Letter to W H Weyzen, Subject: Circumstances Surrounding the Transfer of the Health and Mortality Study of ERDA Contractors to the Oak Ridge Associated Universities

Page 1

Phone 467-6400 ( A r e a Coda 2021 Cable Address Advancercl, Washington, 0 C. Human Health Studies Programs Division of Biomedical and Environmental ' Department of Energy 'During its last meeting, the AAAS Subcommittee on Infringements of 'Scientific Freedom in the United States reviewed a summary of the , I. materials provided by your office in connection with the complaint received from Dr. Thomas Mancuso. The subcommittee concluded that the circumstances surrounding the transfer of the health and mortality study of ERDA contractors from Dr. Mancuso's institution to the Oak Ridge Associated Universities may raise important questions of scientific freedom and responstbility. The subcommittee has decided to further review Dr. Mancuso's complaint and wishes to address two questions in detail. 1) Did the research involved in Dr. Mancuso's project deserve to be continued under his direction at the University of Pittsburgh? and 2) Was the process by which the transfer decision was reached free of bias and conflict of interest? In order to develop its opinion on these questions, the subcommittee has recommended that an outside panel of scientists familiar with the research involved in the project be convened for the purpose of providing expert advice to the subcommittee. this panel i n developing its final opinion on Dr. Mancuso's complaint. These questions are: The subcommittee will consider the findings of we have requested that Dr. Mancuso nominate five experts who he believes . are qualified to objectively review his research on the b a s i s of his final. of adding one f o five additional panel members in order to maintain objeccopies of tho final report to the panel for their review. panel members and their individual evaluations of Dr. Mancuso's research will be held strictly confidential by the committee office. In addition to his nominees, the subcommittee will have the option O Z e the panel has been assembled, my office will distribute ten The names of the

Page 2

In order to address the second question, the subcommittee has requested that I contact your office for additional materials regarding the DOE decision to transfer the health and mortality study to Oak Ridge. a) Copies of the 1972 peer reviews of Dr. Mancuso's project and the summary prepared by Dr. Sidney Marks which were discussed during A copy of the report on the transfer decision prepared by the DOE Office of the Inspector General; and A statement by your office on the appropriateness of the dictated press release on Dr. Milham's research drafted by Dr. Marks for Dr. Mancuso's approval in the Bummer of 1974. Please send these requested items, as well as any other m'aterials that you believe would assist in our review, directly to me. Finally, the subcommittee has requested that Dr. Mancuso provide additional clarification regarding his concerns about DOE'S request for computer data. We have asked him to detail in writing the nature of his request and the issues of scientific freedom and responsibility which he believes are included in this request. subcommittee will consider your statement in our review. If you have any questions regarding these recommendations, please contact my office directly.' It would be most helpful if 'you could send us the requested platerials as soon as possible, preferably prior to August 5 . If you wish to provide a similar response, the Committee on Scientific Freedom John Tmanor, Acting Director DOE Office of Freedom of Information