East Anglia ONE Offshore Windfarm

The list below includes a record of advice we have provided for this project. For a list of all advice issued by the Planning Inspectorate, including non-project related advice, please go to the Register of advice page.

There is a statutory duty, under section 51 of the Planning Act 2008, to record the advice that is given in relation to an application or a potential application, including the name of the person who requested the advice, and to make this publicly available.

Preview
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Enquiry sent to the Secretary of State
I am writing in regard to your email sent to the Secretary of State dated 11 November 2018 in relation to the above proposals. Your email has been passed to the Planning Inspectorate for response as we administer the Planning Act 2008 process under which these proposals will be considered.
The applications have not yet been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate, the proposals are currently at the pre-application stage of the planning process, the developer is expecting to submit the applications in Q4 2019.
I note you have already submitted your comments to ScottishPower Renewables ( the developer ), this is important to enable your views to be considered before their proposals are finalised and the applications submitted. As you may already be aware, the developer is intending to undertake further pre-application consultation in early 2019.
If you would like more information about the Planning Act 2008 process, please see the “Advice Note Eight: Overview of the nationally significant infrastructure planning process for members of the public and others” which can be found along with other advice notes, here: [attachment 1]

06 December 2018
Bridget Barclay
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Enquiry sent to the Secretary of State.
I am writing in regard to your email sent to the Secretary of State dated 12 November 2018 in relation to the above proposals. Your email has been passed to the Planning Inspectorate for response as we administer the Planning Act 2008 process under which these proposals will be considered.
The applications have not yet been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate, the proposals are currently at the pre-application stage of the planning process, the developer is expecting to submit the applications in Q4 2019.
I note you have already submitted your comments to ScottishPower Renewables (the developer), this is important to enable your views to be considered before their proposals are finalised and the applications submitted. As you may already be aware, the developer is intending to undertake further pre-application consultation in early 2019.
If you would like more information about the Planning Act 2008 process, please see the “Advice Note Eight: Overview of the nationally significant infrastructure planning process for members of the public and others” which can be found along with other advice notes, here: [attachment 1]

06 December 2018
Meg Amsden
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Enquiry sent to the Secretary of State
I am writing in regard to your email sent to the Secretary of State and others dated 11 November 2018 in relation to the above proposals. Your email has been passed to the Planning Inspectorate for response as we administer the Planning Act 2008 process under which these proposals will be considered.
The applications have not yet been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate, the proposals are currently at the pre-application stage of the planning process, the developer is expecting to submit the applications in Q4 2019.
I note you have already submitted your comments to ScottishPower Renewables (the developer), this is important to enable your views to be considered before their proposals are finalised and the applications submitted. As you may already be aware, the developer is intending to undertake further pre-application consultation in early 2019.
If you would like more information about the Planning Act 2008 process, please see the “Advice Note Eight: Overview of the nationally significant infrastructure planning process for members of the public and others” which can be found along with other advice notes, here: [attachment 1]

06 December 2018
William Haward Patricia Davidson
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Enquiry sent to the Secretary of State
I am writing in regard to your email sent to the Secretary of State and others, dated 11 November 2018 in relation to the above proposals. Your email has been passed to the Planning Inspectorate for response as we administer the Planning Act 2008 process under which these proposals will be considered.
The applications have not yet been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate, the proposals are currently at the pre-application stage of the planning process, the developer is expecting to submit the applications in Q4 2019.
I note you have already submitted your comments to ScottishPower Renewables, this is important to enable your views to be considered before their proposals are finalised and the applications submitted. The developer is intending to undertake further pre-application consultation in early 2019, I therefore hope this addresses your concerns in relation to the consultation undertaken to date. I note you have also sent your comments to the local authority, who will have the opportunity to submit a representation on the adequacy of the developer’s consultation, once the applications are submitted.
If you would like more information about the Planning Act 2008 process, please see the “Advice Note Eight: Overview of the nationally significant infrastructure planning process for members of the public and others” which can be found along with other advice notes, here: [attachment 1]

06 December 2018
Peter Chadwick
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Project Update Meeting
Please see attached

25 April 2018
Scottish Power Renewables - Scottish Power Renewables
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
A project update meeting to discuss East Anglia ONE, THREE and FOUR wind farms.
See meeting note attached.

22 April 2015
Keith Morrison
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
A project update meeting for East Anglia THREE and FOUR, including an update for East Anglia ONE.
See meeting note attached.

02 March 2015
Keith Morrison
Enquiry received via email
Request information on when view on the project can be submitted.
Apologies for the delay in responding to your email. At present, these projects are at the pre-application stage. Therefore any views that you have on the project should be raised with the Applicant. If an application is submitted to the Planning Inspectorate and accepted for examination, there will be a period of time following that for you to register as an interested party as you did for East Anglia One. At present, the earliest that the Planning Inspectorate is expecting the submission of the first of these 3 projects is late 2014/early 2015.

15 September 2014
Trevor Armstrong
Enquiry received via email
In regard to the s127 application, Anglian Water Services take the view that the Written representations provide useful background information for the Examining Panel and would like to maintain this representation, albeit that the protective provisions and Article 13 issues have been agreed.

Whilst Anglian Water Services may not have any on going concerns about the proposals, we would wish to maintain our representation should any position regarding the acquisition of new rights over land change.
The Examining Authority can now advise that providing both parties agree, representations can be partially withdrawn, thus enabling text which has engaged s127 to be withdrawn and the rest of the text to remain in the examination.

15 October 2013
Kathryn Taylor
Enquiry received via email
Query in relation to s127 applications for the examination of East Anglia One Offshore Windfarm

Anglian Water Services take the view that the Written Representations provide useful background information for the Examining authority and would like to maintain this representation, albeit that the protective provisions and Article 13 issues have been agreed and therefore negates the need for a s127 application.
The Planning Inspectorate advise that providing both parties agree, representations can be partially withdrawn, thus enabling text which has engaged s127 to be withdrawn and the rest of the text to remain in the examination.

15 October 2013
Kathryn Taylor
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Thank you for the information it will help me get started in quest to get up to speed on what is happing.

I appreciate that I may too late to register as an interested party. However, are you able to tell who the interested parties are e.g my local parish councils at Waldringfield?

Could you also clarify if the No1 scheme also included provision for the No3 and No4 cable routes?
In answer to your question, who the interested parties are:

Interested Parties are made up of, people and organisations that the applicant has identified as being affected by the application and those who made a relevant representation. Names and addresses of those people identified by the applicant can be found in the Book of Reference (insert link). Please note that this has been updated throughout the examination. A full list of those who made a relevant representation can be found through the following link:

[attachment 1]

I advise that look through the relevant representations would be of most use to you as they list individuals and Parish Councils. You can filter by keywords, for example 'Parish council.' This brings up ten Parish Councils that have made Relevant Representations, and so are interested parties.

If there are particular people you know who have made Relevant, or Written Representations, you can search for them by name.

Re your question if the East Anglia One scheme included provision for the scheme 3 & 4 cable routes;
The applicant has set out in their Development Consent Order for permission to lay 2 cables for East Anglia One and alongside this, four ducts, two ducts for East Anglia 3 and two for East Anglia Four. If East Anglia 3 and 4 gain permission when the applications are submitted at the end of 2014 and beginning of 2015 respectively, cables will be laid in the ducts.

07 October 2013
Mr Steffen Larsen
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Request to register as an Interested Party and submit written representations during the examination of the application
Thank you for your email and attached letter dated 24 May 2013 regarding the registration as an Interested Party for the above application.

As you note, the deadline to register as an Interested Party for the East Anglia ONE Offshore Wind Farm application passed on 7 March 2013. Unfortunately, as you have not made a relevant representation in the prescribed form within the deadline, we have no discretion to register you retrospectively.

Whilst you will not have the legal status of an Interested Party in this examination, you are able to follow the progress of the application on our webpage. Please see the link: [attachment 1]. This will not prevent you from attending the preliminary meeting or any other public hearings that may be held during the examination.

We note your request to attend the Preliminary Meeting on 25 June 2013, and your intention to submit written representations in relation to any relevant cumulative issues at a later stage during the examination period. Should you wish to submit a written representation during the examination of the application, the Examining authority may use its discretion to take this into account on a case by case basis.

Please state in your representation that you are not an Interested Party but you wish the Examining authority to consider accepting your representation. The case team will then respond on the decision taken.

I hope that this is of assistance but do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions.
Please note that this response constitutes advice under s51 of the Planning Act 2008 and will be published on our website.

28 May 2013
Forewind - Gareth Lewis
Enquiry received via email
Further to the Ministry of Defence representation made on 7 March 2013, please find attached a letter detailing an updated position which the examining authority may wish to consider.
Thank you for your letter dated 8 April 2013, providing an update on the Ministry of Defence's position regarding the above project.
In the pre-examination, the Planning Inspectorate cannot accept any further submissions into the examination until the Preliminary Meeting. At the Preliminary Meeting, a deadline will be set for "Written Representations", and also you will be able to make oral submissions. This is the time at which I suggest you provide this update and any further expansion on your previous submission. A letter providing the date, time and place of the Preliminary Meeting and the draft examination timetable will be issued shortly.
If you have any queries about this email or the process, please do not hesitate to contact me or the East Anglia One team.

19 April 2013
Ministry of Defence - Marie Neenan
Enquiry received via email
On 8 April 2013, East Anglia One brought to the attention of the Planning Inspectorate project team a number of potential amendments that may be considered as part of the examination of the application into East Anglia One Offshore Windfarm. These included the potential inclusion of other land to enable the consideration of amendments to construction techniques, further environmental information and other documents as a result of requests made by parties since the submission of the application and amendments to the compulsory acquisition information.
As the project is currently at Pre-examination stage, this information cannot be formally submitted to be considered by the Examining authority for the application. Therefore, the Planning Inspectorate has offered advice on how to proceed. No view has been taken by the applicant to submit this information formally nor has a view been taken by the Examining authority on whether to accept the information.
See advice below:

From: East Anglia One
Sent: 12 April 2013 15:36
To: 'Thompson, Helen'; 'Smith, Victoria (RU636958)'; East Anglia One
Subject: S51 advice on email of 8 April 2013
Helen,
Thank you for your emails. Whilst I have tried to address in turn, each of the matters raised in your email of 8 April 2013 at 10. 04am, some of the proposed changes you have outlined are interlinked and the information provided on these is limited therefore this advice should be read with that in mind.
Amendments to the order limits/Compulsory Acquisition matters
In your email you note that you are proposing to include land in addition to that currently included within the Order limits.
Your email also refers to additional plots in relation to which Compulsory Acquisition powers are being sought. Can you please clarify whether these have been included in the recent updated Book of Reference, or would a further revised Book of Reference need to be submitted so as to include any further landowners.
Connected to this query is whether these changes result in an increase in land owners whose land will be compulsory acquired and furthermore, whether you would see these changes as engaging the Infrastructure Planning (Compulsory Acquisition) Regulations 2010 which set out a prescribed procedure for the compulsory acquisition of additional land.
Supplementary Environmental Information
With regards any changes to the order limits you will need to consider whether these have any implications in terms of your environmental impact assessment, for example whether this might necessitate the preparation and submission of any supplementary environmental information.
In relation to any supplementary environmental information that you are planning on providing, you will wish to consider whether this information would, in your view, be 'further information' or 'any other information' as defined in the Infrastructure Planning (EIA) Regulations 2009.
Consultation
Whilst information cannot be formally submitted to the Examining authority for consideration prior to the Preliminary Meeting, this does not preclude you, prior to the Preliminary Meeting, from consulting on any new and/or amended information that you may wish to submit. If you decide to carry out such a consultation exercise, you should give careful consideration to the persons to be consulted. You may also wish to consider whether to publicise changes to the application. The approach taken can then be explained to the Examining authority at the Preliminary Meeting. The Examining authority will need to consider if the steps taken are sufficient so as to avoid any unfairness in the process and, if relevant, whether they are in accordance with the Infrastructure Planning (Compulsory Acquisition ) Regulations 2010.
This consultation exercise may, if accepted as being adequate by the Examining authority, negate the need for further consultation on these matters to be carried out during the examination. If the proposed changes to the application were to be accepted by the Examining authority this would enable the examination to take these changes into account from the start, the day after the last day of the Preliminary Meeting.
In our telephone conversation on 27 March 2013 I advised that any consultation on changes at this point, prior to the Preliminary Meeting would require any responses to be returned to the applicant, not the Planning Inspectorate as suggested by yourselves. The additional information, any consultation responses and how you have taken account of these could then be submitted to the Examining authority at the Preliminary Meeting.
Next Steps
To enable this information to be brought into the public domain and comply with the Planning Inspectorate's openness policy, I would suggest that you follow the following approach.
You submit the information that you have on the changes and further work you are undertaking to the Planning Inspectorate as soon as possible, including your consultation schedule of how and when you are undertaking any consultation and who you are consulting.
This information would then be published on the Planning Inspectorate project webpage clearly stating that any queries or comments should be made to yourselves and that the information had not been considered by the Examining authority or formally submitted.
No decision would be taken on the acceptance of this information into the examination until you formally submit the information at or after the preliminary meeting. This would allow you to undertake further work, such as any consultation, and present this to the Examining authority for their consideration.
When issuing the Rule 6 letter, reference would be made to this information and any consultation so as to bring these matters to the attention of all interested Parties and other persons invited to the preliminary meeting in advance of that meeting.
Further Comments
Just to clarify a point in a previous email on 19 March 2013 sent at 12.07pm. The updated Book of Reference as submitted with the s.59 certificate has been uploaded to our website, and all parties set out in this and the previous version of the Book of Reference will be sent a Rule 6 letter to ensure that all these persons are notified of the Preliminary Meeting. In relation to the returned mail you received in relation to your s.59 certificate, please note that the Examining authority will contact the two persons concerned at the time of sending out the Rule 6 letters to explain the situation and possible next steps.
I hope that this assists, but please let me know if you have any queries in this regard.

Kind regards,

Katherine

Katherine Chapman
Case Manager
Major Applications & Plans,
The Planning Inspectorate,
Temple Quay House,
Temple Quay,
Bristol,
BS1 6PN

12 April 2013
East Anglia One Ltd - Helen Thompson
Enquiry received via email
Submission of further comments
Thank you for your email below. Unfortunately, I cannot accept any further submission into the examination until the Preliminary Meeting. At the Preliminary Meeting, a deadline will be set for "Written Representations". This is the time at which I suggest you provide this update and any further expansion on your previous submission.

Whilst I appreciate that this may seem an unhelpful response, we are required to follow procedure as set out in the Planning Act 2008.

If you have any queries about this email or the process, please do not hesitate to contact me or the East Anglia One team and we will seek to assist you.

21 March 2013
Babergh and Mid Suffolk DCs - Nick Ward
Enquiry received via email
Submitting additional documents during the pre-examination stage.
Thank you for your emails and the Certificates, these will be published by the end of today.

However, as discussed previously, at the pre-examination stage, there is no mechanism within which I can accept any other documentation to that submitted with the application. As such, the information provided including the updated Book of Reference and the Supplementary Information will not be entered into the examination or made available to the Examining authority when appointed. It is up to you, as the Applicant, to decide when to make the Examining authority aware of this information. The earliest opportunity for this will be the preliminary meeting. The Examining authority will then make a decision on how to procede.

In relation to the copies of documents, I think three should suffice but until I have the Examining authority appointed, I cannot confirm this.

19 March 2013
East Anglia ONE Ltd - Helen Thompson
Enquiry received via meeting
The query related to whether it was possible to pay one fee for the examination and get a refund of any overspend.
At our meeting you enquired as to whether it was possible to pay one fee for the examination and get a refund of any overspend. I have now spoken to our legal team and as I thought, this is not possible. I have set out the reasons for this below.

1. The Fees Regulations provide for a two stage process, under Regulations 8 and 9, for the charging of fees for handling the examination of an application. The first being an estimated fee, and the second a final fee. There is no express provision for different arrangements to be adopted on a case by case basis.

2. There is no express provision under the Fees Regulations or otherwise for the refund of fees that have been paid. There is also no express power to charge more than the prescribed daily rates under Regulations 8 and 9.

There are no proposals to amend the Fees Regulations in relation to either of these provisions.

Apologies for any inconvenience caused.

26 February 2013
East Anglia One Ltd - Helen Thompson
Enquiry received via phone
response has attachments
How can a Statutory Body become an Interested Party for the purpose of an examination?
As discussed, pleased be advised that as a result of changes implemented through the enactment of the Localism Act 2011, Statutory Parties, such as English Heritage are no longer automatic Interested Parties under the 2008 Planning Act. There are two opportunities for English Heritage to become an Interested Party as outlined below:

1) English Heritage can make a relevant representation through the Planning Inspectorate's website: [attachment 1]. Further information on relevant representation can be found in Advice note 8.3: [attachment 2].

Filling in a relevant representation at this stage will enable the Examining authority (when appointed) to take the views of English Heritage into account when drawing up the principal issues and the draft examination timetable.

2) All statutory parties will be given an opportunity, after the Preliminary meeting, in the Rule 8 letter to advise the Planning Inspectorate in writing of a wish to be an Interested Party.

If a statutory party does not follow either step set out above, they will receive no further information in relation the examination after the Rule 8 letter and will not have any automatic right to participate in the examination.

22 February 2013
English Heritage - Christopher Pater
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Update on East Anglia THREE and FOUR applications and logistical discussion on East Anglia ONE examination
Please see the attached meeting note

15 February 2013
East Anglia Offshore Limited - Helen Thompson
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
A project update meeting for the proposed East Anglia Offshore Windfarm project (East Anglia ONE)with the developers, East Anglia One Ltd. and their legal representatives Bond Pearce, to discuss pre-submission matters.
Please see the attached note for this meeting.

03 October 2012
East Anglia One Ltd. - Helen Thompson
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Pre-application tripartite meeting for the proposed East Anglia Offshore Windfarm (Zone 5) project - East Anglia One, between The Planning Inspectorate, representatives from the local authorities of Suffolk County Council and Suffolk Coastal District Council, and the developer East Anglia One Ltd. and their legal representatives Bond Pearce. This meeting was held to discuss any pre-application issues ahead of the submission of the application.
Please see the attached meeting note.

03 October 2012
Suffolk County Council - John Pitchford
Enquiry received via email
Promoters for the East Anglia Offshore Windfarm (East Anglia ONE), currently at pre-application, sought advice from the Planning Inspectorate on their approach to include cable ducting as part of the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) application.

The Planning Inspectorate's response was by email.
I write with reference to recent discussions and your letters of 23 April and 26 June 2012 seeking our view on your proposed approach to including cable ducting for future projects in the East Anglia Round 3 Zone as associated development within your forthcoming application for East Anglia ONE. We have noted the contents of your letter and our discussions and advise accordingly.

Firstly, we recognise the intention of your approach, that being to include ducting for future projects thereby seeking to avoid prolonging the potential impact of construction activities and overall land take, and we acknowledge that it is borne from the results of consultation with the local community, stakeholders, landowners and local authorities.

Our understanding is that you propose to include one of two possible approaches within the application for East Anglia ONE, although in both cases your intention is to include the ducting for three projects in the application for East Anglia ONE as associated development:

1.East Anglia ONE, THREE and FOUR to be treated broadly as an ?over arching? Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP), referred to in your earlier correspondence as the Bramford-connected NSIP, with each particular project being treated as an individual phase within that but to be the subject of separate applications;

2.To treat the application for East Anglia ONE as a single NSIP, albeit including the ducting for all three projects, and to treat East Anglia THREE and FOUR as separate NSIPs in their own right.

We have reservations with your first approach, mainly due to the interpretation of ?principal development?, and how this sits with what is proposed in paragraph 6(iv) of the DCLG draft guidance on associated development. It is our view that the ?principal development? is the development for which development consent is being presently sought pursuant to s.115(1)(a), and required under s.31, being development which is or forms part of an NSIP. In this regard, we note that paragraph 6(iv)(b) of the consultation draft guidance draws a distinction between this 'principal development' and "other development that the Secretary of State may reasonably expect to be the subject of an application for development consent within five years of the application at hand being made".

Further, we query the approach of an ?over arching NSIP? (containing in this case three phases) and whether this is consistent with the threshold in s.15 and the provisions of s.31 and s.115(1)(a) as each phase would be an NSIP in its own right by virtue of exceeding the threshold for an offshore generating station. It is of course possible for an application to include more than one NSIP, for example a generating station and an overhead power line,
however this approach would in effect be three separate applications for individual projects and submitted at different times.

In respect of your second approach it is our view that this would appear to be broadly consistent with the proposals contained within the DCLG consultation on draft revised guidance dealing with associated development. We do however recognise your concerns that uncertainty remains as to when this might be published in a finalised form, and what in fact may be included within it.

Furthermore, we also recognise the concerns you have in making a compelling case for compulsory acquisition if you were to include the ducting for all three projects in the application for East Anglia ONE as associated development, and some of the land required could only be acquired compulsorily. Despite this, it is our view that should the wording in paragraph 6(iv) of the draft associated development guidance become formal guidance then this would provide a steer as to Government policy in this regard i.e. that in certain circumstances the inclusion of such development is acceptable. You may find this to be of assistance when justifying the inclusion of compulsory acquisition powers in the draft DCO.
You may also wish to make representations to DCLG, if you have not done so already, in relation to the wording of the consultation draft guidance on compulsory acquisition under the Planning Act 2008 regime.

Irrespective of the approach you decide to follow, we would advise you to ensure that you satisfy yourselves that the consultation and publicity you have conducted for the purposes of sections 42, 47 and 48 clearly reflects your proposed approach. It is our view that should you elect to pursue the first approach you should ensure that consultation material has made it sufficiently clear to consultees of your intention to develop an ?overarching NSIP?.

We note that within your recent phase 2 consultation material you referred to the projects as the ?Bramford-connected offshore arrays? rather than as a ?Bramford-connected NSIP? or an ?over arching NSIP?. As noted above, we would advise that, whatever approach you take in describing the project, it is clearly and consistently described in pre-application consultation and publicity. You should also ensure that, whatever approach you take in describing the project in pre-application consultation and publicity this is clearly explained in your Consultation Report. In addition, you should ensure that the Explanatory Memorandum accompanying the draft Development Consent Order (DCO) clearly explains the approach adopted, and that the DCO is consistent with that approach.

I trust that this clarifies our position in respect of this matter.

06 July 2012
East Anglia Offshore Wind Ltd - James Donald
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Following the meeting on 7 June 2012 held at The Planning Inspectorate offices in Bristol, The Planning Inspectorate issued advice to the promoter on some of their draft plans.

The advice was sent via email.
As discussed during our meeting on 7 June please see below advice on the format of plans following our discussion about draft works plans for EAONE.

Plans submitted under regulation 5(2) of The Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009
Notwithstanding the 'relaxation' in the acceptance tests under s.55(5A) of the Planning Act 2008 (as amended by the Localism Act 2011) there is still a requirement on applicants to comply with Regulations 5(3) and (4) of the Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 when submitting plans etc. under Regulation 5(2). This specifically notes that:

'any plans, drawings or sections required to be provided by paragraph (2) shall be no larger than A0 size, shall be drawn to an identified scale (not smaller than 1:2500) and, in the case of plans, shall show the direction of North', and;
'where a plan comprises three or more separate sheets a key plan must be provided showing the relationship between different sheets'.

Application plans etc. - relevant Guidance and Advice
On the format of plans, you should have regard to statutory guidance 'CLG Planning Act 2008: Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects - Application Form Guidance (2009)', as well as Annex 3 of 'CLG Guidance related to procedures for compulsory acquisition (2010)' that provides information on the long-standing convention of using colour-coding on plans showing land proposed to be compulsorily acquired, the acquisition of new rights, and replacement land. The Planning Inspectorate's (non-statutory) Advice Note 6 contains further useful advice on the preparation and submission of application documents including plans etc.

Other matters relevant to application plans etc.
Given the type of project for which development consent is to be applied for, we would recommend that you review The Planning Inspectorate's s.55 acceptance checklist for the Galloper Wind Farm application ([attachment 1]). Further, we would advise that the works plan for the East Anglia ONE Offshore Windfarm application should show the interface between the onshore and offshore elements to a sufficiently large scale so that it is possible to see this aspect of the project clearly, and would recommend the use of single works and land plan sheets to show the offshore array element of the project.

I hope that this advice provides assistance however should you wish to discuss further please do not hesitate to contact me.

18 June 2012
Scottish Power Renewables - Helen Thompson
Enquiry received via meeting
A project update meeting was held on 7 June 2012 with the developer for East Anglia ONE Offshore Wind at the Planning Inspectorate offices in Bristol.

The attendees were: Mike Harris (Case Leader - Planning Inspectorate), Tim Hallam (Legal Manager - Planning Inspectorate), and Jolyon Wootton (Case Officer - Planning Inspectorate), with Helen Thompson (EAOW), James Donald (EAOW), John Houghton (Bond Pearce), and Vicky Redman (Bond Pearce).
In place of publishing a note for this meeting, the Planning Inspectorate sent the developer written s.51 advice on their draft plans and other related matters, and the developer's approach to include cable ducting as part of the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) application.

The written s.51 advice is available on our website (to access these links, either copy and paste the link into your browser or refer to the 'advice' tab within the project page for this application - planning portal, national infrastructure pages):

infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk/projects/eastern/east-anglia-one-offshore-windfarm/?ipcsection=advice&ipcadvice=95e4abee80

infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk/projects/eastern/east-anglia-one-offshore-windfarm/?ipcsection=advice&ipcadvice=c8e22cfbae

07 June 2012
Scottish Power Renewables (EAOW) - Helen Thompson
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
A project update meeting for the proposed East Anglia Offshore Windfarm (Zone 5) - East Anglia ONE, was held on 27 January 2012 at the IPC offices in Bristol and attended by IPC, Scottish Power Renewables and Bond Pearce.

Please see the attached meeting note.

27 January 2012
Scottish Power Renewables - Helen Thompson
Enquiry received via email
The query related to pre-application process and whether advice is available to explain the process.
Details were provided about the consultation requirements of the pre-application stage, specifically the need for the applicant to consult and to have regard for the comments received, or explain where these are not acted upon.

Links were provided to guidance/advice published on the IPC website and it was specifically recommended that Advice Note 8.1 and 8.2 would assist.

24 January 2012
Tony Fryatt
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
A project update meeting on pre-application work was held at the IPC offices in Bristol on 20 September 2011 for the proposed East Anglia Offshore Windfarm (Zone 5). Attendees included the IPC case team and representatives from Scottish Power Renewables and Bond Pearce.
Please see attached Meeting Note

20 September 2011
Scottish Power Renewables - Helen Thompson
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Meeting to discuss draft Development Consent Order (DCO) provided by East Anglia Offshore Wind (EAOW)
See Meeting Notes

24 March 2011
ScottishPower Renewables East Anglia Offshore Wind
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Scottish Power Renewables (?SPR?) and Vattenfall ? Vindkraft (?VV?) to update the IPC on the progress of the project to date and discussion of any matters arising.
[attachment 1]

02 February 2011
East Anglia Offshore Renewables - EAOW EAOW
Enquiry received via phone
Why has Polstead Parish Council been identified as a statutory consultee for this proposal? There is a significant distance between the site proposal and the location of the parish council.
The developer may have identified a search area for the location of onshore development associated with the project such as a sub-station. Where this red line search area has been identified, parish councils within and adjacent to search boundary will be consulted. This is in line with Schedule 1 of The Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 and our Advice Note 8. The caller was advised contact the developer should they wish to discuss the search area for any proposed onshore development.

11 October 2010
Polstead Parish Council - Dave Crimmin
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Meeting between the IPC and East Anglia Offshore Wind Farm Limited to discuss a potential request for an EIA scoping opinion and likely project timescales.
Follow the link for the meeting note: [attachment 1]

20 August 2010
East Anglia Offshore Wind - East Anglia Offshore Wind East Anglia Offshore Wind