City Notes

TransCanada flack accidentally emails reporters a report about the reporters’ reporting

Gonna take a break from posting city news to pass along this email, which TransCanada spokesman Shawn Howard inadvertently sent to several dozen reporters this afternoon. It’s a recap of how the media covered the announcement that Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman had approved a revised route for the Keystone XL oil pipeline.

Pretty standard corporate communication speak, but it’s an interesting peek behind the curtain if you’re into that sort of thing.

---

From: Shawn Howard
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 4:33 PM
To: [a bunch of reporters]

Earlier today, Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman sent a letter to President Obama, indicating that the State had now approved the re-route of Keystone XL through the state. Shortly after the announcement, External Communications provided more than 55 reporters with quotes from Russ Girling on the announcement. Following that, TransCanada issued its own news release with more detailed information (based on content drafted prior to and after Christmas). A copy of our news release can be found by clicking here.

Russ Girling participated in a media scrum in Calgary with TV and print reporters from about 10 media outlets. Shawn Howard completed another 10 media interviews with reporters from Nebraska, Texas, South Dakota, New York and Washington, D.C. The main range of topics included: eminent domain in Nebraska, if we expect President Obama to approve KXL (juxtaposed against his comments in his Inaguaral Speech on climate change), what steps come next in the process, how quickly we could begin construction if we receive a Presidential Permit and the importance of the route approval through Nebraska. Our main messaging on these topics are as follows:

• We are pleased with today’s announcement. This has been an exhaustive process that has involved Nebraskans and the NDEQ for the past seven to eight months and we appreciate the input they provided. We worked hard to address as many concerns as possible and today’s approval reflects our efforts to do that.
• TransCanada supports the move to a less carbon-intense economy but we are decades away from that. TransCanada has invested billions of dollars in emission-less power generation – we know what the technology can do today and what its limitations are. The debate about climate change and emissions is not connected to Keystone XL – the oil sands produce about 1/10 of one per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions and shutting down the oil sands entirely would do almost nothing for emissions. Focusing on improved fuel standards, energy efficiency and other measures will have a real impact on GHGs.
• Keystone XL is the safest way to move oil from Canadian and US oil fields to the markets where they are needed. This is the most responsible way to move oil to markets, will have virtually no environmental impacts, enhances continental energy security and provides jobs of thousands of workers who are ready to build Keystone XL (and have been ready for years).
• Our focus in Nebraska now is to enter into direct discussions with landowners to reach voluntary easement agreements. We work very hard to be a good neighbor and it’s not in anyone’s interests to have to go into the eminent domain process because in our experience, most panels end up awarding landowners less than what we offer as compensation for the easement and in that situation, no one is a winner.
• We continue to believe that Keystone XL will be approved. The need for Keystone XL grows stronger as time goes on. U.S. refiners will soon lose supply contracts with places like Mexico and Venezuela and they need this stable, secure supply of oil to maintain their ability to produce goods and products we all rely on.

As of now, there have been more than 440 media hits on this story and many have taken directly from our news release and background information on our website. David Dodson responded to two Gulf Coast Project calls today. One was from Richard Nelson of the Diboll Free Press regarding our lack of an easement on a small parcel of land owned by the county. David told the reporter:

• Work has been suspended on a small parcel of land in the overall 485-mile Gulf Coast Project in Angelina County, Texas, south of the city of Diboll.
• TransCanada executed an easement agreement with the landowner, who subsequently sold a portion of the property to the county for purposes of construction of a weigh station. TransCanada inadvertently included the county property in its proposed route.
• TransCanada is working with the county and other relevant agencies to resolve the issue. Resolution may include a slight route deviation.
• As no plan is in place, no estimate of time associated with the route change can be made. We are confident accommodation will be reached with all parties.

David also spoke to the San Antonio Current. Mr. Barajas received the standard messages about protestors, number of workers, purpose and need. David stressed that:

• The project is employing about 4,000 workers in Texas and Oklahoma. Because of the nature of pipeline construction and the protestors’ choice of targets, the impact of all the various protests can be counted in hours, not days.
• Still, if the protestors had their way, these thousands of American workers would be kept from their jobs, and an important part of President Obama’s “all-of-the-above” energy strategy would be thwarted.
• TransCanada is gratified by the many showings of local support, and we do not believe these protestors represent an indigenous, grass-roots movement. It is a handful of individuals, and the vast majority of them are from out of state.

SOCIAL MEDIA
There are no items that we are monitoring that require our online engagement at this time. Today’s Nebraska announcement was shared extensively online, including a FOX News article that was shared more than 5,400 times. Interestingly there was very little sharing of postings by our normal opponents.

Many of our supporters were active online in their support for today’s Nebraska announcement. Those tweets and social media postings will be re-tweeted by TransCanada tomorrow and included in our next Media Today report. Have a great evening. Shawn

TransCanada forges ahead

As you’ve no doubt heard by now, TransCanada said it would begin building the southern segment of Keystone XL (Cushing, Okla. to the Gulf Coast) as a separate project while it reapplies for a presidential permit to build the whole thing.

Meanwhile, company spokesman Terry Cunha told me last week, work on the Canadian side of the border continues apace: Crews are finishing up directional drilling where the pipeline would cross the Red Deer River and South Saskatchewan River and building additional storage tanks at the project terminal in Hardisty, Alberta.

Whence the steel for Keystone XL?

TransCanada just sent out a press release breaking down the sources of steel for Keystone XL:

• Welspun, Little Rock, Ark.: 332,800 tons (50 percent)
• Evraz, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada: 156,266 tons (24 percent)
• ILVA, Italy: 103,147 tons (16 percent)
• Welspun, India: 69,457 tons (10 percent)

State Dept. report to Congress on Keystone XL decision

Governor’s office won’t introduce Keystone XL legislation

Gov. Dennis Daugaard will not bring legislation this session to impose additional protections on the Keystone XL pipeline’s route through South Dakota, spokesman Tony Venhuizen said today.

Canadian pipeline company TransCanada has agreed to reroute the pipeline around the ecologically sensitive Sandhills region in Nebraska, where the pipeline ran into a buzz saw of resistance from farmers, environmental groups, tribal representatives and state lawmakers.

Before agreeing to reroute the pipeline, which would carry heavy crude from the Athabascan tar sands to Gulf Coast refineries, the company had proffered a deal to Nebraska state lawmakers: The company would post a $100 million performance bond, encircle the pipeline with concrete or rock jacketing where it would cross a shallow water table and move spill response teams closer to the Sandhills, among other protections.

Daugaard’s office then announced that it would seek similar protections, but it looks like we’ll have to wait awhile for more detail. The State Department announced in November that it was delaying a final decision on Keystone XL until after the 2012 election, and although a provision in the payroll tax cut extension included a 60-day deadline for approving or denying the pipeline, it’s not clear when the pipeline will get a final up or down.

“The Obama Administration’s decision to delay the Keystone XL pipeline has also delayed our reactions,” Venhuizen said in an email. “We won’t be bringing legislation this year as we wait for the situation to become settled.”

State Department announcement

Here’s the press release from the State Department that just landed in my inbox:

Keystone XL Pipeline Project Review Process: Decision to Seek Additional Information

Executive Order 13337 authorizes the Department of State to lead the review of Presidential Permit applications for transborder pipelines, granting the Department discretion in determining what factors to examine to inform a determination of whether the proposed project is in the national interest. Since 2008, the Department has been conducting a transparent, thorough and rigorous review of TransCanada’s application for the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline project. As a result of this process, particularly given the concentration of concerns regarding the environmental sensitivities of the current proposed route through the Sand Hills area of Nebraska, the Department has determined it needs to undertake an in-depth assessment of potential alternative routes in Nebraska.

As part of the National Interest Determination process, the State Department held a public comment period, including public meetings in the six potentially affected states and Washington, D.C., to increase the opportunity for public comments. During this time, the Department also received input from state, local, and tribal officials. We received comments on a wide range of issues including the proposed project’s impact on jobs, pipeline safety, health concerns, the societal impact of the project, the oil extraction in Canada, and the proposed route through the Sand Hills area of Nebraska, which was one of the most common issues raised. The comments were consistent with the information in the final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) about the unique combination of characteristics in the Sand Hills (which includes a high concentration of wetlands of special concern, a sensitive ecosystem, and extensive areas of very shallow groundwater) and provided additional context and information about those characteristics. The concern about the proposed route’s impact on the Sand Hills of Nebraska has increased significantly over time, and has resulted in the Nebraska legislature convening a special session to consider the issue.

State law primarily governs routes for interstate petroleum pipelines; however, Nebraska currently has no such law or regulatory framework authorizing state or local authorities to determine where a pipeline goes. Taken together with the national concern about the pipeline’s route, the Department has determined it is necessary to examine in-depth alternative routes that would avoid the Sand Hills in Nebraska in order to move forward with a National Interest Determination for the Presidential Permit.

Based on the Department’s experience with pipeline project reviews and the time typically required for environmental reviews of similar scope by other agencies, it is reasonable to expect that this process including a public comment period on a supplement to the final EIS consistent with NEPA could be completed as early as the first quarter of 2013. After obtaining the additional information, the Department would determine, in consultation with the eight other agencies identified in the Executive Order, whether the proposed pipeline was in the national interest, considering all of the relevant issues together. Among the relevant issues that would be considered are environmental concerns (including climate change), energy security, economic impacts, and foreign policy.

Governor’s statement on Keystone XL legislation

I asked Tony Venhuizen, a spokesman for Gov. Dennis Daugaard, whether the governor will provide legislative guidance for state lawmakers when he asks them to impose additional protections on TransCanada’s proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline. Here’s the response he wangled from GDD:

“I met with officials from TransCanada this morning, and I let them know that I will be keeping a close eye on what protections they decide are appropriate in Nebraska. I have been consulting with experts at the PUC and DENR, and I will evaluate TransCanada’s actions and determine what steps South Dakota should take. Whether legislation is necessary will depend on what I learn through that process.”

TransCanada, the State Department and the consistency argument

One thing I wasn’t able to jam into this story: If TransCanada’s application to build the Keystone XL oil pipeline is rejected — unlikely, in my opinion — proponents are likely to view the State Department’s decision as being inconsistent with pipeline decisions in the past. This point was made in a March Congressional Research Service report: “Because of its prior approvals of the Keystone and Alberta Clipper pipelines, it might be difficult for the State Department to reach different conclusions on certain environmental issues in its review of the Keystone XL pipeline, and reject the permit application on that basis.” You can read the whole thing here:

The Congressional Research Service is, as the name suggests, Congress’ research team. And their reports are quickly becoming this reporter’s favorite thing in the world. Except, problem, CRS reports are not available until they’re first released by a Congressman or -woman — there’s not even a list of completed reports, which is irritating.

But so then the other day I ran across OpenCRS.com, which solicits, collects and posts already-released CRS reports. The site is registered to Joshua Ruihley, an IT specialist at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and former employee at the transparency group Sunlight Labs (says his LinkedIn profile). Many thanks, Mr. Ruihley!