Underground

From the beginning AMP and the communities along the line have suggested that a
more appropiate option would be for the line to burried either along the N4 road or the
Boyle to Sligo railway line where there was utility corridor. This idea is supported by EU Policy,
however even though repeatedly asked to supply realistic costing comparisions between the
pylon and underground options.

During the planning application process, Sligo Co Council asked ESB in writing for details,
of the costing comparison in more detail than supplied in the EIS.

The planning permission was granted even thought ESB completely failed to supply the information requested by Co Council.

For the Common Good and to enable the planners to make balanced the Co. Council should have insisted in getting a realistic comparisions, but acting against their own proported adjenda the Sligo Co Council granted planning permission without the information they demanded to make a judgement!

This is not a satisfactory example of due dilligence from Sligo Co Council.
AMP estimate that in the ESB's handling of the project to date ESB have already paid
more than twice what it would have cost them to bury the line along the N4.

In light of the fact that not only have the ESB failed to give the information requested and much
of the other information that the planning permission was granted on was incorrect, misleading
there is an urgent need for the true financial implications to be brought to light.

ESB have been bringing huge pressure to bear on land owners to sign way leaves and agree
to pylon bases being put on land. They have also been paying landowners large sums of money
where planning applications were in for houses along the length of the line. An this is appropiate where the applications for planning were submitted before the ESB's project application was submitted in 2000.

However it appears the ESB have been 'wheeling and dealing' with landowners and have been making payments to landowners for loss of development potencial, even though in many cases it appears planning applications had not been subitted as the law required. It is has been suggested that the ESB also lobbied the Co Council planning department to facilitate such an approach, which is not only 'grey' but divisive to the community.

In light of recent EU concerns regarding monopoly generation and transmission company's conduct, AMP feel the common good demands that this aspect of the project be examined.

The current ongoing EU Petition is dealing only with the Environmental aspects of the line, however due to ever increasing amount of concerns concerning the 'due process', AMP and many business's and community are due a fair evaluation of the project.

The is a genuine reasion in light of this for the EU to broaden the investigation into
the granting of the planning permission for this project.

When AMP made a presentation to members of the Western Development Board, in Ballinadareen, the board members expressed surprise that the AMP consultant's figures
were at odds with the ESB's in fundament verifiable techincal aspects. At this time the Chairman of the Western Development Board was also the Chairman of the ESB!

The time has come for Due Process and Common Good and facts to be brought to light,
the people of Roscommon and Sligo deserve no less, a hearing of the facts is essencial
inorder to implement a policy that represents an appropiate and wise solution to the regions and indeed the nations energy requirements in both generation and transmission.

AMP formed with exactly this mandate, and continue and will continue untill Due Process
and the Common Good are seen to transparently and examined in a ancountable fashion.

Attach:undergrounding.pdf

Click heading above to goto doc,

UNDERGROUNDING OF ELECTRICITY LINES IN EUROPE
Table of contents
1. Introduction
2. Analysis by Country - Current situation of underground cables and relative policies
3. Benefits from a policy of undergrounding of electricity networks in Europe
4. Possible contribution of underground cables in the realisation of the priority projects of the
EC Communication on “European Energy Infrastructure”
5. Cost benefit analysis of interconnections
6. Conclusions
Appendix I: Available Technologies for underground cables
Appendix II: The main extra high voltage underground projects world-wide