Environmental groups said the e-mails were disturbing and evidence of “complicity” between TransCanada, the pipeline company, and American officials tasked with evaluating the pipeline’s environmental impact.
The e-mails, the second batch to be released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the environmental group Friends of the Earth, show a senior State Department official at the United States Embassy in Ottawa procuring invitations to Fourth of July parties for TransCanada officials, sharing information with the company about Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s meetings and cheering on TransCanada in its quest to gain approval of the giant pipeline, which could carry 700,000 barrels a day.
“You see officials who see it as their business not to be an oversight agency but as a facilitator of TransCanada’s plans,” said Damon Moglen, the director of climate and energy project for Friends of the Earth. While the e-mails refer to multiple meetings between TransCanada officials and assistant secretaries of state, he said, such access was denied to environmental groups seeking input. Environmental groups argue that the pipeline, known as the Keystone XL project, would result in unacceptably high emissions and disrupt pristine ecosystems.
Before he was TransCanada’s chief Washington lobbyist, Paul Elliott was a top official in Mrs. Clinton’s failed 2008 presidential campaign.
Many of the new e-mails are between Mr. Elliott and Marja Verloop, the counselor for energy and environment at the United States Embassy in Ottawa. On Sept. 10, 2010, in response to an e-mail from Mr. Elliot announcing that Senator Max Baucus of Montana was supporting the pipeline, Ms. Verloop wrote, “Go Paul!” In an e-mail to David Jacobson, the United States ambassador to Canada, she described TransCanada as “comfortable and on board” with some developments in the review process.
Wendy Nassmacher, a State Department spokeswoman, disputed that the e-mails showed a pro-pipeline bias. “We are committed to a fair, transparent and thorough process,” she said in an e-mail on Sunday. “Throughout the process we have been in communication with industry as well as environmental groups, both in the United States and in Canada.”
She noted that the State Department also conducted hearings in communities along the route of the proposed pipeline last week.
Shawn Howard, a spokesman for TransCanada, said Mr. Elliott lobbied the State Department officials on Keystone XL, as did lobbyists for many environmental groups. “Mr. Elliott was and is simply doing his job — no laws have been broken.” The State Department is tasked with permitting pipelines that cross national borders according to the “national interest,” and is weighing the environmental impact of Keystone XL against the benefit in expanding the fuel supply for the United States. Its third and final environmental impact statement, released in late August, said that the pipeline would have “limited adverse environmental impacts” if operated according to regulations.
The Environmental Protection Agency, which may offer comments on such pipelines but is not empowered to rule on their authorization, had sharply criticized the State Department’s previous environmental assessments as inadequate but has not yet weighed in on the most recent judgment.
While the pipeline would help insure the United States a stable fuel supply from a friendly neighbor, environmental groups oppose it because much of the oil would come from subterranean oil sand, and extracting crude oil from the rock produces heavy emissions and destroys the overlying forests. In addition, the pipeline would go through the Ogallala Aquifer, one of the Midwest’s principal water sources, where a spill could prove disastrous.
Although some of the e-mails released Monday speak to a cozy familiarity between Mr. Elliott and State Department officials, others reveal a sometimes tense and conflicted relationship. Officials in Washington repeatedly rejected and parried requests for meetings with TransCanada executives even while trying to please Canada, a close ally; Keystone XL has the strong support of the Canadian government and would provide a lucrative new outlet for Canadian oil.
Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=44a7e995f8e28d4e9de38dfeb040c793