“Who could be happy to be sharing space with a Chemical Waste Treatment Plant to your immediate right, and a Radioactive Storage Plant at the entrance of your village?” Well Coverden should be apparently, because that is the fate those who rule in this land have sanctioned for it. The above question was asked by a former resident and native of the village, Penelope Howell, in a Diaspora column carried in this newspaper in October last year. Needless to say local people did not ask for the ‘benefits’ which are now to be bestowed upon them, and have appealed against the decision of the Environmental Protection Agency not to require impact assessments before approval for the plants is granted.
It was earlier last year while those who live in Coverden were organising their appeals against the Global Oil Environmental Services company which had been given the EPA green light to establish an oil and gas waste treatment facility in their village, that they learned about a second one, this time dealing with radioactive waste products. This plant was to be run by a Trinidadian company, Non Destructive Testers Ltd, and as mentioned earlier, both operations were granted waivers by the EPA for Environmental Impact Assessments.
Coverden residents appealed against the waiver granted by the agency to the Trinidadian company to store and operate Industrial X-Ray and Gamma Ray Equipment last year, and the Environmental Authorisation Board held a hearing to decide whether the EPA was in error. As we reported in February this year, the results of those hearings were not communicated to the appellants, although Ms Howell told this newspaper that, “We heard from the grapevine that [the EAB] rejected the NDTL proposal. However, we are yet to be informed.”
She and the others were therefore very taken aback to learn that at the end of last month the EPA repeated once again that an impact assessment would not be required. What SN was subsequently told by EPA Executive Director Kemraj Parsram was that the company had withdrawn their previous application and had submitted a new one. It was on the basis of this new application that the agency had concluded an impact assessment would not be necessary, although an Environmental Management Plan would be needed, indicating proper safeguards would be instituted, before an environmental permit was issued.
A 30-day period is allowed for appeals against the EPA’s decision, and this started on February 20th. If no objections are raised during that time then the permit will be issued.
We reported in February that the EPA’s environmental screening report identified radiation exposure as the primary hazard, and those at risk included radiation workers and other employees nearby. However, “Radiation exposure is not significant,” said the report, since adequate mitigation measures would be in place to protect employees and the public. The NDTL would have an emergency response plan, a traffic management plan and a Radiation Safety Officer.
The report went on to give the assurance that environmental impacts would not be significant as there was no direct discharge or release into air, soil or water – including the Demerara River − from the operation, and no risk to flora or fauna was envisaged. “The potential impact of radiation exposure was thoroughly assessed and the proposed safety and security risk and measures along with monitoring and emergency response procedures were deemed adequate and in keeping with international standards and best practices,” said the report.
It might be noted that this newspaper had previously reported that in its screening report, the EPA had also stated that if any environmental impact were to occur, the magnitude may be moderate to major in terms of the nature of the chemicals and risk to fauna and water quality. However, the impact was not expected to be continuous, and was predicted to be short term, localised, and with a functional recovery in a short duration. Exactly how much confidence that will give the villagers is very doubtful.
While these developments in Coverden will fundamentally affect the character and possibly the safety of the village, the government is completely unconcerned. There is no debate in the society about what development means, so swathes of mangroves are cut down on the West Bank in the teeth of objections by local inhabitants, and projects involving possible safety hazards, among other things, are sited in small, peaceful rural villages without any prior consultation with residents. When they do object, they are on their own, apart from supporting voices from the odd expert here or there, or some civil society individual.
In this rush to destroy the environment willy nilly, there is also no effective political opposition to apply pressure on behalf of those whose lives are about to be transformed, often for the worse, or who have concerns about the new impositions. The official opposition is in total confusion, obsessed with its own party struggles. That said, on Monday at least one segment of the political opposition came out against radioactive waste storage in Coverden, if a little belatedly considering we are close to the end of the 30-day period when appeals can be made.
The AFC has exhorted the EPA to reconsider the NDTL assessment waiver, stating that “lives are at risk”. In a press release the party expressed the view that material of this kind would have been best sited on the numerous uninhabited islands in the Essequibo River, rather than at Coverden which is only 100 feet away from the East Bank Public Road and 0.32 km from the Demerara River. As for the reassurance given by the agency that the radiation exposure is not significant, the AFC reminded it that the Omai cyanide spill was not supposed to happen, “but it did!”
The party also pointed to the fact that while the agency claimed adequate mitigation measures were documented in the Radiation Safety Manual, this was not available to the public. Similarly in the case of the emergency response plan and traffic management plan, which were also not available. It added that those who traversed the East Bank Road were well acquainted with its frustrations, and queried whether the movement of hazardous material would not make that worse. Significantly it went on to ask, “What happens if there is an accident involving a vehicle transporting radioactive material …?” What indeed.
The government needs reminding that development is not about the oil industry, it is about people. How can people’s development be achieved if Coverden, to use Ms Howell’s words, is destined to become “one of the industrial dumps in Guyana”? As the AFC has pointed out, the government and the EPA have failed “to inform the nation of procedures for the disposal of radioactive waste.” In fact, it might be added, the government and EPA have not just failed to inform the people about radioactive waste, but about all kinds of projects affecting them. Most of all, however, they have failed to consult them. There is a monovision at the apex of this society which is intolerant of any differing views, and one of the arms involved in imposing that monovision is the EPA, which has clearly ceased to serve the people of this country in the way it was set up to do. The village of Coverden is yet another of its victims.
