Tab J Staff Memo--Public Outreach Options 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. PUBLIC OUTREACH May 13, 1994 INTRODUCTION This memo, in response to the Committee's request at the initial meeting that the Staff prepare a memo on outreach, outlines alternatives for public outreach by the Committee. We recommend that the Committee form a subcommittee to work with staff on developing specifics (which, of course, may include alternatives or modifications to this proposal). GOAL Our outreach strategy, subject to the Committee's approval, is intended to insure that the Committee has access to all information material to its concerns that may be held by groups and individual members of the public and to make sure the public has adequate access to the Committee to make its concerns known. METHODS Identification Since the establishment of the Committee, the staff has been approached by many groups and individuals desiring to share information. Staff has met with some of them and where appropriate recommended that they make presentations to the Committee. We cannot, of course, depend on all those groups and individuals who have reason to contact the Committee to find us. Therefore, the staff proposes an aggressive effort to reach the public with the following options: 1) With the Committee's help, staff will identify interested groups and individuals so that the Committee can consider where we should invest our resources. This will be done in a variety of ways including reviewing media coverage, checking the interagency working group's helpline records, talking to the public affairs officers of the relevant agencies, checking with groups or reviewing the records of groups that have carried out tasks similar to ours, possibly advertising in appropriate journals, and surveying Committee members and staff. The universe of groups and individuals is quite large. Since the last meeting staff has sought to identify groups and individuals that might be interested in the work of the Committee. In addition to information from the interagency helpline, we have obtained or ale obtaining: a. An HHS list of groups and individuals who have previously commented or shown interest in human subjects research. b. A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ASTDR) list of invitees and participants at a February, 1994, Workshop on Community, Tribal and Labor Involvement in Public Health Service Activities at Department of Energy Sites. (The list contains several hundred names.) c. A Veterans Administration list of chartered veterans' groups. d. A list of persons who have written to Survivors of Medical Radiation Experiments. e. A list provided by Physicians for Social Responsibility. 2) Staff suggests that the subcommittee determine what the scope and method of outreach should be. Then the staff, together with the subcommittee, will develop for example, a model letter (or letters) to solicit participation. As responses come in staff will see that information is channeled to the Committee and research teams as appropriate, that requests for information are responded to, that public comments are scheduled, and so on. Experts In response to an initiative by Committee members, staff will work with the subcommittee to organize and conduct for the Committee an expert outreach in which members of each discipline represented on the Committee and staff contact colleagues and encourage them to provide the Committee with information on an ongoing basis. Once the subcommittee determines the general principles under which colleagues will be invited to exchange information with the Committee, the staff will coordinate this effort. These principles are needed, among other things, to focus outreach efforts and to ensure they are consistent with the Committee's charter and goals. One such principle might be that the Committee should be aware of diverse perspectives on human radiation experimentation, some of which may fall outside what is generally considered to be the technical expertise of the academic or professional group being addressed. Another principle might be that the Committee should have access to as much information as possible on those cases on which it decides to concentrate. Model letters have been provided by Committee and staff members. Working with these drafts in consultation with the subcommittee, the staff will develop a letter or letters to be sent to relevant academics and professionals before the next Committee meeting. Responses will be handled in a similar fashion to those received through the public outreach. Students It has been suggested by a Committee member that his students participate in the Committee's work. This suggestion has obvious potential benefits for both the Committee and students. The subcommittee might want to consider questions like what would constitute an appropriate and mutually beneficial student involvement. Staff would be happy to work with the subcommittee to determine what kinds of tasks might be done by student volunteers working on or off site. Internet For a minimal cost the Committee can hook up to the Internet and exchange information with the public, or at least that percentage of the public with access. One obvious advantage of the Internet is that it would provide the Committee and staff instant communication with institutional subscribers such as universities and hospitals. 2 There are at least three ways in which the Committee can use Internet as part of its outreach effort: Gopher servers, Use Net and E-Mail. 1) Gopher servers are electronic archives. Once we set one up, anyone on the Internet, including schools and libraries, will be able to find it on a menu and access it. We can make available on-line anything that goes into our reading room --e.g. documents related to cases, documents related to ethical and scientific standards, the Committee charter, etc. 2) Use Net enables anyone on the Internet to connect and download documents to the Committee. Committee members and staff will also be able to use the news group we set up under Use Net to direct questions to the 15 to 20 million members of the public who have access to the Internet. (We have not determined whether this would count as public comment under FACA.) 3) E-Mail will make communications more efficient between Committee members, Committee and staff, and between Committee-staff and the public. We propose that the staff archivist and other staff members work with the subcommittee on this matter. Audio and video tapes Along with the regular flow of documents, we suggest making audio tapes of Committee meetings available in the reading room at 1726 M Street and perhaps at other locations so that scholars and other interested members of the public can listen to them. Committee members might also want to consider videotaping meetings as an educational tool for their own teaching and perhaps as a larger educational outreach to school systems--both high school civics programs and universities. The tapes could be used in government, political science, sociology of science, ethics, and other programs. To prepare tapes for distribution would require working with independent producers to do the actual taping, edit the tapes, develop a series format, and so on. Media Relations Under the Committee's direction staff will develop a coordinated strategy to spread the word about the Committee's work and its openness to public participation. With respect to the general print news media and electronic news media, staff has begun developing relationships with print and television reporters at both the national and regional level, as well as with independent documentary makers. We think there is virtue in encouraging coverage of both the Committees public hearings and other activities as representative of democracy at work, and of the specific cases the Committee identifies for study. Another option is talk TV and talk radio. There is, of course, a very diverse group of programs in this category. Staff will study the marketplace and make recommendations to the Committee about which programs seem appropriate for appearances. The advantage of this format is that Committee members, should they choose to make appearances, will be able to elaborate on aspects of the Committee's work that they believe have been inadequately explained to the public. 3 Public Appearances and press contracts As a general matter, staff suggests a principle for public statements by Committee and staff members: Committee debates on unresolved issues should not be conducted in the press. Staff suggests that the Committee make this principle policy. Staff further recommends that Committee members coordinate with the Committee chair, the executive director or the director of communications when they speak to the press or in public about Committee business. We note that there have already been requests for appearances before groups including Congress, the American Nuclear Society, representatives of radiation victims, and at conferences on openness in government and on research ethics. We also recommend that staff be permitted to talk to the press and at public fora, in their area(s) of expertise, and subject to approval by the Committee Chair, executive director, or director communications. In addition to the principle proposed above, we propose the following guidelines for speaking engagements: 1) Staff will accept speaking engagements based on standard considerations of appropriateness, scheduling, travel costs, etc.; 2) In general, factual presentations of work the Committee has completed are appropriate and are to be encouraged before interested groups, especially those that may have something to contribute. 4