Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm

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 meeting
response has attachments
Feedback meeting between DONG Energy and the Planning Inspectorate following the Secretary of State?s decisions on the Walney Extension and Burbo Bank Extension projects.
Attached

23 March 2015
DONG Energy Walney (UK) Ltd - Sally Holroyd
Enquiry received via meeting
During a break of the issue specific hearing, case manager Nicholas Coombes discussed discrepancies between the project co-ordinates in the draft Development Consent Order and the Order Limits plan with the applicant's project team.
Nicholas Coombes pointed out the anomalous co-ordinates identified in the ExA's Comments on DCO4 using the hard copy application documents.

27 March 2014
DONG Energy Walney (UK) Ltd - Sally Holroyd
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
E-mail received from Bairbre Ni Bhraonain:

This is Bairbre Ni Bhraonain of the Dun Laoghaire Gazette. Can you tell me how far from the Irish shore the wind farm proposed for the Walney Extension will be? Will you be crossing into Irish territory? What are the transboundary effects Dun Laoghaire County Council speaks of that entitle the residents of that county to be publicly consulted in the planning process for the wind farm?
Response from the Planning Inspectorate:

An application has been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for an extension to the Walney wind farm off the Cumbrian Coast. Our project page is at [attachment 1], which contains all of the application and examination documents. The project is approximately 19km from the coast of Walney Island (Barrow), partly in UK Territorial waters, the remainder on the UK continental shelf between England and the Isle of Man.

The Planning Inspectorate, on behalf of the British Government, has screened the possible likely significant effects of the development to other territories. The report is at [attachment 2]. The Republic of Ireland has been included in relation to commercial fishing and migratory avian species.

Consequently, the Irish Government is invited to comment on the proposals as they are being examined. As part of their own processes, it seems that local councils such as Dun Laoghaire are undertaking public consultation into the proposals.

You may wish to contact the developer for further information; their project page is at [attachment 3]

14 January 2014
Bairbre Ni Bhraonain
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
The senior planner at Dun laoghaire-Rathdown County Council requested the GPS coordinates of the proposed windfarm location and a site location map showing the location relevant to the Irish Coast.

The Planning Inspectorate's response was by email.
Thank you for your enquiry regarding the Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm application, requesting the coordinates for this proposed nationally significant infrastructure project.

I have copied the site description and coordinates from the applicant?s application form for your information, which is published on the project page of our website along with the supporting application documents.

Application Form (Doc 1.2):
[attachment 1]

Section 6. Location or Route of the Development Proposal
Description of location of application site(s), or route of development (reference to appropriate plans)

?The proposed Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm is located approximately 19 km west-south-west of the Isle of Walney coast in Cumbria, 26 km south-west from the Millom coast, 35 km north-west from the Fleetwood and Blackpool coast, and 31 km south-east from the Isle of Man. The total area of the Agreement for Lease ("AfL") Site is 149 km2.

The offshore export cables will run eastwards from the offshore AfL Site making landfall in the area of Middleton Sands, within Morecambe Bay.

The onshore cable route heads generally north-east from the landfall site towards the eastern side of the village of Middleton, before heading in a northerly direction towards the onshore Substation Site adjacent to the proposed National Grid Middleton substation. The onshore cable route is approximately 3.7 km long.

The onshore Substation site is located to the north of the A683, to the east of the roundabout of the A683 with Imperial Road and to the east of the site of the proposed National Grid Middleton substation.

Full details of the application site and route of development are shown on the Location Plan (Document reference2.1) Works Plans (Document reference 2.4.1 to 2.4.3). The location of the Project is described in more detail in Chapter 4 of the ES (Document reference 10.1.4).

Start grid reference
Easting 274648
Northing 472873

Middle grid reference
Easting 341681
Northing 457067

End grid
Easting 342260
Northing 460325

Start grid reference - furthest point offshore (Order Limits and Grid Coordinates Plan Document reference 2.3.2)

Middle grid reference - landfall (Transition Jointing Bay) (Order Limits and Grid Coordinates Plan Document reference 2.3.3)

End grid reference - Onshore Substation (Order Limits and Grid Coordinates Plan Document reference 2.3.3)?.

I also provide links to the applicant?s plans which may assist in your enquiry:

Location Plan (Doc. 2.1)
[attachment 2]

Works Plan (Doc. 2.4.1 to 2.4.3)
[attachment 3]

[attachment 4]

[attachment 5]

ES (Doc. 10.1.4)
[attachment 6]

20 December 2013
Dun laoghaire-Rathdown CC - Moira Jones
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
We wish to draw your attention to a DONG document, in which we believe there is significant error, which gives a most misleading impression by showing less than the full magnitude of the Applicant's proposed wind turbine installations.

During the preparations of the Statement of Common Ground, in exchanges of email between TravelWatch Isle of Man (TWIOM) and the Applicant, we have expressed concern at the apparent lack of illustrations comparing size of wind turbine with recognisable features. TWIOM produced a scale drawing (attached below) showing the IoM Steam Packet vessel, Ben My Chree (overall length 125m) , and a 222m overall height wind turbine. The Applicant reluctantly agreed to include this in the Version 2 Draft SOCG, but with his note 'The Project does not believe the illustration provided by TWIOM is accurate nor contributes to useful discussion... The Applicant is confident that the information contained within the ES is sufficient to demonstrate the scale of the proposed developments.'' We could add a vertical 'break line' between ship and turbine pylon, to reassure DONG that such proximity is solely to illustrate comparative sizes.

However, we have now been studying the Applicant's booklet ''Community Briefing Pack, October 2013,'' received recently, and which we understand has been widely distributed by DONG, including at various public exhibitions. Page 5 includes a drawing ''Wind turbine dimensions compared to known landmarks.'' This compares the minimum and maximum sizes of wind turbine with the London Eye and the London Gherkin. No scale is given, and the only dimensions provided are the turbine overall vertical heights of 142m and 222m respectively. Rotor diameters of 120m to 200m are quoted separately on page 4.

The errors became first apparent as the 222m turbine should be approx. 50% taller than the 142m turbine, but is considerably less than this!

Due to absence of stated scale, we are left to assume that the 142m turbine overall height is drawn correctly (and this is consistent with the drawn height of the London Eye, which Wikipaedia quotes as 135m). We then find the following errors:--
--The overall height of the maximum turbine scales as 186m instead of a correct 222m. ie should be drawn TALLER.
--The overall width (ie rotor dia) of the max turbine scales 136m instead of a correct 200m. ie should be drawn WIDER.
--The overall width (ie rotor dia) of the min turbine scales 104m instead of a correct 120m. ie should be drawn WIDER.

These errors give a misleading representation to the public, and to those who have submitted Representations, of both the height and width of turbine installations, and are most misleading.

The use of 'known landmarks' in London city centre by DONG's central London office (Grosvenor Place, London SW1), is hardly informative for the Irish Sea and Cumbrian Coast. More meaningful comparisons would be with the following which are close to the relevant part of the Irish Sea: Blackpool Tower (158m), Barrow Town Hall Tower (50m), or what is claimed to be the tallest building in Cumbria, the Devonshire Dock Hall at BAe shipyard Barrow (51m). (Heights from Wikipaedia.)

We suspect that many would be shocked if they realised how the proposed turbine heights compared with Blackpool Tower. Although most of my professional career was spent working in metric, I was astonished when I realised that 222m converts to 728 feet, the height of a 60 storey building. Is this why the Applicant illustrated the Gherkin instead?

We trust that you will be informing the Applicant, and we shall be pleased if you will let us know the outcome. It is very serious that they have issued such incorrect and misleading material so close to the Examination period.

A possible precedent?? ....We understand that the original Parliamentary Bill for the Liverpool and Manchester Railway was rejected in 1825 in Westminster due to errors in levels shown on drawings, resulting from inaccurate surveys. Clearly, the lesson is that Applicants should thoroughly check their material.

We look forward to your response.

Yours faithfully
John Pennington, FICE,
on behalf of TravelWatch Isle of Man
Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. We have considered this carefully and produced the attached response.

Thank you for your continuing interest in this examination.

12 December 2013
TravelWatch Isle of Man - John Pennington
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Thank for your email with letter dated 28 Nov 2013, in response to my email sent 1101 on Sat 23 Nov 2013, regarding possible clashes between the Walney Extension Examination, and the consultation periods for Celtic Array's Rhiannon Wind Farm.

We appreciate that the timetable for Walney Extension is now fixed, and note your comment that we should contact Celtic Array direct. You will see from the copy of emails attached below that I have approached Celtic Array's nominated contact (Stuart Barnes at RES Offshore ). As yet, I have received no response to my most recent email of 20 Nov 2013. Unfortunately, Celtic Array has a track record of very slow or no response to correspondence.

We are pleased that you have already brought our concerns to the attention of your colleagues working on the Rhiannon project, and would ask that you forward this email to them with a request for a response from Celtic Array. We am sure that you will appreciate that individuals and voluntary organisations have only very limited resources to address both projects simultaneously.

We look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely

John Pennington, On behalf of self and of TravelWatch Isle of Man
Please find attached a response to your e-mail of 28 November 2013.

I can confirm we have also received your Written Representation dated 29 November 2013 and your response to the ExA's First Written Questions dated 30 November 2013.

03 December 2013
TravelWatch Isle of Man - John Pennington
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Dear Sirs,
I am writing to you as an individual John Pennington 10020174, and on behalf of TravelWatch Isle of Man 10020355.

Although I was unable to attend the Walney Extension Preliminary Meeting on 12 Nov 2013, I read in page 7 of the published notes that possible conflicts between the programmes of Walney Extension and Burbo Bank Extension were discussed, in order that you could take account of staffing resource implications for Natural England, who are engaged on both schemes.

As a matter of urgency, I wish to draw your attention to possible effects of Celtic Array's Irish Sea Zone (SE) Rhiannon programme on our resources which we need to devote to Walney Extension.

Celtic Array Ltd held its First Stage Public Consultation in Nov- Dec 2012, including Public Exhibition in Douglas, Isle of Man. TravelWatch Isle of Man submitted a detailed representation regarding Rhiannon's potential impact on the adverse weather route for the Isle of Man Steam Packet service between Douglas and Liverpool. Celtic Array indicated that they intended to publish their consultation report in early 2013, but it has not yet been issued. TravelWatch has not been able to obtain a response to their concerns from Celtic Array. On 30 Oct 2013, I emailed my Celtic Array contact to ask when we could expect to receive the consultation report, and to seek that we should have sufficient time to study it before the Second Stage Consultation. He emailed me on 20 Nov 2013 (ie after the Walney Extension Preliminary Meeting) and stated that he hoped ''Celtic Array will be in a position to publish the report prior to Christmas ... (or)!
! ...prior to our second stage of consultation. .... As regards our stage 2 consultation... not able to confirm exact dates.... It is planned for early 2014, and we will advise stakeholders when the dates have been finalised.''

Thus we and other Isle of Man interests could be faced with having to study and respond to Celtic Array's Rhiannon Consultation Report, and be actively involved in and responding to the Stage 2 Public Consultation / Exhibition process, at the very same time that we are busy with the Walney Extension Examination. We had not been able to raise this matter at the Walney Extension Preliminary Meeting on 12 Nov, as we had not then received Celtic Array's response re their timetable.

TravelWatch, as a voluntary organisation has limited resources, and Rhiannon will be particularly time-consuming for us as we are questioning Celtic Array's turbine spacing criteria and whether their (over) use of the Engineering / Rochdale envelope is resulting in a needlessly large Potential Development Area, with increased impact on navigation.

As Celtic Array have not yet published their Rhiannon dates, I request that the Walney Extension ExA and PI draw this matter to the attention of their PI colleagues overseeing Rhiannon, to seek to ensure that the Rhiannon programme does not conflict with Walney Extension Examination. It is particularly important that any 28 day response period(s) for Rhiannon are clear of the Walney Extension Examination.

I trust that you will be able to address this matter, and look forward to your response.
Yours faithfully,
John Pennington, FICE.
See attached letter

28 November 2013
John Pennington
Enquiry received via email
United Utilities email, ExA with the following:

Thank you for your letter and involving United Utilities Water PLC in this process.

At present we do not wish to speak or to be represented at the examination.

Our historical agreements with DONG Energy Walney Extension [UK] Ltd are still valid and we would like them to be taken into account during the examination process; if necessary we will provide further written evidence.

We would also like to be notified of your decision on whether to accept our comments and the future progress of the Application by DONG Energy Walney Extension [UK] Ltd for an Order Granting Development Consent for the Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm.

If you wish to discuss this in further detail please do not hesitate in contacting me or Jenny Hope.

The Planning Inspectorate reply was by email.
Thank you for your email and letter of 5 November 2013 regarding the Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm application.

Your letter has been forwarded to the Examining Authority who, in exercising its discretion has accepted your comments as an 'additional submission' in relation to this case, as it was submitted prior to the commencement of the examination stage. It will be published on our website shortly.

For this application, United Utilities has been automatically registered as an Interested Party, being one of the persons with an interest in relevant land who have been notified of the acceptance of the application under Section 56(2)(d) of the Planning Act 2008 (as amended by the Localism Act 2011) (PA 2008). Consequently, United Utilities has important entitlements before, during and after the examination process that includes: the right to be invited to a preliminary meeting; the right to require, and be heard at, an open-floor hearing; the right to be heard at an issue-specific hearing, if one is held; the right to be notified of when the Examining Authority has completed its examination; and the right to be notified of the reasons for the decision.

In having an interest in the land to which a compulsory acquisition request relates, the name of United Utilities has been given to the Secretary of State in a notice under Section 59. This means that United Utilities is additionally categorised as an Affected Person, which are also statutory parties under legislation. Affected persons are able to request that a compulsory acquisition hearing be held to consider the issues arising in connection with the authorisation of the compulsory acquisition of the land (for example, whether there is a compelling case for it) and to make oral representations at that hearing.

In being automatically registered as an Interested Party under Section 102 of the PA 2008 and The Infrastructure Planning (Interested Parties) Regulations 2010, procedural letters from the Examining Authority about this application and its examination will be sent to United Utilities accordingly. Following the Preliminary Meeting, the Examining Authority will send its decisions about how the application is to be examined along with an examination timetable. It is therefore for United Utilities to decide whether it wishes to attend the Preliminary Meeting and participate in the examination process (such as submitting representations and responding to Examining Authority's questions) in accordance with the timetable and any other agendas or amendments to the timetable.

Should you have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact the Walney Team who can assist you further.

11 November 2013
United Utilities - David Sherratt
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
was just planning my staff resource into the next stage of this project. We met with Walney recently and they are hoping to run into relevant rep stage as soon as possible after acceptance (assuming that?s what you do).

Allowing for timing between newspaper adverts I have tries to work out the earliest a deadline might be for this as the 6th September. Does that sound about right to you?
I have been appointed case manager for the Walney Extension application. We are currently determining whether the application can be accepted for further consideration. We expect to meet our statutory deadline of 26th July to complete this process.

After this it is up to the applicant to publicise that their application has been accepted, which includes an advertisement in a local newspaper for 2 successive weeks. From this last notice, there is a minimum 28 day period in which individuals or organisations may register as Interested Parties. 6th September does seem like a feasible earliest deadline for receipt of registration. However, the commencement of this process, and indeed the deadline offered, are entirely the choice of the applicant.

After the close of the Relevant Representations period, the Examining Authority (our Inspector) has 21 days to consider the evidence. At the end of this period a Preliminary Meeting will be held for Interested Parties to consider the best process to examine the issues.

Please do have a look at our advice note [attachment 1] regarding Relevant Representations. If the application is accepted for examination, all documentation will be available online immediately, allowing your team to make an early start if necessary.

08 July 2013
Natural England - James Bussell
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
The Walney Extension Windfarm is due for submission shortly. We would like to register an interest in this application. When do we do this and how will will know about the timings. On reading the planning portal website it implies this can be submitted 28 days after the application (expected on 28 June), assuming this gets through the assessment stage, will a request for a registration of interest then be notified on the website after this date, so it is just a case of us checking the website from time to time.
Thank you for your interest in this case. We are indeed expecting an application to be submitted on 28th June for the Walney wind farm extension. Owing to the scale of national infrastructure applications, we do expect that the full 28 day assessment period will be used to determine whether to accept the application for further consideration.

If the application is accepted, then we will notify the applicant on or around 26th July. It is the applicant's duty to publicise the status of their application and invite interested parties to register with the Planning Inspectorate. It is up to the applicant to start this process, which may happen immediately or after a number of months. When this happens you will be able to register through the www.infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk<blocked::http://www.infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk/> website. As an example, the Woodside road scheme has just opened for registration; you can see the 'register online' button at the top of the page at [attachment 1];blocked::http://infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk/projects/eastern/woodside-connection-houghton-regis-bedfordshire/>.

We have an advice sheet on how to register as an Interested Party and make a Relevant Representation at [attachment 2];blocked::http://infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Advice-note-8-3v4.pdf>.

26 June 2013
Butterfly Conservation - Mark Parsons
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Meeting between the Planning Inspectorate and DONG Energy Walney Extension (UK) Ltd
See attached Meeting Note

24 June 2013
DONG Energy Walney Extension (UK) Ltd
Enquiry received via phone
Mr Phillips (representing DONG Energy regarding the Walney Extension offshore wind farm proposal) queried the actions to be taken by an applicant submitting an application after 25 June 2013 rearding section 132 of the Planning Act 2008.
The Planning Inspectorate informed Mr Phillips that the applicant would need to be satisfied that the relevant the test in section 132(3) to (5) of the Planning Act 2008 as amended would be satisfied. In addition, as stated in section 24(3) of the Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013, the relevant subsection in section 132 of the Planning Act 2008 should be recorded in the Order.

14 June 2013
Gareth Phillips
Enquiry received via email
Two emails were received from DONG Energy regarding: the size and scale of the offshore plans to be submitted with the application; and the required format of paragraph numbering in the Environmental Statement (including the annexes).

DONG Energy stated that it makes sense for offshore plans to be shown at a smaller scale than prescribed in the regulations, due to the level of detail on the offshore mapping compared to onshore, DONG Energy referred to two previous offshore applications which took this approach and were accepted.

DONG Energy queried which paragraph numbering system is considered most useful in the Environmental Statement and annex: where paragraphs are all consecutively numbered and not linked to section numbers, or where paragraph numbering restarts after each new section?
DONG Energy were informed that although a small number of offshore applications have been accepted where the plans scale did not strictly comply with the regulations, it should be noted that in one example, further plans at the required scale were later requested by the Examining authority.

Paragraph numbers are required for the Environmental Statement (included annexes). Although there is no fixed requirement regarding the format of the numbering system, it could seem more helpful to re-start the paragraph numbering sequence after each new section (with the section number forming the start of the paragraph reference, to ensure the same paragraph number does not appear twice).

29 May 2013
Sally Holroyd DONG Energy
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Meeting to discuss draft documents and give the Planning Inspectorate an update on the proposal.
Please see attached meeting note, and the linked presentation from DONG Energy.

01 March 2013
DONG Energy
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Email received from Lancashire Moth Group requesting to register an interest in the DONG Energy Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm proposal, including comments regarding the location of the proposal and a Site of Special Scientific Interest and Section 41 Moth species habitat.
The following advice was provided:

DONG Energy are intending to submit their application for the Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm in May 2013.

I note your email states that you have informed DONG Energy of the SSSI and Section 41 Moth species habitat. I would however encourage you to forward your email to DONG Energy to ensure that they are aware of your comments regarding the explanation of the chosen route. We will keep your email on our file at this stage.

Once an application is submitted, a decision is made within 28 days as to whether or not the application can be accepted for examination. If the application is accepted, the applicant will publicise this decision, giving an opportunity for persons to register as an interested party. Therefore at this current pre-application stage you are unable to officially register your interest with us, however this opportunity will be available if the application is accepted.

I have included links to some of the Planning Inspectorate's advice notes below describing the Planning Act 2008 process which I hope you will find helpful:

How the process works:
[attachment 1]

How to register to become an interested party:
[attachment 2]

General link to all Planning Inspectorate Planning Act 2008 advice notes:
[attachment 3]

14 February 2013
Lancashire Moth Group - Stephen Palmer
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Meeting to provide the Planning Inspectorate with an update on the proposal
Please see Meeting Note and DONG Energy's presentation given on 30.10.12 attached.

30 October 2012
DONG Energy
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please could you provide some advice, my query is in relation to the level of consultation and the means of responding to the visual impact of Major Infrastructure projects on non-prescribed bodies.

Under the current guidance Copeland Borough Council is designated as a non-prescribed body as we are within the ZVI of the proposed Walney Island Off Shore Wind Farm Extension.
Within the guidance notes it states The Secretary of state will consult the local authority(s) in relation to any potential visual impact of a proposed NSIP??.. the local authority will be consulted as a non-prescribed consultation body.

What form of consultation will the SOS engage in with the non-prescribed authorities and to what extent or weight is given to the comments received?

As there is no formal mechanism for non-prescribed bodies to feed in to the project (that is we are not invited to feed into the LIR) it would be helpful if you could provide some clarity or guidance as to the manner in which the SOS would expect non-prescribed bodies to respond to any such consultation, along with time scales and the manner in which the potential impacts of the development should be reported?
As you may be aware, the application for the Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm proposal is likely to be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate in Q1 of 2013.

The quote in your email was taken from the Planning Inspectorate?s Advice Note 3: ?EIA Consultation and Notification? which refers to the Environmental Impact Assessment screening and scoping processes at the pre-application stage. As you may be aware, EIA scoping for this application was undertaken on 27 September 2010 . The advice given below gives a brief overview of the opportunities to comment on the proposal.

Before submitting an application for Development Consent Order, applicants are required to carry out extensive consultation on the proposed development as prescribed within s42 and s47 of the Planning Act 2008 as amended, and undertake publicity in accordance with section 48. We are aware that DONG Energy is currently undertaking this consultation and publicity and your Council now has the opportunity to respond. DONG Energy will have set a deadline of no less than 28 days for receipt of responses.

Once the application has been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate, a decision must be made within 28 days as to whether or not the application can be accepted for examination (section 55 of the Planning Act 2008 as amended).

If the application is accepted, the applicant is required to publicise the decision and also notify various bodies. This notice and publicity will include information on when to make a relevant representation, and as a result, become an interested party.

Interested parties then will be able to take part in the examination of the application.

Please view the following Advice Notes published on our website for more information:

8.1 How the process works

[attachment 1]

8.2 Responding to the developer?s pre-application consultation

[attachment 2]

8.3 How to register and become an interested party in an application

[attachment 3]

8.4 Influencing how application will be examined ? the Preliminary Meeting

[attachment 4]

21 September 2012
Copeland Borough Council - Denice Gallen
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Please see attachments.

26 June 2012
DONG Energy
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Conference call between IPC and DONG Energy to discuss the following:
? Update on progress made with regard to the IPC Outreach event to be organised by the IPC.
? Local Impact Report (LIR) ? Feedback from DONG Energy regarding Local Authority consultation and merging LIRs between multiple authorities.
? Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) ? update from DONG Energy on time schedule for submission.
? Transboundary Screening Report ? update from DONG Energy on time schedule for submission.
Please see attached meeting note.

27 January 2012
DONG Energy DONG Energy
Enquiry received via email
Clarification was sought as to the reasons why Wirral Borough Council are classed as a neighbouring authority under s.43 of the Planning Act 2008.
The IPC confirmed that Wirral Borough Council were included on the Regulation 9 (re the EIA Regulations) list produced at the point when the IPC issued a Scoping Opinion for the project because at that time the Scoping Report included three potential grid connection locations.

Since that time Dong Energy have clarified which grid connection offer will be used. However, the IPC will not be producing a further Reg 9 list. It was confirmed that Dong Energy as the future applicant must satisfy themselves that they have consulted appropriately and at a broad enough area to satisfy the requirements of pre-application consultation.

18 January 2012
Wirral Borough Council - Matthew Rushton
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Dong Energy providing a project update on pre-application progress for the Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm project
Please see Meeting Notes attached

13 December 2011
Dong Energy
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
DONG Energy to provide an update on the progress of the proposal to date and to discuss the possibility of an outreach event.

11 October 2011
DONG Energy - Malcolm Johnson
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
DONG Energy requested that the IPC provided comments on a draft Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC) in accordance with published guidance
Dear Malcolm

Further to our telephone discussion please find below our comments on your draft Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC) for the Walney Extension project. As discussed, these points are drawn from our consideration of the draft SoCC against the Act and its associated legislation and published advice and guidance.

? The draft SoCC does not explicitly state that the project is EIA development (although you do acknowledge an ES will be provided) in line with EIA Reg 10
? Paragraph 4 of the draft SoCC refers to seeking consent from the MMO and Local Authorities for various matters (as opposed to the IPC). It may be worthwhile clarifying this section, to reflect your intentions for this proposal.
? IPC Guidance Note 1 (para 29) refers to the need for the SoCC to provide sufficient detail of the project, including positive and negative impacts. You may wish to consider to what extent the wording in the SoCC does this and whether you should be more explicit in stating what the impacts (both positive and negative) are. As discussed, other promoters have been more specific on this point.
? You may also wish to consider whether to acknowledge the current status of the NPS within the SoCC.

The key legislation and guidance for Applicants and Local Authorities on the preparation and content of SoCCs have been listed below with the appropriate links:
? section 47 of the Planning Act 2008 (the Act) [attachment 1]
? IPC Guidance Note 1 Revision 1 on pre-application stages, paragraph 12 onwards [attachment 2]
? The Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2009, Regulation 10 (a) and (b) [attachment 3]
? CLG Guidance on pre-application consultation. Please note that paragraph 92 of this Guidance refers applicants to Regulations 9 and 10 (of the EIA Regulations), however it should read as Regulation 10 and 11 of the EIA Regulations instead [attachment 4]
? CLG Guidance for Local Authorities [attachment 5]

Please note that in accordance with section 55(4)(c) of the Act, when determining whether an application can be accepted, the Commission must consider the extent to which the applicant has had regard to any guidance issued under section 50 (see CLG guidance above) and in accordance with section 55 (3) (d) applicants should give reasons for each respect in which applicable guidance issued under section 37 (4) (see the Commission's Statutory Guidance Note 2) has not been followed. Therefore, if any guidance has not been followed, you may wish to explain and justify this within your consultation report or appropriate application document.

All advice the Commission provides at this stage does not prejudice or pre-judge the decision of the Commissioner regarding acceptance or non-acceptance of an application. We would strongly recommend that you always seek your own legal advice upon which you can rely.

If you have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact Kath or myself.

Kind regards

Mike

30 June 2011
DONG Energy - Malcolm Johnson
Enquiry received via phone
response has attachments
Dong Energy queried whether a National Park Authority (NPA) would be a statutory consultee for their proposal.
The Regulation 9 list (of The Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2009) issued on 04 November 2010 for the proposal set out the names and addresses of those bodies 'so notified' by the IPC about their duty to make information available in accordance with Regulation 9. This list does not represent a list of all those bodies that you may need to consult in order to comply with your pre-application consultation duties and you will need to carry out your own due diligence to identify the relevant prescribed consultees as the scheme is developed.

The opportunity remains for the NPA to provide comments to you about what should be included in the environmental statement and although the scoping opinion has now been adopted it is considered that they have not therefore been prejudiced. If you submit a further Regulation 6 (1) (b) notification identifying the land affected by the preferred connection route the IPC will notify the NPA (as required by Regulation 9 (1) (a)) of the duty imposed to make information available to you. This will assist you in preparation of the environmental statement.

A link to The Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2009 has been provided below:
[attachment 1]

11 March 2011
Dong Energy -Malcolm Johnson - Dong Energy
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Meeting with Dong Energy to provide a project update
See meeting note [attachment 1]

25 January 2011
Dong Energy - anon.
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Inception meeting between IPC, Dong Energy, Local Authorities and MMO regarding the Walney Extension offshore wind farm.
Please follow this link to view the meeting note and presentations: [attachment 1]

02 November 2010
Applicant, Local Authorities and MMO