A scientist from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration falsified findings to lowball the amount of oil that leaked in the 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion, according to a scientific integrity complaint filed today.

Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility is already pursuing a lawsuit against the Department of the Interior over a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the memos and emails behind the official scientific assessments of the size of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Today's complaint stems from the documents thus far received and is the first the group has filed under NOAA's new scientific integrity policy.

The complaint alleges that NOAA senior scientist William Lehr intentionally misrepresented the findings of the one of the teams under the Flow Rate Technical Group, a panel of experts convened by the White House to estimate the flow of oil in the disaster. Lehr headed the Plume Analysis Team.

NOAA's scientific integrity policy was finalized in December, meaning Lehr's actions preceded the policy. How that will affect the complaint is unclear.

Lehr wrote in a final report a few weeks after the spill that "most of the experts" concluded that the best estimate was between 25,000 and 30,000 barrels per day. That estimate turned out to be only half of the actual leakage, and experts have said that the original low estimate hampered the cleanup.

PEER asserts that the team was actually split on that estimate from the beginning. According to the group's complaint, only three of 13 team members made such an estimate, using a technique called Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV), and they concluded that it was inappropriate.

Three others used a different method that estimated a leak rate to be between 50,000 to 60,000 barrels per day, while one team member used a third method, and the rest didn't submit estimates at all, according to PEER.

The group cites an email to the plume team from Marcia McNutt, director of the U.S. Geological Survey, who led the Flow Rate Technical Group. In it, she appears to respond to some concerns about oil plume estimates released to the press. She refers to pressure from White House officials on how to frame the results, including one communications person who suggested she say that the flow was 12,000 to 19,000 barrels per day but could be as much as 25,000.

"I cannot tell you what a nightmare the past two days have been dealing with the communications people at the White House, DOI, and the [National Incident Commander] who seem incapable of understanding the concept of a lower bound," she wrote. "The press release that went out on our results was misleading and was not reviewed by a scientist for accuracy."

NOAA spokesman Scott Smullen said the agency had just received the documents and thus was unable to respond to it. PEER sent out a press release at about 11 a.m. announcing the complaint.

PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch said the complaint will serve as a "litmus test as to whether the Obama administration will apply its scientific integrity rules to its own actions."

"Hopefully, the investigation of this complaint will force the immediate release of the full deliberations so that the scientific record can be set straight," Ruch said, citing his group's continuing lawsuit over emails concerning the plume estimate.