The Department of Interior issued a new draft policy on scientific integrity on Tuesday, a long overdue addition to the agency's manual outlining the rules and regulations for employees when it comes to ensuring that their decisions are based on sound science. It's certainly a step in the right direction, given such a policy didn't even exist previously. But there are still concerns that the policy doesn't go far enough in reforming an agency known for ignoring (or outright manipulating) scientific findings.

In the wake of the BP disaster, Interior has come under increased scrutiny when it comes to its enforcement and oversight activities. The Minerals Management Service, now renamed the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, has been singled out for the bulk of the criticism. As the agency's Inspector General pointed out in April, in its not-so-subtly-titled report "Interior Lacks a Scientific Integrity Policy," DOI's other divisions have also fallen down on the job when it comes to upholding sound scientific practices. At fault, the IG says, has been the lack of a policy on the subject. From the report:

We found that Interior has no comprehensive scientific integrity policy and only one of its bureaus has such a policy. In addition, we found that Interior has no requirement to track scientific misconduct allegations. Without policies to ensure the integrity of its scientific research, Interior runs the risk that flawed information will reach the scientific community and general public, thereby breaching the public's trust and damaging Interior's reputation. The time for a comprehensive scientific integrity policy at Interior is, therefore, long overdue.

The report offered a few examples illustrating why the lack of a policy is problematic. In one case, a deputy assistant secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks "was found to have unduly influenced a critical habitat designation." In another, a National Park Serve senior science adviser for Point Reyes National Seashore "misrepresented research regarding sedimentation, failed to provide information sought after from Freedom of Information Act request, and misinformed individuals in a public forum regarding sea life data, and put into question NPS' scientific integrity."

The IG's office recommended that the agency develop and implement an Interior-wide, comprehensive scientific integrity policy, one that covers "all agents, appointees, employees and contractors involved in researching and publishing scientific results of any kind." Now, the watchdog group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility says the draft policy DOI produced only includes about half the rules that are needed. While agency scientists would be disciplined for things like falsifying data and not disclosing or avoiding conflicts of interest, there are a number of concerns. Chief among them is that the draft policy only applies to employees, contractors, and volunteers, excluding supervisors and appointees. Which is pretty key—most of the officials responsible for suppressing or altering scientific data have been political appointees.

"The scientists within Interior are not the ones rewriting documents inappropriately. Scientific misconduct stems from Interior's political appointees and hand-picked senior managers but these folks are not covered by the policy," said PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. "Interior's approach to scientific integrity in essence penalizes the victims and gives a free ride to the perpetrators… Reform at Interior needs to start at the top."

The policy will be open for public comment for the next 20 days. It's also worth noting that President Obama issued a directive in March 2009 calling for a new scientific integrity policy covering all the federal agencies, an attempt to reform the tattered reputation agencies earned under the Bush administration for burying or manipulating incovenient science. Each agency was also supposed to write its own policies, and today's DOI draft is in response to that directive. And while the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy was supposed to deliver the overarching policy for all agencies by July 2009, it still has yet to be completed.

• Print
• Email
• Tweet

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's crusade against climate science was dealt a setback today after a judge denied his attempt to subpoena documents relating to former University of Virginia climate scientist, Michael Mann. Need to Know’s Alison Stewart spoke with Mann about the dangerous precedent the Cucinelli's case could have set and about what he calls the climate change denial "industry."

This podcast was produced by Need to Know as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

• Print
• Email
• Tweet

Photo by KentonNgo, via Facebook.

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has been waging a war on climate science, among his many other right-wing crusades. Today, his climate mission was dealt a setback after a judge denied his attempt to subpoena documents relating to a former University of Virginia climate scientist.

Cuccinelli was seeking the records of Michael Mann, a climate scientist now at Pennsylvania State University, in an attempt to prove the scientist  perpetrated some type of "fraud" via global warming warming work. Mann is best known for the so-called "hockey stick" graph illustrating the uptick in global temperatures over the last century. His work was at the center of the bogus controversy over the so-called ClimateGate emails, which skeptics continue to harp on as evidence that climate change is a conspiracy devised by a cabal of scheming scientists, even as investigations have found no such evidence or even any sign of wrongdoing.

Cuccinelli wanted access to five grant applications Mann wrote while at UVa., as well as his email records in order to investigate whether Mann willfully mislead colleagues and the public during his employment at UVa., which as a state school uses taxpayer dollars. Cuccinelli has been trying to pursue a case against Mann under the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act. But today's ruling is bad news for Cuccinelli's case. The Washington Post reports:

Judge Paul M. Peatross Jr. ruled that Cuccinelli can investigate whether fraud has occurred in university grants, as the attorney general had contended, but ruled that Cuccinelli's subpoena failed to state a "reason to believe" that Mann had committed fraud.

The ruling is a major blow for Cuccinelli, a global warming skeptic who had maintained he was investigating whether Mann committed fraud in seeking government money for research that showed the earth has experienced a rapid, recent warming. Mann, now at Penn State University, worked at U-Va. until 2005.

According to Peatross, the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act, under which the civil investigative demand was issued, requires that the attorney general include an "objective basis" to believe fraud has been committed. Peatross indicates that the attorney general must state the reason so that it can be reviewed by a court, which Cuccinelli's failed to do.

This fight isn't over yet. The judge indicated that Cuccinelli could take another stab at the subpoena. Given Cuccinelli's zealous pursuit of the climate issue in the past, there's little doubt that he will.

• Print
• Email
• Tweet

Today in oil spill news:

BP's internal probe into the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon has found that the company's engineers misinterpreted pressure data warning of a blowout, Bloomberg reports. The full report has not yet been made public, however.

The New York Times weighs in in support of the BP Gulf Fund and its administrator, Ken Feinberg. Feinberg also talked to the Southern Governors' Association annual meeting about the claims process.

The Telegraph reports that BP will admit to spending $1 million a week on television and radio advertisements to promote the company post-spill. The figure comes in response to a congressional inquiry.

The co-chair of the oil spill commission expressed frustration with the fact that the Senate still has not approved legislation granting the panel the power of subpoena. "I wish they would give us subpoena authority and hope that they do that as soon as they come back from recess," said William Reilly on Platts Energy Week.

While everyone was paying attention to the Gulf disaster, a BP refinery released 538,000 pounds of toxic chemicals—including benzene, a carcinogen benzene—in Texas City, Texas over the course of 40 days, making a number of residents sick.

From President Obama's speech on the fifth anniversary of Katrina on Sunday: “[W]e will continue to rely on sound science, carefully monitoring waters and coastlines as well as the health of the people along the Gulf, to deal with any long-term effects of the oil spill. We are going to stand with you until the oil is cleaned up, until the environment is restored, until polluters are held accountable, until communities are made whole, and until this region is all the way back on its feet."

• Print
• Email
• Tweet