ExxonMobil’s consultant, Environmental Resource Management (ERM) has submitted a revised impact study to the Environmental Assessment Board (EAB) which is expected to lead to a final decision on the permit for the proposed Yellowtail oil well.
At the end of February, Executive Director of the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) Kemraj Parsram had told Stabroek News that the agency advised ERM to present a revised Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) following an independent review.
Exxon’s local affiliate and partners applied to the EPA for an environmental permit and have since submitted the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and other ancillary documents as part of the process. They also held public consultations. The statutory period for the public to submit objections expired in December 2021.
During the public consultation phase, a number of environmentalists and groups submitted objections to the EIA, while pointing out that the company failed to address a number of impacts on the environment.
Parsram had said that the EPA compiled those concerns and its own recommendations and sent the document back to ERM for more work to be done.
“So, we sent those comments to the consultants as well as the EAB and the consultants will submit a revised EIA, which will be reviewed by the EAB and the EAB then has to give its approval of the EIA. Once I receive the approval or rejection of the EIA, then I’ll take my next course of action,” he had said. The EAB adjudicates on appeals of EPA decisions.
On the sidelines of an EAB hearing on Tuesday, Chair of the Board Pradeepa Bholanath told Stabroek News that ERM has submitted its revised EIA.
“We did receive a revised document from ERM about two weeks ago. I cannot say when it will be approved or not because it is a process,” she said.
When asked whether the new study addressed all of the concerns raised by the EPA, Bholanath could not say. Instead, she along with fellow board member Joslyn McKenzie directed the questions to the EPA.
When previously asked about what sort of recommendations were provided by the EPA to ERM, Parsram said that he was not in a position to release those as yet. He also added that a timeline has not been attached for ERM to submit the revised EIA.
The list of recommendations was dispatched to ERM around February 25 and the revised document was submitted by mid-March. So it is unclear whether ERM, which has been silent on its operations locally, addressed all of the concerns raised by the EPA.
The Yellowtail project is ExxonMobil’s and its 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 commences this year and production in the latter part of 2025.
Exxon’s last development was Payara, which is expected to come on stream next year. Payara is the third petroleum development project in the Stabroek Block that has been granted the go-ahead. It entails the drilling of some 45 injection and production wells and is expected to produce between 180,000 and 220,000 barrels of oil per day.
The final EIA for the Payara project was submitted in July 2019 and approval was granted for the environmental permit on September 18, 2020. The permit was issued on September 24, 2020.
Earlier in the year, the government had announced that United Kingdom-headquartered oil and gas consultancy, Bayphase Ltd was contracted to conduct the review of the Yellowtail Development Plan. Bayphase also conducted the review of Liza and Payara projects in the Stabroek Block.
They will be paid US$423,360 for the execution of the contract.
Environmentalists and other activists have been calling for the EPA to deny Exxon’s application for Yellowtail until a new EIA can be conducted to address the serious environmental implications the project poses.
The next step is to have the EAB approve or deny the impact study.
