EAB conducts hearing on Coverden residents objections to EPA’s approval

Oil & gas waste treatment plant

Residents of Coverden on the East Bank of Demerara and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are at odds over the establishment of a waste treatment facility for the transfer, storage, treatment, and disposal of oil and gas waste in the community.
Global Oil Environmental Services (GOES), which is a joint venture between JaParts Guyana and Global Oil and Managements Group, recently applied to the Environmental Assessment Board (EAB), for approval for the construction and operation of the facility at Block X TE Huste, Block I, T Huste, Coverden.
The EPA has already determined that the project will not significantly impact human health and the environment and therefore does not require an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). However, several residents of the community have submitted appeals against the development of the oil and gas waste treatment facility in the area.
A petition inked by Penelope Howell, which was accompanied by the names of over 130 residents from the community called on the EPA to put a halt to the construction and operation of the facility unless and until further consultations are done with the project’s developer, relevant stakeholders, and residents.
On Monday, the EAB held a virtual public hearing into the appeals.
Those present at the hearing included EPA officials, residents of the Coverden community, the project’s developer, and other key stakeholders. Following the hearing, the EAB will deliberate on the findings and prepare a report with its decision confirming or setting aside the EPA’s decision.
The residents have objected to having such a project in their community which they described as densely populated and located near the Demerara River. Most of them said that from a simple Google search, they have come to the inescapable conclusion that GOES has a questionable track record.
“When I researched the company, I did not see anything positive that I can take away,” a resident said.

For such a major project, which has the potential of being hazardous, the residents are angry at the fact that the EPA failed to provide them, or the public with any background information about the company, and the environmental and health impacts of the project.
According to them, no such information has been published on the EPA’s website, social media pages, or in the daily newspapers. “If you are going to do such a major project this should have been posted on the EPA’s website,” one resident remarked.
In this regard, the resident called for there to be more transparency. Moreover, they are demanding that the EPA produce more scientific data in relation to the environmental, social, cultural, adverse, and economic impacts of the project.
Among other things, they want to know about the project’s construction period impact. Moreover, the concerned residents would like to know about the disaster, demographics change, and epidemic impact assessments on the project.
In determining that the project is exempt from an EIA, the EAB, during a PowerPoint presentation, noted that it considered the fact that the project is not located in a historical or culturally important site. According to the EAB, the project location is privately owned and leased to the project proponent, and the closest resident is located approximately 280 metres northeast of the project.
Additionally, the EAB said that transboundary effects from the project are low and will be mitigated via the transport of waste in ISO secured Fac Tanks.

Social benefits to community
Notwithstanding the aforementioned, the EAB said that the project has attracted public interest and concern.
Meanwhile, in addressing some of the residents’ concerns, the project’s developer outlined that the project will have many social benefits to the community.
“Our role is to invest in any community in which we operate in. If there is one thing that we do no matter where we are, is to invest in the community. This project is only one project of many that we plan on doing here in Coverden…” the developer said.
He noted that the project will create employment opportunities for residents in the area.
At Monday’s hearing, several questions posed by residents to the developer and EPA officials went unanswered. The developer and EPA officials, however, assured the residents that they have taken note of their questions and will provide answers at a later time.
The EPA was heavily criticised for its poor-quality call. Throughout the two-hour Zoom meeting, residents complained of the microphone at the EPA’s end being muffled. They also complained about the agency’s officials not appearing on camera. (G1)