The long-awaited expansion of Suvarnabhumi Airport has been set in motion now that Airports of Thailand Plc (AoT) has agreed to proceed with the 78-billion-baht programme.

The majority state-owned and SET-listed airport operator’s board last Friday endorsed the Phase 2 development and will soon seek final consent from the Transport Ministry and the cabinet.

The expansion, which was supposed to have begun shortly after the airport opened in September 2006, would increase the passenger handling capacity of Thailand’s gateway airport by 33%, to 60 million in the next six years from 45 million currently.

Kulya Pakakrong, AoT’s senior executive vice-president, said yesterday that the expansion would deal with the crowding problem at the airport which is now operating close to its capacity.

The expansion involves building a midfield terminal and a third runway.

AoT’s decision comes at the time when the airline industry is facing a severe downturn with a marked slowdown in traffic and ballooning operating costs, all triggered by skyrocketing fuel prices.

But it responds to the airline industry’s longstanding call for AoT to deal with the congestion that had inconvenienced airlines and passengers alike.

The industry has warned that Suvarnabhumi was losing out to rival airports in Southeast Asia, namely Singapore Changi Airport and Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA), as the region’s preferred air hubs due to its restricted capacity and high service fees.

Mrs Kulya insisted that the possible excess capacity at the airport resulting from the expansion was not an issue as AoT was still seeing traffic growth through Suvarnabhumi.

”Suvarnabhumi’s traffic is on course with projections for 6.5% annual growth in the near term, 5.5% in the medium term and 4% long-term,” she said.

But according to AoT figures, passenger traffic through Suvarnabhumi grew just 1.94% year-on-year in the first half of this year to 21.21 million.

AoT aims to call a tender for the airport expansion work next year and hopes to be able to start construction by the end of 2009.

About 33 billion baht of the estimated project cost would come from loans from the Japan Bank for International Co-operation (JBIC), which was a major lender for the phase-one project that cost 155 billion baht.

Mrs Kulya said AoT had already contracted a consulting company to conduct an environmental impact study for the expansion project. It will hold public hearings to explain plans to mitigate noise pollution resulting from the increased air traffic.

AOT shares closed yesterday on the Stock Exchange of Thailand at 38.50 baht, unchanged, in trade worth 5.5 million baht.

Chiang Rai _ The Civil Court has ordered Airports of Thailand (AoT) to let King Power International Group resume business at Suvarnabhumi pending a decision on their dispute.

AoT earlier cancelled its contracts with King Power, the operator of duty-free shops and commercial areas at the airport, for alleged irregularities in the contracting process. The firm filed a counter lawsuit with the Civil Court and sought damages of 68 billion baht.

The court’s injunction, issued on Wednesday and released yesterday, said the firm must be allowed to operate until a ruling is made in their dispute.

It also prohibited AoT and its executives from giving press interviews that might affect King Power’s operations.

AoT has ordered King Power’s eviction from duty-free outlets and commercial shopping space at the airport.

The contracts ran into problems early last year after the AoT board accused King Power of breaching the public-private joint-venture law.

It said King Power had concealed information to keep the official investment in each of its two commercial developments at the airport under one billion baht to avoid proper scrutiny.

The court also instructed King Power to pay about three billion baht to the AoT, which has not received any revenue from the company since the airport opened.

The incoming government has a lot on its plate, and a lot of special-interest groups pushing their pet projects. But for a number of good reasons, Prime Minister-designate Samak Sundaravej and his cabinet-in-waiting need to put an urgent item on their primary to-do list.

The problems at Suvarnabhumi airport are beginning to unravel. The traveling public seem to be at risk, the airport employees are unhappy, and the taxpayer is uninformed, puzzled about how this most high-level status symbol has gone so wrong. After 15 months of periodic reports of carelessness, incompetence and possibly worse, the news just keeps getting worse. Last week, a Burmese refugee somehow walked into the heavily restricted, supposedly guarded areas where the jetliners park. Yesterday, reporters of this newspaper detailed the astounding fact that almost a third of the lights at the airport are out. One could be excused for wondering just whether this expensive, showpiece, gateway to Thailand is reliable at all. At the rate airport equipment, services and security are deteriorating, Suvarnabhumi seems to be taking shape as a gigantic white elephant.

The worst problem is airport security. The public, the airlines and numerous foreign embassies and organisations are close to the end of their patience. There has been no accounting and little explanation of how a Burmese man strolled onto an empty Turkish Airlines jet inside a supposedly high-security parking area. Authorities explained they were unable to determine what happened because the 27-year-old refugee had given conflicting accounts of his actions. To call this account unprofessional is kind. No imagination is necessary to realise the extreme danger to life, limb and property of such carelessness.

Yet, airport director Sereerat Prasutanont said he didn’t know if the man broke through a fence, hid in a supply vehicle, or mingled with airport workers. That means he believes a would-be terrorist gang, for example, could use any of these methods.

Airports of Thailand has admitted poor security on several occasions, last July for example. That was when AoT could not make up its mind how to improve airport security, beyond yet another reprimand to the Loxley-ICTS consortium responsible for the lack of protection. Most international airlines, untrusting of the AoT facilities, perform their own security checks on passengers. But this is no confidence builder. As a Burmese refugee showed, a violent person or gang bent on mayhem can easily penetrate the airport and airplanes.

The irony of the Burmese man’s intrusion was soon clear. Mr Sereerat assured the public that his staff would increase security measures. He promised more patrols and better lighting to spot any future intruders.

That was two days before the airport admitted that the lights were going off all over the airport. Some 2,000 of the 7,200 bulbs are burnt out or broken, and not a baht is available to buy new ones. So for the immediate future at least, the chances of better security at Suvarnabhumi have become darker _ literally.

Normally, travellers would overlook the niggling, maddening things that go wrong at Suvarnabhumi. But many of these have been mismanaged beyond description _ and too often, there have been cynical reactions, and suspicions that money is changing hands under the table. The so-called ”black licence” taxis operate under obvious protection of certain authorities _ unregulated, unmetered and a known hazard to life and limb. Contrary to assurances before the airport opened, there are indescribably long lines at immigration counters, but fewer than a third are staffed; again, there is supposedly no budget.

As the old saw goes: ”The whole world is watching.” The airport clearly suffered from major corruption while it was built. Contractors cut too many corners. Successive governments opened the facility before it was ready. Suvarnabhumi is not only a gateway to Thailand, but the Thai gateway to the world. It can take a few weeks for an airport to gain a worldwide reputation as unsafe and badly managed. It would take years to reverse such an impression.

Suvarnabhumi deserves to be on the new government’s priority list for urgent attention. The safety of millions and the country’s reputation are at stake.

AoT investigation uncovers irregularities

Airports of Thailand’s (AoT) investigation committee has found six groups of people were involved in irregularities in the awarding of a contract to King Power Suvarnabhumi Co to run commercial space at Suvarnabhumi airport. The investigation team has confirmed that King Power Suvarnabhumi, a firm under King Power International Group, acquired the commercial space contract from AoT without undergoing scrutiny required under the Public-Private Joint Venture Act.

The law requires in-depth scrutiny of every state project worth one billion baht or more.

AoT board spokesman Chirmsak Pinthong said AoT will inform the company in writing that the contract is invalid.

AoT will then proceed to petition the Office of the Attorney-General to evict the company from the commercial space it occupies at Suvarnabhumi.

King Power Suvarnabhumi operates commercial areas at the new airport, while King Power Duty Free Co runs the duty-free shops.

The investigation team, headed by former national police chief Pol Gen Pratin Santiprabhob, has named in its report six groups of people allegedly involved in the contract irregularities.

The first group was the previous AoT board, chaired by then transport permanent secretary Srisook Chandrangsu, which awarded the contract to the company, allegedly breaching the joint venture law, said the report.

The second was the board’s sub-committee to run and develop general affairs in the airport.

The investigation team accused the sub-committee of acting beyond its authority by allowing the company to build the City Garden building outside the airport’s passenger terminal, which is not stated in the terms of reference.

The third was the AoT’s revenue-handling committee, which is accused of negligence after allowing the company to make use of more space than indicated in the contract. It did not try to charge the company for using the extra area.

The fourth group included the committee which received the bids for the contract and the committee which selected the bidders.

The investigation panel said the company’s bidding document had been tampered in a way that put AoT at a disadvantage. Also, nobody in the two committees could say where the missing important documents were being kept, the investigation team said.

The fifth group was King Power Suvarnabhumi and its management.

The AoT investigation committee alleged King Power Suvarnabhumi had concealed information to keep the official investment of the commercial space development below one billion baht, to avoid scrutiny under the Public-Private Joint Venture Act.

The sixth group was the consortium of consultant companies appointed by the old AoT board. The investigation team alleged these advisers tried to estimate the investment value of the project, which was not allowed under the contract. They also tried to put the investment cost below one billion baht, the investigation team said in its report.

The investigators also noted that then prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, as chairman of a committee overseeing the development of Suvarnabhumi, and the transport minister and transport permanent secretary at that time might have been aware of contract irregularities

News from : Bangkok Post

Airports of Thailand (AoT) will take legal action to evict King Power from the commercial space it occupies at Suvarnabhumi airport.

AoT board spokesman Chirmsak Pinthong said the board’s investigation committee headed by former national police chief Pol Gen Pratin Santiprabhob had confirmed that King Power Suvarnabhumi Co, a firm under King Power International Group, had acquired the commercial space contract from AoT without undergoing scrutiny required under the Public-Private Joint Venture Act. The law requires in-depth scrutiny of every state project worth a billion baht or more. King Power Suvarnabhumi operates other commercial areas at the new airport, while King Power Duty Free Co runs the duty-free shops.

The AoT committee alleged King Power Suvarnabhumi had concealed information to keep the official investment of the commercial space development below one billion baht, to avoid scrutiny under the Public-Private Joint Venture Act law.

The AoT board reached the resolution in its meeting in Chiang Rai on Tuesday.

Mr Chirmsak said the AoT would talk to the Office of the Attorney-General about the possibility of evicting King Power from Suvarnabhumi airport.

King Power Duty Free would also be evicted. The AoT board has accused it of acquiring its duty-free shops contract by evading the joint venture law in a similar fashion.

Any legal action must be filed by March or AoT could lose the right to expel King Power Duty Free Co under a one-year statute of limitations.

AoT will also demand compensation from the two King Power companies and urge the National Counter Corruption Commission to prosecute.

The AoT board also plans to terminate the contract of Thai Airports Ground Services Co (Tags) which operates the customs-free cargo zone at Suvarnabhumi airport.

The board claims Tags sets its service fees too high, and violated its contract by sub-leasing part of the zone to a restaurant operator.

SAMUT PRAKAN, Jan 9 (TNA) – Heavy fog disrupted air traffic at Suvarnabhumi International airport Wednesday morning, forcing aircraft to land at other airports.

Serirat Prasutanond, Suvarnabhumi airport director, said heavy fog, suddenly formed when heating weather rapidly passed over cool temperature, blanketed Suvarnabhumi and its environs at 7am Wednesday.

“The fog cut visibility. An international airliner had to land at Chiang Mai International airport instead, while three domestic flights landed at Don Mueang and Utapao airport,” Mr. Serirat said.

The fog lifted about an hour later, dissipating and allowing flights to resume normal landing as normal.

The airport director said it is necessary to closely monitor weather changes to ensure security for both aircraft and passengers. (TNA)-E110

Airports of Thailand’s Chiang Mai office is investigating a complaint from German businessman Rainer Gassenschmidt about broken and dislodged roof tiles on his house he said were caused by Thai Airways International flight TG 110 flying too low on Dec 12.

Irate residents affected by aircraft noise around Suvarnabhumi airport say they plan to petition the United Nations next Thursday.

They say there has been no progress in implementing the plan agreed by the government and the tripartite committee to compensate and assist them.

Wanchat Manathamsombat, the residents’ leader, said they want the world community to know about their ordeal and how they have been neglected by the government.

Mr Wanchat said the residents decided they would petition the UN after the New Year when the cabinet failed to consider assistance earlier this week.

This showed the Transport Ministry and the other agencies were not sincere in their promises.

Transport Ministry officials had told the residents to wait for the next cabinet meeting on Jan 3, Mr Wanchat said.

Deputy Transport Minister Sansern Wongcha-um said the ministry would put its plan to assist aircraft-noise affected residents to the economic ministers’ screening committee chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Kosit Panpiemras.

If the committee approved the plan, it would be presented to the cabinet for approval.

Details needing cabinet approval include zones affected by aircraft noise, entitlements of residents who moved in after airport construction began in 2001, and compensation criteria.

Transport permanent secretary Chaisa-wat Kittipornpaibul said after a meeting with residents’ representatives that problems with documents and procedures had prevented officials from buying houses and paying compensation.

For this reason, residents were being asked to wait for a while, as negotiations on compensation were time consuming.

A source in the Transport Ministry said it expected the residents to eventually file complaints with the Administrative Court, which is one of the options that would help to quickly end the compensation dispute.

Residents of Chiang Mai’s Mae Hia district, home to the city’s airport, already plan to petition the Administrative Court to order compensation for the damage caused to their roofs by aircraft noise.

The residents claim Thai Airways International flight TG 110 flew too low over their houses on Dec 12 and the vibrations from the plane damaged their rooftops.

German businessman Rainer Gassenschmidt and his wife Supaporn have filed a complaint with the Chiang Mai office of Airports of Thailand office on behalf of residents of Nimmannoradee housing estate, which is under the airport flight path.

Mrs Supaporn said the complaint was lodged a fortnight ago, but they have still to receive any response from AoT.

Source : Bangkokpost

Residents affected by noise pollution around Suvarnabhumi airport filed a lawsuit at the Administrative Court, asking it to ban air traffic at the airport between 10pm and 5am.

About 50 residents went to the court on Wednesday morning, saying that the period should be their rest time.

Chaisak Angsuwan, director-general of the Aviation Department, admitted that Thai economics especially aviation business will be greatly affected if the court grants the residents emergency protection and bans the air traffic between the time.

Airport of Thailand (AOT) chief executive Chana U-sathaporn said he was worried.. The matter will be brought into a board meeting on Thursday for urgent discussion.

Air Marshal Chana insisted AOT is not neglecting the complaints of residents, adding that it is willing to pay them compensation if new studies show they should have higher payment.

He said AOT has set aside a budget of about 3 to 4 billion baht or so to cover the compensation cost.

I can understand Thai Airways International’s refusal to return to Don Mueang. Their investment at Suvarnabhumi is heavy. On the other hand, I can understand that a split between domestic and international flights is highly impractical for travellers.

I also realise that many travellers would love to use Don Mueang again. I have used Suvarnabhumi once and all I can say is that it is hugely impractical in all respects. Parking is far away, walking distances in the building are enormous, architecture is cold and the long concrete corridor near the gates is claustrophobia-inducing. Reminds me of a bomb shelter.

As Suvarnabhumi is doomed to be a white elephant, it would be a smart move to return all passenger operations to an updated and improved Don Mueang and convert Suvarnabhumi to a cargo-only airport. This would be a very logical solution as the Eastern Seaboard is not only highly industrialised, but is also home to Thailand’s largest deep-sea port not far away.

W STREULI

———-

The stem cell debate

I read with interest the article on “The stem cell debate” and, once again, the major ethical and moral issue in the stem cell debate is allowing people without basic scientific knowledge to write about stem cells.

From the article, it is intentionally unclear what type of stem cells we are talking about! Is it embryonic stem cells, fetal stem cells or adult stem cells from the person’s own bone marrow, own umbilical cord blood, or own peripheral blood?

The first two categories of embryonic and fetal stem cells respectively raise ethical and moral concerns, and if the article is about those, then it should be clearly stated from the beginning. At all times when the public is addressed, the author must clearly define what kinds of stem cells are being debated to avoid confusion and conscious or unconscious misleading of the readers – unless the aim of the article is indeed to create confusion!

We develop from one single totipotent stem cell and our human body harbours adult stem cells since the first day of our lives and into long age. Those adult stem cells participate in the homeostasis of all our tissues and organs, aiding and promoting repair and regeneration. Initially and immediately at birth, blood from the umbilical cord can be collected and adult stem cells can be separated and cryo-preserved in the form of umbilical cord blood (UCB) stem cells. Those UCB stem cells are the source most readily available worldwide without pain or risk for the involved parties, most cost-effective and without ethical considerations.

Other stem cell sources available throughout life are the bone marrow (BM) and peripheral blood (PB) as a G-CSF stimulated extension of the former. Today, an estimated 45,000 to 50,000 hematopoietic stem cell transplants (blood or marrow transplants BMT), using predominantly autologous (patient’s own) and related allogeneic (from within the patient’s family) rather than unrelated allogeneic (unrelated donor), are performed annually worldwide to treat patients with life-threatening malignant and non-malignant diseases. Sixty per cent of all bone marrow transplants worldwide are autologous (patient’s own stem cells) and similarly 80% of all allogeneic transplants come from within the greater family of the patient.

Cord blood stem cells have now surpassed the use of bone marrow and peripheral blood according to the April 2007 issue of the British Journal of Hematology. In Thailand, 80% of all transplants in children between 1997 and 2005 were either autologous or related allogeneic; that means either the patient’s own stem cells or stem cells from within the family – the reason being tissue compatibility.

Our bone marrow is a magnificent factory regularly and constantly renewing the constituents of our blood system throughout life and increasingly appears to be a reservoir of immature cells that possibly take part in various regenerative and repair functions in our body.

Decreased levels of circulating endothelial progenitor cells (EPC)/CD34+ stem cells are now recognised as important indicators of cardiovascular disease and may have initiating roles in the pathogenesis of all diabetic complications and cardiovascular disease, and seem to convey cumulative cardiovascular risks better than Body Mass Index, diastolic blood pressure and total cholesterol.

Those observations inevitably and intuitively lead us to innovative therapeutic thoughts. Will modulation of EPC/CD34+ levels and function aid us to overcome the clinical needs and challenges in the 21st century created by changes in longevity and lifestyle, notably diabetes, cardio- and cerebrovascular disease, neurodegenerative diseases (Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s) and joint ailments? In that case, is replacement with autologous ex vivo expanded/enriched EPC or pharmacological stimulation of the endogenous cells the best way to go?

The former would be possible if previous autologous storage at birth or at a young age before the development of the disease, was available to avoid the profound impairment of EPC in established diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

The latter could happen in two ways, one being physical exercise and administration of ACE inhibitors, statins and glitazones all known to stimulate EPC generation. Alternatively, classic G-CSF stimulation, autologous PBSC collection and consequent implantation around the areas needing regeneration and vasculogenesis could happen in both established disease or with previously stored autologous healthy and non-diseased PBSCs.

Future research on all the above-mentioned parameters will show us the way to proceed. Cord blood stem cells are now increasingly viewed as the capital ingredient for future cellular therapies in regenerative medicine, and may revolutionise the way we treat our society’s major ailments and medical threats without causing any heated ethical debates.

The discussion should focus on early parental education regarding available alternatives and on the ethical dilemma created by the possibility of discarding cord blood stem cells rather than on whether or who should store it.

DR KOSTAS I PAPADOPOULOS

Specialist in Endocrinology and Diabetes

MD, PhD in Immunology and Endocrinology