UPDATE: I’ve confirmed this document, see below the “read more” line.
It appears bigger things are brewing related to CRU’s Climategate.
WUWT commenter J.C. writes in comments:
I work at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. I’ve been following the Climategate scandal since its inception. The first time many of my coworkers had heard of the situation was when I asked them about it.
Well, well, well.
Look what was waiting in every single email Inbox on Monday morning:
______________________________________________
“December 14, 2009
DOE Litigation Hold Notice
DOE-SR has received a “Litigation Hold Notice” from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) General Council and the DOE Office of Inspector General regarding the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England. Accordingly, they are requesting that SRNS, SRR and other Site contractors locate and preserve all documents, records, data, correspondence, notes, and other materials, whether official or unofficial, original or duplicative, drafts or final versions, partial or complete that may relate to the global warming, including, but not limited to, the contract files, any related correspondence files, and any records, including emails or other correspondence, notes, documents, or other material related to this contract, regardless of its location or medium on which it is stored. In other words, please preserve any and all documents relevant to “global warming, the Climate Research Unit at he University of East Anglia In England, and/or climate change science.”
As a reminder, this Litigation Hold preservation obligation supersedes any existing statutory or regulatory document retention period or destructive schedule. The determination of what information may be potentially relevant is based upon content and substance and generally does not depend on the type of medium on which the information exists. The information requested may exist in various forms, including paper records, hand-written notes, telephone log entries, email, and other electronic communication (including voicemail), word processing documents (including drafts, spreadsheets, databases, and calendars), telephone logs, electronic address books, PDAs (like Palm Pilots and Blackberries), internet usage files, systems manuals, and network access information in their original format. All ESI should be preserved in its originally-created, or “native” format, along with related metadata. Relevant backup tapes and all indexes for those tapes should also be preserved. Further, information that is reasonably accessible must nonetheless be preserved, because such sources will, at the very least, need to be identified and, under compelling circumstances, may need to be produced.
If you have any doubts as to whether specific information is responsive, err on the side of preserving that information.
Any employee who has information covered by this Litigation Hold is requested to contact Madeline Screven, Paralegal, SRNS Office of General Council, 5-4634, for additional instructions.
Michael L. Wamsted
Associate General Council”
_______________________________________________
Everyone on-site who has an email account received this letter. That’s somewhere in the neighborhood of 8000 people. How about that? And this is the first official mention of the entire subject that I have seen.
DOE-SR = Department of Energy Savannah River
SRNS = Savannah River Nuclear Solutions
SRR = Savannah River Remediation
NOTE: Some commenters raised some doubts about the authenticity of this email.
I checked out a couple of things before I posted this. The IP address of J.C. comes from the correct location in South Carolina, Aiken, and the name Michael L. Wamsted does work for DOE at the SRS in SC in legal. See http://phonebook.doe.gov/
Also the existence of the paralegal “Madeline Screven” listed in the email (whom I believe composed it) is listed in the DOE phonebook search of “Screven” and is listed in the same building as Wamsted.
The “Council -vs- Counsel” spelling error could be something as simple as a spell checker substituting the wrong word, or just a dumb mistake when composing email where the spell checker would not flag “council” as it is spelled correctly. Heck, I misspell “meteorologist” sometimes in correspondence, dropping an “o”. I have had a situation sometimes where “metrologist” (also valid) gets substituted on spell check. Spelling mistakes, compounded with spell checker substitution errors – they happen. I have one computer (the one I’m typing on) that always switches the word “because” to “becuase” in spell checks for some odd reason, and I can’t figure out how to correct it. So I live with it and try to manually fix it when I notice it. There is another spelling error “Climate Research Unit at he University”. Which is a mistake I make from time to time, missing the “t” on the. Spell checkers don’t catch that one, since “he” is a correctly spelled word.
If the IP had not come from Aiken, SC where Savannah River Site and lab is, I would be highly suspect of it. But the IP address in Aiken and the names check out. Aiken is right next to SRS.
See the doc and map for directions here: http://www.srs.gov/general/about/directions_aiken.pdf
The language used also checks out, it has been reviewed by an attorney who frequents WUWT and he raised no red flags. Steve McIntyre points out that Dr. Jones got funding from DOE (of which SRS is part of). The different pieces connect pretty well and I don’t have a reason to doubt this memo sent via email today. – Anthony
======================
UPDATE: 12/15/12:36 PST
I called SRS Legal office just now and spoke with Madeline Screven, who is listed as a paralegal in the letter I posted. I found her telephone number via the DOE phonebook.
When I called, she fully identified herself in her greeting to me, I explained who I was, giving my full name. She asked if I was “on or off site” referring to SRS. I explained I’m off-site.
My question: “Do you have a litigation hold notice related to the Climate Research Unit.”
Her answer: “Yes we do”
Confirmed.
Somewhat O/T (and forgive me if this has been posted before – there is so much to keep with!) – but it’s priceless from Tony Bliar:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6803921/Copenhagen-climate-summit-Tony-Blair-calls-on-world-leaders-to-get-moving.html
In the finest traditions of Nuremberg – to rid the world of the Nazi cancer, it’s time for the ThermoBerg Trials.
But where will they find a courtroom large enough to accommodate all the perpetrators?
move over bernie you may have a few friends coming to join you on your 150 year holiday
“OT but just a few hours ago I noticed solar flux was up to 76. It’s now up to 79! The highest we’ve seen in a while, no? A few days ago (last I noticed) it was down to 70.”
The solar flux did crack 80 at the end of October.
http://www.solen.info/solar/
lawyer up…..Soros has lots of money.
This story could not possibly be correct, because at 6:30 am EST the New York Times website did not mention it, and they would have jumped all over it.
🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂
Presuming the notice to preserve is authentic you should focus on the last paragraph. The government lawyers will tell the person(s) that respond to put a clamp on discussing or disseminate in any form information without first clearing with them (the lawyers). While they’re at it they’ll prepare a list of “associates” who have or may have access and/or information regarding the action/pending action. A simple fact of life in the legal business. This, effectively, drops a legal curtain over the (pending) action. Don’t be surprised if they annex all physical and electronic information as well in order to preserve it.
Again, if authentic, it is virtually assured you may see leaks but I would bet on very, very few. The power of the government, should they decide to act, is incredible especially if there are issues of misappropriation/fraud involving Federal monies. Think felonies. Since someone is at investigating, the whistle blower laws won’t apply. Plus, if it’s someone in the an Inspector General’s office and possible criminal issues are on the table, any Congressional inquiries would be deferred pending completion. Expect several months to go by while the process grinds away. If the DOE finds something, the DOJ must get involved which means more delays.
One can do a lot of speculation at this point. Let’s do a simple one for fun. If you’ve checked out the sources of funding for global warming studies you’ll think the entire US Government agency has a few dollars in the mix. This includes everything from DOJ to the DoD to Education, et al. If you’re a politician with an agenda and just want to tamp down the evolving scandal, this would be about as good as it gets at this point. You can say it’s under investigation, you can say you can’t comment due to “litigation”, you can say an IG audit is underway and you can say any wrong doing will be given to AG Holder (so he can put it next to the Black Panther and ACORN cases). A bonus is you then continue putting forth the canard of needing to act since “even if”. At a minimum it becomes old news while allowing the AGW proponents to continue their campaign. The more universities and government offices that report they are “investigating” simply means less, not more, information. At least for several months and maybe longer. And expect “preliminary findings” which will be either neutral or support “the science”.
Well, in a few hours the warmists will get in contact with their buddies who are at the supposed recipients of this notice and confirm or disconfirm it. I’m fearing it will be disconfirmed.
“I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives”.
Leo Tolstoy
If the politicians are to save face they have to make it as clear as possible that they were misled.
I think there is a lot of defensive positioning going on and there may soon be considerable anger expressed in public by those politicans who feel that their own credibility has been called into question.
As regards Copenhagen it is beconing clear that the main reason for third world involvement is the vast amounts of compensation and other funds transfers promised in return for emissions restraint.
The first world leaders have belatedly realised that they have been drawn into a financial trap by AGW enthusiasts and, more pertinently, a trap that can neither be afforded nor will be supported by their electorates.
There are signs that platforms are being built from which to launch serious official and legal assaults on the individuals involved.
The political aspect means that there will be little in the way of charitable interpretations of their actions especially once the general public realises how much taxpayer money has been spent on inadequate science right up to the highest level.
Politicians are probably now considering damage limitation and how far to go in sacrificing the careers and livelihoods of alarmist scientists.
After all, crying out ‘fire’ in a crowded building when there is no such fire is rightly treated as a criminal act.
If we have many decades or even centuries to deal with CO2 emissions rather than there being an immediate need for action then calling out that we face an imminent climate disaster would be a similar offence on a global scale.
Could the spelling mistakes be intentional? Errors that give lawyers room to move in court? A delaying tactic; so they can claim to have sent something but ‘due to a minor technicality the document received on Monday was not valid until the corrected version arrived Wednesday.” Shred on Phil.
Also if we can check who the general council of the DOE is and who else works there so could a hoaxer. Watch out.
I’m optimistic that this is real and that most climate related labs have received a version.
As I’ve said on another site.
When we pray that God sends confusion upon our enemy’s; It may be wise to notice and thank him when it happens. It seems someone was praying hard. Confusion run riot.
Speaking of spellcheckers, my favorite correction is when I spell “politician” incorrectly, as in “poliitian,” and it gets corrected to “pollution.
The Freedom of Information Act is the Federal Law of the Land. It is extremely
serious business. The attitude / behavior exhibited in the e-mails relative to FOIA is a very serious mistake.
I was amazed to learn that NASA/GISS had apparently ignored a FOIA request. Very likely that is the sole case in which this has occurred.
The DoE has funded ‘climate’ research at several National Laboratories, not just LLNL.
Just as the response to the leaked e-mails has involved extremely weak rationalizations based on ‘stolen’ ‘private property’ arguments, that are absolutely wrong, the rationalizations for ignoring FOIA requests will soon evaporate into thin air.
If the e-mails had been associated with persons / organizations responsible for the safety of elevators, for example, there would have been not a single rationalization. Somebody(s) would already be in jail. The same is true for FOIA requests. If FOIA requests had been simply ignored by persons / organizations responsible for the safety of building materials and proper constructions methods, there would have been not a single rationalization.
Climate ‘scientists’ have yet to realize that when they enter the arena of public policy, all the rules change. They are no different than those who verify the safety of elevators, bridges, escalators, milk, foods, building materials, and a very long list of other items.
Careful about those people fasting. Many are totally convinced that greenhouse is real, catastrophic and immanent. They are terrified. The IPCC and their school teachers has terrorised them for 20 years. The collapse of climate change will hit some very hard. Don’t be surprised if we see suicides, and green terrorism.
Also expect millions of children to rebel in class when school resumes after Christmas. Teachers that teach a lie find teaching gets much harder then the kids catch them out.
If the DOE is rounding on the warmest, scape-goating them to save political face, then the CRU and the other labs are in deep trouble. What’s the penalty for defrauding whole planet?
“Baffling to me.. what does DOE have to do with climate change or CRU?”
The DOE is involved in dispensing quite a few grants. I assume they are worried about fraud. I know that CRU does enjoy some grant money from the US federal government. What must be worriesome to those people who have collaberated with CRU, or are involved in the same kind of work (temperature reconstructions), there is a chance of this snow-balling. Both NASA and NOAA could see quie a bit of fall-out.
But, as I have said all along; the real danger to the Team and Alarmists will come from civil suits. Unlike official internal investigations, civil suits have much lower standards concerning evidence. And judges give the plantiffs much wider discreation.
I wonder how the Climate Scares(tm) fit into the theorized Power of Nightmares Control System that we see taking hold in every country around the world? For the Climate Scares of yelling fire and doom in An Inconvenient Truth sure seem to have worked their scary magic. Al Gore fits into this in so many scary ways.
http://pathstoknowledge.net/2009/12/15/politicians-discsover-the-power-of-nightmares-and-make-full-use-of-them-to-control-you
Thanks to “Michael (22:49:06)”.
Hopefully, this “Litigation Hold Notice” isn’t an Administration/DOE dodge to stall any FOI requests which may be in the pipeline.
To be upbeat, the US FOI Act doesn’t really specify that documents under a FOI
request can be withheld due to potential or actual litigation.
The citizens’ trump card is our Representatives and Senators have a specific
subsection in the law that mandates anything they might request, except classified documents, MUST be given to them.
I’m not sure the British FOI has the same provision for MPs.
To Alan and all others who seem confused:
The letter above is directed at subordinate agencies of the Department of Energy, NOT entities in the UK. Regardless of any other factors, the DOE is fully within its authority to give direction to its subordinate agencies.
Perhaps y’all should actually read the darn thing before you get your undies in a knot.
I’m new to this site but very glad that you’re here. Yours is heroic work. A word of caution: I spent a very long time in the US government and it’s very hard to accept that internal correspondence concerning a legal matter would include the council/counsel error. I would check that very closely. In over 30 years’ service I don’t recall seeing that error even once. Reason is that the people who send these notices use those words all the time; one episode of public embarrassment is enough to make the lesson stick.
Ask what it was doing there in the first place, never mind was it commented out in this run. Eg you are auditing a bank’s accounts, and you come in the excel sheets that generate the reports a commented out line that reduces bad loans by 50%. The comment to it says something like, now apply a fudge factor to bad loans.
Someone points this out, and you reply, OK, we just tried it out, we didn’t use it. You can see it is disabled in this version.
Reassured, are you?
I don’t find a “Michael Wamsted” listed on the DoE General Counsel site. Might be that I’m not a very good searcher or it might be something else.
If you can be proved to have committed fraud while performing under a US Government contract, or with grant funding from the US Government, —
you may be disbarred from any future contracts, grants, or other funding.
A disbarred person will find it almost impossible to get employed in academia, almost every major institution in the US gets funding from the federal government for basic research.
I’d like to get my hands on e-mails from: Greenpeace; Sierra Club, Environmental Defense Fund; RAN etc.
Yet Another small step for man…………..
Inch by inch !!!
Alan (02:20:59)
Don’t you read the papers? Ever heard of extraditon? Ever heard of the ‘NatWest Three’? Ever heard of Gary McKinnon?