Scientist denies falsifying data on Yucca

Suzanne Struglinski

Wednesday, June 29, 2005 | 11:06 a.m.

WASHINGTON -- U.S. Geological Survey scientist Joe Hevesi told a congressional subcommittee that he did not falsify any scientific information on the Yucca Mountain project, though he was "somewhat horrified" when he looked back at his e-mails on the subject, which he thought were personal correspondence.

"I have never falsified any documents related to Yucca Mountain or any other project," Hevesi said at a House Federal Workforce and Agency Organization subcommittee hearing today. "This whole process has been a learning process for me when I realized that an e-mail is actually an official documentation. I was not perceiving e-mail that way."

Hevesi testified in response to questions about the latest Yucca Mountain project controversy that has had Nevada calling for the Energy Department to stop the project.

Hevesi insisted that while he used "poor wording" in some of his messages, he did not falsify any documents or scientific information.

"I have completely rethought how I use the whole e-mail system and how I communicate with others," Hevesi said.

Hevesi testified at the subcommittee hearing this morning as part of an investigation by Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., into e-mail messages uncovered by Energy Department in March. The department said it found e-mails written by U.S. Geological Survey employees that suggest they falsified scientific information at the Yucca Mountain project.

As Porter read down a list of e-mails, asking for detailed information on Hevesi's intent and reasoning behind the messages, the scientist calmly described his work on the project and his frustration in trying to get the job done.

"I place things in e-mails out of emotional response," Hevesi said. "... I believe I had reputation for being flippant in e-mails."

Requests for "delete this memo" that appeared in several messages made public by the subcommittee were not attempts to cover up information but just to delete personal e-mail sent between himself and his colleagues, Hevesi said. They were not professional memos.

Hevesi testified that when he used the words "fudge factor" in his e-mail, he meant "simplification, not falsification." Fudging the information meant to use placeholders, and Hevesi said scientists use fudge factors all the time.

"My heart was in my work to do the best I could," Hevesi said. "I did feel the work was important."

Hevesi called the scientific work on the project "sound" but that getting the documentation together took more time than originally thought.

Hevesi was a research hydrologist who studied how water flowed through the mountain. He said several times at the hearing that he was not in a position to say whether the site was suitable to safely store nuclear waste.

After its announcement on the e-mails, the department did not name the scientists, citing ongoing investigations, but Porter sent a letter to the Interior Department asking for Hevesi along with fellow scientists Alan L. Flint and Lorraine E. Flint to appear before the subcommittee. Today's hearing was one that Porter had initially tried to conduct in late April, but the three scientists refused to attend at that time.

The Flints, who are married, have met with subcommittee staff, Porter said, but he had House Government Reform Committee Chairman Tom Davis, R-Va., issue a subpoena to Hevesi earlier this month after he refused repeated attempts to testify.

Hevesi said today that the only reason he refused to appear was that he wanted to wait until other investigations into the e-mails were over.

"I was trying to focus on one situation at a time, rather than having two parallel situations," Hevesi said.

Porter is still waiting for a number of documents from the Energy Department related to e-mails written by Hevesi and others. Porter may request another subpoena for the documents, although he has not made a decision yet.

Porter wants the documents for the committee's investigation and to back up his claims to fellow House members that this is not just a Nevada issue.

"Nevada's message consistently for 20 years has been 'no' and many times we get discounted because they expect us to say no," Porter said in an interview. "So I have been making it very clear to the committee members, that this is not just a 'no.' It is real people with real falsified documents, with real falsified science and it is not just Nevada one more time saying 'no.' "

Porter said as the subcommittee chairman he has a responsibility to the federal employees working on the project. He wants to make sure they were not harassed and that the management culture illustrated in the e-mails does not carry over into nuclear weapons or other Energy Department programs.

"It isn't just a witchhunt for employees," Porter said. "It's to be fair to those employees as well as to the agency and to the American people first. It's a balance."

Nevada's other House members, Rep. Shelley Berkley, a Democrat, and Rep. Jim Gibbons, a Republican, did not attend the hearing, but were invited to submit written testimony.

Porter spokesman T.J. Crawford said the subcommittee sees this as a continuation of the hearing Porter conducted April 5, which Berkley and Gibbons attended, asked questions and made statements.

"They've already spoken," Crawford said. "This is more of a subcommittee thing."

Gibbons spokeswoman Amy Maier said Porter wanted to make sure the hearing would focus on the "blatant mismanagement" within the Energy and Interior Departments, and not be labeled another Nevada driven-initiative against Yucca Mountain, so Gibbons agreed not to attend.

"It's a broader issue," Maier said.

Berkley spokesman David Cherry would only say that she was asked not to participate.