Thursday's story on National Trust plans for a Supreme Court challenge against the approval of the Bermuda Underwater Exploration Institute should have said the Trust executive was planning to get approval for such action from its council, not its general membership.

The National Trust is set for a courtroom showdown over the proposed $10 million East Broadway underwater museum.

Trust members will be urged at a special meeting on Monday to fight the proposal in the Supreme Court.

Last night the Trust's executive decided to put the recommendation to members.

The move follows the Transport Minister's decision to give the go-ahead to the Bermuda Underwater Exploration Institute.

The Hon. Maxwell Burgess overturned a Development Applications Board ruling.

One of the highlights of the proposed waterfront museum would be a simulated submersible ride.

Other exhibits would be aimed at showing what it is like to search the ocean's depths.

Having six attached buildings, the central exhibit hall would stand 31 feet above Crow Lane. A new dock would be built on 4,000 square feet of reclaimed land.

The Trust, one of six objectors, says it supports the purpose of the BUEI but believes the physical structure is "entirely incompatible'' with the proposed site.

A central plank of any appeal by the Trust would be that Mr. Burgess's decision had the "appearance of bias''.

The Trust complain Government was too intertwined with the museum planning application.

One of the BUEI's backers is Finance Minister the Hon. David Saul.

And, therefore, it was wrong for Mr. Burgess to rule on the issue, the Trust argue.

Last night Trust director Ms Amanda Outerbridge issued a statement following the executive meeting.

"The executive will recommend to the Council, which is the governing body of the National Trust, that we refer the matter to the Supreme Court to have the Minister's decision quashed on the basis that it was wrongly made.

"The Council will be asked to attend a special meeting on Monday July 4 to consider the matter as we only have 21 days in which to act and the next regular council meeting takes place after that 21-day period.'' "We are concerned that the appeal was not dealt with by an independent inspector, thereby giving rise to a perception of bias, and the ruling itself was incorrect.''