Controversy Surrounds Gadeokdo New Airport Environmental Impact Assessment Advisory Group

“It is necessary to investigate topographical changes such as changes in sedimentation and sedimentation at the mouth of the Nakdong River following the construction of a new airport on Gadeokdo Island.” “Even if the reclamation plan is finalized, come up with an alternative to reclamation that can reduce the amount of earthwork.” According to the ‘Results of the Gadeokdo New Airport Advisory Group Advisory Meeting’ obtained by Lee Eun-joo, a member of the Justice Party of the National Assembly Environment and Labor Committee on the 1st, the advisory members of review institutions such as the Korea Environmental Research Institute, which should analyze and review the Gadeokdo New Airport Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment, are in fact consulting equivalent to the environmental impact assessment. It turned out to have done The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport sent an official letter to the Ministry of Environment on the 4th, prior to submitting the Gadeokdo New Airport Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment on the 30th, and formed the ‘Gadeokdo New Airport Environmental Impact Assessment Advisory Group’ with 7 people from the environmental impact assessment review agency. An advisory group meeting held in Sejong City on the 19th was attended by 15 people, including six advisory committee members sent by the review agency, the Gadeokdo New Airport Construction Promotion Team under the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, and the private service team. A situation similar to that in which students (the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs and service companies) met with a grader (review agency) and received tutoring before taking the test (environmental impact assessment). The most emphasized by the advisory committee members at the meeting that day was the topographical change that will occur due to the reclamation of the new airport on Gadeok Island. They said that the sand dunes at the estuary of the Nakdong River, the surrounding tidal flats, and the environment for sediment formation would be affected, and ordered a detailed investigation and an alternative when writing an evaluation report. In addition, he did not spare advice such as △ Suggest measures to preserve the ecosystem of the southern slope of Guksubong and Dongdong-myeon of Namsan, △ Suggest appropriate reasons through a detailed investigation, as damage to the sea cliffs of Gadeok Island is inevitable. In no other environmental impact assessment, there is no case in which the reviewing body provides prior recommendations and advice in such detail. According to the environmental impact assessment procedure, business operators must predict and evaluate the environmental impact of development plans or projects, prepare a (strategic) environmental impact assessment report containing conservation measures, and submit it to the Ministry of Environment. The Ministry of Environment commissions this to professional review institutions such as the National Institute of Environmental Research and the National Institute of Environmental Research, and these review institutions must analyze and review it independently and objectively. The Ministry of Environment will decide whether to agree to the evaluation report by synthesizing the review opinions of these agencies. However, a situation occurred in which the reviewers of the review organization acted as an advisory group for business operators and suggested the direction of the drafting before writing the evaluation.

Feeling burdened by this situation, the Korea Environmental Research Institute received an official letter of recommendation from the Ministry of Environment on the 4th of last month and expressed an internal opinion that “Gadeokdo New Airport is a development project currently being reviewed by the Environmental Assessment Headquarters, and it is not appropriate for the Environmental Assessment Headquarters to consult.” It turned out that the notice had been circulated. In the end, the Environmental Research Institute sent two members of the research department, not the environmental impact assessment review department, to the advisory group. Another organization that attended the meeting felt the same burden. An advisory member belonging to the agency told the agency, “Two people were selected as advisors, but the other was the one who directly reviewed the environmental impact assessment, so I decided not to attend (I thought it was inappropriate).” It is known that this agency did not submit its opinion on this day, conscious of the controversy over the damage to the independence of the environmental impact assessment.

Gadeokdo Island Gadeokdo Island viewed from Yeondaebong Peak. yunhap news

If you look at the ‘Regulations on Environmental Impact Assessment Statement Preparation, etc.’, it says that “if the review agency performs services directly related to the project’s environmental impact assessment statement or is involved in consulting, etc.”, it should be excluded from the review agency. Kang Eun-joo, head of research at the Ecological Horizon Research Institute, an environmental group, said, “There is no conclusion, such as agreement or disagreement, but the advisory opinion they gave is the same as the review agency’s review opinion in the future environmental impact assessment procedure.” If it goes through the review process as it is, it will be a clear violation of the regulations.” Regarding this, an official from the Environmental Impact Assessment Division of the Ministry of Environment, who recommended personnel from the review agency as an advisory group, said, “The purpose of the environmental impact assessment is for business operators to prepare the evaluation report as best as possible and reflect it in the project contents, considering the environmental impact.” “I don’t think it goes against the purpose of the environmental impact assessment,” he said. Rep. Lee Eun-joo said, “If the purpose of the environmental impact assessment is to prepare an assessment report in a substantial way, I cannot help but ask the Ministry of Environment for prior consultation on the environmental impact assessment report from private operators in the future, asking whether they will form an advisory group and provide advice.” He pointed out that not only the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, but also the Ministry of Environment, which recommended advisors without any awareness of the problem, is not free from responsibility.” Reporter Nam Jong-young [email protected]