Sea-bed mining company Trans-Tasman Resources' second application to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for mining consent has been labelled a ''largely unchanged application'' by several players in the fishing industry.
Trans-Tasman wants to annually mine up to 50 million of ironsands off the coast of Taranaki for the next 35 years, but its first application was turned down by the EPA in early 2014.
Trans-Tasman is opposed by Fisheries Inshore New Zealand, the New Zealand Federation of Commercial Fishermen, Talley's Group, Southern Inshore Fisheries Management and Cloudy Bay Clams.
Closing submissions on Trans-Tasman's application are due to be heard on May 24-25.
Fisheries Inshore New Zealand chief executive Jeremy Helson said Trans-Tasman's latest application was ''almost identical to the first'', and did not address the EPA's key reasons for refusing its consent in 2014.
''It's hard to understand why the EPA allowed Trans-Tasman Resources to resubmit a largely unchanged application,'' Dr Helson said in a statement yesterday.
Te Runanga o Ngati Ruanui Trust had also submitted opposition to the bid, and, in April, environmental groups Kiwis Against Seabed Mining and Greenpeace said they were considering applying for a judicial review of the EPA process, a declaratory statement or an appeal based on what they described as a ''flawed process''.
Trans-Tasman's application was lodged with the EPA in August 2016, then the Environment Court overturned an EPA decision to approve the withholding of some information, following an application by the seafood industry, iwi and environmental groups.
Dr Helson said Trans-Tasman's first application was refused in June 2014 after an EPA-appointed Decision Making Committee found the application was premature and more time should have been taken to understand the proposed operation, its effects on both the environment and existing commercial interests.
''Trans-Tasman has a responsibility to provide robust information to support its application,'' Dr Helson said.
He claimed the extension of the application process and continued resubmission of evidence had resulted in submitters incurring unreasonable costs to address deficiencies in Trans-Tasman's application.
Dr Helson said the way the proceedings were conducted demonstrated why applications should be handled by the Environment Court and ''not a quasi-judicial body'' appointed by the EPA and potentially subject to political interference.
