Start A Petition

EXCLUSIVE: State Dept. Hid Contractor's Ties to Keystone XL Pipeline Company

Business  (tags: climate, climate-change, climatechange, CO2emissions, conservation, destruction, ecosystems, endangered, energy, environment, government, habitat, habitatdestruction, healthconditions, nature, humans, politics, pollution, protection, science, research, Su )

- 1917 days ago -
A top expert who helped write the government's latest Keystone report previously consulted on three different TransCanada projects--a fact the State Department tried to hide.

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


JL A (281)
Saturday March 23, 2013, 10:26 am

Mother Jones
EXCLUSIVE: State Dept. Hid Contractor's Ties to Keystone XL Pipeline Company
A top expert who helped write the government's latest Keystone report previously consulted on three different TransCanada projects—a fact the State Department tried to hide.

By Andy Kroll | Thu Mar. 21, 2013 3:00 AM PDT

Late on a Friday afternoon in early March, the State Department released a 2,000-page draft report [1] downplaying the environmental risks of the northern portion of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline [2], which would ferry oil from Canada's tar sands to refineries in Texas, passing through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma. But when it released the report, State hid an important fact from the public: Experts who helped draft the report had previously worked for TransCanada, the company looking to build the Keystone pipeline, and other energy companies poised to benefit from Keystone's construction. State released documents [3] in conjunction with the Keystone report [1] in which these experts' work histories were redacted so that anyone reading the documents wouldn't know who'd previously hired them. Yet unredacted versions of these documents obtained by Mother Jones confirm that three experts working for an outside contractor had done consulting work for TransCanada and other oil companies with a stake in the Keystone's approval.

When the Keystone report—officially known as a "draft supplemental environmental impact statement" [4]—was released, environmental activists ripped [5] it as shoddy and misleading. Russ Girling, TransCanada's CEO, cheered [5] the report as "an important step" toward receiving President Barack Obama's final stamp of approval for the pipeline.

Outside contractors (managed by the State Department) wrote the Keystone report, which neither endorsed nor rejected the Keystone pipeline. The contractor that produced the bulk of the report was Environmental Resources Management (ERM), an international consulting firm [6]. On the day the State Department published the Keystone impact report, the agency also released a cache of documents that ERM submitted in 2012 to win the contract to produce the Keystone environmental report. That cache included a 55-page filing in which ERM stated it had no conflicts of interests writing the Keystone report.

But there was something strange about ERM's conflict-of-interest filing: The bios for the ERM's experts were redacted.

Here's what those redactions kept secret: ERM's second-in-command on the Keystone report, Andrew Bielakowski [7], had worked on three previous pipeline projects for TransCanada over seven years as an outside consultant. He also consulted on projects for ExxonMobil, BP, and ConocoPhillips, three of the Big Five oil companies that could benefit from the Keystone XL project and increased extraction of heavy crude oil taken from the Canadian tar sands.

Another ERM employee who contributed to State's Keystone report—and whose prior work history was also redacted—previously worked for Shell Oil; a third worked as a consultant for Koch Gateway Pipeline Company, a subsidiary of Koch Industries. Shell [8] and Koch* have a significant financial interest [9] in the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. ERM itself has worked for Chevron, which has invested in Canadian tar sands extraction, according to its website [10].

Here is ERM's redacted filing as it appeared on the State Department's website (begin reading on page 30):
p. 1
p. 2
p. 3
Page 1 of 55

Here is the unredacted version:
p. 1
p. 2
p. 3
Page 1 of 55

So who hid ERM's connections to TransCanada?

ERM spokesman Simon Garcia directed all questions to the State Department. TransCanada spokesman Grady Semmens said that although the company paid for ERM's analysis (as is common practice), TransCanada did not control what State and ERM released to the public. "The Department of State was responsible for posting the conflict of interest statements and has complete control over all activities of ERM," Semmons wrote in an email. "TransCanada does not direct or control ERM's actions in any way. TransCanada does not speak for the State Department with respect to the details of how it manages its review process."

After a half-dozen inquiries, a State Department official emailed this statement: "Some information in the administrative documents that was required for State Department conflict of interest procedures has been redacted. This redaction protects the private information of ERM's previous clients." Asked who exactly made the redactions, the official said: "On background, I don't know."

The State Department appears to be responsible for the attempt to mask the ERM-TransCanada connection. When State first posted the redacted ERM filing, it was possible to digitally remove the redaction and read the ERM bios. But some days later, a new version of the filing was posted online in which the ERM bios had been scrubbed from beneath the redactions.

The State Department has faced heaps of criticism for potential conflicts of interests involving TransCanada and Keystone XL. In October 2011, Obama's reelection campaign hired [11] Broderick Johnson, who had previously lobbied in favor of Keystone, as a senior adviser. Emails obtained by Friends of the Earth, an environmental group that opposes the Keystone pipeline, revealed a cozy relationship [12] between TransCanada lobbyist Paul Elliott and Marja Verloop, an official at the US Embassy in Canada whose portfolio covers the Keystone project. Before he lobbied for TransCanada, Elliott worked as deputy campaign manager [13] on Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential bid. Clinton served as secretary of state until recently.

The State Department's inspector general disagreed with critics who cried foul over these apparent conflicts of interest. In February 2012, the IG found no evidence of bias [14] in State's handling of the application to build the pipeline.

President Obama has the final say the fate of the Keystone XL. The president, who says he supports an "all of the above" [15] energy policy, delayed a decision [16] on the pipeline in November 2011 until after the 2012 elections, and has remained coy ever since. He has downplayed the idea [17] that building the Keystone will create jobs, but has not ruled out building it.

The president is facing huge pressure from energy interests and environmental groups. TransCanada has spent millions of dollars lobbying for the pipeline. The environmental group and many other advocacy organizations have protested the Keystone in front of the White House and urged Obama to kill the project. A final decision on the Keystone XL remains months, if not a year or more, away.


Update: After this story was posted, a spokeswoman for Koch Industries, Melissa Cohlmia, wrote in an email that "Koch has no financial stake in the Keystone XL pipeline and that we are not party to its design or construction. We are not a proposed shipper or customer of oil delivered by this pipeline." In 2009, Koch subsidiary Flint Hills Resources Canada told [18] (PDF) Canadian regulators it had "a direct and substantial interest" in the application to build the Canadian portion of the Keystone pipeline. (Here's Koch's take [19] on that.) A spokeswoman for Canada's National Energy Board told [20] InsideClimate News that Flint Hills got involved in the Keystone application process because it had a "business interest." Steven Paget, vice president of energy infrastructure at FirstEnergy Capital in Calgary, told InsideClimate News that the Keystone pipeline would raise the price of Canadian crude oil, benefiting all companies in the oil sands business. (Flint Hills describes itself as "among Canada's largest crude oil purchasers, shippers, and exporters.") A 2010 report by Accufacts Inc. noted that a Koch subsidiary's refinery in Corpus Christi [21] is one of 22 refineries equipped to handle the type of heavy crude oil that Keystone XL would carry from Canada to Texas. Asked to further discuss Koch and Keystone, Cohlmia declined.

Return to the story.
Source URL:


Kit B (276)
Saturday March 23, 2013, 1:33 pm

Are any of us surprised by "cozy" interests or "conflict of interests" seems business as usual these days.

This morning it took me about 5 or 6 minutes to send out 545 tweets to every Congress person...(both Houses) on the XL pipeline and CISPA, two separate tweets. If we did that, even if you sign up for tweeter for one cause, it would get some attention. I know not everyone fully understands the real environmental longer term impact from this pipeline, but if they have a computer or a library they could find out. Not everyone will or wants to be a part of a physical protest, that doesn't mean they can not write and call their own Congressional representatives (both Houses), sign petitions, write letters and generally make their opposition well known to both Congress and the White House. Congress worries about re-election, make this an issue for them to really worry about. Ultimately this final decision will be Obama's hands, let him know how you feel.

Tamara Hayes (185)
Saturday March 23, 2013, 2:47 pm
Kit, you keep nailing them all on the head. The entire reason I have a twitter and google account are to maximize the impact I can have with regards to this and all issues that we are trying so hard to bring attention to. There is an amazing amount of noise we can make when we care enough to try. People, we need to shout it out in every medium possible so that how we really feel makes an impact. You cannot be silent and then complain about the outcome of any situation. It is up to all of us to remind our leaders that we are the ones who ultimately put them in the cozy positions that they currently reside and I am sure would like to continue to occupy. Never think for one moment, but how can I make a difference? You will not be alone in your action. But action has to start for it to accomplish anything. Thanks J.L.

JL A (281)
Saturday March 23, 2013, 2:56 pm
You are welcome Tamara. Thank you Kit and Tamara for explaining how each person can make their voice heard to make a difference.
You cannot currently send a star to Kit because you have done so within the last day.
You cannot currently send a star to Tamara because you have done so within the last day.

Past Member (0)
Saturday March 23, 2013, 3:19 pm
Noted thanks

John B (185)
Saturday March 23, 2013, 4:35 pm
Thanks J.L. for the post. Did someone mention transparency? Does anyone at the State Department know the definition? Read and noted.

JL A (281)
Saturday March 23, 2013, 5:34 pm
You are welcome Carol and John. Excellent point John. You cannot currently send a star to John because you have done so within the last day.

paul m (93)
Sunday March 24, 2013, 7:41 am

Governments are allowed to change the Goalposts to suit themselves and once their is money in it they
don' t care about the people , just to look after their plundering Companies . They look after each orther.
But keep prosting and next time don't vote for them.

JL A (281)
Sunday March 24, 2013, 9:46 am
You cannot currently send a star to paul because you have done so within the last day. On this issue it will be hard to find candidates in either party that didn't support.

Angelika R (143)
Sunday March 24, 2013, 12:17 pm
Didn't we KNOW IT! This reveals the very same corruption we already saw before when DOS was in Hillary's hands. It would take a MIRACLE to have this reversed, too deep already is the poisoneous influence I guess.
What Kit suggests and has been and is doing in an outstanding example of activism may or may not help, but I doubt if enough people would follow up this endeavour. It's in all of your hands.. So don't say "we didn't kow" later when others tell you "We told you so".

JL A (281)
Sunday March 24, 2013, 1:44 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Angelika because you have done so within the last day.

Helen Porter (39)
Tuesday March 26, 2013, 3:02 am

Lynn Squance (235)
Wednesday March 27, 2013, 11:27 pm
One thing that I remember being told was that when Baby Bush left office, Republican/Teabaggers seeded the State Dept and other key areas with Republican/Teabagger snivel servants. Although 4 years has passed since Baby Bush left office, is it possible that GOP plants are responsible for some of the problems? Just asking. It doen't mean however that there shouldn't be better supervision in activities at State. And it does not absolve the Secretary from accountability.

This whole Keystone XL pipeline is a nest of incestuous vipers. The planet has too much to lose if this goes forward. The same with the Northern Gateway pipeline.

JL A (281)
Thursday March 28, 2013, 7:14 am
You cannot currently send a star to Lynn because you have done so within the last day.
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in Business

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.