Anti-seabed mining groups are threatening the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) they may seek a judicial review or court action over its handling of a mining application by Trans Tasman Resources.
Trans Tasman Resources had its first seabed mining application turned down in early 2014, but last August reapplied to the EPA, seeking to mine five million tonnes of iron-rich sands offshore in the Taranaki Bight for export.
At the heart of the issue is the EPA having last September formally accepted Trans Tasman's application as ``complete''. However, since then it has requested a wide range of new information for the application, which the environmental groups claim will leave it disadvantaged.
The EPA's handling of the application is being described as having ``seriously gone off the rails'' by Kiwis Against Seabed Mining (Kasm) and Greenpeace, Kasm chairman Phil McCabe said in a statement yesterday.
``This is an unlawful exercise of power which also significantly prejudices submitters in opposition to the application,'' he said of the hearing extension to May 31 given for inclusion of new information.
Kasm and Greenpeace were considering applying for a judicial review of the process, a declaratory statement or an appeal based on what Mr McCabe described as ``the flawed process''.
Mr McCabe said Kasm and Greenpeace contended, in a recent memo to the EPA, that they knew the new information was missing at the time and had told the EPA in September the information should have been part of the original application.
After the EPA accepted the original application as ``complete'', and after hearing submitters' evidence, calling a wide range of experts and recalling them to give further evidence, the EPA had now turned around and asked Trans Tasman ``for a whole lot of new information'', Mr McCabe said.
He said the missing information was one of the main reasons the EPA refused Trans Tasman consent the first time.
``Yet the EPA went ahead and accepted this deficient application and are now requesting detail they should have asked for seven months ago,'' Mr McCabe said.
He said Kasm was a volunteer-run organisation without an open cheque book and the application had already cost it ``tens of thousands of dollars'' and huge amounts of time.
He said the fishing industry and Ngati Ruanui had withdrawn from much of the hearing, citing excessive cost burdens.
``It's requisite for major proposals such as this to have comprehensive and comprehensible information available when parties are deciding whether or not to engage and what areas require attention, energy and resources.''
Mr McCabe said the EPA requesting more information at this stage was ``the latest in a number of very questionable procedural decisions by the EPA''.
Last November, Kasm and Greenpeace were successful in the Environment Court in overturning a decision by the EPA that would have allowed Trans Tasman to redact 190 pages of its application.
