Jeroen.mentens@elia.

be


The impact of public consultation and participation on the authorisation
of a new 380kV line in Belgium

V. DU FOUR, J. MENTENS*
Elia
Belgium
SUMMARY

The Stevin project has the objective to expand the 380 kV grid in Belgium. The length of this new 380
kV link is 47 km, which is one of the largest new overhead power lines for the last two decades.
Although the connection was optimised to minimise the environmental impact it was hard to gain
acceptance for the project. This is caused by the dense population and a dispersed urbanisation pattern.
Locally the collision of habitation, protected landscape and a bird protection area play a major role.
The authorisation process of this overhead line project was launched in the beginning of 2009 and will
last at least up to mid 2014. There is mandatory participation (consultation) integrated in the
procedures. Four main stages can be identified, each with a specific goal and scope concerning
participation: SEA, land-use planning, EIA, permitting procedures. Additional actions of
information and consensus building were taken. These were different for each type of stakeholder.
The need for the project is not contested because of the drivers which are easy to comprehend. The
most comprehensible and attractive driver is the off shore production by windmills.
The major point of contestation during the consultation for the SEA was the routing of the overhead
line. The uncertainties regarding possible long-term health effects of EMF cause a high level of fear
and the uncertainty on the quantitative impact of overhead lines on birds makes Special Protection
Areas in Flanders a no-go zone for overhead lines. As a result of the public participation a large
number of additional alternatives had to be evaluated in the SEA, including alternatives with a much
higher cost and technical risk.
The preliminary approved land-use plan, as decided by the government, did not selected the optimal
route. On the contrary, the selected route crosses the SPA by means of an underground cable
connection of about 10 km. This doubles the total cost of the project and reduces the reliability of the
connection. Nearly 2000 remarks were received during the public participation period. The
consequences of these remarks are still unclear at the moment.
Despite large efforts in providing extra and extensive information, the consultation and consensus
building has only clearly benefitted at the regional administrative level and the highest political level
regarding the necessity of the project. At the local level it is unclear whether the efforts have paid off.

KEYWORDS

SEA - Spatial Planning Land-use planning Public Consultation Participation NIMBY
Natura 2000


21, rue dArtois, F-75008 PARIS C3-106 CIGRE 2012
http : //www.cigre.org

1

1. The new 380 kV line
1.1. The Stevin-project
With the Stevin project, the TSO has the objective to expand its 380 kV grid from the inland (near
Ghent) to the coast (Zeebrugge) by constructing a double 380 kV overhead line with a capacity of 2 x
3000 MVA. Up-to-now the 150 kV grid is the highest voltage level in the coastal region.

There are multiple motives for this connection. First of all the need for more capacity in order to
connect the off shore production, about 2200 MW of wind farms, and the growing on shore
decentralised production. Secondly the planned DC interconnection with the United Kingdom which
will come on shore in Zeebrugge. Finally to ensure the security of supply for the expansion of the Port
of Zeebrugge.
Each driver on itself necessitates a new power connection.

The length of this new 380 kV link is 47 km, which is one of the largest new overhead power lines in
Belgium for the last two decades. In order to minimise the impact of this project the connection is
conceived by making use of existing lines as much as possible, bundling with existing linear
infrastructure and keeping the total length of overhead grid status quo. Therefore 6 km of the line will
be constructed on an existing 150 kV-line. To make this possible the 380 kV-line will use high
temperature conductors on this part and the existing 150 kV connection will be put underground. For
10 km of the connection a second circuit will be added to an existing 380 kV-line.
Of the new route 21 km will be constructed parallel to an existing 150 kV-line. The transmission
towers of the 380 kV-line will have about the same height as the existing 150kV towers due to the use
of isolating cross arms.
Finally the standstill principle will be achieved by suppressing an old 150 kV-line which will have lost
its function after the construction of the 380 kV-line.

As a result of the reuse of existing lines and corridors only 10 km of the total 47 km needs to be
constructed as a new cross country route.

1.2. The surroundings
Although the connection was optimised to minimise the environmental impact, several areas crossed
still present a lot of challenges.

Spatial planning in Belgium is, at least for such a densely populated area (about 330 inhabitants per
km), a quite recent topic. Only in 1962 the first legislation on spatial planning appeared and merely in
the last decade the fragmentation of the landscape has slowed down [1]. This late appearance of
adequate spatial planning has resulted in a much dispersed urbanisation pattern. As a result Belgium
has, apart from Luxemburg, the most fragmented landscape in Europe [2]. This has a major impact on
the public perception of the project.

A more local issue is the coincidence of both habitation and protected zone around Bruges. The
habitation around the centre of Bruges has extended towards the historical fortification belt which is
classified as a protected landscape. Outside this fortification belt lays a Special Protection Area (SPA),
which is a protected area for birds as part of the European Natura2000-network. The new 380 kV
connection has to cross this region where habitation collides with protected landscape and nature
conservation areas.

2. Public participation
Public participation is a generic term which can be interpreted in many ways ranging from the broad
general meaning of involvement of anyone in the process to very specific ways to exercise the
involvement.

The first way of involvement is informing or providing of information. This is the most limited type
of participation. It is disputable whether mere informing can be considered as participation, since
informing is usually linked with consultation.
2

Consultation or gathering of comments is the most common type of public participation. It allows
the public to express their opinion about a certain topic so it can be taken into account by the decision
maker. However there is no direct interaction with the persons responsible for decision taking.

The most advanced type of public participation is consensus building or collaborative problem
solving through negotiation, mediation or other techniques, Depending on the topic and the public
involved this can induce very good results and a very high acceptance of the topic.

Different tools exist to facilitate public participation. For the participation process in this project the
Resource Manual to Support Application of the UNECE Protocol on SEA [3] is used. Although the
manual is written specifically for SEA it is applicable on EIA and permitting procedures as well.

3. Participation within the legal framework
The authorisation process of this overhead line project is extensive with mandatory participation
integrated in several separate procedures. In total four main stages can be identified, each with a
specific goal and scope concerning participation.
The process sets off with a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) on the land-use plan which is
required prior to the final approval of the plan. A land-use/zoning plan needs to be made as a
framework for the permits. On the project level an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) needs to
be made before can be decided about some of the permits. In total four different consents have to be
acquired.

The SEA stems from the European Directive 2001/42/EC [4] which implies the assessment of the
environmental effects of different plans and programs, including land-use plans. This directive is
transposed into national or regional legislation. In Flanders (the northern region of Belgium) public
participation during the SEA is required very early in the procedure. The goal of the public
participation is to allow consultation about the methodology for studying the environmental issues and
the alternatives to be evaluated. The results of the public participation can be found in the SEA. There
is no consensus building of the SEA itself. The approval of the SEA is done at an administrative level.

The procedure for the approval of the land-use plan comprises public participation about the so called
preliminary approved land-use plan. The goal of this participation is to consult about the land-use
plan. This can result in changes or even non-approval of the plan due to important information
obtained through the public participation. However, the limits of the SEA, i.e. the alternatives
assessed, have to be respected. Therefore it is problematic when new alternatives are proposed during
the participation regarding the land-use plan.

The EIA stems from the European Directive 85/337/EEC [5], as amended, which implies the
assessment of the environmental effects of certain projects. The procedure for public participation is
analogous to the procedure during SEA. The subject of the consultation here is a concrete project and
the methodology to study its environmental effects.

The procedures for the permits comprise also public participation of the proposed project. The
objective is to consult about the project. This participation can result in additional requirements for the
project or the refusal of the permit.

Currently (January 2012) the first two participation procedures have been completed.
The SEA started in the beginning of 2009 and ended mid 2011. The spatial planning started mid 2011
and will probably be ended by the end of 2012. The EIA and permitting procedures will last at least up
to mid 2014.

3

4. Voluntary participatory actions
In order to increase consensus on the project, the different stakeholders have been actively involved
and/or informed from the start of the project.
The mandatory actions involved consultation at certain stages. To assist the realisation of the project
additional actions of information and consensus building have been taken. The way of
communicating has been differentiated by the type of stakeholder.

An informal advisory committee was composed with the different regional administrations responsible
for the approval of the SEA and EIA, the preparatory work of the land-use plan and most of the
permits. An informal structure was used to make sure the composition of the committee could be
changed easily and the right public servants are involved. The meetings were held at an irregular
interval, only if required. This kept the active involvement at a high level. The committee was used for
informing, consultation and consensus building.

The local administrators, at the community and provincial level, were regularly informed by the TSO
about the progress of the project. rather than active involvement. The goal was to ensure the
administrators would have correct and appropriate information. The meetings were also used to get
opinions and to search a consensus about certain topics.

Very early in the process general information was made available to the citizens: a brochure about the
project and the procedures, a website containing all information and public documents including the
routing in Google maps, an e-mail address to ask question about the project, Additionally an
advertisement campaign (written press, radio, TV) was launched to explain the tasks of the TSO, with
a special focus on the connections of off-shore production.
The aim of the broad communication was to ensure the correct information would be available.
The citizens were also informed by specific actions during the mandatory public participation
moments.
During the SEA procedure a staffed exhibition was organised in all municipalities to present the
project. This also made it possible to interact and improve acceptance. During the land-use planning
procedure information sessions were held to present the preliminary land-use plan.

Throughout the process several ministerial cabinets were visited to inform them about the project and
to make them clearly understand the importance of the project for the Flemish region. The aim was to
ensure the approval of the land-use plan and permissions would not be delayed the political decision
taking.

5. The influence of participation on the SEA and land-use procedures
5.1. The drivers
In general the need of the project is not contested. This is the consequence of multiple drivers which
are easy to comprehend. The most comprehensible and attractive driver for the general public is the
off shore production by windmills. This driver is perceived as a very sympathetic green development.
Since the success of the off-shore developments depend totally of the new 380 kV power connection,
this is crucial for the acceptance of the project.
It is difficult to estimate the effect of participation on the acceptance of the project. However it is clear
that the planned off shore windmills have been a great benefit for the visual communication.

5.2. SEA
As stated above the goal of public participation during the SEA is to allow consultation about the
alternatives and study methodology.
The study methodology was rather well accepted, which is common in SEA.
The major point of contestation during the consultation showed to be the routing of the overhead line.
As a result several additional alternatives had to be taken into account in the SEA. From different
locations for both endpoints and alternative routings up to displacement of existing overhead lines and
(partial) undergrounding of the line.

4

This resulted from a strong NIMBY-reaction. This is common in SEA about infrastructure plans but
power lines have some particular disadvantages compared to e.g. roads or railways.
The uncertainties regarding possible long-term health effects cause a high level of fear, although the
potential risk is known to be very small. Thus far there exists no regulation about distance limits
between power lines and people. There is no legal prohibition of constructing new overhead lines
above habitation.
The uncertainty on the quantitative impact of overhead lines on birds and bird populations makes
Special Protection Areas in Flanders a no-go zone for overhead lines due to the precautionary
principle. Consequently, since there are no legal restrictions to construct an overhead line in residential
area, there is always an alternative route possible to avoid an SPA.
The cost of each alternative is not regarded as part of the assessment in an SEA. This makes it difficult
to argue not to take into account the irrelevantly expensive options.

As a direct result of the public participation a large number of additional alternatives had to be
evaluated in the SEA, including alternatives with a much higher cost and technical risk.
The informal advisory committee agreed on a framework regarding the possible partialy
undergrounding of a 380kV-connection, also for future projects. This was of great importance in order
to be able to eliminate the irrelevantly expensive alternatives from the study.

As an indirect outcome of the consultation, a literature review about EMF and health [6] was
commissioned by the government. This study was made by local universities and could be the first
step towards a Flemish policy on EMF and high voltage lines. The prospect of a clear and
unambiguous policy on EMF, almost regardless of the content of this policy, is of high importance to
the TSO.

Given that a significant part of the NIMBY reactions are based on financial ground, a compensation
policy has been made. The introduction by the TSO of a policy for financial compensation of farmers,
house owners was very important to gain acceptance.

Although the results of the mandatory participation were not what the TSO wantend, it is obvious
some of the results will benefit the TSO. This is because the participation made objections and
problems visible and the correct actions could therefore be taken at an early stage in the process.

The voluntary actions demonstrated to be very useful towards the regional administrative level, which
in general gives attention to the general interest on the regional scale.
On the other hand it is difficult to estimate how much the participation has benefited with respect to
the public. Despite the level of participation there will always be a vocal minority who will have a
personal benefit by opposing to the project. The number of genuine questions however is rather low.
The usefulness of participation at the political levels is somewhere in between the administrative level
and the public, since the politicians are more or less influenced by the opponents. Nevertheless it is
obvious that providing substantial information has increased the political support for the project.

5.3. Land-use planning
As stated above the objective of the participation is to allow consultation about the preliminary
approved land-use plan. During the public participation period, since the land-use plan is
indispensable for granting the permits very strong NIMBY-reactions are to be expected.
The preliminary approved land-use plan, as decided upon by the Flemish government, did not
selected the most cost-effective and technically optimal route, which would cross a number of houses.
On the contrary, the selected route crosses the SPA by means of an underground cable connection of
about 10 km. This solution doubles the total cost of the project and reduces the reliability of the
connection.
It is clear the government has given more importance to the psychological/sociological and political
aspects than to the technical, environmental and financial aspects. It is however unclear if this is the
result of the influence by local politicians and the public during the participation or whether it was a
deliberate choice to increase acceptance.
5


Currently nearly 2000 remarks received during the public participation period are being processed by
the competent authority. Up to now it is still unclear what the result of the participation will be. The
following is already known.

The uncertainties regarding possible long-term health effects lead to calls for precautionary measures.
The cost-effectiveness of the measures, an important aspect of the precautionary principle is often not
taken into account.
One of the most widespread definitions of the precautionary principle is principle 15 of the Rio
Declaration notes: "In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely
applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible
damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective
measures to prevent environmental degradation."[7].
In the SEA, based on the statistical relations between EMF and childhood leukaemia [8] has been
calculated that the additional expense of about 150 million (cable) reduces the occurrence for 1 case
of childhood leukaemia from once every 200 years to once every 340 years.
The inclusion of the cost-effectiveness in the definition is an important aspect. This means the
principle takes the costs and benefits of the measures into account. In practice this is not easy since the
understanding of what is a reasonable risk and a reasonable cost depends on the local conditions and
evalutions through time [9]. Any decision is therefore a mixture between rational and ethical
considerations. Because the decision about the land-use plan is made by the government it is also
influenced by political aspects [10].

The choice for a route with an underground section has, understandably, resulted in a large acceptance
in the affected area. But as a result other communities also start to ask for partially undergrounding.
Besides the technical and financial drawbacks of such solution, this also imposes the legal constrains
as this was not investigated in the SEA and therefore can not be decided.
A similar problem arises when new local routes and new locations for the high-voltage substations
which are proposed during the consultation.

The consultation has certainly given a considerable amount of work to process the remarks made by
the public. Its also possible additional changes to the routing will be made which can result in a
technical inferior, much more expensive and less reliable connection. In the worst case the
consultation will be used in legal actions based on calls for the use of the precautionary principle and
the confusion which exist about the meaning of the precautionary principle.
This is unclear at the moment.
It is our experience that the public does not understand the goal of the consultation.

As for the voluntary participatory actions it is difficult to estimate how much the participation has
helped. Like during the participation of the SEA there is very verbal opposition by some members of
the public. This can not be avoided. But the high number of remarks (nearly 2000) indicates that there
is a large misunderstanding about the impacts of this project.

6. Conclusions
The participatory actions which are mandatory take place at different moments with different
objectives and level of detail. This distinction is not made/understood by the public, local
administrative levels or local politicians, which causes confusion and wrong expectations.
Despite large efforts in providing extra and extensive information, the consultation and consensus
building has only clearly benefitted at the regional administrative level and the highest political level
regarding the necessity of the project. At the local level it is unclear whether the efforts have paid off.
The main issues of opposition are the uncertainties regarding possible long-term health effects. This
caused strong NIMBY-reactions with a lot of extra research and delays at the SEA-level as a result. At
the decision level of the land-use plan this has resulted in a choice for the route with an underground
section, despite significant technical and financial drawbacks.

6

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1] H. Gulinck, J. Peymen and L. Stalpaert. Milieurapport Vlaanderen, Achtergronddocument 2007,
Versnippering. (Vlaamse Milieumaatschappij, www.milieurapport.be, 2007)
[2] European Environment Agency. Landscape fragmentation in Europe. (Joint EEA-FOEN report
EEA Report series: ISSN 1725-9177, 2011, 87 pp)
[3] United Nations Economic Commission for Europe & Regional Environmental Centre for
Central & Eastern Europe. Resource Manual to Support Application of the UNECE Protocol on
Strategic Environmental Assessment (www.unece.org/env/sea/, April 2007 revised February
2011)
[4] European Parliament and Council. Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on
the environment (Official Journal of the European Union L 197, 21 July 2001, p. 3037)
[5] European Council. Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the
effects of certain public and private projects on the environment. (Official Journal of the
European Union L 175, 5 July 1985, p. 4048)
[6] L. Goorden, I. Loots, A. Crabb, L. Martens and W. Joseph. Samenvattend eindrapport over het
consultatietraject ter voorbereiding van een actieplan over milieu- en gezondheidsrisicos van
extreem laagfrequente velden van elektrische installaties zoals hoogspanningslijnen.
(Universiteit Gent Universiteit Antwerpen, 13 September 2011)
[7] United Nations. Report of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, (United
Nations publication, Sales No. E.73.II.A.14. Stockholm, 5-16 June 1972,
http://www.unep.org/Documents.multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=78&ArticleID=1163 )
[8] A. Ahlbom, N. Day, M. Feychting, E. Roman, J. Skinner, J. Dockerty, M. Linet, M. McBride, J.
Michaelis, JH. Olsen, T. Tynes and PK. Verkasalo. A pooled analysis of magnetic fields and
childhood Leukaemia. (British Journal of Cancer, 2000, 83(5), 692698)
[9] M. Martuzzi and J.A. Tickner (Eds.) The precautionary principle: protecting public health, the
environment and the future of our children. (WHO Europe, 2004)
[10] United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. The Precautionary Principle.
(World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology (COMEST), 2005)