The inspector general for the Department of the Interior says the Obama Administration edited an Interior report to make it seem as if independent scientists supported the 6-month drilling ban the administration sought to impose.

In the wee hours of the morning of May 27, a staff member to White House energy adviser Carol Browner sent two edited versions of the department report’s executive summary back to Interior. The language had been changed to insinuate the seven-member panel of outside experts – who reviewed a draft of various safety recommendations – endorsed the moratorium, according to the IG report obtained by POLITICO.

“The White House edit of the original DOI draft executive summary led to the implication that the moratorium recommendation had been peer-reviewed by the experts,” the IG report states, without judgment on whether the change was intentional attempt to mislead the public.

The Obama Administration says the editing procedure is normal and there was no intent to mislead the public. Really? Then why did the White House edit the report to make it seem like independent scientists backed the moratorium when, in fact, they hadn’t.

“At 2:13 a.m. on May 27, 2010, Browner’s staff member sent an e-mail back to Black that contained two versions of the executive summary,” the IG report states. “Both versions sent by the staff member contained significant edits to DOI’s draft executive summary but were very similar to each other.

“Both versions, however, revised and re-ordered the executive summary, placing the peer review language immediately following the moratorium recommendation causing the distinction between the secretary’s moratorium recommendation – which had not been peer-reviewed – and the recommendations contained in the 30-Day Report – which had been peer-reviewed – to become effectively lost.”

Apparently the Interior Department ended up apologizing to Interior staffers for the re-written report back in June. That doesn’t fix the main problem, though. The Obama Administration edited an independent report to make it seem favorable to the administration’s political goals.