THE NATION: Review panel attacks a

[suriya@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

Politics 

      Review panel attacks
      assessment of Yadana
      pipeline

      MEMBERS of the national committee set
      up to review the controversial Yadana gas
      pipeline project zeroed in Tuesday on the
      weaknesses of Thailand's environmental
      impact assessment (EIA) process. 

      A presentation before the hearing by
      Sirinimit Wongsunthorn, a representative of
      Team Engineering Consultants, the
      company which carried out the oft-criticised
      EIA report for the pipeline project, spurred
      panel members into raising many questions
      about the EIA process in general. 

      Chiraphol Sintunawa, a lecturer at Mahidol
      University, echoed the comments of many
      environmentalists when he argued that ''the
      funding for EIAs should not come from the
      project owners, as is currently the case,''
      because it gives them too much control of
      the EIA process. 

      Committee chairman Anand Panyarachun
      noted that consultant firms vying for EIA
      contracts are businesses and therefore
      may have a tendency to try and please their
      clients -- the project owners -- in order to
      keep them as customers in the future. 

      Anand also praised an approach used in
      other countries where the budget for EIAs
      come from project financiers like the World
      Bank instead of the project owners
      themselves. If the survey shows that the
      social and environmental damage is too
      great, then the project does not receive
      funding. 

      Sirinimit, meanwhile, coolly answered the
      panelists' questions and defended her
      company's survey methods. She noted, for
      instance, that EIAs must not only satisfy the
      project owners but also the Office of
      Environmental Policy and Planning
      (OEPP), an EIA evaluation committee and
      finally the National Environment Board
      (NEB). 

      OEPP secretary-general Saksit Tridech
      also testified before the public hearing
      Tuesday, recounting how the original draft
      EIA had to be revised because of the lack
      of comprehensive data on wildlife in the
      affected area. 

      Saksit said that the Royal crab, a rare
      species endemic to Kanchanaburi, was
      previously thought to be found only in Sai
      Yok National Park but has now been
      spotted in the Huay Khayeng forest, near
      the route of the pipeline. He announced that
      the OEPP will propose at an upcoming
      meeting of the NEB that the area be
      declared an environmental conservation
      zone. 

      Asked if he was satisfied with the work of
      the consulting firm, Saksit simply said that
      revision is part of the EIA process. 

      But other voices were far more critical.
      Testifying before the committee, Surapol
      Duangkhae, deputy secretary-general of
      Wildlife Fund Thailand, read off a long list of
      points where the EIA had allegedly
      presented faulty or incomplete information. 

      Environmentalists have complained, for
      instance, that the EIA claims there are no
      elephants in the affected forest during the
      dry season, when in fact there is a herd of
      40 to 50 animals. 

      Chiraphol said that local villagers knew
      about the wildlife situation but the surveyors
      apparently didn't pay attention to their
      information. 

      ''This is a major weakness of the EIA
      system,'' he said. ''Villagers know a lot
      about the local situation but they don't seem
      to be allowed any input.'' 

      Sirinimit noted that villagers were polled
      about the pipeline project and reported that
      79 per cent expressed support for it,
      claiming it would improve the local
      economy and the national energy supply. 

      But a closer look at the statistics shows that
      only two out of the 136 people polled
      claimed to have a ''good understanding'' of
      the project. Most of the respondents, 110,
      said they knew nothing at all about it. 

      Asked if there were any weaknesses in her
      company's research methods, Srinimit said
      that the firm carries out ''assessments''
      rather than research. ''If we did it over
      again, I would try to make an assessment
      along the entire pipeline, rather than
      sampling [at certain sites].'' 

      Meanwhile, Piti Yimprasert, the Petroleum
      Authority of Thailand (PTT) official in charge
      of natural gas development, was less
      circumspect about his company's
      achievements, insisting that the pipeline is
      ''100 per cent secure'' and that ''the PTT's
      compensation system is the best in the
      world''. 

      According to Suchit Pitragool, a geologist
      from Chiang Mai University who testified
      before the committee on Monday, the
      pipeline runs along the Three Pagodas
      fault, an active earthquake zone, for roughly
      100 kilometres. 

      Saksit testified that the pipeline should be
      able to withstand an earthquake of 8.0 on
      the Richter scale without any damage.
      Suchit, however, said that the seismic risk
      depended on the location of an
      earthquake's epicentre more than on its
      strength. 

      ''If an earthquake of magnitude 5.0 hits in
      the Andaman Sea then there should not be
      any problems,'' he said. ''If it hits right under
      the pipeline then it would probably cause
      damage.'' 

      Suchit said that the last major earthquake
      to strike along the pipeline route occurred
      on March 11, 1959, when a quake
      measuring between 5.0 and 6.0 on the
      Richter scale hit Muang district's tambon
      Klaundo. 

      BY JAMES FAHN 

      The Nation