"I thought the hearing was brought on the basis of dust and...

"I thought the hearing was brought on the basis of dust and light, impacting a nearby resident, not the basis for an NRDC attack on the ISL process"

Lawrie - I have tried to clarify this a couple of times but have obvioulsy failed. Even though it is SO simple

I'll try one more time.

There are TWO levels to the 'petition to intervene' process. One is objecting to an application by CONTENDING against elements of it (e.g.contending that certain elements are inconsistent with legislation, standards etc). The other is STANDING - that is, the establishment of the legal basis to make contentions. To get standing, you need to prove that you are personally or corporately impacted by the proposal. If you can't get standing you cannot submit contentions.

The dust and light issues were used for STANDING - that is, a member of NRDC and PRBRC (Viviano) would be impacted by the proposal.

STANDING has now been confirmed. Dust and light are now OUT of the picture. They have done their job. We are now on to the CONTENTIONS (water quality, cumulative impacts etc) - and that is what NRDC is now focussed on