The House Energy and Commerce Committee's top Democrat today renewed charges that Koch Industries stands to reap significant profit from the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline, calling for a panel probe into whether the politically active energy conglomerate concealed its ties to the $7 billion Canada-to-U.S. project.

In a letter to top Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans, Rep. Henry Waxman of California cited a report this month that a subsidiary of Koch -- known for its eponymous founders' support of conservative and tea party groups -- reported a "direct and substantial interest" in Keystone XL as part of a 2009 filing with Canadian energy regulators. Such an interest, Waxman wrote, may run counter to the company's avowals earlier this year to his aides that Koch had nothing to gain from the 1,700-mile pipeline.

"Charles and David Koch and Koch Industries should not be exempt from responsible oversight and normal accountability," Waxman wrote to Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and a top subpanel chief, Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.). "If members of the committee were misled by Koch, that is a serious matter that deserves prompt and thorough investigation."

The prospect of a financial gain to Koch from Keystone XL, which would nearly double U.S. imports of emissions-intensive Canadian oil sands crude if approved and has propelled a massive lobbying battle between environmentalists and industry, represents potent political fodder for Democrats. Waxman and another top Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Bobby Rush of Illinois, in May blasted Koch representatives for a "lack of candor" with their staff members in an initial request for an investigation (E&E Daily, May 23).

Koch quickly and publicly sought to refute the Democrats' charges, however, posting a response to the original report in InsideClimate News of its subsidiary's 2009 filing for "intervenor status" with the Canadian National Energy Board (NEB). The company blasted InsideClimate as "advocacy media" -- a reference to its founder's anti-fossil fuel views and work on research into "the business case for climate action" -- and charged its reporter with failing to fully investigate the context behind "intervenor status" requests with NEB.

"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," the company stated in its response to the report. "We challenge InsideClimate News and other advocacy media to ask Sierra Club Canada and other interveners in this case if they have a financial interest in the pipeline."

Click here to read Waxman's letter to Upton and Whitfield.