facebook twitter subscribe

Donate to SolveClimate News

Rep. Waxman Again Requests Investigation of Koch Connection to Keystone XL Pipeline

Waxman cites legal papers filed by a Koch subsidiary, uncovered by InsideClimate News, in which it claimed a 'substantial' interest in the pipeline.

Oct 18, 2011
Rep. Henry Waxman

Editor's note: This version of the story adds comment from Koch Industries.

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) today renewed his request that the House Committee on Energy and Commerce investigate the role of Koch Industries in the Keystone XL pipeline.

Waxman, the ranking minority member of the committee, made his request in a letter to committee chairmen Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.).

Waxman first asked for an investigation in May, when the committee was holding hearings on the Keystone XL, a controversial Canada-to-Texas oil pipeline that would allow as much as 830,000 barrels a day of a particularly dirty form of oil, locked up in Alberta's tar sands, to reach refineries in the Gulf of Mexico.

The controversy over the Kochs and the pipeline was sparked by an InsideClimate News report from February. That analysis, also published on Reuters.com and later cited by various news organizations, found that Koch Industries is deeply involved in the Canadian oil sands trade and is well positioned to benefit if more heavy crude is exported to the United States. The company denied the report, and Waxman subsequently made his own inquiries.

"When I first raised this issue in May, representatives from Koch denied any interest in the pipeline and Chairman Upton called the idea that there could be a link between Koch and the pipeline an 'outrageous accusation' and a 'blatant political sideshow,'" Waxman wrote in his letter. "Recently, however, I have become aware of evidence that appears to contradict the assertions of the Koch representatives and Chairman Upton."

Waxman cites legal papers that a Koch Industries subsidiary, called Flint Hills Resources Canada LP, filed with the Canadian government, recently uncovered by InsideClimate News, in which the company claimed "a direct and substantial interest" in the Keystone XL.

"There appears to be a direct contradiction between what Koch representatives told me and the assertion by the Koch subsidiary," Waxman wrote. "If members of the Committee were misled by Koch, that is a serious matter that deserves prompt and thorough investigation."

In an email to InsideClimate News, Philip Ellender, president and chief operating officer at Koch Companies Public Sector, again denied that Koch has any interest in Keystone XL. "As previously stated, Koch Industries has no financial stake in the Keystone pipeline," he said. "We are not party to its design or construction, we are not an investor in the project, and we are not a proposed shipper or customer of oil delivered by this pipeline."

Calls to the office of Rep. Upton were not returned. Rep. Whitfield was traveling today and was not able to comment by deadline.

A decision on the presidential permit application that would allow TransCanada to build the pipeline is pending with the State Department. It has been under review for more than three years, and a decision is expected by the end of the year.

A former centrist on environmental issues, Rep. Upton has given the pipeline project full support, co-sponsoring a bill that gave the White House a Nov. 1 deadline to finish its review of Keystone XL project. The bill passed the House but was ignored by the Senate.

AttachmentSize
Upton.Whitfield.KochKeystone.2011.10.18.pdf925.73 KB

Comments

Statement from Koch Industries

Statement by Philip Ellender, President and COO, Government and Public Affairs, Koch Companies Public Sector, LLC:

As previously stated, Koch Industries has no financial stake in the Keystone pipeline. We are not party to its design or construction, we are not an investor in the project, and we are not a proposed shipper or customer of oil delivered by this pipeline.

This is just the latest of many false allegations initiated by InsideClimateNews and advanced by aligned advocacy media. It is also evidence that those promoting these falsehoods do not even do basic due diligence before attacking Koch Industries. A rudimentary effort by any legitimate reporter would reveal the clear difference between "intervening" in an application in Canada's National Energy Board hearings, and "having an interest" in the pipeline. By definition, an intervener is anyone who wants to learn more about a project. In this case, interveners included individuals, environmental groups, businesses and many others. We challenge InsideClimateNews and other advocacy media to ask Sierra Club Canada and other interveners in this case if they have a financial interest in the pipeline.

A complete list of interveners is found here.

 

Publisher's Reply to Statement from Koch Industries

Dear Mr Ellender:

We are a non-partisan news organization staffed by accomplished journalists who abide by the highest professional standards. We have made no false allegations and remain in the dark about what you think they might be. You have never asked us to correct any errors of fact. We have also endeavored to involve you in our due diligence but you have not responded to our repeated queries, until yesterday for the first time by furnishing the statement above.

In the application for intervenor status before the Canadian Energy Board in its hearing on the Keystone XL pipeline, Koch Industries, through its Flint Hills subsidiary in Canada, made the following representation:

“Flint Hills Resources Canada LP (Flint Hills) is among Canada's largest crude oil purchasers, shippers and exporters, coordinating supply for its refinery in Pine Bend, Minnesota. Consequently, Flint Hills has a direct and substantial interest in the application" for the Keystone XL.

The plain meaning of this statement is that your “direct and substantial interest” in Keystone XL is a consequence of your business activities in crude oil purchasing, shipping and exporting. When we spoke to the Canadian Energy Board that approved your application, they said that was indeed their understanding as well.

But we didn't stop there. With all due diligence, we contacted Koch Industries to provide an opportunity to furnish further elaboration or clarification.

We never received any response. Our invitation remains open for you to explain to us what your "direct and substantial interest" in the Keystone XL pipeline is.

The Flint Hills North Pole Alaska chemical spill

When is anyone going to try and protect the people instead of Flint hills about the poisoned and contaminated soil and water table in North Pole Alaska? Is North Pole Alaska the next cancer cluster area in the US? Shouldnt Flint Hills be forced to purchase the properties that they poisoned?

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <p> <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <h1> <h2> <h3> <ul> <li> <ol> <b> <i> <p> <br>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Youtube and google video links are automatically converted into embedded videos.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Images can be added to this post.

More information about formatting options