NOTIFICATION OF UNWITTING SUBJECTS OF DRUG EXPERIMENTATION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP81-00142R000200100010-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 21, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 18, 2008
• Sequence Number: 10
• Publication Date: October 13, 1978
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release 2008/04/18: CIA-RDP81-00142R000200100010-1
PJ `A Kegistry
DD/A 78-2930/5
13 October 1978
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Administration
FROM:
SUBJECT:
REFERENCE :
Special Assistant/DDA
Notification of Unwitting Subjects
of Drug Experimentation
My Memo to You.of 26 September 1978;
Subj: Drug Experimentation - the Problem
(DD/A 78-2930/4)
1. This memorandum is an extension and, to some
degree, an elaboration of my earlier memorandum (Reference).
Because it is clear that we are going to have to notify some
MKULTRA subjects, I have started some preparatory and pre-
liminary actions. These actions, however, cannot be com-
pleted until. we have further guidance.
2. I have reviewed summaries of the MKULTRA
projects prepared by OTS and the IG (the ue." book and
the "White" book) and the categorization of those projects
prepared by the Office of the General Counsel aid separated
the files on all subprojects where human testing appears to
have been involved. Each of these files has been reviewed
with some care and a separate summary 'sheet prepared for
each-suggesting what action needs to be taken. As a means
of moving forward, I have started to prepare correspondence
to implement those actions subject to your agreement and
that of the General Counsel. Copies of drafts of those
prepared so far are attached for your review. I suggest
we add these to the agenda for discussion with Mr. Lapham
whenever we meet.
STAT
3. Some of the attached drafts are self-explanatory,
but a couple require comment.
a. The draft letter to Secretary Califano is offered
with the idea that it might be used as a conversation
piece if you elect to go to HEW; you might take the letter
along in draft to find out how he would react to receiving
it. Before you go, however, we need to agree whether we
want to turn the whole project over to HEW, or ask them
to respond to specific tasking. At the moment, the only
Approved For Release 2008/04/18: CIA-RDP81-00142R000200100010-1
 Approved For Release 2008/04/18: CIA-RDP81-00142R000200100010-1
11.% `tirr'
DD/A 78-2930/5
Page 2
specific task we might give them is the list of
drugs for evaluation. Perhaps we should go direct
to the Food and Drug Administration for that,
although we can probably expect an "'it depends"
answer - it depends on dosage, frequency, duration,
etc. Perhaps we should go to the Public Health Service
if we want to request intercession in dealing with.
institutions and researchers. Perhaps we should go to
Califano for political reasons, a show of good faith,
or whatever, to pacify the Congress. The draft will
serve as a point of departure for discussion-of-these
questions.
I suggested we do virtually nothing about seekin sub'ect.s
of drug testing STAT
b. The draft letter to the Drug Enforcement Admini-
stration is offered for the same reason, i.e. a point
of departure for discussion. In my earlier memorandum
This draft is intended to imply that DEA maySTAT
STAT
STAT
have a responsibility parallel to ours. The opinion of
the Attorney General says the Government has a duty to
inform people whom it may have cause TTiarm. DEA is an
agency of the Government too and perhaps should share
the responsibility Exactly
what took place has never been established
in non-fiction. The only possibility of learning more
about it is to interview former (or present) Bureau of
Narcotics Agents and former (or present) CIA employees.
We need to consider whether CIA should interview Bureau
-of Narcotics people; whether we should. ask them to do it;
or whether interviewing should be done jointly-by both
agencies. The same questions apply to CIA people, and
lead to the further question of whether we want Bureau of
Narcotics people to participate in interviews of former
CIA people. It seems to me it has to be a joint operation
if it is done at all.
4. While the content of other drafts attached is self-
explanatory, they do raise procedural questions that need to
be discussed and answered.
a. Is a Memorandum for the Record sufficient to close
out a case.
b. The MFR about subproject 125 passes judgment about
the effects of drugs. in OMS has review+STAT
the memo and the file in this case and will sign a con-
currence when it is put in final form. Is this sufficient?
Approved For Release 2008/04/18: CIA-RDP81-00142R000200100010-1
 Approved For Release 2008/04/18: CIA-RDP81-00142R000200100010-1
IMF
DD/A 78-2930/5
Page 3
Should 0GC or anyone else he asked to concur?
c. Who should sign letters to institutions
such as the one to the University of Oklahoma and
who should concur - OGC; OMS; DDA; Mr. Hetu?
5. Other cases for which. there are no samples
attached will require collection of additional information.
Institutions, in some cases have denied knowledge, but
.researchers were witting. Do we write to the researchers
if we can locate them, to request information by return
letter or do we request interview? If interviewing is to
be done, who does it -
STAT
SIAI
the undersigned or a Task Force member? Some ca
may suggest that former employees be interviewed, and the
same questions apply. We need to consider also how far
afield we travel; some retirees reside in foreign countries,
for example.
6. Perhaps this memo should be added to the earlier
one as an agenda for the meeting with OGC. I have sent a
copy to Mr. Lapham with that in mind.
STAT
cc: Mr. Lapham w/att
Distribution:
Or?ig DDA w/att
1 - GC w/att
l,- DDA Chrono
- DDA Subject
RHW Chrono
'DA;se 13 October 1978
Approved For Release 2008/04/18: CIA-RDP81-00142R000200100010-1