MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Santa Fe Small Panel FROM: Advisory Committee Staff DATE: January 23, 1995 RE: Overview of Briefing Materials I. SUMMARY OF ENCLOSURES We enclose the following briefing materials for the Santa Fe public hearing: l. An overview of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL)/Department of Energy (DOE) role in human experimentation (this item appeared in the October 1994 Briefing Book (Tab A)); 2. Overviews of fact patterns relevant to the meeting, including: TAB A: Human Experimentation in Connection with Atomic Bomb Tests (LANL/DOE and its officials served as AEC manager for many of the tests); TAB B: Materials on Intentional Releases ("RaLa" and "Operation Rollercoaster"); and TAB C: Materials on Uranium Miners II. SUMMARY OF DOCUMENT AND INFORMATION PROVISION Since mid-summer, Committee staff and LANL/DOE staff have been engaged in discussions regarding the production of data regarding LANL/DOE related activities. The discussions have focused on three areas: biomedical research, intentional releases, and experimentation in connection with bomb tests. A. Biomedical LANL/DOE has, particularly in comparison with other DOE sites, engaged in a productive search for information relating to its biomedical experimentation. (This search has focused on the "H" (Health Division, which had the primary role in biomedical research). In addition, LANL/DOE has assembled a team of former employees who have been available for discussion with the Advisory Committee staff, in addition to playing a key role in the LANL/DOE search. While substantial materials have been provided, much of the reporting on particular experiments remains fragmentary. As noted below, this is especially so in the case of the questions of disclosure and consent. B. Intentional Releases Much information regarding the LANL/DOE releases has been classified until recently. Because of weapons related data, a significant portion will, it is said, continue to require classification. Staff (with consultation from John Till) has been working with LANL/DOE to review classified material (and, of course, to seek declassification). Gil Whittemore visited LANL/DOE to review such material, and Mark Goodman will be reviewing classified material on this trip. C. Bomb Test-Related Human Experimentation In September, the Advisory Committee requested all documents relating to biomedical experimentation in connection with the test program, including, specifically, those relating to any biomedical planning groups or screening committees, cloud fly- throughs, psychological testing, and body fluid measurement. In the interim, LANL/DOE has provided some material which has been useful and interesting. However, it now appears that a comprehensive search has not yet been done. In forwarding the request, Staff was particularly interested in material maintained by the "J" Division, which had primary responsibility for tests and which had not been searched in connection with the human experimentation project. It appears that only a limited search of the J-files was conducted in response to this request. LANL/DOE has stated that the classified index to these files (as well as the files themselves) will be available for Committee review. On this trip Staff hopes to be available to determine the extent of the search which remains to be done, and to accomplish as much of it as possible. LANL/DOE has offered to provide guidance on files that have been reviewed, and those that may be particularly relevant. D. Trip Research As indicated above, LANL/DOE has invited the Advisory Committee to view its files directly, and staff is working with the Advisory Committee to do so. Key questions include: (l) the extent to which the collection that has not yet been reviewed by LANL/DOE is the subject of indices; and (2) the extent to which LANL/DOE can otherwise readily locate information still being sought. III. OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS As noted in more detail in the attachments, while LANL/DOE has provided much information, many basic questions remain to be answered. For example: A. Biomedical o What use was made of the plutonium injection data in regard to health and safety standards (LANL/DOE Wright Langham was a key figure in the injections, and authored the 1950 opus on them)? o Why, in 1951, did LANL/DOE ask AEC Headquarters for information on experimental ethics? (The November, 1947 General Manager Wilson letter was cited to LANL/DOE in response to its inquiry; however, the inquiry was from the Declassification Division, and the recipient of the AEC response, Mr. Redman, cannot recall why the issue came up.) o Why is there no documentary evidence that the consent policy stated to LANL/DOE in 1956 by the AEC (Letter from AEC/ DBM Chief Dunham to Los Alamos Health Division Chief Shipman) was ever effectuated? (Why did Shipman have to inquire in 1956, given that experiments had been ongoing, and the policy had been provided in 1951?) o Was the policy putatively adopted in 1956 by LANL/DOE applied to patients and indigents, as well as labworkers? o Why is there no documentation of the LANL/DOE and/or AEC understanding of the terms on which bodies taken for autopsy by LANL/DOE pathologist Clarence Lushbaugh in the 1950's were to be used in AEC/LANL/DOE research? (LANL/DOE has transmitted a contemporary autopsy form, but it does not appear to provide for research.) o What is the full range of classified human data gathering engaged in by LANL/DOE? (LANL/DOE says its biomedical research has generally been public; however, the 1950 Langham plutonium report was kept secret until the late 1960's; LANL/DOE also was involved in Project Sunshine which, as summarized in the draft Secrecy chapter, was conceived in secret, and involved the use of deception to collect human tissue). B. Intentional Releases o How carefully has LANL/DOE reviewed its records for information on the RaLa tests in Bayo Canyon? How well does the source information for the environmental dose reconstruction reflect the actual records? LANL/DOE will be providing a report to the Committee in Santa Fe which may answer many of these questions, but many source documents will remain secret. o What was the purpose of the aerial sampling of effluent from the Kiwi nuclear rocket motor tests? Were these tests necessary for technical reasons? Were there any unique hazards to flight crews, such as neutron irradiation, and how well were these hazards understood? o There were a number of biomedical experiments in conjunction with one-point safety and plutonium safety tests known as Operation Roller Coaster (see Tab B-2). What was the role of LANL/DOE in these tests? How did the results of these tests affect nuclear weapons safety standards? The principal purpose of Operation Roller Coaster appears to have been to understand environmental and occupational safety standards for handling nuclear weapons. To what extent was this also the purpose of the one-point safety tests? C. Human Experimentation in Connection with Bomb Tests o What are the facts relating to human experimentation? ( In a December 1994 transmittal to the Advisory Committee, Los Alamos took the position that "[r]adiation effects studies were never conducted on humans. The AEC always opposed the use of volunteers for medical studies, and regarded the operational exposures as occupational.") o What was LANL/DOE role in regard to the many activities that appear to have been human experiments, as summarized in the attachment? (As the supplier of key AEC personnel to many DOD/AEC bomb test task forces, LANL/DOE plainly was involved in, and responsible for, all significant test activities; what role did it have in proposing experiments, reviewing them, setting risk standards, etc.) o What more can we learn about the dialogue between LANL/DOE and DOD over the risks to which experimental subjects, and others, were exposed? (In discussions with staff, for example, LANL/DOE indicated that it could not have been involved in the "decontamination" experiment in which aircrew rubbed hands against a plane fuselage, because the activity was not safe; in documents cited in the Air Force' history of Cloud Sampling, LANL/DOE criticized the Air Force's refusal to expend further sums on decontamination of planes, to minimize hazard to aircrew). o What more can we learn about the dialogue between LANL/DOE and the DOD over biomedical experimentation? (At mid-century DOD and the AEC sought to engage in joint screening of biomedical projects; in a January, 1952 letter to Shields Warren, then DBM Chief, LANL/DOE H-Division Chief Shipman complained that the committee "as now composed will consider only those experiments proposed by civilian organizations. . .if AEC can not exercise a measure of control in this matter, they might better withdraw from the picture completely and permit the military to continue on its own sweet way without the somewhat ludicrous spectacle.