In our capacity as Statutory Auditors of Total and at its request, we have performed a review that allowed us to provide a moderate level of assurance on certain environmental and social performance data selected⁽¹⁾ by Total (“the data”) for 2006, identified in this report by the symbol .

The Strategy and Risk Assessment Department was responsible for preparing the environmental performance data and the Human Resources and Corporate Communications Department was responsible for preparing the social performance data, in accordance with:

• The Corporate Environmental Performance Reporting Guideline and the Corporate Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting Guideline
• The Corporate Social Reporting Protocol and Method
  Hereinafter the ”Reference Procedures”, which can be consulted at Total’s head office and which are described in part on page 90. It is our responsibility to express a conclusion on these indicators, based on our review.

Nature and Scope of the Review

We performed a limited review to provide a moderate level of assurance that the selected data is free of material misstatement. A high level of assurance would have required a more extensive review.

• We reviewed the processes with regard to their relevance, reliability, neutrality, understandability and completeness.
• We met with the persons in charge of the reporting process in the Holding Company and in the Exploration & Production, Gas & Power, Refining & Marketing, and Chemicals businesses.
• As part of our review, we visited 12 operating sites⁽²⁾, representing 8% for one and 23 to 52% for the remainder, of the consolidated environmental data for Total and ten sites and subsidiaries⁽³⁾ representing 12% of consolidated employees for social data. For these sites and subsidiaries, we verified understanding and application of the procedures and, on a test basis, verified the calculations, performed consistency checks and reconciled the data with supporting documentation.
• We also verified, on a test basis, calculations and data consolidation at the business and holding company levels.

Comments on the Procedures

Information on the preparation of the data and the scope of reporting are provided on pages 89 and 90 of this report.
We bring the following comments on the reporting process to your attention:

Environmental Reporting

• The audited sites and business units have introduced reporting procedures covering the main indicators. The reliability of the reported data has been significantly improved and internal controls have been strengthened.
• However, Refining’s procedures for calculating SO₂ and NOx emissions and for waste reporting need to be finalized. At one Refining site, corporate reporting needs to be improved.
• Corporate procedures now differentiate more clearly between hazardous waste from routine operations and special hazardous waste, but application needs to be harmonized. Exploration & Production’s classification of hazardous waste from routine operations needs to be standardized with the corporate classification.
• Despite improvements by Marketing in taking into account transportation-related CO₂ emissions, the differentiation between direct and indirect road transportation emissions needs to be made clearer. the differentiation between direct and indirect road transportation emissions needs to be made clearer.

Social Reporting

• The procedure for reporting this data has been expanded, particularly with regard to indicator definition, and distributed to subsidiaries.

Conclusion

During our review, we observed that the composition of flared gas reported at one Exploration & Production site was not representative of the real composition with regard to SO₂ content. The corresponding correction has been made. The variable composition of gas that is flared or burned as fuel needs to be documented at certain Refining and Exploration & Production sites.

Based on our review and subject to this reservation, nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that the reviewed environmental and social data have not, in all material respects, been prepared in accordance with the procedures.

Paris-La Défense, March 12, 2007

Statutory Auditors

Ernst & Young Audit		KPMG Audit A Department of KPMG S.A.
Gabriel Galet and Philippe Diu Partners	Eric Duvaud Partner Manager of the Environment and Sustainable Development Department	René Amirkhanian Partner	Philippe Arnaud Partner Manager of the Environment and Sustainable Development Department

(1) Environmental performance indicators: number of ISO 14001-certified sites, greenhouse gases (CO₂, N₂O, CH₄, HFC, PFC, SF₆), SO₂, NOx, hazardous waste production (treated offsite). Social performance indicators: workforce (by age, socio-professional category, gender), hires, departures and balance, French and non-French managers, number of training days, guaranteed minimum wage, mobility, regular medical checkups, number of days absent for medical reasons, employee representatives.
(2) Exploration & Production: ABK (Abu Al Bukhoosh - Abu Dhabi), Cameroon and Indonesia subsidiaries; Gas & Power: TIGF in France; Refining: Port Arthur in the United States, Donges in France, Vlissingen in the Netherlands; Marketing: Duisburg terminal in Germany, Total Huadong Lubricants terminal in China; Chemicals: Drocourt and Grand-Quevilly/Rouen sites in France, FAO in Belgium.
(3) Exploration & Production: ABK (Abu Al Bukhoosh - Abu Dhabi), Cameroon and Indonesia subsidiaries; Gas & Power: TIGF in France; Holding Company: Total SA; Chemicals: Cray Valley Drocourt facility, Cray Valley S.A. and Hutchinson Montargis facility in France and review of controls at Hutchinson; Marketing: Total Deutschland.