Hi oze1,I was actually refering to GBG being aware of the whole...

Hi oze1,
I was actually refering to GBG being aware of the whole EPA process and not specifcally to the "decison" timeline.

That's a good question you raised. It doesn't appear from recent media statements that management knew exactly how long a decision would take but it was surprising when they said they expected the decison by Feb 16. Once EPA approves the project the Gov't still has to provide approval; so for all that to take only a few weeks did surprise me. As it turned out it does take a lot longer.
Recent GBG comments don't indicate any problem holding things up other than Gov't process.

Back to your question, I think planning for the delay may have been on the cards in any case. I can't reason why a delay in the EPA decision of a couple of months would necessitate a 12 month postponement. That's absurd if time was of the essence. Obviously it's not anymore.
Remember, the startup increase has also been abandoned for the time being...

As you say, not long now we are told, so let's hope it's a good one that holders can drink to!