In light of the possibility that the TMT may re-enter the permitting process after their permit was remanded by the Supreme Court here is some useful information regarding the contested case hearing process from kahea.org.
The TMT official statements seem to elude to the idea that if they are required to conform to the due process set forth by the State of Hawaii and its Conservation District Use Application process, that they were considering a “Plan-B” for an alternative sight.
We know the TMT corporation has suggested that if they had to finance another Environmental (EIS) and Cultural impact (CIS) statement (which the contested case process involved) that the cost would be too much. To put cost into perspective the Makua valley EIS and CIS was financed with multi-million dollar budgets and still was not completed in time.
Let’s remind the TMT corporation that it is a bad investment to build…
View original post 1,146 more words