The EPA have refused to provide the numbers of emissions units by Norske Skog Tasman Ltd surrendered via the NZETS in 2010 (6 months) and 2011. The EPA rely on Section 99 of the Climate Change Response Act 2002 (http://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/20...) and on Section 52(3)(b) of the Official Information Act 1982 (http://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/19...).
I will complain to the Office of the Ombudsmen.

s99(b)(iv) allows disclosure "as provided under this Act or any other Act".

Subject:We have received your complaint
From: info@ombudsman.parliament.nz
Date: Wed, November 21, 2012 12:07 pm
Thank you for submitting your complaint. Please find below a copy for your own references
What is the nature of your complaint?
I have a complaint about a request for official information.
I would like to complain about: Environmental Protection Authority
Please give details of your complaint
On 2 November 2012 using the www.fyi.org.nz website, I requested from the Environmental Protection Authority, the number and type of emission units surrendered by Norske Skog Tasman New Zealand Limited in terms of the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme for the six month compliance period ending on 31 December 2010 and for the calendar year 2011
(http://fyi.org.nz/request/emission_units...).

I asked for this information so I could compare the units surrendered by Norske Skog to the number of units allocated which is available on the Ministry for the Environment's website. I wished to know whether Norske Skog had been allocated more units than it surrendered which would indicate that it's greenhouse gas emissions were not in fact 'priced' as an externality by the operation of the NZ Emissions
Trading Scheme.

On 20 November 2012 the Environmental Protection Authority refused this request citing Section 99 of the Climate Change Response Act 2002 and Section 52(3)(b) of the Official Information Act 1982 (letter ref Letter SJohnson ENQ 20367 ZQ7CCH.pdf
http://fyi.org.nz/request/655/response/3...).
Will you please review their decision? Thank you.

I received a letter from the Ombudsmens Office that this complaint was yet to be investigated due to their backlog. I replied asking them to consider it as soon as they could.

After a year's delay, the Deputy Ombudsman Leo Donnelly advised that he agreed with the EPA view that they did not have to provide the information on units surrendered. This is a quote from his letter dated 8 April 2014.
"I am not persuaded that the OIA is an Act that provides for the disclosure of information in s 99(2)(a) of the Climate Change Response Act. The OIA confers a right to request official information and requires that such requests be processed in accordance with its provisions, but those provisions do not provide for the disclosure of information under the CCRA (or any other Act that imposes restrictions on the availability of official information). Instead, section 52(3)(b)(i) of the OIA provides that nothing in that Act derogates from any provision which is contained in any other Act which imposes a prohibition or restriction in relation to the availability of official information. Section 99 is such a section.
Accordingly, the OIA does not override the restrictions imposed by section 99 of the CCRA and it would be contrary to that section for the requested information to be made available to you. Consequently, section 18(c)(1) of the OIA provides a reason to refuse your request on that basis."

Its in their 2011 annual report filed with the companies office:

http://www.business.govt.nz/companies/ap...

They were allocated 119,646 units in 2010, and a further 241,825 in 2011. They surendered a mere 10,754 units in 2011, and sold another 160,000.

Yes, I'd seen the Norske Skog Tasman annual financial statements for 2011. They pretty much confirm that the emission units allocated exceed units surrendered for emissions and that the NZETS industrial allocation of emission units acts as a transfer of wealth, and not a partial discount of a carbon price.
See my blog post
http://hot-topic.co.nz/norwegian-wood-th...