“Walney Extension Limited owns the Walney Extension Windfarm comprising Walney 3 and 4, an operational offshore windfarm with a Development Consent Order (DCO) and relevant marine licences (“our Development”). Its proximity to Mona Offshore Wind Farm (“MOWF”) can be seen in MOWF’s Environmental Statement (the “ES”) (F2.10 Figure 10.4 and Table 10.10). Our Development does not object to the principle of MOWF. We do, however, wish to participate in the DCO Examination to make representations about the potential impacts on and interactions with our Development and, where appropriate, to secure appropriate mitigations. Concerns were previously highlighted to MOWF via a s48 consultation response and subsequent meeting. Our concerns as raised in the s48 response remain extant and we expect further meaningful engagement to seek to address the issues raised below and previously. We are open to addressing such matters within or outside the Examination process. Our Development expects to continue to operate and be maintained in the long-term. It may be upgraded and repowered in future, and will then be decommissioned. Co-existence with our Development must be considered and protected over the long-term – and the acceptability of cumulative and in-combination impacts – must be properly assessed taking into account each of the above stages of our Development’s life. Our Development requires that its operations, consents (including conditions), and any stakeholder agreements entered into by it are unaffected by MOWF. Our Development’s concerns include the following. Issue one: The ES highlights potential significant impacts on wildlife features, including potential significant project-alone and in-combination impacts on marine mammals (F2.4). We are not convinced that the baseline and the predicted impacts are robust and align with our understanding of the local environment and we require to analyse this further. Future impacts of our Development, such as operation and maintenance, must be accounted for by MOWF and appropriate mechanisms must be put in place to facilitate co-existence and allow co-ordination to reduce potential cumulative or in-combination impacts. Issue two: The ES highlights extensive impacts on shipping and navigation and commits to stakeholder engagement (F2.7 7.14.1.2-7.14.1.4). We require to be involved in such engagement to ensure that our consents, agreements, and operations are not adversely affected by MOWF. Issue Three: We believe that MOWF will adversely affect the energy yield of our Development. Due to the proximity outlined in the above-referenced figure and table, there is the potential for MOWF to interfere with wind speed or direction at our Development causing reduction in energy output. This requires to be properly assessed and appropriately mitigated / compensated. Issue Four: Our Development has put in place appropriate mitigation in relation to potential impacts on the Warton Airfield Primary Surveillance Radar. We require assurance that MOWF will not adversely affect or increase the cost of such mitigation.”