ICF, Slammed For Oil Co Coziness During State Review, Withdraws From XL "Sister" Pipeline Project
A State Department contractor for the Keystone XL that has been under attack for alleged conflicts of interest has withdrawn from contract negotiations to review a lesser-known but still controversial tar sands pipeline: Enbridge's Alberta Clipper.
The unusual move has led some legal and industry experts to question whether public and political pressure against the company might have played a role in the decision. "There's no doubt it is in the back of our minds," said David McColl, an energy analyst for Morningstar, an investment research company, who focuses on Enbridge. Federal contracts for major projects can be lucrativepotentially worth into the millions, depending on the scope and scale of the work and the agency involvedand are often the bread-and-butter of consulting firms' business.
On March 15, 2013, the State Department announced it had chosen ICF International, a technology and policy consulting group based in Fairfax, Va., to carry out the environmental review of Enbridge's proposed expansion of the Alberta Clipper oil pipeline to transport 880,000 barrels a day from Canada to Wisconsin.
The announcement came days after the department released its draft environmental analysis of the Keystone XL, which was partly prepared by ICF. The report concluded that the pipeline wouldn't have much effect on the environment or climate, and touched off a flurry of controversy and a campaign by environmentalists to expose alleged bias of the contractors. Groups criticized several of the firmsincluding ICF, but mainly the ERM Group Inc.over their business ties to Keystone builder TransCanada and to other oil companies that would benefit if the pipeline is built.
EDIT
http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20140326/why-did-icf-intl-withdraw-tar-sands-pipeline-contract-state-department