The Washington Post

FDA, contractor bicker over Web posting of scientists’ e-mails

The Food and Drug Administration’s parent agency told a government contractor that 80,000 pages of confidential employee communications that the company posted on the Internet contained no sensitive or personally identifiable information, documents show.

The communications are at the center of a controversial surveillance-gathering operation that monitored a group of whistleblowing scientists critical of the FDA’s process of reviewing medical devices.

The contractor, a document management company hired to archive the data, released a government work order to congressional investigators this week that stated the files did not contain classified, sensitive or personal information.

The government’s instructions to Maryland-based Quality Associates may explain why the company stored the documents on an unsecured Internet site.

The intercepted communications, sent from the scientists’ personal accounts across FDA networks, however, contained both sensitive and personally identifiable information, from names and e-mail addresses to proprietary data about medical devices.

The latest revelation in a case that has alarmed privacy advocates and members of Congress prompted a new round of inquiry from Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), who is investigating the monitoring that began three years ago and expanded in 2010. In a letter Tuesday to FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg, Grassley demanded answers to why Quality Associates had been told that the information was not sensitive.

Grassley’s inquiry prompted a round of finger-pointing between Quality Associates and the FDA.

“In the case of the FDA, if they’re not informing us otherwise, then we’re simply moving the data along” to be stored on a publicly available Internet site, Scott Swidersky, the company’s chief executive officer, said in an interview. “Our role is very, very limited.”

Swidersky said his company does not look at the content of the data it is hired to archive. “Clearly you can see from the [work] order how the information was processed was determined by the direction of our client.”

But FDA officials said the company had no instructions to post any of the surveillance data on the Internet, even though they acknowledged that the purchase order was incorrectly filled out.

FDA officials faulted workers at its parent agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, for the incorrect purchase order.

“The agency requested that the Program Support Center at the Department of Health and Human Services use a vendor who had proven experience to handle sensitive, confidential information,” the FDA said in a statement. “We are continuing to investigate the unauthorized disclosure of these documents.”

The monitoring began after nine FDA scientists signed a letter to President Obama’s transition team, alleging that they were pressured to approved numerous medical devices that posed a danger to the public.

The agency began monitoring the private e-mails of five of the scientists who were communicating with Congress and government watchdogs about their concerns. The surveillance expanded to include an enemies list of what the FDA called 21 “actors” at the agency, in Congress, academia and the news media it believed were sympathetic to the scientists’ cause.

The 80,000 documents made public by Quality Associates were on the Internet for at least several days in May before they were taken down.

The dispute over who was responsible for the documents appearing on the Internet came a day after a federal judge ordered the FDA to turn over by Aug. 24 another 4,000 pages of documents from the spying operation the scientists sought as part of a series of lawsuits against the agency.

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg did not order the FDA to turn over the 80,000 documents, because they have been made public. But he ordered thousands of other communications to be given to attorneys representing the scientists.

Lisa Rein covers the federal workforce and issues that concern the management of government.

The Freddie Gray case

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!

Campaign 2016 Email Updates

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!
Comments
Show Comments
The Republicans debated Saturday night. The New Hampshire primary is Feb. 9. Get caught up on the race.
Highlights from Saturday's GOP debate
Except for an eminent domain attack from Bush, Trump largely avoided strikes from other candidates.

Christie went after Rubio for never having been a chief executive and for relying on talking points.

Carson tried to answer a question on Obamacare by lamenting that he hadn't been asked an earlier question about North Korea.
The GOP debate in 3 minutes
Listen
Play Video
Quoted
We have all donors in the audience. And the reason they're booing me? I don't want their money!
Donald Trump, after the debate crowd at St. Anselm's College booed him for telling Jeb Bush to be "quiet."
Listen
Play Video
New Hampshire polling averages
Donald Trump holds a commanding lead in the next state to vote, but Marco Rubio has recently seen a jump in his support, according to polls.
New Hampshire polling averages
A victory in New Hampshire revitalized Hillary Clinton's demoralized campaign in 2008. But this time, she's trailing Bernie Sanders, from neighboring Vermont. She's planning to head Sunday to Flint, Mich., where a cost-saving decision led to poisonous levels of lead in the water of the poor, heavily black, rust-belt city. 
55% 38%
Upcoming debates
Feb. 11: Democratic debate

on PBS, in Wisconsin

Feb 13: GOP debate

on CBS News, in South Carolina

Feb. 25: GOP debate

on CNN, in Houston, Texas

Campaign 2016
State of the race

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.