Explain pullout, minister tells DOC

The Department of Conservation is being asked by the Government to "please explain" why it did not speak to its submission on a coal-fired power station at Marsden Pt.
The Northern Advocate revealed on Wednesday that DOC had withdrawn its request to speak to its submission, after receiving assurances from Mighty River Power that environmental effects of its proposed coal-burning Marsden B power station on department land around the site would be only minor.
Greenpeace has attacked the withdrawal, saying it showed DOC was turning a blind eye to pollution and had not listened to all the evidence on the application to fire up the station.
A spokesman for Conservation Minister Chris Carter said he had had no input into DOC's withdrawal from the hearing into the 11 resource consents sought for the station.
The spokesman said Mr Carter had now written to DOC asking that it "please explain" why it withdrew.
DOC told the Northland Regional Council it was "of the view that any adverse affects on its conservation concerns appear to be minor, subject to stringent resource conditions being imposed as recommended in the staff reports".
But Greenpeace says that ignores expert evidence presented to the resource consent hearing.
DOC said in its original submission that the power station would affect recreational use of Bream Bay, could adversely affect habitats and biodiversity, and that measures to control leaching of contaminants to groundwater were inadequate.
DOC also said in the submission that Mighty River Power had failed to demonstrate that water discharges would not adversely affect the coastal water and marine ecosystems, and that most of the proposal relied on information not currently available.
The submission advocated a precautionary approach and stated that Marsden B should not go ahead. But that changed after Mighty River technical experts met DOC experts and provided more information on the environmental effects.
However, Greenpeace climate and energy campaigner David Fields said DOC's original concerns had been borne out by evidence during the month-long hearing. "But DOC has not been there to hear it. It chose instead to only listen to Mighty River Power in a private meeting," he said.
"What is of grave concern is that DOC is simply taking Mighty River Power at its word and has withdrawn from the process before taking other evidence into account. It's like blindly accepting scientific arguments from tobacco companies that cigarettes are good for you. By withdrawing from the process, DOC has abdicated its responsibility to advocate for conservation, and has certainly failed the community."
He said regional council staff had concluded that the discharges would be a very high point source for several potentially toxic metals and dioxins. "All of the evidence before the hearing points to serious contamination of the local area, and something DOC should be concerned about," Mr Fields said.
"The only remaining submission by central government is from the Ministry of Economic Development, which supports the proposal. This submission was specifically requested by the NRC, which argued that DOC's opposition would be the only Government response to the proposal."
* Decision at least fortnight away
A decision on whether the controversial Marsden B Power Station proposal can go ahead could be known by the end of this month.
Five weeks of public submissions on resource consent applications by Mighty River Power to restart the station using coal ended in Whangarei yesterday and the hearing commissioners have adjourned.
The State-owned power generator has applied to the Whangarei District and Northland Regional Councils for 11 resource consents to convert the unused oil-fired Marsden B station at Ruakaka to a coal-fired power station.
The four commissioners have 15 working days to deliver their finding, although they can get an extension if the applicant agrees.
Staff from both councils have recommended the consents be granted - but asked that more stringent conditions than they had originally recommended be imposed.
Regional council air quality team leader Paul Baynham said, "It is our opinion that provided the recommended conditions of consent are complied with, the effects of the proposal will be less than minor."
He also said the consents should be granted for 25 years, rather than the 17 years regional council staff originally recommended. Mighty River wants the consents for 35 years.