After a prolonged period of silence from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Sunday Stabroek has been able to confirm that no decision has been reached as yet on whether to grant an environmental permit for ExxonMobil’s Yellowtail development project.
During a brief interview on Wednesday, EPA’s Executive Director Kemraj Parsram told this newspaper that the regulatory body is currently at the stage of ironing out concerns with ExxonMobil’s environmental consultant, Environmental Resource Management (ERM), relating to its Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).
Exxon, through ERM, applied to the EPA for an environmental permit to operate in the Stabroek Block offshore Guyana. It has since submitted the EIA and other ancillary documents as part of the process and held public consultations. The statutory period for the public to submit objections expired early December and since then the EPA and the Environmental Assessment Board (EAB) have been silent as to what the next move will be.
This newspaper had tried several times to contact the EPA but was unsuccessful.
On the sidelines of the international energy expo, which was held at the Georgetown Marriott Hotel last week, Stabroek News was able to corner Parsram, who said “there’s a process [to get to the environmental permit approval]. So the 60 days is a public review period and we have not authorised that project as yet.”
He explained that following the public consultation period the EPA engaged experts to review the EIA document and make recommendations. Those recommendations would be combined with the objections and other feedback received during the public consultation period and sent to the EAB for further review.
“When those reviews are done then the EAB as well has to give their acceptance or recommendation on the ESIA. Until then, then the EPA can take that recommendation as well as inputs from the public during that 60 days period and then decide whether we should approve the project
“EPA does not approve the ESIA, it is the EAB and then we have these expert reviews as well to support EAB and the EPA. When that process is done they make recommendations to us and we say okay we look at all these recommendations and that this project is sound from the environmental prospect and that we can approve it by issuing a permit. But, of course, it doesn’t end there, the permit has a suite of obligations that address all the environmental factors,” Parsram further explained.
He added that every project poses some impact on the environment and that is where the EPA comes in to ensure that safeguards are in place so that those impacts do not become a significant problem that will affect human health and the environment.
Objections
The Yellowtail project is ExxonMobil and partners’ fourth development in the Stabroek Block and is considered the largest undertaking since Guyana became an oil-producing nation. As part of the Yellowtail Project, ExxonMobil plans to drill between 40 and 67 wells for the 20-year duration of the investment. It is intended to be the largest of the four developments with over 250,000 barrels of oil per day targeted once production commences. Based on the schedule, once approval is granted, engineering would commence this year and production in the latter part of 2025.
A number of environmentalists and groups submitted objections to the EIA, arguing that the company failed to address a number of impacts on the environment. Also, questions were raised about ERM’s ties to Exxon since it is the same company that did all of Exxon’s EIAs.
Included in the plethora of objections to Exxon’s Yellowtail Development was an alliance of Caribbean organisations which argued that regional states that could potentially be affected were excluded from the process.
In a December 15, 2021 letter to EAB Chairman Omkar Lochan, environmentalist Simone Mangal-Joly, on behalf of the Caribbean Coastal Area Management (C-CAM) Foundation, The Jamaica Fish Sanctuary Network, the Jamaica Environment Trust, the Institute for Small Islands, Fishermen and Friends of the Sea, and Freedom Imaginaries, saying that the EIA is “significantly deficient” as it fails to establish a baseline economic value of the coastal areas of the Caribbean, including Guyana.
“We, therefore, call on the EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] to reject the EIA until minimum guarantees are established in Guyana,” Mangal-Joly added in the letter.
In the letter, Mangal-Joly further argued that the Yellowtail EIA process fails to meet basic standards of international environmental law that were designed to protect the planet’s ecosystems and citizens from potentially catastrophic accidents.
According to the EIA, should there be an oil spill offshore Guyana, a number of Caribbean territories can be affected. Trinidad and Tobago, Venezuela, Grenada, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Bonaire, Curacao, Aruba, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Jamaica and Colombia are some of the countries that could be affected, the document states.
A number of the groups and individuals who submitted objections have complained that the environmental body has failed to respond to the objections or indicate how they would be treated with. When asked about this, Parsram said “In the EIA process we take them (the objections) into consideration but there is no need for us to respond to those.”
“Actually when we get their comments we take that into consideration and we say to consultants (and or) the company that these are the concerns of the public, these are the concerns of the reviewers, these are our concerns, these are the concerns of the EAB, you look at them and address them in a revised EIA to us,” he added.
Parsram said that the EPA is at that stage with ERM and Exxon in relation to the Yellowtail Development.
“We sent all those comments all from the public, the expert review and are sending it and having meetings with the consultants to address it and address it adequately. Some things, of course, you have to be realistic, some things can be addressed immediately and would not be detrimental to approving the project while some things can happen after,” he further stated.
He said after that process is over only then, the EPA would be in a position to approve or reject the EIA.
