Midnight Oil

Subject: Re: Peter Goes For His Gunns
From: "Tom Spencer" <tomspencer@eml.cc>
Date: 24/08/2008, 6:50 am
To: powderworks@yahoogroups.com.au

Dear Bruce

It's an Australian Financial Review piece (22 August) titled "Garrett: 
Gunns unlikely to meet deadline":

Timber company Gunns is unlikely to meet a deadline for providing
environmental information for its proposed $2billion Tasmanian pulp
mill, federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett says.

Mr Garrett said the company had yet to seek an extension and he had
approved just four of the 16 modules of the environmental management
plan for the mill.

Other modules had gone back to Gunns for extra information and had to be
submitted, some were with the Environment Department, one had gone to
the expert panel for assessment and there had been no sign of another.

"So all we have at this present point in time is four of the 16 modules
that make up the environmental impact management plan.  The remainder
haven't reached my desk yet" he told ABC Radio.

"Given the time that these modules have taken to be delivered to the
department satisfactorily, then it is unlikely that Gunns are going to
meet the October 4 deadline".

The previous government approved the controversial Tamar Valley pulp
mill, subject to it meeting an environment management plan.

Under the plan, Gunns must submit each module to the department for
approval.  If approved then they go before an expert panel for
assessment and only once approved do they go to the Minister.

Mr Garrett said each module faced stringent and rigorous assessment in
accordance with the conditions set by the previous government.

Australian Greens Senator Christine Milne on Thursday challenged Mr
Garrett to release a CSIRO report on the impact of the mill releasing
64,000 tonnes of effluent into Bass Strait every day.

Senator Milne's request for the report to be released under Freedom of
Information (FOI) laws was rejected.

Mr Garrett said the decision was made by his department and Ms Milne
could appeal.

He said he had been advised the department decided to withhold the
report because it contained preliminary and unverified data.

"The bottom line is that the environmental management plan is to define
a set of environmental parameters within which the mill must operate",
he said.

"If there is material that comes through which indicates that effluent
from the mill may have an unacceptable impact on the marine environment,
then there's (the) possibility that modification to the project, for
example possible extension to tertiary treatment, might be required".

t