Tab G Staff Memo--Methodological Review of Agency Data Collection Efforts: Department of Energy DISCLAIMER The following is a staff memorandum or other working document prepared for the members of the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments. It should not be construed as representing the final conclusions of fact or interpretation of the issues. All staff memoranda are subject to revision based on further information and analysis. For conclusions and recommendations of the Advisory Committee, readers are advised to consult the Final Report to be published in 1995. May 12, 1994 PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE- DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DOCUMENT COLLECTION Committee Staff was briefed by DOE staff on May 4, 1994, 1 {DOE staff in attendance included Search Team Director Mr. Glenn Podonsky agency historians, records management staff, hotline staff, staff from the office of security evaluations, and Ms. Ellen Weiss, who will shortly join DOE to take a lead role in radiation experiment documentation. Committee staff present were Faith Bulger, Jim David, Dan Guttman, Gregg Herken, and Ron Neumann.} and this meeting was followed up by phone inquiries. This report is based on Staff's best understanding of the DOE search at this time, and is subject to elaboration and revision. This memo 1) provides background on DOE and its records; 2) summarizes DOE's search strategy and activities to date; 3) discusses lessons learned from the search to date, and questions raised by staff; and 4) provides options and recommendations for the next steps to be taken by DOE and the Committee. I. SUMMARY RECORDS DOE estimates that it has 500,000 cubic feet of records just at its nine field offices throughout the country. An indeterminate further amount of field office records is maintained at Federal records centers and National Archives facilities around the country. A very large but presently unknown quantity of headquarters office records of DOE and its 1 predecessors are still at headquarters offices, Federal records centers, and the National Archives. Both past and present contractors of DOE and its predecessors also have an indeterminate number of records. SEARCH STRATEGY DOE has committed significant resources to its search efforts, and promises the continued effort needed to complete the location and retrieval of relevant documents. DOE states that within several months it will complete a comprehensive record series guide which will identify all pertinent collections of records at its field offices, headquarters offices, Federal records centers, and the National Archives. SEARCH LIMITS DOE acknowledges that the search has been fundamentally constrained by a history of poor record management; indeed, it hopes that the search will permit it to improve records management practices. *DOE acknowledges that the search has been further hampered by 1) incomplete field office understanding of Headquarters' guidance; 2) instances of contractor resistance to assistance in search efforts; and 3) instances of "malicious compliance" (e.g., incorrect representation that documents do not exist). QUALITY CONTROLS The work of the teams at the nine field offices is reported periodically to the management team at Headquarters. Additionally, separate Headquarters teams have started to visit each field office to monitor the work done to date and to assist in the identification and retrieval of documents. 2 SEARCH OPPORTUNITIES DOE agrees that headquarters files should be a "rich" source of data (e.g., files of the Atomic Energy Commission's (AEC) Executive Secretariat and the AEC's Division of Biology and Medicine), as well as the files of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy of Congress. * DOE agrees that licensing data of radioisotopes produced and supplied by its predecessors may lead to information on experiments conducted by other governmental agencies and private sector institutions which is not obtainable elsewhere (or at least not obtainable from one single source). DOE is still undertaking to locate the records of the licensing process. * Through the years, DOE and its predecessors have conducted a number of projects and experiments with or for other agencies, including some in the biomedical research field. DOE says data on this "work for others" may provide information on experiments performed by it for other agencies. However, in recent years DOE top management has not been able to obtain complete data on its current "work for others" program, evidently in part because of classification problems. * DOE believes that some DOE contractors are likely to be "rich" sources of data that are not available in any other collections. A directive to the field from Secretary O'Leary has alerted contractors to the importance of the search. * While DOE has not analyzed its hotline data to determine precisely how many calls relate to experiments, data is computerized and amendable to creative sorting. 3 CLASSIFICATION DOE's search Team does not believe it currently has knowledge of (and access to) all collections of classified headquarters office records. Records to which it lacks access may include data on "work for others" and on intentional release experiments. The search Team reports that it has, since February, been unsuccessful in ongoing information requests to the DOE Office of Nonproliferation and National Security, which evidently controls or has knowledge of the documents. * DOE acknowledged that it cannot now say whether relevant public sources of data (e.g., AEC annual reports to Congress and isotope licensing reports) had classified supplements which are still not publicly available. DOE will look into this. II. BACKGROUND A. Organizational History The Department of Energy (DOE) is the successor agency to the Manhattan Engineering District (MED), Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), and the Energy Research And Development Administration (ERDA). The MED was established in 1942 under the U.S. Army to build the atomic bomb. As part of this effort, it conducted an extensive biomedical research program both at its own facilities and at various contractors. Beginning in 1946, the MED also started to distribute radioisotopes produced at its facilities to domestic and foreign applicants for several purposes, including biomedical research. The MED was replaced on 4 January 1, 1947, by the civilian-run AEC, which continued a wide-ranging biomedical research program at its own facilities and at numerous contractors. Additionally, it maintained the program of distributing radioisotopes produced at AEC installations to domestic and foreign users. The AEC was succeeded by ERDA in 1974, which in turn was replaced by the DOE in 1977. When ERDA was created in 1974, the responsibilities for the civilian nuclear power program were transferred to the newly-established Nuclear Regulatory Commission. DOE and its predecessors have relied substantially on contractors to manage and perform its work. Today, DOE's workforce approximates 20,000 civil servants and perhaps 150,000 or more contractor employees. Contractors have historically managed the facilities at Oak Ridge, Los Alamos, Hanford, and other sites at the core of the nuclear weapons complex. "Management and operating" (M&O) contractors have included universities (e.g., U. of California), nonprofits (e.g., Battelle), and profitmaking entities (e.g., Dupont, Union Carbide, Westinghouse). B. Organizational History/MED and AEC Biomedical Research The Medical Section of the MED was created in August 1943. Among other things, it had responsibility for directing and coordinating the extensive biomedical research programs conducted at MED facilities and by contractors. It was apparently succeeded by the Medical Division in 1946. From late 1943 until the establishment of the AEC on January 1, 1947, the Medical Section 5 and Medical Division were located at Oak Ridge, Tennessee. In mid-1946 the Medical Advisory Committee was created to advise the Medical Division on a number of issues, including the future biomedical research program. Beginning in 1946 the MED started to distribute radioisotopes for purposes that included biomedical research. The Interim Advisory Committee on Isotope Distribution Policy was created in 1946 to provide guidelines in this area, including the use of radioisotopes in humans. The AEC established the Interim Medical Advisory Committee in early 1947 to act as a bridge between the MED's Medical Division and Medical Advisory Committee and successor organizations to be created by the AEC. In September 1947, the Advisory Committee on Biology and Medicine (ACBM) was created to review medical and biological research and health programs and to advise the AEC on policies in these areas. The following year the AEC established the Division of Biology and Medicine to direct and coordinate the AEC effort in these areas, and the ACBM became its principal advisory committee. These organizations continued in existence until 1974, when ERDA was created, at which time the Division of Biology and Medicine became the Biological and Environmental Research Division. On January 1, 1948, the Advisory Committee on Isotope Distribution replaced the Interim Committee on Isotope Distribution Policy. The Subcommittee on Human Applications was created at the same time to advise on policies and standards for the regulation and licensing of uses of radioisotopes in humans. 6 In 1958 the Subcommittee on Human Applications was succeeded by the Advisory Committee on the Medical Use of Isotopes. III. DOE RECORDS: BASICS A. Location and Organization Records of DOE and its predecessors are currently housed at numerous headquarters offices, nine field offices, and National Archives facilities and Federal records centers here and throughout the country. The volumes of materials maintained by the field offices alone approximate 500,000 cubic feet. DOE recordkeeping practices have been critiqued in detail in a 1988 National Archives report and a 1992 General Accounting Office report. Agency staff volunteered that the present search confirms that agency records management has been substantially deficient.2 {2 Indeed, DOE views the search as an opportunity to bring order to DOE records management.} The search has confirmed that the record-keeping practices of individual headquarters and field offices varies widely, the result being "very dysfunctional," with "no real recordkeeping system." DOE reports that it found that some field offices have indices, "but not in any way comprehensive." Some offices have transferred few, if any, of their records and those of their predecessors outside their custody. Others have transferred or destroyed large portions of their records and those of their predecessors, with in many cases only poor records being kept of these transfers and destructions. 7 Because of the prominent roles contractors have historically played in DOE's activities, contractor records are an important component of agency records. Some contractor records are embedded in the records of headquarters and field offices. DOE is exploring access to records of both current and former contractors. Examples of the latter include the Universities of Chicago and Rochester, which may be rich sources of data because of their extensive biomedical research for the MED and AEC. B. Document Destruction Policy Since the 1940s document destruction at DOE and its predecessors have been guided by a series of Records Retention and Disposition Schedules. The current one has been in effect for about 30 years. (Prior ones are on microfiche at the National Archives, and. copies will be provided to the Committee.) Additionally, DOE will examine all the Schedules and provide a list of collections of potentially relevant records that likely have been destroyed. DOE said the Schedules, when adhered to, provide a limited guide. In the cases of some records, Schedules are very precise as to what should be retained and what should be destroyed; in other cases they are not. Over the years, this has lead to sometimes widely varying records retention and destruction practices. Records on what has been destroyed are generally poor. In some cases there is simply no record of destruction. In others, records documenting records destruction contain inadequate 8 descriptions of the records in question. Moreover, there is no one location where all "record destruction records" are stored. IV. SEARCH LOGIC A. Guidelines In December 1993, each of the nine DOE field offices around the country established teams to begin examining their holdings for relevant records. Detailed guidance was thereafter issued by DOE headquarters on February 22, April 12, and April 21, and April 27 to all headquarters offices and field offices on the inventorying, processing, declassifying, and dissemination of human radiation experiments records. B. Experiment Definition In addition to "radiation experiments," the guidance sought documents on "any intentional non-ionizing exposure of humans to controlled substances or toxic chemical substances." C. Staff The DOE program is under the direction of Dr. Tara O'Toole, Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety, and Health. The day-to-day management is led by Glenn Podonsky, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Security Evaluations, Environment, Safety, and Health. Presently, each field office has a 20-30 person multi-disciplinary team working full-time on the effort. DOE headquarters has approximately 45 - people working full-time on the effort, including health professionals, records managers, archivists, and historians. 9 D. Use of Agency Historians Published Literature, and Interviews DOE historians are part of the DOE search group. DOE's Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) has created an annotated database which contains "annotated references to published and unpublished studies produced by the Department of Energy, its predecessors agencies, and Departmental contractors since 1943."3 {3 The database includes "information on the biological effects or dosimetry of ionizing radiations or radioactive isotopes using humans as the experimental subject [and] may include studies of experimental nuclear medicine and radiation accidents involving human injury or death." Staff's brief review of the database suggests that the breadth: and quality of data on given experiments varies considerably, depending on the material being abstracted. The hardcopy version of the database is segmented by performing organization ( e.g., specific university, hospital, public agency)}. The Committee has the database on disk as well as hardcopy. DOE is using the database as an aid in its document search. Informal interviews of mostly retired personnel have been conducted by some field offices as part of their efforts to identify pertinent collections of records and specific experiments. The names of the personnel interviewed, as well as any notes, will be provided shortly. E. Activities Field Offices DOE is in the process of conducting a "sweep of its 10 field offices. According to the April 27, 1994 "Inventory Assistance and Document Retrieval Team Procedures," the "actual scope of each team's activities" will be "determined by the organization of each site's records system and the status of each sites...document inventory and retrieval program." The document states that each site must have a "records search strategy and an inventory plan" that is a "blueprint" for site activities. In addition, each site must file a bimonthly report ("Search Strategy and Record Inventory Report") with DOE Headquarters. The guidance provides that "potential collections or sources" will be identified, then "records within the collection are inventoried." (April 27; at 6). Following the completion of an "inventory form"4 {4 Among other data, the inventory form requires a description of the record series title, an estimate of the percentage that are classified, and a ranking (1-3) of likelihood that experiment related data is present. In addition, "if known or easy to determine," data on specific experiments (title, investigator, etc.) should be provided.}, individual documents are identified for retrieval, and described in a "records provenance form." Documents are to be photocopied, along With any provenance forms/information. A document collection log is to be completed for all photocopies. Following the first "sweep" DOE is planning a second sweep of the field offices The second sweep will concentrate on an intensive document retrieval effort. 11 Headquarters Offices The search of headquarters offices records is being conducted along the same lines as that of the field office records. Initially, pertinent collections of records are being identified and reported on the "inventory form." This will be followed by the retrieval and photocopying of documents, and then the completion of the "records provenance form" and document collection log. National Archives and Federal Records Centers DOE agrees that the National Archives contain some critical collections (e.g., the National Archives here in Washington, D.C. has the 1947-1958 AEC Executive Secretariat files). It is presently collecting all the available finding aids to these collections from the National Archives facilities around the nation. With the exception of the holdings in the National Archives in Atlanta, however, DOE is not currently planning to review any of the collections because the National Archives has assumed both physical and legal custody and control of them. DOE states that it must work with the Committee and the National Archives to assure timely retrieval and declassification of documents of interest. Similarly, DOE acknowledges that the Federal records centers contain significant collections. Headquarters-teams are reviewing the transmittal forms (Standard Form 135s) prepared when these collections were shipped to the records centers to 12 identify relevant collections. Once these collections are identified and inventoried, both field office and headquarters teams will begin the document retrieval and indexing process. Contractors / Grantees As noted, DOE has alerted current contractors to search and inventory documents as provided in the guidance to DOE field offices; however, this guidance does not apply to former contractors. V. WORK PRODUCT DOE says that its sweep of the field offices will result in three products for Committee use. First, DOE will provide organizational histories and inventory documents (which describe relevant record sources). Second, DOE will provide abstracts of experiments. Third, DOE will provide copies of individual documents that are related to radiation experiments. DOE is working with a contractor, Reynolds Electric, which has helped DOE catalog radiation-related documents assembled in response to concerns about the "downwinders". The plan is that as relevant documents are identified, hard copies will be transmitted to Washington for abstracting and full text inclusion in a CDROM database.5 {5 DOE noted that while documents will necessarily be reviewed prior to transmission to the Committee (and public), the review will be to determine basic relevance---i.e., there is no single individual or group which is reviewing the documents as a whole on a coordinating basis.} The Department's initial (December 1993) call for documents produced about 6,000 documents. The bulk of these 13 are the "plutonium injection and "Markey collection' documents, which had been collected previously. In addition ,the 270,000 document "downwinder" collection (which DOE believes may contain relevant data) is now available on microfilm (fiche) in Washington. (It is accessible to keyword search.) VI. HOTLINE ("Helpline") In December, DOE established a toll-free hotline. On January 26, 1994 the- hotline was expanded so that calls would be routed to other agencies, as appropriate. The hotline has functioned to collect information which is to be forwarded to the appropriate agency for personal contact. To date, the hotline has served to collect information, and not to direct callers to assistance. DOE intends to provide caseworkers who will work with callers on follow-up; eg, help them obtain medical records and further data on experiments in which they (or relatives) may have been involved. DOE will shortly be able to cross-reference callers to the documents searched, and thus be able to furnish documents when applicable. DOE officials estimate that of the more than 20,000 calls received to date, less than half relate to radiation experiments. (Other calls involve citizens concerned about radiation, veterans who may have been exposed during service, and individuals who have undergone radiation treatment.) Hotline data is computerized, and can be sorted by a number of categories. 14 VII. DOE'S LESSONS LEARNED DOE identified both obstacles and successes. Obstacles have included: * A basic problem is the general lack of indices. As noted above, DOE estimates that just-at its nine field offices there is over 500,000 cubic feet of documents, for which there are very few inventories or indices. There is no estimate for the amount of documents still at DOE headquarters, as well as at the National Archives and Federal records centers throughout the nation, but it is undoubtedly a massive amount. With some notable exceptions, there are few comprehensive indices to these collections either. * DOE encountered resistance to the search, including: --- Contractors at Los Alamos and Chicago initially resisted the search, seeking a non-disclosure agreement from DOE. --- Contractors at Hanford (Westinghouse and Pacific Northwest Laboratories) have delayed assisting on grounds that more funding is needed. --- Episodes of "malicious compliance" occurred--e.g., offices stated that documents cannot be located, when they can be. * DOE has not asked former contractors to identify or search records in their possession. Legal and financial questions will likely arise in this regard. For example, the University of 15 Chicago is no longer under contract to DOE and there is no mechanism to fund a search of their extensive holdings. * The quality of field office compliance varies considerably. Further guidance was issued following field office statements that the initial guidance was not adequately comprehensible; there is still trouble understanding instructions. Following the initial searches, some sites have good indices of relevant records; others "don't know what they've looked through 1, * "Work for others" documentation is hard to come by. Historically, DOE (including DOE contractors) has performed work for other federal agencies. A 1991 study commissioned by Secretary Watkins was able to locate only 90% of work performed for others during the 1989-91 period. Evidently much data and identification was classified and/or hidden in code words. * Some relevant records may not be retrievable to Washington, DC. In particular, DOE indicated that the 14,000 (approximate) medical records maintained by Brookhaven may require review at the site. DOE reported successes include: * DOE believes the substantial resources and people devoted to the effort reflect Secretary O'Leary's deep commitment to openness in government and the need to locate and disclose information relating to human experiments. DOE believes that, as noted at the onset, it will soon have a complete guide to relevant DOE records. 16 * DOE reports that the work done by some sites has been excellent (Staff has not looked at this documentation yet). * DOE reported some retrieval of potentially broad historic import, e.g., the search of the Chicago filed office located several thousand notebooks kept by the Metallurgical Laboratory (part of the Manhattan Project), at least five of which appeared to be relevant to experimentation. (Some of the notebooks are radioactive, and must be treated). VIII. STAFF QUESTIONS REGARDING SEARCH LOGIC In addition to issues identified by DOE, Committee staff raised a number of questions regarding search logic. The areas addressed included: * Publicly available AEC reports -- Staff's preliminary review of a limited number of publicly-available AEC reports from the late 1940s through the 1960s reveals potential experiments and data sources that do not appear to have otherwise been identified. DOE has not "systematically" mined these sources. * Headquarters documents -- As noted above, the MED and AEC were both major sponsors of biomedical research and suppliers and licensors of radioisotopes. Potentially relevant AEC headquarters records include, for example, documents from the AEC Executive Secretariat files; and minutes, transcripts, and reports of the Advisory Committee on Biology and Medicine. DOE agrees MED and AEC Headquarters documents are likely to be a "rich" source. The question is. what is the best approach? 17 * Isotope licensing documents -- DOE agrees that MED and AEC isotope licensing documents may be of significant use in directing further searches. Preliminary inquiries by DOE of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission indicate that the latter may very well have the post-1957 documents, and DOE is following this up. However, DOE has not yet located pre-1957 documents. * Classified documents --- On staff inquiry, it developed that the DOE search has not included an undetermined number (and class) of classified collections. For example, files of the AEC's Division of Intelligence and any successors likely contain(ed) relevant materials on intentional releases, such as Green Run. (In addition, such files likely contain(ed) data on "work for others" information shared among intelligence agencies.) At the May 4 meeting the DOE Team said they had not been successful in gaining access to these files, despite inquiries that began in February. In subsequent discussions, the Team reported to Staff that it was still seeking the information, but had not yet obtained information on the nature and/or magnitude of any such files. (Staff understands that the files in question, to the extent they exist, are now within the control, or known to, DOE's Office of Nonproliferation and National Security.) ---DOE has not yet determined whether classified supplements exist to otherwise publicly-available reports (e.g., the AEC annual reports to Congress) and, if so, what pertinent information they may contain. 18 ---It is believed that many of the records ultimately retrieved from the numerous repositories around the nation will be classified. Perhaps most of these are still classified far the simple reason they have never been reviewed far declassification. As a relevant example, DOE stated that one of the three or four boxes of minutes of the Advisory Committee on Biology and Medicine in the custody of the History Division is still classified. These minutes are likely to be an essential source of information. Staff asked DOE to determine the time required to declassify this box. DOE agreed to report back. * Congressional Joint Committee on Atomic Energy The AEC was overseen by this Committee. The Committee's records could be an excellent source of high-level policy or summary information. Almost all the Committee's records are in the National Archives in Washington, D.C., but many are still classified. It remains to be determined who will examine and, if necessary, declassify relevant documents. IX. OPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS At the initial Committee meeting DOE, as well as other agencies, invited the Committee to engage with it in its document search effort, and to suggest search alternatives and directions. In discussions with DOE (and other agencies) Staff has sought to make plain that the Committee's suggestions must come from the Committee, and not Staff. In light of the foregoing discussion of DOE's search, the following are a list of currently-available 19 options that Staff believes merit the Committee's consideration. In proposing that the Committee adopt these (and/or alternative) options, th.e intent is not to fashion a straitjacket, but to provide a working basis on which the Committee and DOE can begin to move forward. Staff emphasizes that the options are not mutually exclusive. In particular, Staff believes that searches for documents at the Headquarters level and searches for documentation of specific experiments at the field level should, if well conceived, be mutually reinforcing.6 {6 For example, headquarters documents may not only provide policy context for specific experiments, but may also provide specific information on the location, nature, and interrelation of experiments.} The extent to which particular options should be immediately pursued should depend on consideration of resource costs, time constraints, quality controls, and short and longterm payoff potential. The options that follow include suggestions for 1) Committee advice/direction to DOE; 2) Committee action; 3) Committee direction to Staff. A. Recommendation/Options for Committee Advice to DOE SUMMARY. DOE has already committed substantial resources to the first option---a broad sweep to inventory all relevant document sources, with the ultimate goal of retrieving relevant documents. Staff recommends that this course be continued, but, as noted further below, that Staff be directed to 20 provide means of monitoring the connection between the resources committed and the results achieved. Staff recommends that options 2-4, which have potentially high near term payoff, also be immediately pursued. Staff understands that DOE is in agreement, and is prepared to work with staff. Options 5-7 essentially call on DOE to provide the Committee with previously collected data, and should require limited resources. As to Option 8, DOE and Staff agree that the National Archives are a rich source of documents, and the only question is the most efficient means to mine them. OPTIONS. l. DOE should proceed with the strategy of developing, in the near future, a comprehensive (record series) guide which will identify pertinent collections of records at field and headquarters offices, and in the Federal records centers and the National Archives. DOE should produce, as a component of this strategy l) narratives on the relevant organizational history of each site, and an inventory of relevant record sources; 2) summary data on individual experiments; 3) hard copy and electronically formatted documents. 2. DOE should immediately focus on collections of highlevel documents which can be immediately retrieved and made available. Requires of the Agency: --- identification of relevant policy offices and groups (e.g., congressional Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, AEC Advisory Committee on Biology and Medicine), and ; 21 location and provision of minutes, reports, policy directives, etc. Potential Benefits: ---Policy documents. ---Documents indicating relation among experiments, and possible experiments not previously identified. ---Documents showing activities conducted/sponsored by other agencies. 3. DOE should focus on defining categories of classified documents not previously addressed which may contain relevant documents (e.g., interagency intelligence committees, classified supplements to public materials). Requires of the agency: ---survey and inventory classified records collections not encompassed in search to date. ---determine extent to which otherwise public materials (eg, AEC annual reports, Congressional Committee documents) contained classified components. Potentially produces: ---same as in "2" above. ---data on activities of other agencies. 4. Focus on documentation of AEC radioisotope licensing process. ---Requires of the agency: ---Continued inquiry into process. ---Coordination with NRC. 22 Potentially produces: ---Central listing of governmental and non-governmental users of radioisotopes, with information that separates human and non-human experiments. ---Method to narrow searches by other agencies , such as HHS and its predecessors (where they sponsored/conducted radioisotope work) 5. Provide the Committee with "work for others" study performed for Secretary Watkins. Requires of the agency: ---Provision of existing study. Potentially produces: ---Committee understanding of "work for others" records. ---experiments performed for others. Strategy to deal with work for others (which can lead to identification of experiments sponsored by other agencies). 6. Provide documents supporting the 1974 Inspector General report on plutonium injection experiments. Requires of the agency: --- location of documents previously collected. Potentially produces: --- Extensive data on the plutonium --- injection experiments. 23 --- Invaluable contextual documentation on the relation between an early experiment and Manhattan Project activities. 7. Provide the Hotline database to the Committee. Requires of the agency: --- provision of existing database. Produces: --- Possible sorts of data to assist in prioritizing experiments for further Committee study. 8. Identify the most efficient means of accessing data under control of the National Archives. Requires of the agency: --- Coordination with Committee and Archives staffs. Produces: --- Most -efficient access to rich data. B. Direct Committee Action Staff suggests that the Committee must provide guidance on whether, when, and how to seek data in the possession of non- Federal entities. In the case of DOE the Committee's policy need presently address only former contractors (since DOE has already sought data from present contractors). As noted, DOE believes the U. of Chicago and the U. Of Rochester are rich sources. In the case of other agencies, eg HHS, the policy may also have to address present contractors. 24 Staff suggests that the Committee begin to think about this question now, and reserve a policy choice for the next session. The policy requires consideration of: -- kinds of documentation Committee may ultimately wish to seek from non-Federal entities. -- most efficient and least burdensome collection means. -- selection criteria. -- whether and when access should be through DOE or the Committee directly (DOE access being limited to document production). -- access protocol (eg, who is authorized to initiate contact with institutions? what procedure should be followed? what basis four selecting particular institutions?) The Committee should also provide for the development of parallel policy on collection of non-documentary data from non-Federal entities (e.g., interview data). C. Committee-Directed Staff Action Staff Recommends that the Committee direct it to: 1. Continue communications with DOE on the matters discussed in this memo. (DOE and Staff agree that immediate discussions between Staff and DOE historians regarding particular document collections would be of great value.) 2. Provide options on the means to monitor the relation between DOE's field search effort and the quality and amounts of relevant documents actually retrieved. 25 As noted, the numbers of new documents retrieved to date are in the low thousands, but the universe to which substantial search resources are directed is in the many millions. DOE believes the effort will be a valuable longterm contribution to the improvement of its records management. This may well be the case, and worth effort in that context. However, is the effort likely to be worth it from the Committee's perspective (particularly given time constraints)? Staff asked DOE to provide a sense of the expected payoff (in new documents) from the large search effort. DOE was not able to provide assurance about the orders of magnitude of relevant documents that will be turned up. DOE emphasized that any present estimate would be speculative. By way of example, however, DOE's Richland field office estimated it has approximately 150,000 cubic feet of documents and that 30,000 cubic feet will be set aside as potentially relevant. DOE emphasized, however, that Headquarters cannot presently verify this estimate. 3. Develop alternatives for accessing data located at non-Federal entities. 4. Facilitate exchange of DOE information with other agencies, including possibilities for enhanced interagency coordination. 5. Develop options for organizing DOE-provided data (in connection with data from other sources) for use by Committee and public. 26