The decision was unanimous.

The State Records Committee agreed Thursday that freshman Jeremy Beckham has the right to view protocol documents concerning primate experimentation at the U.

The decision could set precedent for future requests from the public.

However, the U retained the right to redact, or black out, certain information it claims proprietary. This will include researchers' names, addresses and contact information because of safety concerns. According to Jack Taylor, director of the Animal Resources Center, one investigator recently had an animal rights activist threaten him at his home.

However, Beckham worries the U could decide the majority of information is proprietary. "What I may end up with are pages full of black magic marker," Beckham said.

Beckham requested the documents out of concern for the welfare of the primates currently housed at the U. His group, the Utah Primate Freedom Project, advocates the release of all primates and "an end to all primate experimentation on the U campus," according to handouts.

Conversely, the U is seeking to protect the confidentiality and the scientific discoveries of its researchers. Before the committee's decision, U attorney Phyllis Vetter told Beckham that all records would be made public after the experiment results are published. Vetter denied Beckham's requests in a letter dated Sept. 18, 2003, stating that the records "contain confidential information regarding research in progress, the results of which have not been published."

However, Beckham was quick to point out that "Siegler has already published papers relating to his protocols that are currently being funded," referring to U scientist Richard Siegler. He also referred committee members to the U's Research Handbook, which states, "The Utah Public Records Act provides for general access to proposals, awards and research documents such as interim and final reports and laboratory notebooks."

Vetter commented on the handbook by saying, "We don't know whose ideas those are or where they came from."

One committee member, Betsy Ross, said "it seems there is information in a proposal that would be public." To encourage the U to redefine what is, or is not, proprietary, Ross said, "It would be fair for the committee to put a little more pressure on the U."

Other states already have guidelines for redacting and releasing protocol information. Under the Freedom of Information Act, the University of California at San Francisco must make all protocol documents public.

According to UCSF researcher Stephen G. Lisberger, names of scientists are always considered proprietary. More importantly, he said, researchers "[have] to assume that everything they write could potentially fall into the hands of the public."

cwieser@chronicle.utah.edu