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 ” .