RECENT DOCUMENT REQUEST SUBMITTED TO LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY (LANL)/DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (DOE) The following is the text of the most recent document request submitted to LANL/DOE with some minor clarifications for the ease of Committee reading. A team of researchers from the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments plans to visit LANL/DOE during the week of January 30 to February 3. In anticipation of this visit, ACHRE staff has identified a number of general and specific research interests listed below about which it requests further information. Staff also requests LANL/DOE provide any indices, electronic media, finding aids or other general information that could supplement the series descriptions already provided for various record collections. I. ATOMIC VETERANS AND WEAPONS TESTING A. General Questions 1. The summary, "A Brief History of Biomedical Studies Associated with Atomic Nuclear Tests," provided to the Committee on December 8, 1994 only goes through the 1952 tests. Other LANL/DOE documents show that biomedical committees stayed in effect for some years thereafter. Why does the summary conclude following the 1952 tests? We would like to review the files for all documents related to the biomedical test committees for the later years, as well as for the earlier years. 2. The following questions regard a one page summary of "The Biomedical Test Screening and Planning Committee" that was provided by LANL/DOE (see attached). a. The write-up introduces a "collection" of documents said to be "representative of the effort directed to safety and design of biomedical experiments . . . ." We would like to review the files (and boxes, as relevant) from which these were selected, and any other documents related to the biomedical committees. b. The memorandum states that exposures of pilots "were restricted to limits set by the Surgeon General." Which Surgeon General is referred to? Please provide documents showing the establishment of these limits by the Surgeon General, and their basis, with regard, e.g., to pilots (and other aircrew) involved in the Teapot and Redwing tests. In addition, we are interested in documentation or other information showing how the referred to "limits set by the Surgeon General" compared to then-governing limits established by the AEC (including LANL/DOE) for its own workers. For example, please provide any documents showing AEC review or consideration of these limits, and showing whether or not the AEC agreed to them. c. The write-up states that "doses that exceeded the [Surgeon General] limit required explanation and removal of the individual from further exposure." Please provide documentation of the policy which provided for this, and documentation showing its effectuation. d. The memorandum states that "[radiation effects studies were never conducted on humans." What is meant by "radiation effects"? For example: (1) Were the studies that measured the extent to which radiation was absorbed by, or penetrated, humans "radiation effects" studies (e.g., the MB-1 experiment; the decontamination experiments)? If not, why not? (2) Were the studies of the psychological and physiological effects of bomb detonations on soldiers (e.g.., at Desert Rocks I and IV) not studies of radiation effects? If not, why not? (3) Were post-test follow-up analyses (e.g., urine sampling, health monitoring) of individuals involved in activities such as cloud fly-throughs, troop maneuvers, and decontamination activities sampling, at least on occasion). Is LANL/DOE aware of such data gathering? Were these radiation effects studies? If not, please explain? (4) In the December, 1955 Argosy article on cloud fly-throughs provided by LANL/DOE, Colonel Pinson is quoted as stating, "[o]ne of the most important things we must learn is exactly how much radiation penetrates into the human system" (page 63 of article.) Were any such studies, as referred to by Col. Pinson, conducted with use of human subjects? e. The memorandum states that "[the AEC always opposed the use of volunteers for medical studies. . . ." With reference to this statement, please (1) Provide any documents showing AEC (or LANL/DOE) opposition to the use of human volunteers; (2) Identify, to the extent not shown in documents, the activities which were opposed, and the basis for opposition. (3) Our records show the following as likely human experimentation in connection with bomb tests: ù Psychological and physiological testing; ù Measurement of radioactive isotopes in body fluids; ù Measurement of radiation in the bodies of aircrews; ù Measurement of radiation on the hands of aircrews; ù Crawling through contaminated areas; ù Driving of tanks through contaminated areas; ù Flashblindness tests; and ù Civil defense tests in which humans were placed in shelters at detonations. Did the AEC oppose any of these tests? If so, is there any available information or documentation relating to the opposition? f. The memorandum concludes by saying that the AEC "regarded the operational exposures as occupational." (1) Please provide any contemporaneous documents which might explain the distinction between experimental and occupational exposures. (2) Did the AEC regard the exposures conducted in conjunction with biomedical programs, e.g., the flashblindness experiments, as occupational? If so, please explain? If not, what standards were applied? (3) Did the AEC regard the use of human subjects as measures for radiation (e.g., as in the MB-1 test and the Redwing fly-through) as operational? If so, please provide any rules or policies providing for "operations" which use humans in such respect? Also, please explain in light of DOD documents which refer to these as "experiments," what analysis underlay the AEC's determination that they were "occupational"? (4) Similarly, DOD investigators referred to the psychological and physiological testing at Desert Rock as "experimental." Please provide any contemporary analysis showing how and why the AEC deemed the activities to be occupational. 3. As we have discussed, with the exception of the flashblindness tests, human radiation experiments conducted in connection with the bomb tests do not appear to have been conducted under the Biomedical Program. We would appreciate any documentation, or other information which might show the authorization and review procedures that were followed in the further cases cited in I (e)(3), and further cited below. 4. Defense Nuclear Agency (DNA) has provided the Committee with a matrix concerning activities at atmospheric test series. Our review of documents provided by LANL/DOE indicates that we have not received information on many of these activities from LANL/DOE. For example, does LANL/DOE have information on the following. (We note that for information regarding Operation Crossroads LANL/DOE' referred ACHRE to the "excellent" work by Jonathan Weisgall. We have been in communication with Mr. Weisgall.) a. Body Fluids: Urine and blood tests from CROSSROADS, CASTLE, REDWING; b. Cloud sampling/tracking/probing: CROSSROADS, SANDSTONE, RANGER, GREENHOUSE, TUMBLER-SNAPPER, IVY, CASTLE, TEAPOT (the report from the cloud probing experiment), Post-REDWING; c. Decontamination: Studies/Procedures from CROSSROADS, SANDSTONE, RANGER, GREENHOUSE, BUSTER-JANGLE, TUMBLER-SNAPPER, IVY, UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE, CASTLE, TEAPOT, WIGWAM, REDWING, PLUMBOB, HARDTACK I, HARDTACK II, DOMINIC I, DOMINIC II. This information would include any correspondence between LANL/DOE and the Department of Defense regarding the decontamination of planes, as referred to in the 1963 Air Force history of cloud sampling, which we have previously provided. d. Flash blindness: PLUMBOB, DOMINIC I, and any others; e. HUMRRO/ORO psychological and physiological testing of troops; f. Officer Volunteer Observers at the 1953 tests; 5. In addition to the activities identified by DNA, we have identified the following additional activities which may have involved human experimentation, and regarding which we would like information on: a. Civil Defense: PLUMBOB and any other series in which humans were used in civil defense experiments; b. Respiratory Hazard to Tank Crews: BUSTER-JANGLE Project 6.3-2, and any follow-up studies. c. Collective Protection Devices and Clothing: BUSTER-JANGLE Project 6.3-1, and any follow-up studies. 6. By separate request to DOE we have sought information on the practices and policies of public information related to the testing program, particularly for the 1953-54 period. We enclose excerpts from the work by Barton Hacker on "radsafety" at the testing program, in which he references exchanges with DOD about the safety levels, and the need for public disclosure of data. We would like to review the files where the footnoted material came from. B. Further Specific Questions 1. On 5 March 1954 Col. Irving Branch, Acting Chief of Staff Armed Forces Special Weapons Project recognized the applicability of the 1953 Secretary Wilson memorandum to flashblindness experiments. Does LANL/DOE have any evidence that written consent forms were required for post-1954 flashblindness studies or other human experiments conducted in connection with bomb tests? 2. Documents provided by LANL/DOE indicate that when the press reported the safety standards for the cloud penetration experiments at TEAPOT, it was reported that the dosage limit as 3.9R; however internal government documents indicate it was actually 15R. Can you please clarify the actual standards employed, and the standards that were reported to the press. 3. Does LANL/DOE have any information regarding precautions for humans involved in Project 6.3-2 Operation JANGLE (Evaluation of the Potential Respiratory Hazard to Tank Crews Required to Operate in Contaminated Areas) and Project 6.3-1 (Evaluation of Military Individual and Collective Protection Devices and Clothing)? 4. Does LANL/DOE have any information on the use of human subjects in bomb shelter or shielding experiments? (We have identified at DOE's Germantown facility, and are awaiting production of, information indicating that at least one such experiment, involving Lovelace Foundation, took place in the mid-50's.) II. BIOMEDICAL EXPERIMENTS A. Request for Finding Aids For the following collections, we request information about whatever finding aids are available. 1. Project Y Records. This collection reportedly contains information about the MED plutonium injections and the earliest references regarding the possible need for human experimentation. The Advisory Committee has received a collection of memoranda/letters which fits this description and which may have come from this collection. As documentation was pulled from this collection, was a record kept of which boxes/folders contained these documents? 2. Office of Director and Lab Management Files, Paper & Microfilm. We would particularly like to see any files relating to the publication/classification of experiment reports, particularly the plutonium injection experiment. (We have one letter from University of Rochester to Norris Bradbury regarding the classification/distribution of the plutonium report.) 3. Health Division and H-4 Central Administrative Records. We would like to search all H-4 records, and to sample the Health Division records. 4. Wright Langham Papers. We would like to search the complete collection. 5. J Division Records. On what basis does the series description state that "The series may contain information on human testing done at nuclear weapons tests." Has any such material been found in this collection? 6. D Division Records. Which D Division files were searched for materials regarding the Redman letter? Were any relevant documents found? 7. N Division Records, Rover Program Files. We would like to search files relating to the experiments on humans measuring transit time of uranium microspheres. 8. Underhill. We would like to look at files relating to insurance policies. 9. Lab Notebooks. We would like to see lab notebooks recording plutonium experiments and tracer studies performed on humans. 10. Reports Collection. Was this the collection from which the Committee has received final reports on human tracer studies conducted at LANL/DOE? Is this collection searchable by electronic means? Is there an index of reports? B. Specific Research Interests 1. Where is Langham's correspondence regarding the plutonium experiments, including his patient follow-up into the 1950's located, if not in his records? We have some of this documentation from the IG investigation which looks like it came from the LANL/DOE archives, but the series description for Langham's papers does not mention such records. 2. Are the Robert Underhill records the only files which contain information on insurance/hazardous work, or are there others? We would like to review any such files. 3. Which files contain the memoranda from Wright Langham to Oppenheimer on contamination of some valleys and possible liability if the valleys were not fenced in? We would like to see these files. 4. Staff wants to review any files related to the declassification debate over worker safety studies produced by LANL/DOE. (See attached 1948 secrecy memorandum on LANL/DOE worker study.) 5. We would like to see any records of Harry Foreman's chelation experiments (other than final reports). Documentation we have suggests that he may have performed Ethylene-Diamine Tetra-Acetate (EDTA) chelation work on subjects of the plutonium injection experiments at the University of California and University of Rochester. 6. Which files contain information on LANL/DOE uranium data gathering in connection with uranium mine inquiries? III. INTENTIONAL RELEASES A. Request for Finding Aids For the following record collections, we are interested in any additional finding aids. 1. US AEC LANL/DOE, GMX-5 (Dynamic Weapons Testing Division), RaLa (Radiolanthanum) Groups--RaLa Test Records (2 cu ft). 2. US AEC LANL/DOE, Records of N-Division, Nuclear Rocket Propulsion Division, Rover Program Central Administrative Files (40 cu ft). 3. Is there an index of the lab notebooks? B. Specific Research Interests 1. Staff intends to review RaLa report and source materials. Goals: (a) understand dose reconstruction; (b) check consistency between source documents and table on RaLa data. 2. Review Kiwi tests, including neutron dosimetry studies. Goals: (a) understand magnitude of neutron doses; (b) get a feeling for the contemporaneous standards for risk and risk assessment for environmental releases. 3. Review Operation Roller Coaster and 1-point safety tests. Goals: (a) understand LANL/DOE role in Roller Coaster; (b) understand risks and safety standards. IV. OTHER A. AEC Intelligence Division DOE has stated that the files of the AEC Intelligence Division were purged, but that DOE is committed to search field offices for remaining files. What efforts has LANL/DOE made in this regard? Staff wishes to review any intelligence records that have been identified. B. Potential Legal Liability Don Petersen mentioned to Gil Whittemore of Committee staff that he had come across memoranda from Langham to Oppenheimer referred to above. We would like to review the files in which these documents were discovered. We are also interested in any records expressing concern over contamination or misuse of isotopes in medical research. C. Isotope Use Committee(s) Did LANL/DOE ever establish any such committee to oversee use of isotopes on humans? If yes, what records (correspondence, meeting minutes, deliberations etc.) have been identified?