a
“oh
ti Filpee gates Ae
ty
oS
"Aswocona xeason for considering‘the
transfer of the program
from
the
wey
etCae
weere
ee
7 «Lyte
DOE to NIH would be to evaluate the mechanisms of such a transfer.“Tifeel
;
eg while:
ae
'
that other BNL programs’ are ‘facing some of the same types of problems with
the scientific. management at DOE,
This transfer might serve as a "trial
balloon" for a dispersion of the management base for scientific programs. It
is obvious that some definitive steps should be taken soon by Brookhaven
National Laboratory to insure the viability of this program.
On 25 January 1980 Dr. Borg asked me informally, "Should the Marshall
Islands Study continue?”
I interpreted his question as presenting a matrix
of options:
1.
Should the study be revised/maintained with the came/different
|
management base?
2.
Should the study continue at BNL,
or elsewhere, or be discontinued?
feel the study must be continued because:
1.
TE is an absolute political necessity.
The US government has
a moral and a fiscal mandate to continue to follow and care
for the people of the Marshall Islands exposed to “ahove. ambient"
levels of ionizing radiation from weapons testing in the
Marshall Islands.
Both the United Nations and independent
international interests are focussed on this population and. are
watching how we proceed with the followup.
2.
This is a unigne irradiated population with both internal and.
wor
external contamination at 26 ycars of continuit:y of sound data.
3.
With refinement, the study could become a sound scientific
program.
4,
Bill Scott has 22 years of inveluable experience with this
proqram.,
.
His continued input into the program is essential for
continued suecein.
sud 2d |
at
”
.