We were investigating a complaint of dust pollution and noise by a furniture manufacturer

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56521229


We were investigating a complaint of dust pollution and noise by a
furniture manufacturer
Tuesday, May 29th 2007

Dear Editor,

Please permit me to respond to the article in Kaieteur News of
Thursday, May 24, 2007 in the Freddie Kissoon Column on "Powerful
Nations and Powerless Ones" and more specifically on the aspects
regarding the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The article
contains a number of misinformation and misrepresentations which I wish
to correct.

As far as we are aware, the EPA was not a regime imposed on Guyana nor
was it established as a condition to access aid. The Government of
Guyana took a conscious and independent decision to establish the
agency as a regulatory institution to, inter alia, take steps that are
necessary for the effective management of the natural environment, so
as to ensure conservation, protection and sustainable use of its
natural resources and to prevent or control environmental pollution.

The Environmental Protection Act (1996) gives the EPA the authority to
coordinate the environmental management activities of all persons,
organizations and agencies. As such, the EPA can regulate any activity
within Guyana's environment that has an impact on the environment. It
does not matter if the activity is funded or managed by local or
international organizations - there is no exception.

The EPA, in accordance with its mandate of ensuring the effective
protection and management of the environment, engages in fieldwork,
which encompasses the entire country. To be effective in its operations
the agency, like many other organizations, must have the necessary
human, financial and physical resources at its disposal. Adequate
transportation facilities are absolutely necessary for an organization
such as the EPA. Contrary to the misinformation provided by Mr Kissoon,
the agency has only three vehicles equipped for carrying out its
fieldwork. The agency also has three other old vehicles, one of which
is unserviceable and the other two are rapidly approaching
unserviceable condition, which we sometimes use in our day-to -day
division, located away from our Main Office at Earl's Avenue,
Subryanville and which must have transportation facilities for its
operations. One of our vehicles was obtained through funds made
available by the Inter-American Development Bank, under the
Environmental Management Programme - Phase 11 and the one used by the
Natural Resources Management Division was purchased with funds provided
by the Federal Republic of Germany, under a KfW Small Grants Project.

We wonder where Mr Kissoon got the idea from that EPA has a fleet of
cars. The vehicles that he may have seen in the EPA compound, on his
way to the University of Guyana, do not all belong to the EPA. The
Institute of Applied Science and Technology (IAST) which is also
accommodated in the compound with EPA also has some vehicles therein as
well as vehicles of staff of the two institutions. Members of the
public who visit the agency to do business also sometimes park their
vehicles in the compound. We are surprised that Mr Kissoon would resort
to writing about the Agency and convey the wrong impression to the
public, without ascertaining the true situation, which obtains at the
agency.

Mr Kissoon in the said article also tried to mislead the public into
believing that the EPA is harassing Guyanese investors. He mentioned
that he "caught up with a squad of EPA officers in an SUV in the
village of Success on the East Coast Demerara, trying to terrorise a
small furniture-maker." The vehicle, which we used, was one that is
normally used for field trips and we again wonder why Mr Kissoon chose
to describe it as an SUV. In addition, there was not a squad of
officers from EPA on the field trip. Only two technical officers of the
agency were on the trip, along with a driver. Mr Kissoon's use of the
words "SUV" and "squad" is a clear case of exaggeration.

The EPA does not harass investors as claimed by Mr Kissoon. Officers of
the agency on the field trip on the East Coast Demerara were carrying
out their legitimate duties of responding to a complaint of dust
pollution and noise nuisance from the said furniture manufacturing
operation. We do not know what Mr Kissoon meant by saying that he
"caught up with a squad of EPA Officers" on the trip, but we wish to
state categorically that the EPA was carrying out its responsibility in
the public interest of ensuring the protection of the environment and
public health. When complaints are forwarded to us, we normally
investigate these complaints and make recommendations to mitigate the
effects of the problem on the environment and if there is
non-compliance with our recommendations, we may resort to other courses
of action. We must be allowed to carry out our mandate and it is most
unfortunate that Mr Kissoon would interpret our role in the context of
harassing investors.

I wish to further state that subsequent to the field trip to Success,
Mr Kissoon visited me in my office at the EPA, along with someone whom
he claimed to be the owner of the furniture operation, to intervene and
plead on his behalf (the owner of the operation). Whatever may be the
role of Mr Kissoon in the matter, I trust that he would appreciate the
legitimate mandate of the agency, which at all times is carried out
objectively, fairly, professionally and in the interest of the
protection of the environment and human health.

Yours faithfully,

Doorga Persaud

Executive Director

Environmental

Protection Agency