On behalf of our client, Professional Waste Solutions Inc. (hereinafter “PWSI”), reference is made to a letter published in sections of the media on August 21, 2024, by Ms. Audreyanna Thomas, captioned “No EIA was done for oil and gas waste treatment facility at Coverden”.
SphereX prepared the investment proposal that was submitted to the Guyana Office for Investment (Go-Invest) in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the investment agreement that was inked between PWSI and the Government of Guyana (GoG) in respect of the Waste Treatment Plant.
It was since the publication of that Agreement, Ms. Audreyana Thomas, under the pretext of a genuine (concerned) citizen, wrote a series of objectionable letters in the media, criticizing the project, lobbying for its abandonment, of which all of her claims are unfounded, and more so, disingenuous.
In her latest missive, she made several allegations, implying to the reading public that, she’s had a special interest in this particular project since the inception. What she insincerely failed to disclose to the general public, however, was that as the Managing Director of a consulting firm that she apparently owns and operates, namely, Global Perspective Inc., she had approached the previous project developers, namely GOES and Japarts, to offer her consulting services. Her unsolicited proposal was never taken seriously, and it was since then, that she has been constantly attacking the project and the project sponsors.
Further, Ms. Thomas had publicly announced that she’s running for President in the upcoming 2025 General and Regional Elections. Yet, her apparent professional conduct leaves much to be desired, whenever she is rejected by any of her potential, targeted corporate clients as demonstrated herein. (See her letter in the Kaieteur News edition of June 3, 2024, captioned “My approach as President).
That having been said, in all of her missives concerning PWSI, Ms. Thomas failed to establish whether there has been any breach of the relevant governing legislation and / or regulation—that is, the Environmental Protection Act (1996) (hereinafter “EPA”). Moreover, her assertion that there was no “Environmental Impact Assessment” (EIA) is totally misleading.
Notably, it was only when Mr. Jettoo took over the project, with all the requisite approvals and permits in place, that Ms. Thomas rejuvenated her campaign chiefly against him [PWSI] albeit unjustified.
It should be noted, too, that the EPA provides for the waiver of an EIA under certain circumstances. To this end, Section 11 (2) of the EPA Act establishes that, “Where it is not clear whether a project will significantly affect the environment, the developer shall submit to the Agency a summary of the project which shall contain the information as required by subsection (1) and the Agency shall within a reasonable period publish in at least one daily newspaper a decision with reasons as to whether the project:
(a) will not significantly affect the environment, and thereof exempt from the requirement for an environmental impact assessment”…
Notwithstanding S.11 (2) (a) of the Act, contrary to Ms. Thomas’ tenuous aspersions, an EIA was conducted pursuant to the conditionalities set out in the Environmental Permit in respect of the construction of the facility (Attached hereto is an extracted version of the EIA that was performed for the subject matter Waste Treatment Plant).
As can be seen from the picture below, the site where the facility is located is nowhere close to residential homes. Residential homes are about one (1) square mile away from the project site. It therefore begs the question, what was Ms. Audreyanna Thomas objective (s) by seeking to sabotage the project.
Finally, in the interest of transparency and proper ethical conduct, Ms. Audreyanna Thomas may want to disclose to the general public whether she had/has a financial interest in the said project referenced herein.