EPA says ready to comply with court order

Dec 28, 2022 Court Stories, Features / Columnists, News

…after losing case over waiver of EIA for Schlumberger Houston radioactive storage facility

Kaieteur News – The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has said it is ready to comply with the directive of the High Court after losing the case of its decision to waive an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for Schlumberger Guyana Inc. (SGI) to build a radioactive at the facility at Houston.

The EPA issued a statement in respect to the outcome of the recent case in which Danuta Radzik and others challenged the agency. It acknowledges its error and promised to adhere to the Court’s judgment. The agency clarified however that the judgment was not against the agency’s decision to waive the requirement for an EIA, but rather its failure to publish in the statutory notice reasons/adequate reasons for the decision not requiring an EIA.

The High Court of the Supreme Court of Judicature of Guyana, on December 16, 2022 issued several administrative orders, which dealt with the issue of the EPA not publishing reasons/adequate reasons for a decision in relation to not requiring an EIA for the construction and operation of a source storage/calibration building in accordance with Sec.11 (2) of the Environmental Protection Act, Cap.20:05, Laws of Guyana.

According to the EPA, Justice Nareshwar Harnanan in his judgment stated; “That the EPAs decision to waive the requirement of an Environmental Impact Assessment with respect to Schlumberger Guyana Inc. (SGI)’s application for environmental authorization for the construction of the said facility is in breach of the EPAs statutory duty for failure to provide reasons for the wavier as mandated under section 11(2) of the Environmental Protection Act, Cap.20:05.”

It continued that notably, Justice Nareshwar Harnanan, further stipulates in paragraph. 56 of his judgment that it’s “[t]he EPA by section 11(2) is mandated to determine whether the project requires an EIA or not”, as the regulatory body.

In the meantime, the agency said it remains committed to working in the best interest of the Guyanese people and the environment. On February 14, 2022, three Environmental Activists and residents who live nearby the facility, Vanda Radzik, Danuta Radzik, and Raphael Singh, through their Lawyers: Marlene Alleyne, Siand Dhurjon, and Ronald Burch-Smith, filed a lawsuit at the Demerara High Court against the EPA, the Environmental Assessment Board, and Schlumberger.

The residents won their case last Friday when the Judge handed down his ruling in the case not only quashing the EPA’s decision to grant permission to the US-owned company to construct and operate the facility but also halting the works at the radioactive storage facility.

Justice Harnanan declared that the EPA’s decision to not conduct an EIA into the effects of the construction of the facility was illegal, ultra vires, unreasonable, and irrational since it breached the Environmental Protection Act, Cap.20:05.

Section 11 of EPA Act, stipulates that any project that may significantly affects the environment requires an EIA and such an assessment requires publication in the newspapers of the intended project as well as consultations with the public. The Judge said, “This court is of the view that the EPA’s decision to waive the requirement or EIA cannot be found to be lawful as it directly contravenes [section] 11 (2) of the [EPA] Act, the court also finds that no adequate reasons were contained in the notice published by the EPA…”

Justice Harnanan highlighted that while the EPA contended that by granting a permit to Schlumberger to construct the facility it does not guarantee storage of the radioactive sources at the facility – the EPA Act explains – that the agency should not issue a construction or operation permit unless the agency includes in the permit conditions that are reasonably necessary to protect the environment.