<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19120"></HEAD>
<BODY style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: 15px"
id=MailContainerBody leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 CanvasTabStop="true"
name="Compose message area">
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Verdana>
<DIV id=fb-root></DIV>
<DIV class=header>
<DIV class=left><A href="http://www.nytimes.com/"><IMG
title="http://www.nytimes.com/
CTRL + Click to follow link" border=0
hspace=0 alt="The New York Times" align=left
src="http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/nytlogo153x23.gif"></A>
<NYT_REPRINTS_FORM>
<LI class=reprints>
<FORM name=cccform
action=https://s100.copyright.com/CommonApp/LoadingApplication.jsp
target=_Icon></FORM></LI></DIV>
<DIV class=right> </DIV></DIV><BR clear=all>
<HR align=left SIZE=1>
<DIV class=timestamp>October 3, 2011</DIV>
<DIV class=kicker></DIV>
<H1><NYT_HEADLINE version="1.0" type=" ">TransCanada Pipeline Foes See U.S. Bias
in E-Mails</NYT_HEADLINE></H1><NYT_BYLINE>
<H6 class=byline>By <A class=meta-per
title="More Articles by Elisabeth Rosenthal"
href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/r/elisabeth_rosenthal/index.html?inline=nyt-per"
rel=author>ELISABETH ROSENTHAL</A></H6></NYT_BYLINE><NYT_TEXT>
<DIV id=articleBody><NYT_CORRECTION_TOP></NYT_CORRECTION_TOP>
<P>A State Department official provided Fourth of July party invitations, subtle
coaching and cheerleading, and inside information about Secretary Hillary Rodham
Clinton’s meetings to a Washington lobbyist for a Canadian company seeking
permission from the department to build a pipeline that would carry crude from
the <A class=meta-classifier title="More articles about oil sands."
href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/o/oil_petroleum_and_gasoline/oil_sands/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier">oil
sands</A> of Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. </P>
<P>E-mails released Monday in response to a Freedom of Information Act request
filed by the environmental group <A title="The group’s Web site."
href="http://www.foe.org/">Friends of the Earth</A> paint a picture of a
sometimes warm and collaborative relationship between the lobbyist for the
pipeline company, Trans-Canada, and officials in the State Department, the
agency responsible for evaluating and approving the billion-dollar project. </P>
<P>The exchanges provide a rare glimpse into how Washington works and the access
familiarity can bring. The 200 pages are the second batch of documents and
e-mails released so far. </P>
<P>They also offer insight into the company’s strategy, not revealed publicly
before. <A class=meta-org title="More information about TransCanada Corporation"
href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/transcanada-corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-org">TransCanada</A>
lobbyists exchanged e-mails with State Department officials in July about their
intention to drop their request to operate the <A class=meta-classifier
title="More articles about the Keystone XL pipeline."
href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/k/keystone_pipeline/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier">Keystone
XL</A> pipeline at higher pressures than normally allowed in the United States
to win political support, but then suggested they would reapply for the
exception once the project had been cleared. </P>
<P>“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
the 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 environmentalists seeking input, who
had only one group meeting at that level. </P>
<P>Environmental groups argue that the 1,700-mile pipeline, which could carry
700,000 barrels a day from Alberta to the Gulf Coast of Texas, would result in
unacceptably high emissions and disrupt pristine ecosystems. </P>
<P>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. “Throughout the process we have been
in communication with industry as well as environmental groups, both in the
United States and in Canada.” </P>
<P>TransCanada’s chief Washington lobbyist is Paul Elliott, a top official in
Mrs. Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign. All of the documents pertain to
contacts between Mr. Elliott and government officials. </P>
<P>“What differentiates this case is the potential for conflict of interest.
That really raises eyebrows,” said Jake Wiens, an investigator with the Project
on Government Oversight in Washington. </P>
<P>Many of the e-mails released Monday are between Mr. Elliott and Marja
Verloop, the counselor for energy and environment at the United States Embassy
in Ottawa. </P>
<P>On Sept. 10, 2010, in response to an e-mail from Mr. Elliott announcing that
Senator Max Baucus of Montana was supporting the pipeline, Ms. Verloop wrote,
“Go Paul!” </P>
<P>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. </P>
<P>In a fragmented exchange, Ms. Verloop wondered whether TransCanada could
reapply to use higher pipeline pressures in the future, to which Mr. Elliott
replied, “You are correct.” Such a request after the State Department signed off
on the pipeline would require approval only by the Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration, a small federal agency, bypassing broader
political scrutiny. </P>
<P>Shawn Howard, a spokesman for TransCanada, said Mr. Elliott lobbied the State
Department officials as did lobbyists for many environmental groups. “Mr.
Elliott was and is simply doing his job,” Mr. Howard said. “No laws have been
broken.” </P>
<P>The State Department is tasked with granting permission, according to the
“national interest,” for pipelines that cross national borders and is weighing
<A title="Times article on the risks."
href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/business/energy-environment/19sands.html">the
environmental impact</A> of Keystone XL against the benefit of expanding the
fuel supply for the United States. Its third and final environmental impact
statement, released in late August, said the pipeline would have “limited
adverse environmental impacts” if operated according to regulations. </P>
<P>The Environmental Protection Agency, which may offer comments on such
pipelines but is not empowered to rule on their authorization, <A
title="Times article on the concerns."
href="http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/06/07/07greenwire-epa-seeks-expanded-review-of-proposed-oil-sand-60126.html">sharply
criticized</A> the State Department’s previous environmental assessments as
inadequate but has not yet weighed in on the August report. </P>
<P>Though the pipeline would help ensure a stable fuel supply from a friendly
neighbor, environmental groups oppose it because much of the crude would be
extracted from subterranean oil sands in a process that they say results in
heavy emissions and destroys the overlying forests. In addition, the pipeline
would go through the Ogallala Aquifer, one of the Great Plains’ principal water
sources, where a spill could prove disastrous. </P>
<P>While acknowledging that the extraction produces higher emissions than
conventional oil drilling, proponents say that environmental groups exaggerate
the difference and that new processes are making it cleaner. </P>
<P>Some of the e-mails have a cozy tone while 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
placate Canada; Keystone XL has the strong support of the Canadian government
and would provide a lucrative new outlet for Canadian oil. </P>
<P>This year, for example, State Department officials struggled with how to
respond to Mr. Elliott’s request for a second meeting with Jose W. Fernandez,
assistant secretary for economic, energy and business affairs. </P>
<P>“I definitely think that Fernandez should NOT meet with TransCanada folks at
this point,” one e-mail said. Another said: “It would be unusual for an
Assistant Secretary to meet twice with the same company in such a short time,
and we wouldn’t be sending a message that we’re unwilling to meet since others
of us will be meeting with them.” </P>
<P>Environmental groups have long argued that Mr. Elliott’s lobbying of the
State Department is a conflict of interest since he served as Mrs. Clinton’s
deputy national campaign director and chief of delegate selection in 2008. </P>
<P>The department has said the decision about whether to permit the pipeline “is
not and will not be influenced by prior relationships that current government
officials have had.” </P>
<P>In the first cache of e-mails, made public in September, State Department
officials seem at times to advise TransCanada officials on how to maximize their
chances for pipeline approval. </P>
<P>That tone continued on Dec. 14, when Ms. Verloop sent Mr. Elliott a copy of
an article raising questions about his conflicts of interest with information
about Mrs. Clinton’s trip to Canada for a meeting of North American foreign
ministers, noting: “Oversaw S’s trip to Ottawa yesterday for the trilat. KXL not
raised, but Doer flew back on the plane with her.“ Gary Doer is Canada’s
ambassador to the United States. </P>
<P>Mr. Elliott responded by saying the coverage made him ill. </P>
<P>Ms. Verloop replied: “Sorry for the stomach pains but at the end of the day
it’s precisely because you have connections that you’re sought after and hired.”
For emphasis, she added a frowning emoticon. </P>
<P>With a judge now checking to make sure the State Department complies with
Friends of the Earth’s document requests, Mr. Moglen anticipates more e-mails
will be released. A final decision on the pipeline is expected by the end of the
year. </P><NYT_CORRECTION_BOTTOM>
<DIV
class=articleCorrection></DIV></NYT_CORRECTION_BOTTOM><NYT_UPDATE_BOTTOM></NYT_UPDATE_BOTTOM></DIV></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Verdana>________________________________</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Verdana>Wayne A. Fox<BR><A
title="mailto:wayne.a.fox@gmail.com
CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="mailto:wayne.a.fox@gmail.com">wayne.a.fox@gmail.com</A><BR></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>