The Environmental Assessment Board (EAB) has set a public hearing for Tuesday, March 29 on the decision by the EPA not to require an impact study for the proposed new bridge over the Demerara River.
The decision of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been met with condemnation and an earlier process to appeal its decision was aborted. The move for a new hearing comes amid reports that the government is close to clinching a deal for the construction of the bridge. (See story on page 12.)
In a notice in the Guyana Chronicle yesterday, the EAB said the hearing will be held at 2 pm in the Conference Room of the Cara Lodge Hotel at 294 Quamina Street.
The notice said that the public hearing will involve representations from the appellants, the developer and other key stakeholders. Thereafter, the notice said that the EAB will deliberate on the findings and prepare a report with its ruling on the EPA decision.
A hearing by the EAB on the EPA decision had been set for October 12 last year but this was put on hold at the last minute to allow the EPA more time to provide answers.
“The General Public and formal appellants are hereby notified that the public hearings into appeals submitted against the Work Services Group – Ministry of Public Works – Replacement of the existing Demerara Harbour Bridge, to be located at Nandy Park…and EEPGL Well Exploration Well Exploration and Drilling Program…have been postponed until further notice”, a notice on the EAB Facebook page stated on October 11 last year.
In late August last year, environmentalist Simone Mangal-Joly wrote the EAB objecting to the EPA’s decision not to require an Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) for the new bridge over the Demerara River and pointing out that it was a reversal of an earlier position that one was needed.
She also pointed out that the EPA was now describing the bridge as a replacement and not a new one, as it had previously done, even though entirely different construction and engineering methodologies were involved.
Mangal-Joly based her appeal on three grounds: (1) the decision contradicted an earlier EPA decision for exactly the same project; (2) the information provided in the Project Summary was grossly deficient and does not enable the public to exercise its right to rationally consider the proposed activity; and (3) the reasons for the EPA’s decision that the impacts would be insignificant and not require an EIA were not provided.
Then on October 8 last year, Mangal-Joly wrote in response to an invitation by EAB Chairman Omkar Lochan to attend the meeting on the waiver for the bridge project, telling the EAB that the EPA was still to fulfil its legal obligation to provide the technical reasons for the decision and both the agency and the EAB should meet the legal thresholds prior to holding the hearing.
“A credible EAB hearing to adjudicate can only occur after all the prerequisites are met,” she asserted. The EAB then relented.
According to the project description, the bridge will span the Demerara River from Nandy Park to La Grange, upstream and in proximity to the existing harbour bridge. The structure will be a fixed four-lane bridge with a vertical clearance over the channel of approximately 50 metres above the maximum tide level. The proposed design allows for the bridge to be connected to the main road network through road approaches connecting it to the West Bank Public Road and the imminent Mandela to Eccles road, respectively.
