. The applicant will need to ensure that suitable authorisations (permits, exemptions etc.) are in place for any waste management activity undertaken. These authorisations must be in place before the waste management activity commences. 12. Protected Landscapes 12.1. NRW is satisfied that the proposed connection would result in no significant effects on the Isle of Anglesey AONB and Snowdonia National Park, singularly, or cumulatively. We concur with the ES Chapter 7 Landscape Assessment and ES Chapter 8 Visual Assessment. We have no disagreement with the assessment. The DCO will need to enable the implementation and monitoring of the CEMP (document 7.4), and associated plans, to ensure the reinstatement of landscape within the setting of the AONB. 13. Contaminated Land 13.1. NRW is satisfied with the methodologies to be adhered to with regard to potential contamination along the route and will work with the developer and appointed contractor as the project progresses to ensure the risks from any contamination discovered are minimised. 14. Environmental Management 14.1. NRW is satisfied with the overarching methods detailed in the ES and will continue to work with the developer and any appointed contractors to reduce and minimise the risks from pollution and siltation of watercourses along the working corridor. The applicant will need the relevant permits for discharges and licences to abstract water unless the exemptions criteria are complied with. 15. Air Quality 15.1. NRW is satisfied with the assessment methodology and conclusions drawn in chapter 5.14 and associated appendices with regard to this subject, and that the potential effect on sensitive ecological receptors from the project are not likely to be significant. 16. NRW’s General Purpose 16.1. NRW is satisfied that this advice is consistent with its general purpose of pursuing the sustainable management of natural resources in relation to Wales and applying the principles of sustainable management of natural resources. NRW acknowledges that the principles of sustainable management include taking account of all relevant evidence and gathering evidence in respect of uncertainties, and taking account of the short, medium and long-term consequences of actions. NRW further acknowledges that it is an objective of sustainable management to maintain and enhance the resilience of ecosystems and the benefits they provide and, in so doing meet the needs of present generations of people without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs, and contribute to the achievement of the well-being goals in section 4 of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. ANNEX A 17. Marine Licensing Comments 17.1. NRW is of the opinion that works which are licensable under the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 are included in the application, particularly the formation and use of the tunnel under the Menai Straits. To date, NRW has not been approached by the applicant with a formal Marine Licence application. "

Neet Jones
"Dylid trosglwyddo'r trydan dan y ddaear neu 'r mor fydd yn effaith negyddol ar y tirwedd, a thwristiaeth ond yn bwysicoch fyth ar iechyd gan fod tystiolaeth fod peilonau yn neweidiol i iechyd bobol are anifeiliaid."

Addleshaw Goddard LLP on behalf of Network Rail Infrastructure Limited
"Network Rail Infrastructure Limited Application by National Grid Electricity Transmission PLC for an Order granting Development Consent for the North Wales Connection Project Section 56 Relevant Representation Network Rail Infrastructure Limited (Network Rail) owns, operates and maintains the railway infrastructure of Great Britain. Network Rail operates the railway infrastructure pursuant to a network licence granted under section 8 of the Railways Act 1993. Network Rail does not object in principle to the North Wales Connection Project (North Wales Connection) to which the Development Consent Order (Order) application relates. The Book of Reference (BoR) identifies 39 plots of land owned by Network Rail, or in which Network Rail has an interest, in respect of which rights are sought by the Applicant to enable overhead lines to be constructed between the proposed Wylfa nuclear power station and Pentir substation and associated works being plots B1-095, E3-044, E3-045, E3-048 - E3-061, E3-065, E3-069, E3-082, E3-085, E3-086, E3-091- E3-093, E3-103, E3-111, F1-010, F1-012, F1-013, F1-016 – F1-018, F1-022 – F1-025, E3-058 (Plots). The compulsory acquisition powers sought in relation to operational railway are described in the BoR as being "the compulsory acquisition of rights by the creation of new rights, the imposition of restrictions or the acquisition of exiting rights or benefits of existing restrictions" (Compulsory Powers). Network Rail notes that the Plots include land used for the operational Llanfaipwll to Bodorgan line. Network Rail objects to the inclusion of the Plots in the Order and to the acquisition of Compulsory Powers in respect of the Plots. Plots E3-048, E3-059 and E3-061 constitute land acquired by Network Rail for the purpose of its statutory undertaking and, accordingly, this representation is made under sections 56, 127 and 138 of the Planning Act 2008. Network Rail considers that there is no compelling case in the public interest for acquisition of the Compulsory Powers and Network Rail considers that the Secretary of State, in applying section 127 of the Planning Act 2008, cannot conclude that new rights and restrictions over the railway land can be created without serious detriment to Network Rail's undertaking; no other land is available to Network Rail which means that the detriment can be made good by them. Network Rail also objects to all other compulsory powers in the Order to the extent that they affect, and may be exercised in relation to, Network Rail's property and interests. In order for Network Rail to be in a position to withdraw its objection, Network Rail requires: (a) agreements to be entered into with Applicant that regulate: (i) the manner in which rights over the Plots, and any other railway property, are carried out including terms which protect Network Rail's statutory undertaking and agreement that compulsory acquisition powers will not be exercised in relation to such land; and (ii) the carrying out of works in the vicinity of the operational railway to safeguard Network Rail's statutory undertaking. (b) the inclusion of protective provisions in the Order for its benefit. Network Rail notes that there are no protective provisions for its benefit in the Order and Network Rail will provide the Applicant and the ExA with its required protective provisions when it submits its detailed Written Representation. To safeguard Network Rail's interest and the safety and integrity of the operational railway, Network Rail objects to the inclusion of the Compulsory Powers and any other compulsory powers affecting Network Rail in the Order. Network Rail requests that the ExA treat Network Rail as an Interested Party for the purposes of the Examination and reserves the right to raise further issues in evidence and intends to take a full part in the examination including, if required, attending and making oral representations at, relevant hearings. "

Nicola Howard Reese
"1 - HT cables on pylons carry a significant risk to human health' 2 - Pylons will be detrimental to views over beautiful countryside. 3 - Pylons will be detrimental to tourism. 4 - National Grid's decision to opt for pylons is unfair and undemocratic,based only on cost,and totally against the wishes of the local population.With pylons,it is only the people of Anglesey who will BEAR ALL THE COSTS. 5 - The" consultation process" consisted of The Grid telling the local people what they were going to do.They published their plans before their" consultation" commenced. 6 - Did Grid follow Government policy as described in EN-1 and EN-2? 7 - At no point has a genuine cumulative impact assessment been carried out or consulted on. 8 - WALES' WELLBEING OF FUTURE GENERATIONS ACT has been disregarded and ignored by National Grid in favour of their shareholders pockets."

North Anglesey Councils Partnership
"The North Anglesey Councils partnership represent six town and community councils in north east Anglesey (Amlwch, Llaneilian, Llanbadrig, Mechell, Rhosybol, Cylch y Garn). National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, and none are planned, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a 21st century solution. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be detrimental to house value, which NGET have not considered. More pylons will be detrimental to Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers”. The NACP reserves the right to raise further issues in, or by presenting evidence and intends to take a full part in the examination process including, if required, attending and making oral representations at relevant hearings."

North Wales Police
"I write to formally register North Wales Police (NWP) as an interested party in the North Wales Connection Development Consent Order (DCO) and provide below our Relevant Representation. NWP has responsibility for policing the whole of North Wales, which includes the Counties of Isle of Anglesey, Gwynedd, Conwy, Denbighshire, Flintshire and Wrexham. If the North Wales Connection Project is agreed NWP’s responsibilities will extend to the provision of policing for all associated works and impacts. The DCO has been reviewed and the proposals will place a significant impact on North Wales Police and the communities it serves. The DCO submission currently contains insufficient mitigation to properly address the potential impacts relating to services provided across the force, which includes Roads Policing, Local Policing, Protecting Vulnerable People and Forensic Services, amongst other key support and logistics areas. There are a number of factual inaccuracies within the documentation particularly in relation to the Traffic Assessment. Overall the proposals will need to ensure that NWP will be able to maintain a policing service that continues to be fully effective in covering all eventualities without detriment to the current policing service afforded to its communities. The North Wales Connection DCO has been submitted at the same time as the Wylfa Newydd Nuclear Power Station DCO (PINS Reference Number: EN010007). This other DCO is currently going through the Examination process, and it is likely that both projects will be under construction simultaneously. It is our view that neither DCO application has adequately assessed the likely cumulative impacts during construction of the other. It will be essential to effectively assess the collective significant potential impact of both projects, particular around the areas of Construction Traffic Management, Staff Travel and Worker Accommodation. These significant areas are yet to be accurately assessed but it is crucial that a full and robust assessment of both are properly undertaken in order to ensure that each project is robust, deliverable and free from legal challenge. As a direct result of the North Wales Connection DCO, the likely impacts are: Workforce and Transport - An increase in population and a significant increase in road traffic, particularly during construction. This will require an appropriate increase in police resources and infrastructure in order to maintain a safer North Wales for its communities, visitors and the construction work force. A robust assessment and monitoring process will be essential throughout the build to effectively assess the resource and funding implications. It is imperative that NWP are involved in assisting with the drafting, agreement and sign off of the relevant documentation referred to in the DCO. The application does not contain sufficient information at this time to effectively validate the traffic assessment and questions will be raised concerning the validity of the baseline data used. Protest - The experience from other nationally significant developments has shown that should protest/s occur and become protracted the resulting impact on the local police force can be extremely detrimental both in terms of resourcing and finance. To date the proposals have already seen protests and there is a considerable potential that the development may draw protestors and this will need to be correctly assessed and adequately mitigated for. Menai Crossing - National Grid are still conducting tests regarding the tunnelling works required for the proposed development and as such no final decision has been made regarding the preferred option. The crossing is critical to the delivery of the construction programme but NWP has been unable to determine the true potential impact due to the lack of information available at this time. This position will need to be confirmed by the applicants as soon as possible to allow NWP to assess the potential impacts and the associated mitigation potentially required as a result. Absent any certainty regarding the options to be utilised, NWP will be seeking appropriate security within the DCO and any associated planning obligation, in order to ensure that all potentially options are properly assessed, reviewed, monitored and correctly mitigated. Monitoring and Reporting - Agreement on the definition of the figures and terms included in the monitoring and reporting is critical to understanding the impact from the development and applying appropriate mitigation Intangible Impacts - NWP is undertaking an assessment of the potential impacts of the development but expect there will be future, at present intangible, impacts that will become clearer as the construction gets under way, particularly in combination with the Wylfa Newydd construction programme These will need to be factored in with an appropriate mechanism and funding put in place to cater for them. We reserve the right to add to the matters raised herein as the Examination proceeds. Further, detailed comments will be provided through the submission of Written Representations to the Examination. "

P Evans
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Pauline Williams
"It will be detrimental in so many ways - scenic beauty, tourism, house values and possibly health too. Better solutions exist - underground or subsea - and although these will be more expensive the extra cost is well worth it, especially considering that Anglesey is one of the most deprived areas in the UK and will be further disadvantaged if this goes ahead."

Phil Nelson
"• I believe that the cheapest option rather than the best for all parties has been chosen • Sub-sea to Liverpool was discounted as too expensive but I don't believe that the long term economic cost to Anglesey was fully considered or formed part of the costing exercise. • The crossing at the Menai Straits should only be considered if combined with the building of a new bridge to reduce costs to the tax payer "

Rhodri S Williams
"1 -There are significant health risks from electic and electromagnetic fields. 2 -Pylns will have a detrimental effect on tourism. 3 Pylons will have a detrimental effect on property prices. 4 - More pylons will have a detrimental effect on the beautiful ANGLESEY countryside. 5 - National Grid'S decision to opt for Pylons is UNFAIR and UMDEMOCRATIC.It is AGAINST the wishes of the people of ANGLESEY,all their elected representatives and THE WELSH ASSEMBLY'S VOTE AGAINST THE PYLONS. 6 - The decision for pylons is also against THE WELLBEING OF FUTURE GENERATIONS ACT - A DISGRACE AND AN INSULT TO WALES AND IT'S PEOPLE. 7 - The consultation was ineffecive and not carried out in good faith. 8 - National Grid have not followed the guidance in THE PLANNING ACT 2008,and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on. "

Rhun ap Iorwerth
"Diolch am y cyfle i mi, fel Aelod Cynulliad Ynys Môn, ddatgan fy ngwrthwynebiad i gynnig y Grid Cenedlaethol ar Gysylltiad Gogledd Cymru. Rwyf yn gwrthwynebu’r prosiect arfaethedig hwn ar lefel gwbl sylfaenol - buasai codi rhes arall o beilonau ar draws yr ynys yn cael effaith andwyol ar gymdeithas, lles ac economi Ynys Môn. Isod fe restraf y materion sydd o bryder i mi. • Nid wyf o’r farn fod y Grid Cenedlaethol a Horizon wedi dilyn canllawiau’r Ddeddf Gynllunio 2008 hyd yma - does dim asesiad gwirioneddol o’r effaith gronnus a gaiff y datblygiad (hy. Wylfa Newydd a Chyswllt Gogledd Cymru) yn ei gyfanrwydd wedi bod - ac mae gen i bryderon dwys nad yw’r ymgynghoriadau sydd wedi eu cynnal chwaith ddigon trylwyr. • Mae sawl enghraifft ble nad yw’r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi dilyn y canllawiau mewn polisi Llywodraeth y DU (EN-1 a EN-5) • Bu’r ymgynghoriad yn aneffeithiol – roedd cynlluniau wedi eu cyhoeddi yn 2009, tair mlynedd cyn y cyfnod ymgynghori gychwyn, a ni roddwyd ystyriaeth i unrhyw opsiynau eraill yn ymgynghoriad 2016. • Tra bod cannoedd wedi ymateb i’r ymgynghoriad, mae dros 13,000 wedi llofnodi deiseb y gr?p ymgyrchu ‘Ynys Môn yn dweud na i Beilonau’ ac yn wir, fe ystyriwyd fy ngwrthwynebiad i, a’r Aelod Seneddol, fel barn bersonol yn hytrach na barn cynrychiolwyr etholedig. Mae pob haen wleidyddol - gan gynnwys yr Awdurdod Lleol - yn gwrthwynebu’r cynllun hwn. • Pleidleisiodd Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru dros ffafrio tan-ddaearu ceblau yn Ionawr 2017, ac ers hynny mae degfed rhifyn Polisi Cynllunio Cymru yn nodi’n glir bod Llywodraeth Cymru yn ffafrio i bob cysylltiad newydd fod dan-ddaear. Ni fydd hyn yn cael unrhyw sgil-effaith ar ddichonolrwydd yr orsaf bwér. • Mae’r costau ychwanegol o dan-ddaearu o gwmpas 11p/flwyddyn ar fil trydan gyffredin o £554 – cynnydd o 0.02% yn unig. • Er bod sawl cynnig amgen wedi eu gwneud, yn cynnwys tan-ddaearu a gosod ceblau dan y mór, mae’r Grid Cenedlaethol wedi gwrthod unrhyw addasiadau i leihau’r effaith weledol ond yn cynnwys addasiadau i gynnwys y rhes newydd o beilonau. Yr enghraifft diweddaraf yw’r methiant i ystyried gosod ceblau i groesi’r Fenai ar 3ydd bont mewn partneriaeth á Llywodraeth Cymru (all leihau costau o £200miliwn). • Nid oes ystyriaeth ddigonol wedi bod i’r saith Rheol Holford – yn syml, ni ellir cuddio peilonau ar Ynys Môn oherwydd natur y dirwedd. • Mae peilonau’n etifeddiaeth gwael i genhedlaethau’r dyfodol – sy’n groes i’r Ddeddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau’r Dyfodol. • Mae technolegau amgen yn bodoli - yn cynnwys gosod ceblau dan ddaear a dan y môr - prosiectau na fyddai’n effeithio’n negyddol fel bydd rhes arall o beilonau. • Allforio trydan o Ynys Món a Chymru fydd y peilonau hyn. Tra’n cartrefu gorsaf bwér newydd yn barod, ni ellir ddisgwyl i Ynys Món ddioddef rhes newydd o beilonau’n ogystal. • Ni ddylid ddefnyddio’r rhes bresennol fel esgus dros osod ail res, a dadlau bod y cyhoedd yn derbyn y peilonau presennol. A fyddai ail res o beilonau yn cyfiawnhau trydydd, a pedwerydd rhes hefyd? • Pe bai statws AOHN wedi ei ddynodi i Ynys Môn ynghynt, mae’n annhebygol y gallasai llawer o’r rhes bresennol fod ar beilonau. • Mi fydd y peilonau’n niweidiol i olygfeydd Ynys Môn a’r Ardal o Harddwch Naturiol, golygfeydd eiconig Parc Cenedlaethol Eryri a sawl safle hanesyddol hefyd. Mi fyddai effaith andwyol ar y diwydiant dwristiaeth yn ogystal. Buasai’n effeithio ar amaethyddiaeth, drwy golli tir a lleihau gallu amaethwyr i ffermio rhannau eraill. Mae gan Ynys Môn gyfan statws Geo Parc - nid yw’r statws hwn yn berthnasol i’r arfordir yn unig fel yr awgrymir. • Mi fydd yn lleihau gwerth tai, yn cael effaith gymdeithasol o £500 miliwn ar amcangyfrif – mae hyn yn cael ei lwyr anwybyddu er canllawiau’r Undeb Ewropeaidd a Llywodraeth y DU. • Mae ymchwil gwyddonol wedi ei gynnal ar effaith peilonau ar Iechyd pobl a da byw. Er bod barn yn amrywio, dylid ddilyn egwyddorion rhagofal o ganlyniad. "

Richard Barry Hallsworth
"I am against this and want to register as an Interested Party"

Richard Dew
"As an Elected Member of the Isle of Anglesey County Council, representing the Ward of Llifon, I wish to register as an interested party in respect of the Examination of the North Wales Connection Project Development Consent Order application. I object to National Grid’s proposal for constructing a second overhead power lines across Anglesey as I feel it will potentially have significant adverse impacts on visual amenity, the well-being of residents and communities as well as to business interests, particularly tourism businesses which are of vital long term importance to the Island’s economy. I feel that the only acceptable solution to connecting the Wylfa Newydd development to the National Grid at Pentir is by an undergrounded cable. Whilst accepting that the construction of such a connection will, in itself, result in significant short-term inconvenience and disruption to residents of, and visitors to Anglesey, this is far outweighed by the longer term benefit of not having a second overhead power-line spanning the length of the Island."

Richard Edwards
"Environment, scenery, tourism, economy. The connection should be underground"

Richard Lee Hallsworth
"I am against this and want to register as an Interested Party"

Richard Owain Jones
"As an elected Member of the Isle of Anglesey County Council, representing the Ward o Twrcelyn. I wish to register as an interested party in respect of the Examination of the North Wales Connection Project Development Consent Order application. I object to National Grid's proposal for constructing a second overhead power lines across Anglesey as I feel it will potentially have significant adverse impacts on visual amenity, the well-being of residents and communities as well as to business interests, particularly tourism businesses which are a vital long term importance to the Islands economy. I feel that the only acceptable solution to connecting the wylfa Newydd Development to the National Grid at pentir is by an undergrounded cable. Whilst avcepting that the construction of such a connection will, in itself, result in significant short-term inconvenience and disruption to residents of, and visitors to Anglesey, this is far outweighed by the longer term benefits of not having a second overhead power-line spanning the length of the Island."

Ruth Morgan
"1. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact of the development in total (ie Wylfa Newydd and the North Wales Connection) been assessed or consulted on 2. There are numerous instances where NGET have not followed the advice in Government policy (EN-1 and EN-5) 3. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith. NGET had already published plans in 2009 three years before it commenced and the only statutory consultation in 2016 did not consider any other options Although NGET pretended to evaluate other options in 2012, the people of Pembrokeshire and the Wirral were not consulted 4. While hundreds of people responded to the consultation, over 13,000 have signed our petition against the proposals 5. Engagement since the consultation has felt patronising and some landowners report feeling intimidated 6. The tenth edition of Planning Policy Wales is quite clear that the preference of the Welsh Government is for all new connections to be underground. This will have no impact on the feasibility of the power station 7. The additional costs are estimated at some 11p/year on an average UK electricity bill of £554 – an increase of 0.02%, affordable even to vulnerable households suffering fuel poverty 8. Despite frequent requests, NGET have refused to consider modifications to the existing line to reduce visual disamenity, and comply with current routing guidance, yet have included modifications to facilitate the new line 9. Of the seven “Holford Rules”, NGET ignore all of them for the modifications to the existing line, and follow only one of them for the new line 10. NGET have not planned for the use of the third Menai crossing which could reduce costs by £200 million 11. While NGET are not bound by The Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, pylons are a poor legacy for future generations 12. Other technology exists (underground and subsea), which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Underground is acceptable to Horizon 13. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England. While hosting a power station the island should not have to bear the visual intrusion of pylons 14. All levels of democratic representation (Council, AM, MP) have spoken against the proposals 15. NGET are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second, on the (false) assumption that people are now used to the presence of these towers. It is well known that further reactors are likely at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy (EN-5) a second row will be used to justify even more lines 16. Had the AONB designation been in place earlier, it is unlikely that much of the existing line could have used pylons. As NGET propose significant modification to this line, current design guidance should be followed 17. Pylons will be detrimental to views of the countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the AONB, iconic views of Snowdonia National Park and the landscape setting of numerous historic features 18. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through a spoilt, blighted, stigmatised and “industrial”, landscape 19. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices 20. Pylons will be detrimental to house value due to loss of visual amenity, blight and stigma 21. The “social costs” of this proposal, estimated at £500 million, outweigh the additional cost of undergrounding 22. NGET ignore the social costs in their evaluation methodology, despite UK Government and EU guidance 23. Pylons will hinder Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers” 24. The whole of the Anglesey landscape is recognised by UNESCO as a Geo Park for the geological and geomorphological features (not just the coast as NGET imply) 25. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons (EMFs) on people and farm animals. There are different views, but learning from early research into tobacco in the 1950’s, the precautionary principle should be followed"

S Barley
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Sean Flaherty
"PLEASE WRITE TO ME AS I HAVE BORROWED AN EMAIL I am against this and want to register as an Interested Party"

Snowdonia National Park Authority
" Thank you for the invitation to respond to the consultation on the latest detailed designs of the route of the North Wales Grid Connection, and for copies of the application and supporting documents. It is noted that the majority of its length will run overground, close to the existing connection. The National Park Authority previously provided comments during November 2016, which was during an earlier consultation regarding the route of the connection, and concerns were expressed by the Park Authority on the National Grid’s preferred option of overgrounding the majority of the route. Whilst it is acknowledged that NG has made efforts to reduce the visual and landscape impacts on the Anglesey AONB; some concerns remain and are reiterated here regarding the potential impact on the broader landscape setting of Snowdonia National Park. The high mountains of Snowdonia are visible over long distances and provide a dramatic backdrop to views from Anglesey as are highlighted in many of the photomontages provided (e.g. page 8/9 of 5.29 part 2, page 12 of 5.29 part 3, page 8 of 5.29 part 5 and page 9 of 5.29 part 6 – there are potentially more but it is dependent on the direction that the picture was taken). Therefore the new overhead lines, in combination with the existing route, has the potential (as is evident in a number of the photomontages/viewpoint assessments) to harm the views of the mountains of Snowdonia and the hills of the Ll?n AONB from many parts of the island. The National Park Authority welcomes the proposals to underground the cables under the Menai Straits, but the National Park Authority would also welcome further consideration to be given to additional undergrounding of the connection, along the chosen route to avoid further impacting the setting of the National Park. "

Sonia Walls
"I am very concerned about National Grid's intention to build a second line of pylons across our beautiful island and would like to state my objections for the following reasons: A second row of pylons will be detrimental to the tourism due to its negative impact on views. Visitors who come here to find tranquillity and enjoy the natural beauty of this unique island do not wish to be confronted by ugly monster pylons. It would be tragic if Anglesey's status as a popular holiday destination was lost. A second row of high voltage power cables will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Furthermore, it will have a negative impact on property values, an aspect which has been completely ignored by National Grid. Finally, I am very worried about the negative health impact on people, particularly children, who live and play near such pylons. It would be grossly unfair to transport and export electricity to England at the expense of the people of Anglesey. Other solutions, such as undergrounding of cables and/or a subsea connection, which are the people's and the County Council's favoured options, must be seriously considered as viable alternatives. However, this is where National Grid's consultation exercise was seriously flawed and undemocratic. It completely ignored the people's voice. I hope you will give these concerns your full attention."

Stephen Roberts
"1 - HT cables carrying electricity carry a significant risk to human health. 2 - Pylons will be detrimental to tourism on Anglesey. 3 - Pylons will degrade the countryside. 4 - National Grid's consultation process was inadequate,ineffective and not carried out in good faith. 5 - By ignoring THE WELLBEING OF FUTURE GENERATIONS ACT National Grid have compromised the people of Anglesey, and possibly legally the Anglesey County Council who are bound by the act.This is contemptable and arrogant behaviour :beyond belief. 6 - House prices will be affected negatively by the presence of pylons in their vicinity."

Stuart Godwin
"I am against this 1 - think of the future, and don't repeat the mistakes of the past. This is a dreadful legacy for future generations 2 - the impact on local communities, as well as tourism, will be awful 3 - the cost of undergrounding will only be 11p/UK consumer - CHEAP!! "

Sue Godwin
"I am against these proposals 1 - dreadful legacy for future generations 2 - impacts on local community, tourism, house values etc 3 - no consideration of the impact of the COMBINED project - ie the power station AND connection"

Susan Shepherd
"The Island needs tourist to survive why would tourist want to visit an island with spoilt county side and country side that is devastated with multiple pylons. Not to mention the de-value of property for local people, this area is an area of out standing beauty why would extra pylons enhance the view and why would anyone want extra pylons on Anglesey that do not help the local community, but only serve to export power to the south east of England, leaving the Anglesey people to suffer all the costs."

T Barton
"I refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. I have engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. I support the residents of Star and request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual/environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • existing infrastructure and visual constraints. • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. "

Ted Gittins
"1 - There are significant health risks associated with electric and electromagnetic fields generated by HT electricity cables. 2 - Pylons will be detrimental to tourism. 3 - House and property prices near pylons will be significantly reduced. 4 - The consultation was not carried out in a fair and honest manner.Grid appears to have published their plans before consultation started. 5 - Grid have ignored WALES' WELLBEING OF FUTURE GENERATIONS ACT .THIS IS AN INSULT TO ANGLESEY AND WALES. 6 - Pylons will be detrimental to Anglesey's beautiful landscape. "

Tony Debell
"please write to me as I needed to borrow an email address 1. NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact of the development in total (ie Wylfa Newydd and the North Wales Connection) been assessed or consulted on 2. There are numerous instances where NGET have not followed the advice in Government policy (EN-1 and EN-5) 3. The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith. NGET had already published plans in 2009 three years before it commenced and the only statutory consultation in 2016 did not consider any other options Although NGET pretended to evaluate other options in 2012, the people of Pembrokeshire and the Wirral were not consulted 4. While hundreds of people responded to the consultation, over 13,000 have signed our petition against the proposals 5. Engagement since the consultation has felt patronising and some landowners report feeling intimidated 6. The tenth edition of Planning Policy Wales is quite clear that the preference of the Welsh Government is for all new connections to be underground. This will have no impact on the feasibility of the power station 7. The additional costs are estimated at some 11p/year on an average UK electricity bill of £554 – an increase of 0.02%, affordable even to vulnerable households suffering fuel poverty 8. Despite frequent requests, NGET have refused to consider modifications to the existing line to reduce visual disamenity, and comply with current routing guidance, yet have included modifications to facilitate the new line 9. Of the seven “Holford Rules”, NGET ignore all of them for the modifications to the existing line, and follow only one of them for the new line 10. NGET have not planned for the use of the third Menai crossing which could reduce costs by £200 million 11. While NGET are not bound by The Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, pylons are a poor legacy for future generations 12. Other technology exists (underground and subsea), which does not have the negative effects of pylons. Underground is acceptable to Horizon 13. Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England. While hosting a power station the island should not have to bear the visual intrusion of pylons 14. All levels of democratic representation (Council, AM, MP) have spoken against the proposals 15. NGET are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second, on the (false) assumption that people are now used to the presence of these towers. It is well known that further reactors are likely at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy (EN-5) a second row will be used to justify even more lines 16. Had the AONB designation been in place earlier, it is unlikely that much of the existing line could have used pylons. As NGET propose significant modification to this line, current design guidance should be followed 17. Pylons will be detrimental to views of the countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the AONB, iconic views of Snowdonia National Park and the landscape setting of numerous historic features 18. Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through a spoilt, blighted, stigmatised and “industrial”, landscape 19. Pylons will be detrimental to farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices 20. Pylons will be detrimental to house value due to loss of visual amenity, blight and stigma 21. The “social costs” of this proposal, estimated at a minimum of £500 million, outweigh the additional cost of undergrounding 22. NGET ignore the social costs in their evaluation methodology, despite UK Government and EU guidance 23. Pylons will hinder Ofgem achieving their principal objective “… to protect the interests of existing and future electricity … consumers” 24. The whole of the Anglesey landscape is recognised by UNESCO as a Geo Park for the geological and geomorphological features (not just the coast as NGET imply) 25. There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons (EMFs) on people and farm animals. There are different views, but learning from early research into tobacco in the 1950’s, the precautionary principle should be followed"

Tracy Ralph
"Please write to me as This email address is not mine. I have only recently become aware of the proposed second run of pylons on Anglesey. I believe the consultation has not been carried out correctly if it had, more people on Anglesey would be aware of the plans for the proposed route. A second row of pylons on Anglesey would have a negative impact on the Island affecting our tourism that would affect our incomes. Permanent loss of land will affect the farming community. We have a wealth of history on Anglesey, standing stones etc, people come from all over the world to visit. Pylons will ruin our beautiful landscape and their is no need for them when we can have undergrounding. Pylons have cause us endless problems with health affects, lines coming down killing animals even a helicopter crashing into one at Rhosgorch claiming lives. I do not want pylons for the Future Generations Act for Wales"

Trefor Pritchard
"I am against the construction of a second row of pylons running alongside the existing pylons. I want the cables to be buried underground. The existing pylons already scar the beautiful natural landscape of Anglesey and to add a second row will industrialise our landscape, much of which has been designated an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Anglesey has a heavy reliance on the tourist industry for jobs and economic development. The main assets Anglesey has to sell to tourists are peace, tranquility and the beautiful natural environment - a second row of pylons will destroy this forever. If cables were buried then within a few years no-one would know they were there. National Grid's approach to the people of Anglesey has been derisory. The consultation was a tick box exercise. They had obviously decided that pylons were the only way forward and undertook a meaning less consultation on potential routes which was divisive within the community. We were not 'consulted' with, there was no interest on NG's part to engage with local people or give anything back to the community. We owe it to future generations to protect Ynys Mon. "

Urdd Gobaith Cymru - Ynys Môn
"Ymatebwn fel un o brif Fudiadau Ieuenctid ym Môn ar gyfer hyrwyddo defnydd y Gymraeg yn gymdeithasol. Ymrwymwn i gyflawni amcanion Cymraeg 2050 y Llywodraeth. Hoffwn felly gofrestru fel parti â buddiant oherwydd ein harbenigedd ar effaith y datblygiad ar yr Iaith Gymraeg. Prif bwrpas Urdd Gobaith Cymru ydi hyrwyddo’r defnydd cymdeithasol o’r Gymraeg a sicrhau dyfodol a pharhad i’r Gymraeg fel iaith fyw tu allan i'r ystafell ddosbarth. Fel mudiad rydym yn gweithio gyda chymunedau ym mhob rhan o Gymru gyda Swyddog yn gweithio ym mhob Rhanbarth. Mae gan yr Urdd ym Môn 3100 o Aelodau sydd yn mynd o’r oedran bl derbyn i 25 oed. Yn ogystal â hyn mae gennym ni dros 150 o wirfoddolwyr sydd yn rhoi eu hamser am ddim yn wythnosol ar gyfer dyfodol y Gymraeg. Credwn ei fod yn hanfodol bod unrhyw berson sydd yn gwneud gwaith ar safle'r datblygiad newydd yn derbyn cwrs ymwybyddiaeth iaith fel rhan o'i anwytho, credwn y dylai hyn fod yn wir ar gyfer staff ac unrhyw gontractwyr / gweithwyr allanol. Credwn yn gryf y dylai cyfleoedd gwaith fod ar gael ar gyfer trigolion lleol ac wrth leol rydym yn ei olygu Môn a Gwynedd yn unol â 'proximity principle' wrth gychwyn ar stepan drws y safle gan roi cyfleoedd i’r bobl fwyaf lleol yn gyntaf gan fanteisio ar y cynllun prentisiaethau / cwrs hyfforddi sydd eisoes wedi bodoli gyda Choleg Menai. Credwn dylai unrhyw fewnfudwyr gael y cyfle i ddilyn cwrs yn Gymraeg fel rhan o'i swyddi. Dylai'r GRID fel cyflogwr cydwybodol fod yn cynnig yr hyfforddiant yma i'w staff ac yn eu hannog i'w wneud hynny. Credwn ddylai GRID newydd gefnogi'r Ysgolion lleol gan roi arian tuag at gynllun i agor a chefnogi canolfannau Iaith er mwyn roi'r gefnogaeth ar gyfer plant a phobl ifanc hwyrddyfodiad. I gloi'r peth pwysicaf i ni fel Mudiad ydi eich bod yn rhoi parch a chware teg i'r Gymraeg ac yn cefnogi Mudiadau fel yr Urdd sydd yn brwydro'n ddyddiol ar gyfer parhad a datblygiad ein hiaith ac ar gyfer cyrraedd nod Llywodraeth Cymru o sicrhau miliwn o siaradwyr Cymraeg a bod ein pobl ifanc yn cael y cyfle i aros ar yn eu cymunedau drwy ennill bywoliaeth yn lleol. Mae croeso i chi ddod i ymweld â ni ar gyfer trafod unrhwy un o'r materion uchod a byddwn yn ymfalchïo yn y cyfle i wneud hynny. Iaith. O ran proses, noder nad ydi’r ddogfen gais wedi ei gyfieithu’n llawn, sy’n tanseilio hawliau ieithyddol siaradwyr Cymraeg i gael mynediad cyfartal at wybodaeth. Er i’r Grid mewn cyfarod gyda chi 17/9/12 (EN020015 ) gydnabod “that 70% of identified key stakeholders for this project are Welsh speakers” nid yw’r siaradwyr yna yn cael cyfle cyfartal i ymateb i’r ddogfen cais yma yn eu hiaith. "

Welsh Government
"Please see attached for written representation."

Wendy Williams
"I write to object to the proposed 2nd row of pylons across Anglesey as unsightly addition to the island’s landscape, and deem an underground connection to be more beneficial. If it’s possible across the Glaslyn estuary from Penmorfa to Minffordd in Gwynedd, then it’s possible across Anglesey and the Menai Straits. A 2nd row would have a huge impact on tourism, which the island’s economy relies on heavily, impact for farming, impact on house valuations, a major impact on designated landscapes. These reasons must not be side-stepped for the convenience of a profit making company, and neglect the thoughts and views of the islanders. I urge the planning inspectorate to consider all objections carefully. "

Why Box In Star?
"We refer to the above application and specifically to Section 5 (Ceint to the Afon Braint, previously referred to as Section E–Route Option 5C): Adopting any route other than the line of existing pylons would result in new transmission towers and cables running through currently unspoilt parts of Anglesey. We have actively engaged in National Grid’s pre-application consultations and, like others, have requested that their route be placed underground or revert to the subsea option. Due to serious misgivings about the detail of the current proposals, we request that the Inspectorate’s attention is given to the following issues:- 1. Their current proposal to follow all Route Options, including Section 5 (previously Section E-Route Option 5C), above ground. Its impact upon the landscape, local community and the important gateway to the Island overall will be grievous, such as: • Section 5 Route Option would completely "box in" the community of Star and surrounding properties with pylons and electric cables • unacceptable visual and environmental impact for generations to come • concentration or "wirescape", as this means routing new transmission towers and cables closer to residential properties and tourist destinations • direct contravention with Holford Rules and NPS EN5 • towers/cables dominating houses, farms and other small scale settlements • provisions made for others but no consideration given to Star • views of Snowdonia completely blighted by the site of transmission towers and cables visible from every direction, North, South, East & West • towers prominent/visible from many sensitive locations (Anglesey & mainland) • tourism and their first impressions of Anglesey • area is famous for its views and how they would be adversely affected by the proposed infrastructure, as noted by Cadw and Natural Resources Wales • affect on health, noise, EMFs, clearance, AONB 2. There are far better alternatives that previous consultations have found are preferred to mitigate (1) above. The alternatives have not been properly considered by National Grid Plc. The most preferable being to follow the existing line, Route Option 5E, and the cables being installed underground, taking advantage of the new third bridge across the Menai Strait, recently confirmed by First Minister Carwyn Jones, such as: • unnecessary cost of Central SEC, tunneling under AONBs, Menai Strait, tipping of spoil. • flood risks, climate change, existing infrastructure, ancient woodlands, ecological, landscape and visual constraints. • tourist route, greenbelt land, historical monuments • viable route/SEC alternatives already identified by National Grid • shortest/direct route, unconstrained, wildlife, natural screening • listed buildings, existing infrastructure • new bridge capabilities, cost saving, end consumer, Ofgem • Section 5 never part of original consultation, deviation from existing line, residents, stakeholders, consultation process/flawed, preferred route, feedback ignored The Purple route option for the new bridge, confirmed by the First Minister Carwyn Jones, sits directly between National Grid’s Anglesey North & Gwynedd North SECs! This is an opportunity to create a joint venture with the Welsh Assembly Government by saving money for the end consumer whilst reducing a severe visual/environmental impact a tunnel under the Menai Strait will have, as all three bridge options put forward are capable of carrying Wylfa’s cables. With construction due to start in 2021, some 3-4 years before Wylfa Newydd starts generating in 2025, why create an additional visual/environmental impact by having to find somewhere to tip thousands of tones of spoil from a tunnel that is no longer necessary? This would effectively avoid making a similar mistake in the future as a third bridge connects Anglesey to the mainland mitigating another visual impact, as a result of National Grid's short sightedness, especially within Section 5. As individuals, residents and homeowners, we are merely custodians for future generations and feel that it is important to support the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act in Wales. Mae peilonau’n gymynrodd gwael i’r dyfodol (pylon’s are a poor legacy for future generations). "

William Raymon Evans
"Rwy'n cofrestru fel un sy'n gwrthwynebu codi ail res o beilonau ar draws Ynys Môn, y bwriad presennol gan y Grid Cenedlaethol. Dyma'r rhesymau dros fy ngwrthwynebiad: Bydd yn difetha'r golygfeydd o gefn gwlad. Mae sawl AHNA o fewn cyrraedd ac fe fydd peilonau newydd yn amharu'n sylweddol ar y gwelediad ohonynt. Byddai hyn yn anharddu rhannau helaeth o Ynys Môn. Byddai codi ail res o beilonau yn ddinistriol iawn i'r diwydiant twristiaeth. Ni fydd ymwelwyr yn dymuno treulio eu gwyliau o fewn cyrraedd peilonau ac yn sicr, ni fyddant yn dymuno dychwelyd. Mae'r diwydiant hwn yn un o bwys mawr i economi'r Ynys hon ac yn dwyn incwm sylweddol iawn sydd yn cynnal nifer fawr o deuluoedd a busnesau. Rwyf o'r farn y bydd amaethyddiaeth yn dioddef hefyd dros gyfnod bodolaeth y peilonau gan amharu ar allu ffermwyr i wneud defnydd llawn o'u tir. Fe fydd yn cael effaith ar werth gwerth eiddo yn cynnwys tir. Er nad yw'r Grid yn fodlon cydnabod yn agored, mae yna dystiolaeth fod EMF yn cael effaith ar iechyd. Tan ddaearu neu fynd o dan y d?r yw'r ateb gan y byddai'n dileu'r broblem hon. Mae dwy ochr i'r ddadl hon ond mae digon o dystiolaeth i ddweud bod angen bod yn ofalus. Mae yna risg ac yn yr unfed ganrif ar hugain mae'n ddyletswydd arnom gymryd sylw o'r risg honno. Does dim esgus dros chwarae gydag iechyd a bywydau trigolion yr Ynys hon. Rwy'n teimlo'n rhwystredig iawn nad yw'r Grid wedi gwrando arnom yn ystod y cyfnod ymgynghori maith. Mae pawb wedi datgan eu barn yn glir mai o dan y d?r neu'r ddaear y dylai'r ceblau redeg ond nid yw'r Grid wedi cymryd unrhyw sylw o'r elfen hanfodol yma o'r ymgynghoriad. Mae';r aelod cynulliad, yr aelod seneddol, y Cyngor Sir, Un Llais Cymru ac unigolion dirifedi wedi dweud yn glir nad peilonau yw eu dymuniad ond maen nhw wedi eu hanwybyddu. Mae hyn yn annemocrataidd. Mae'r newidiadau a waned gan y Grid Cenedlaetholo dros y blynyddoedd diwethaf yn rhai bychan. Maen nhw wedi dewis canolbwyntio ar un opsiwn yn unig gan anwybyddu barn y cyhoedd yn gyfan gwbl mai opsiynau eraill yw eu dewis hwy. Mae materion ariannol wedi llywio'r drafodaeth. Nid yw'r Grid wedi cymryd unrhyw sylw o Ddeddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau'r Dyfodol, deddf unigryw i Gymru sy'n mynnu fod unrhyw gorff yn ystyried effaith datblygiad ar ein plant a'n disgynyddion. Rwy’n apelio arnoch i ystyried y sylwadau uchod a gwrthod cais y grid Cenedlaethol fel y mae ar hyn o bryd. "

Yvonne Hallsworth
"I am against this and want to register as an Interested Party"

Zoe Fell
"1 - Pylons will be detrimental to tourism on Anglesey. 2 - Pylons will be detrimental to views of beautiful countryside. 3 - Electric and Electromagnetic fields pose a significant risk to human health,in particular to children regarding LEUKAEMIA. 4 - National Grids decision to opt for pylons is unfair,undemocratic and based only on cost to themselves and their consumers.Anglesey residents will bear the cost of this decision for many decades. 5 - Other technologies exist and these cables should be undergrounded. 6 - National Grid have not followed the guidance in the Planning Act 2008,as at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed o consulted on."