State Department Watchdog: No Conflict of Interest in Keystone Review

The finding is a blow to environmentalists battling the Keystone pipeline.

Pipe is stacked at the southern site of the Keystone XL pipeline on March 22, 2012 in Cushing, Oklahoma. U.S. President Barack Obama is pressing federal agencies to expedite the section of the Keystone XL pipeline between Oklahoma and the Gulf Coast.
National Journal
Ben Geman
Feb. 26, 2014, 1:18 p.m.

The State De­part­ment’s in­spect­or gen­er­al said Wed­nes­day that the de­part­ment fol­lowed in­tern­al guidelines in se­lect­ing the con­tract­or that stud­ied the pro­posed Key­stone XL pipeline and that the pro­cess to gauge po­ten­tial con­flicts of in­terest was “ef­fect­ive.”

However, the re­port also finds that the “pro­cess for doc­u­ment­ing the con­tract­or-se­lec­tion pro­cess, in­clud­ing the con­flict-of-in­terest re­view, can be im­proved.”

The re­port fol­lows al­leg­a­tions by en­vir­on­ment­al­ists and anti-Key­stone Demo­crats that the con­tract­or who stud­ied the pipeline, En­vir­on­ment­al Re­sources Man­age­ment, suffered from con­flicts of in­terest in weigh­ing the en­vir­on­ment­al foot­print of Tran­sCanada Corp.’s pro­posed pipeline.

However, the Of­fice of the In­spect­or Gen­er­al re­port states: “In the case of con­cerns raised about ERM’s al­leged lack of ob­jectiv­ity be­cause cur­rent ERM staff had pre­vi­ously worked for Tran­sCanada and oth­er oil and pipeline com­pan­ies, OIG found that the de­part­ment’s con­flict of in­terest re­view was ef­fect­ive and that the re­view’s con­clu­sions were reas­on­able.”

It states that “a reas­on­able re­view was un­der­taken to in­de­pend­ently eval­u­ate ERM’s cer­ti­fic­a­tion that it had no con­flict of in­terest.”

The re­port fol­lows a re­cent State De­part­ment ana­lys­is, con­duc­ted by ERM, find­ing that build­ing Key­stone would be un­likely to cause a surge in green­house-gas emis­sions, al­though al­tern­at­ive scen­ari­os modeled showed a big­ger cli­mate foot­print.

The OIG find­ing, com­bined with the en­vir­on­ment­al ana­lys­is re­leased in late Janu­ary, quickly buoyed pipeline sup­port­ers.

“With this de­vel­op­ment, the path should be clear for the State De­part­ment to is­sue an af­firm­at­ive na­tion­al in­terest de­term­in­a­tion based on the mer­it and im­port­ance of this much-needed en­ergy in­fra­struc­ture pro­ject for the na­tion,” said Sen. John Ho­even, a North Dakota Re­pub­lic­an who is press­ing the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion to ap­prove the con­tro­ver­sial pipeline.

En­vir­on­ment­al groups bat­tling the pro­posed pipeline re­acted crit­ic­ally to the find­ings, in­clud­ing one centered on ERM’s mem­ber­ship in the Amer­ic­an Pet­ro­leum In­sti­tute, a power­ful in­dustry lob­by­ing group that sup­ports the pipeline.

The OIG says a State De­part­ment law­yer’s con­clu­sion that this was not a “dis­qual­i­fy­ing” con­flict of in­terest was a “reas­on­able con­clu­sion.” That drew harsh words from the en­vir­on­ment­al group 350.org.

“While al­low­ing a mem­ber of the Amer­ic­an Pet­ro­leum In­sti­tute to re­view a tar sands oil pipeline may tech­nic­ally be leg­al, it’s by no means re­spons­ible. Sec­ret­ary [of State] Kerry and Pres­id­ent Obama can let their cli­mate legacies be tarred by this dirty pro­cess or they can do the right thing and re­ject the Key­stone XL pipeline once and for all,” said Jason Kow­al­ski, 350.org’s policy dir­ect­or.

While the re­port is a blow to anti-Key­stone act­iv­ists, it won’t end the in­tense polit­ic­al and lob­by­ing battle over the pipeline that would bring oil from Al­berta’s oil sands to Gulf Coast re­finer­ies.

The pro­ject re­mains un­der State De­part­ment re­view, and the de­part­ment is tak­ing com­ment from the pub­lic and oth­er fed­er­al agen­cies on its fi­nal en­vir­on­ment­al re­view re­leased in late Janu­ary.

The State De­part­ment’s in­spect­or gen­er­al said Wed­nes­day that the de­part­ment fol­lowed in­tern­al guidelines in se­lect­ing the con­tract­or that stud­ied the pro­posed Key­stone XL pipeline and that the pro­cess to gauge po­ten­tial con­flicts of in­terest was “ef­fect­ive.”

Key­stone op­pon­ents on Wed­nes­day launched fresh ef­forts to per­suade the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion to re­ject the pro­ject.

Demo­crat­ic Sens. Bar­bara Box­er and Shel­don White­house sent Kerry a let­ter Wed­nes­day call­ing for an “im­me­di­ate and com­pre­hens­ive study on the hu­man health im­pacts of tar sands and the pro­posed pipeline” be­fore any fi­nal de­cision.

But an ar­ray of pipeline ad­voc­ates said the in­spect­or gen­er­al re­port on the con­tract­ing pro­cess knocks aside any reas­on for the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion to avoid ap­prov­al.

“After more than five years, all the ex­cuses not to build Key­stone XL have been ex­hausted. The state of limbo needs to end,” said Cindy Schild of the Amer­ic­an Pet­ro­leum In­sti­tute.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
10 hours ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
10 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
10 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
10 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
11 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×