FINLA Y GEOGHEGAN, J.--- 1. This appeal primarily' concerns the proper approach in law to the conduct of an Environmental Impact Assessment ("EIA") by a planning authority where the development for which permission is sought forms part of a larger plan or masterplan.
2. This appeal is against the order of the High Court (McDermott :I.), dated 1 November 2017, which refused the application for judicial review of two decisions of the respondent, An Board Pleanala ("the Board"), issued on 11 August 2016, to grant planning permission to the second named notice party , Apple Distribution International (- Apple"), in respect of the construction of a data centre and associated works and a substation and grid connection near Athenry , Co. Galway . The reasons of the High Court dismissal are set out in a written judgment delivered on 12 October 2017 [2017] IEHC 595.
Factual and Procedural Background
3. The facts are fully set out in the judgment of the High Court and it is only necessary for the purposes of this appeal to summarise same.
4. The proposed developments in respects of which planning permission has been granted comprise the construction of a single data hall and ancillary infrastructure ("the data centra") and a 220KV substation and accompanying grid connection ("the substation"). The site upon which both develo pment were situated comprised approximately 202 hectares in woodland owned by Collet, who consented to the application. Apple submitted a masterplan ("the masterplan") which made clear that it was envisaged that eight data halls would potentially be constructed on the site in the future.
5. In April 2015, Apple lodged an application for planning permission with Galway Country Council in respect of the proposed data centre. The permission was granted by the Country Council on 9 September , 2015, and this was subsequently appealed to the Board. The second application for permission in respect of the substation, which was designed to serve eight data halls with the requisite electricity supply and grid connection, was submitted to the Board directly in February 2016, in accordance with the provisions of s. 182A(1) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 ("the 2000 Act") as amended, and of the Strategic Infrastructure Act 2006.
6. The Board, in the data centre appeal sought further information from Apple pursuant to s. 132 of the 2000 Act.
The information sought is recorded in full at para. 9 of the High Court judgment. The information sought included further information regarding renewable energy projects in the context of an expressed aspiration by Apple that the development would be powered by 100% renewable energy . In addition a revised environmental impact statement was requested. Certain directions were given in relation to the revised environmental impact statement including "in order that a comprehensive assessment of the overall impacts of the proposed development arising