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