As BP prepares for a deluge of spill related lawsuits, contractual agreements with scientists hired to access the extent of the damage and provide expert testimony will be under close scrutiny. A July 29th letter written by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry A. Waxman and Rep. Edward Markey to BP America Chairman Lamar McKay warns that "any effort to muzzle scientists or shield their findings" will not be tolerated.
Concerns over the transparency of scientific data and suppression of scientific testimony arose as a result of an investigation led by the House panel and recent media reports. Information alleging that BP has retained only those scientific experts agreeing to contractual confidentiality agreements led the Committee on Energy and Commerce to request timely access to "copies of all contracts that BP has executed with any third party consultant, scientist, or academic... relating to assessing the environmental and health impacts of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill or restoration efforts in the Gulf of Mexico".
BP's corporate influence on research has also come under recent inquiry. Last week, California congresswomen Lois Capps and Lynn Woolsey urged BP to allow the National Academy of Sciences to take over management of its Gulf of Mexico Research Initiative, citing the need for " a rigorous peer review process" of research proposals. UC Berkeley is currently engaged in a 10 year, $500 million dollar contract with BP's Gulf of Mexico Research Initiative and has received heated criticism from students and staff who feel the corporate influence of BP compromises research validity. BP spokesman Steve Rinehart responded to complaints that Initiative scientists are contractually prohibited from releasing their research findings for three years stating, "We have asked that they limit public discussion of the dealings they have directly with our attorneys ... or the projects directly done for BP. They are free to discuss environmental or other data."
Reminding McKay and BP that " the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico is not a private matter", the Committee's letter stressed the importance of " an open exchange of scientific data and analysis" for the full recovery and future development of the Gulf environment.
More information/Sources:
BP's scientific integrity is questioned
A copy of the Committee's letter to McKay McKay.BP.2010.7.29.pdf
