From a press release:
Vitter: New Richard Windsor Emails Show EPA’s Transparency Problem More Widespread
New emails show acting Administrator Perciasepe used non-official email to conduct official business. EPA Region 8 Administrator, who is resigning this week, is being investigated for the same problem.
(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW), today released findings from the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) second tranche of Richard Windsor emails. The release shows that acting Administrator Bob Perciasepe used a private email account to conduct official business, similar to Region 8 Administrator, James Martin, who is the subject of an ongoing investigation launched by Vitter and U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee (OGR) Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.).
Sen. Vitter also announced today that he has learned Martin is resigning this week, less than two weeks after hiring legal counsel and following a letter from Vitter and Issa. Read more about Vitter and Issa’s investigation into Martin here.
“Region 8 Administrator Martin is likely resigning this week in part because of the open investigation about his use of a non-official email account to conduct official business,” said Vitter. “Now we know that Lisa Jackson’s acting replacement, Bob Perciasepe, appears to have been doing the same thing to dodge the agency’s mandatory recordkeeping policy. EPA owes us all some answers about their absolute disregard for transparency, especially from their acting administrator or any potential nominee to be administrator.”
In documents obtained by Senate EPW and House OGR committees, Region 8 Administrator Martin used a non-official, me.com, e-mail account, which may have been an attempt to circumvent the Federal Records Act, the Freedom of Information Act, and Congressional oversight. The Richard Windsor email release shows that Bob Perciasepe was using a non-official, “perciasepe.org,” email account, too.
You can find an example of Perciasepe’s non-official email on page 470 at the following link to the EPA’s second release of Richard Windsor emails: http://www.epa.gov/epafoia1/docs/Second-Release-Part-O.pdf .
“There’s a lot of information in these emails that warrant further investigations, but it is clear that EPA continues to abuse exemptions under FOIA law with significant redactions of information to avoid transparency,” Vitter added.
EPA instructs its employees to “not use any outside e-mail account to conduct official Agency business.” However, the documents obtained suggest that Administrator Martin regularly used a non-official e-mail account to conduct official business, and acting Administrator Perciasepe may be doing the same.
-30-
2/19/13 2:07 PM EST via Politico email alert
EPA Region 8 Administrator James Martin has resigned from his post, effective Friday, Feb. 22, EPA spokeswoman Alisha Johnson confirmed to POLITICO. But she denied the allegation from EPW Ranking Member Sen. David Vitter that the decision came in response to his discovery that Martin had used a personal account for his government duties. Johnson said Martin’s decision to leave is for “personal reasons.” Regarding Vitter’s email claims, the agency says that “the Regional Administrator does not use his personal email account to conduct official business. That Mr. Martin responded to one email sent to his personal email account to confirm a meeting that appears on his official government calendar does not alter that fact.” EPA says the email was produced for Vitter when, “In an abundance of caution and to be fully transparent, the Regional Administrator searched his personal email account and produced any email that contained the term the ‘Environmental Defense Fund,’ which are the emails cited by Senator Vitter and Chairman Issa in their inquiry,” the agency’s statement says. “In producing these documents, the EPA and the Regional Administrator have gone beyond any legal requirements in our efforts to ensure full transparency.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Oh come on! You ALL know Obama has the most transparent administration in the whole entire history of the world. His gives you access to EXACTLY everything he wants you to know. You are all a bunch of flat-earth, racist, mouth breathing, trogolodytes that beat your wives and kick your dogs!
Would bar complaints be appropriate for the outside recipients of these emails?
Are these the EPA emails that were denied to Chris Horn and CEI?
I guess the EPA didn’t think the FOIA was for that “Richard Windsor”.
Monster document! While most of it seems to be mostly news that Richard Windsor liked to hear, I do wonder what might be in it.
So I started a search; Tallbloke was the first word I started searching for. The thing is still busy so I won’t know if I can find any skeptics listed until later, maybe never if my search locks my machine…
(WUWT will be my second choice for a search. I chose Tallbloke because of the odd ‘sudden’ interest in finding UEA’s whistleblowing leak. Somehow, I’ve wondered if Richard Windsor was interested.)
Searching for known ‘eco alarmist’ names might be neat too.
“Regarding Vitter’s email claims, the agency says that “the Regional Administrator does not use his personal email account to conduct official business.” ”
And does the Regional Administrator know how many accounts James Martin has?
The EPA are doing a lot of denying these days. Can we call them deniers now?
/sarc
‘Regarding Vitter’s email claims, the agency says that “the Regional Administrator does not use his personal email account to conduct official business. That Mr. Martin responded to one email sent to his personal email account to confirm a meeting that appears on his official government calendar does not alter that fact.’
Actually it does alter that fact. It is smoking gun evidence that Martin used his personal account to conduct official business. That is a smoking gun. Nothing else is needed to establish Vitter’s claim.
The fact that this email exists on Martin’s personal account means that all the contents of that account must be requested by Vitter or Isaa.
How did Martin’s correspondent get his personal email address? Given that Martin received the email, why did he not respond by directing the emailer to his official account? Did Martin ask the emailer how he got Martin’s personal account?
Would love to see the personal emails leading up to the EPA’s CO2/pollutant decision.
“Yo, Lisa! These jamokes actually believe their input matters!
~ James”
I’d say Bob Perciasepe’s actions weren’t very perspicacious and now his situation is perspicuously precarious. Poor Bob, I’d say.
the documents obtained suggest that Administrator Martin regularly used a non-official e-mail account to conduct official business, and acting Administrator Perciasepe may be doing the same
‘suggest’, ‘may’ ?
Well did they or did they not?
Pull My Finger, I do NOT kick my dog!!
Funny thing, it was liberals who demanded all of this open govt type legislation in the first place.
(NOTE: I agree with the open govt legislation, I’m just amused that it is suddenly the liberals who feel that they can’t conduct the govt’s business in the open.)
Theo Goodwin says:
February 19, 2013 at 11:41 am
—
If he replied from his personal account, but did a CC to his official account, would that be sufficient?
Or perhaps he could forward the question to his official account, and then answer it from there.
Three down, and how many more to go? First was Region 6 administrator Armendariz, infamous for his declaration that “EPA’s general philosophy is to crucify and make examples of oil and gas companies . . .”
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/46268
Second is Lisa Jackson herself, of whom her fellow environmentalist coworkers at the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility wrote the following less than glowing critique:
http://www.www.peer.org/news/news-releases/2008/12/08/why-lisa-jackson-should-not-run-epa
Let’s just save what’s remaining of America by shutting down the EPA once and for all, if only because it was created by an unconstitutional executive order by Richard “I’m not a crook” Nixon in 1970 . . .
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/14564-epa-ex-boss-jackson-caught-breaking-law-scamming-us-taxpayers
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/dethrone-epa-robert-zubrin
. . . and as if that weren’t enough, here’s two more reasons:
1) The EPA (and the entire green movement) has become the haunt of Marxists with nowhere else to go . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdLReIes8Q8
2) As depicted by the following group of loonies . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHrb6TLmrDM
Resignations in response to the finding that secret email accounts are being used and were used at the EPA to hide correspondence from FOI requests is a first step.
The Congress was a constitutional responsibility to provide oversight of government agencies and to investigate and resolve issues. The fact that there was and is clandestine activity at the EPA, indicates that the EPA has something to hide. What specifically is being hidden there?
The next step is a full investigation, and complete cooperation from the EPA and Obama administration. If the Obama administration and the EPA do not fully cooperate a special prosecutor might be required.
The EPA is not the CIA.
Theo Goodwin says:
February 19, 2013 at 11:41 am
I am not going to hold up the EPA as a paragon of FOI virtue here, but it is important to establish what actually happened in context before leveling charges of obstruction. I have access to my personal home email account while I am at work, using the same mail reader and therefore sharing the same address book. If I’m not careful I can send mail to personal contacts which appears to come from my work email, and email to work contacts which appears to come from my home email. Given the way people tend to abuse the “reply all” button, once a personal email address appears in a work email thread, it tends to have a long half-life.
An occasional cross-contamination of work/personal emails does not constitute a pattern of evasion or obstruction. However to maintain claims of FOI compliance, the EPA would have to insist that where mixing of personal and work emails does occur, anyone subject to an FOI request must search personal email as well.
I use a unified Email client that aggregates my work and personal emails. When I compose an email, the program allows me to select which account I will send the email from. By default, when I am replying, the program sets the sending account to the account that received the email I am replying to.
I have, on occasion, composed an email from scratch, and sent it from the wrong account, for example sending a report to my boss from my personal account. That wouldn’t be malice, but absent mindedness.
If this is happening routinely, then it being accidental becomes far less likely.
Reblogged this on SOYLENT GREEN and commented:
A little late to the party with this because #work, but Mwuhahahahahahahaha, couldn’t happen to a more retched cabal.
It’s sad, but given how in lock-step these people are, Martin and Jackson will– even though they have flagrantly violated the law–go on to jobs related within government and/or the environmental movement and be rewarded handsomely. Just like the guy who talked about crucifying oil companies just to set an example.
It’s what Eisenhower warned us about in his farewell address: “Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
Anthony: just for laughs, I’d really like to know the source of this ridiculous “press release”. I mean, even Heartland would be hard-pressed to come up with such a ridiculous accumulation of fact-free accusations.
I also encourage everyone to look at the single document that is actually cited in this release, that is, “page 470” the 1203-page long PDF. You will be able to see the “official business” that was surreptitiously conducted in this email. Oh wait, you won’t, because there wasn’t any! Seriously, look it up!
Next time you want to make yourself a conduit for self-aggrandizing politicians on a witch hunt, you might want to find someone classier than Paul “I demand abstinence-only sex ed but I’ll still see a madam on the side” Vitter.
LSvalgaard: look up “plausible deniability”. Actual accusations are potentially actionable, while mere insinuations aren’t.
government of the people, for the people, and by the people…
You betcha!
As McIntyre says, you have to watch the pea here. Did they search for any email that contained the term “EDF?”
Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7 says:
February 19, 2013 at 12:17 pm
I have to disagree with you there Alan. It is one thing for a private company employee to make an error in getting private and company email accounts crossed, it is quite another for heads of government agencies to do so. They know better and should know the need for staying above reproach. It seems to be a clear pattern of many higher ranking government employees not to care about laws and restraints on their power so one can only assume it is intentional. As Thomas Jefferson said, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants”. Perhaps it’s time for the blood letting to begin.
You’re going to have to do better if the example on page 470 is representative of the emails sent from his personal account. It is just a forward of a news article, I fail to see how that could be construed as official business.
Rule of law is for the little people.
Rattus Norvegicus,
Read the comment below yours.