ADDITIONAL DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S OAK RIDGE SITES: PLUTONIUM INJECTION EXPERIMENTS AND THE ETHICS OF OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE DATA GATHERING Addressee: UNK

Page 1

FROM: Advisory Committee StaN Members of' the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments Sites: Plutonium Injection Experiments and the Ethics of Occupational Exposure Data Gathering The week of November 14-20, five Advisory Committee Staff members travelled to Oak Ridge, TN to visit document repositories at the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge Operations oflices, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (previously known as ORINS). Don Weightman, Jini David, Debbie Holland, Noel Theodosiou and Miriam Bowling surveyed and sampled from the collections. The trip resulted in the location and retrieval of additional documentation regarding the plutonium injections (in addition to those cited in a memorandum in TAB I regarding secrecy), and hrther interesting documents. We enclose three of the plutonium injection documents; please let us know if you want krther documentation. In addition, we enclose a document bearing on the ethical obligations regarding occupational exposure data gathering. I. PLUTONIUM INJECTION DOCUMENTS Attachment 1, a December 30, 1946 niemorandum from T.S. Chapman, Chief Operations Branch, Research Division to The Area Engineer, Berkeley Area, regarding I' Human Experimentation." This document addresses work being done at the University of California, which was under Manhattan District contract. The memorandum states, in part: 1. With the concurrence of Lt. Col. Meals this oflice discussed a with Drs. Stone and Miller. It was stated that preparations were being made for injection in humans by Drs.Stone and Miller. 2. These doctors state that the injections would probably be made without the knowledge of the patient and that the physicians assumed hll responsibility. Such injections were not divergent from

Page 2

the normal experimental method in the hospital and tlie patient signed no release. A release was held to be invalid. 4 Interestingly, the memorandum followed a December 24, 1946 memorandum (Attachment 2),also to tlie Berkeley Area Engineer, in which Colonel K.D. Nichols of the Manhattan District declared that the human experimentation contained in the Contract # 48 progress report was beyond the scope of the contract. Colonel Nichols told the Area Manager: It is therefore deemed advisable by this ofice not only to recommend against work on human subjects but also to deny authority for such work under the terms of the contract. You will take immediate action to stop this work under this contract, and report to this office upon compliance. . I Finally, Attachment 3, a document entitled "Experiment I on P.49/ 4" appears to be a report on the initial plutonium injectee. 11. DOCUMENT ENTITLED "DETERMINATION OF POLICY ON CASES OF EXPOSURE TO OCCUPA'I'IONAL DISEASE" I Attachment 4 is a July 25, 1945 memorandum from an Oak Ridge Manhattan District military oficial, showing a copy to medical director Stafford Warren, regarding the need for a policy "on cases of exposure to occupational disease." The memorandum states that nephritis and tuberculosis are becoming increasingly common among workers at the Oak Ridge plant being run In the case of the initial nephritis victim; "[slhe is unaware of her condition which now The memorandum discusses the need for a policy: shows up on routine physical check and urinalysis." . ' The employees must necessarily be rotated out, and not permitted to resume firrther exposure. In frequent instances no other type of employment is available. Claims and litigation will necessarily flow . from the circumstances outlined. The memorandum explains that a policy is required because tlie situation will result in labor relations and worker morale problems, litigation, and the related potential jeopardy to security. Under the heading "Ethical Considerations" the memorandum states: The feelings of the medical officers are keenly appreciated. Are they in accordance with their canons of ethics to be permitted to advise the patient of his true condition, its cause, effect, and probable ,

Page 3

prognosis? If not on ethical grounds, are they to be permitted to fblfill their moral obligations to the individual employees in so advising him? If not on moral grounds, are those civilian medical doctors employed here bound to make full disclosure to the patients under penalty of liability for malpractice or proceeding for revocation of license for their failure to do so?

Page 4

List of Attachments Attachment 1: Memorandum from T.S. Chapman, Chief Operations Branch, Research Division to the Aread Engineer, Berekeley Area, subject: "Human Experiments," dated December 30, 1946. Attachment 2: Memorandum from K. D. Nichols, Colonel, Corps of Engineers, District Engineer to Area Engineer, California Area, Berekeley, California, subject: "Adrmnistration of Radioactive Substances to Human Subjects," dated December 24, 1946. Cases of Exposure to Occupational Disease," dated July 26,