-mangroves expected to be removed
-public has 30 days to lodge appeal again
The EPA yesterday launched a fresh process for the approval of a new bridge over the Demerara River and stuck to its controversial opinion that an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is not required even though protected mangroves will have to be removed.
Thirty days have now been set aside for the public to appeal the decision.
An earlier process for the approval of the new bridge was aborted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at the appeals stage after it came in for severe flak from environmentalists and civil society activists for not providing reasons why an EIA was not required.
In its notice published in yesterday’s state-owned Guyana Chronicle, the EPA corrected this defect by providing a link with the reasons why it had ruled that an EIA was not required.
The EPA said that yesterday’s notice superseded all others.
According to the notice, the EPA “having screened the application has determined that it will not significantly affect the environment and therefore is exempt from the requirement to conduct an Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA), as set out in section 11 of the Environmental Protection Act, Cap. 20:05, Laws of Guyana…this notice hereby supersedes any previous notice regarding this proposed project.”
Persons who may be affected by the project, and wish to object to the EPA’s non-requirement of an EIA are advised to lodge an appeal with the Environmental Assessment Board (EAB) within 30 days of the publication of the first notice.
Based on the project summary, the replacement of the 43-year-old existing floating bridge is critical for a number of reasons ranging from it exceeding its lifespan to costly and regular maintenance. The project summary also indicates that there is an increased vulnerability to disruptive incidents on the bridge and it limits the capacity for travellers owing to the long and slow retraction process.
The Demerara Harbour Bridge (DHB) was constructed by the UK firm Mabey and Johnson and commissioned on July 02, 1978, and links the Region Three (Essequibo Islands-West Demerara) at Meer-Zorgen on the West Bank of the Demerara river with Region Four (Demerara-Mahaica) at Peter’s Hall, East Bank Demerara.
The new bridge is expected to land in the vicinity of Nandy Park on the eastern side of the Demerara River and at La Grange/Meer-Zorgen on the West Bank. Based on the information provided, the bridge is expected to land some 700 metres inland from the eastern bank of Demerara and will be elevated 50 meters at the beginning of the channel – which is closer to the east bank. The descent is slated to be at a rate of 5%.
The Scope of Works in the design/build contract included the complete design and construction of a two-lane dual (four-lane) carriageway, hybrid cable-stayed centre-span bridge with concrete box/T-beam girder approach bridge structures, and must include bridge collision protection, a navigation span to accommodate Handymax vessel navigation aids, lighting, signage, and all other ancillary works, an access road with a minimum of 50 meters up to abutments, toll-collection buildings and ancillary buildings on the West Bank of the Demerara River.
In August, the EPA announced that it would not require an EIA for the project which is expected to significantly change the landscape in the area, both during and after construction. The Agency has, ever since, been coming in for harsh criticisms over its decision not to require an EIA for the DHB project and several other developmental undertakings which would have a significant impact on the environment.
Reasoning
Yesterday’s notice provided persons with a link to access the reasons for its decision not to require an EIA. The EPA’s publishing of reasons for its decision is now becoming a trend following calls from various environmentalists and transparency activists.
The EPA said that its conclusions were drawn based on existing data, technical review, observations/field inspections, engagements with residents and the exercise of its discretion.
In relation to the biodiversity aspect of its reasoning, the EPA said that the impacts are not potentially significant despite the requirement to clear approximately 2,360m2 (47.2m x 50m) of mangroves at La Grange. Offering a justification, the reasoning proffered “…No endangered species are in the area. Snowy egret and scarlet ibis are noted in the area. This removal is considered negligible as impacts will be minimal and localized since the area is already impacted by human activities and removal will be limited to a relatively small area and localized.”
The EPA said that the impacts are certain to occur but the risks are considered medium and as such proposed mitigation measures. Those measures include the limited and phased clearing of the mangroves and an assessment of the affected mangroves following the completion of construction. It also suggests, as compensation for the destroyed mangroves, the planting of trees, bushes and fire-resistant grass.
At Versailles/Malgre Tout, WBD, a stone’s throw away from the proposed landing site of the new DHB, a large swathe of mangroves were cleared for the construction of a shore base facility to service the oil and gas sector. A recent World Bank Climate Report stated that coastal areas that have mangroves suffer from 40% less damage during storm surges than other coastal areas.
The EPA said it found that approximately 24 lots would have to be acquired to facilitate the landing of the bridge on the eastern end of the Demerara but due to the small number of households to be relocated it considers the issue “low and not potentially significant.” It notes that the bridge will pass close to just about 40 households in Nandy Park and Providence but reasoned that despite the increase in traffic and subsequent commercial activities, the risk remains minimal.
With the potential of nominal contamination of Demerara River from accidents due to minor fuel/oil leaks/spills during construction and operation as a result of accidents, the EPA said that since surface water in the project area is not used for drinking then the risks are considered negligible and bring no significant changes to the water quality. It justified that opinion by highlighting that the Demerara River and drainage canals “have experienced legacy contamination especially from residential and industries up and downstream of the project site.”
The possibility of sedimentation and storm water runoff, during construction, is strong and as such the EPA said that erosion and sedimentation measures would be implemented as a means of mitigating the impacts. It added that not more than 300 litres of fuel would be transported in the Demerara River as means of reducing the impacts in the event of a spill.
With construction of such magnitude, it means that there would be an increase in traffic, noise and dust pollution. However, the EPA is saying that sprinkling water on materials at the construction site, properly maintaining machinery and covering stockpiled material at the site would reduce the impacts to air quality in the area.
The increase in noise is also deemed to be “not potentially significant” since there will be specified operating times and noise mitigation measures implemented.
“The overall significance of environmental impacts of this project are considered to be low to medium and manageable from a technical, social and financial point of view. The overall social impact of the project will be positive. Therefore this proposed project is exempt from the conduct of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), as set out in section 11(2) of the Environmental Protection Act, Cap. 20:05, Laws of Guyana. While the EPA has exempted this project from the requirement of an EIA, it is recommended that an Environmental Social and Management Plan (ESMP) be prepared for this project,” EPA said.
While it mentioned pile driving for the new bridge in the context of noise generation, it did not address the geotechnical and other implications from this structure compared to the one that currently exists.
At the beginning of November, Government announced that it will be engaging China State Construction Engineering Corporation (CSCEC) on the construction of the bridge since it submitted the lowest responsive bid. The company still has to accept the award and enter into negotiations with the government as it relates to the contract and design of the bridge.
CSCEC, in its tender document, pegged the cost for the construction of the bridge at US$256,638,289 and this is based on the Design, Build and Finance (DBF) option, or Design, Build, Finance, Operate and Maintain (DBFOM).
Negotiations were expected to commence following the return of President Irfaan Ali from the United Nations Climate Change Summit (COP26) in Glasgow, Scotland however there has been no word from the Office of the President on whether the process has commenced.
st decision
