388 



Mr. Wyden. Then access is not in any way limited. This commit- 

 tee, the newspapers and all of the scientific organizations that have 

 interests in this could look at your research files in a consistent, 

 orderly fashion? I am coming down, because I would like to see it. 

 Can I arrange to see what is in your files? 



Mr. Glenn. Yes, sir. We would welcome you. 



Mr. Wyden. All right. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you. 



Mr. Waxman. Thank you, Mr. Wyden. 



Dr. Glenn, this is what we would like from you on the record. We 

 want a list of all of the special projects, a copy of the research re- 

 sults, any correspondence between CTR and the tobacco companies, 

 and/or the researchers regarding any of these special projects. The 

 dollar amount spent on each of the special projects; the itemization 

 of whether and where each special project was published, or if it 

 was published at all; and any other documents in your possession 

 relating to special projects. 



Mr. Glenn. Yes, I understand. 



Mr. Waxman. You will cooperate with us and get those to us? 



Mr. Glenn. Yes, sir. 



[The following information was received:] 



We have gathered 14 boxes of documents, consisting of about 30,000 pages, from 

 the Council's files on Council Special Projects. The vast majority of these documents 

 are from files that are arranged alphabetically by the name of the principal inves- 

 tigator or, in some cases, the investigator's institution. There are also documents 

 from files containing financial information about Council Special Projects and docu- 

 ments from Special Project desk files of certain Council employees. Approximately 

 Va of these pages consist of applications and pre-publication reports by researchers, 

 or evaluations of a researcher or of his or her research. We believe that the informa- 

 tion that is reflected in these documents was provided to the Council with a reason- 

 able expectation of confidentiality, and we therefore regard these documents as con- 

 fidential. 



We expect to be able to provide all these documents to you promptly after we have 

 reached an understanding with the subcommittee staff with respect to procedures 

 for the subcommittee's handling of materials provided by the Council. In the in- 

 terim, I respectfully request that this letter be included in the May 26 transcript. 



In addition, I am advised that there are 54 documents from these Council Special 

 Project files that are subject to claims of attorney-client privilege, attorney work- 

 product protection or joint defense privilege asserted by the Council or its sponsors. 

 We do not intend to provide 51 of these documents to the subcommittee, and we 

 intend to redact the other three. None of these documents constitutes a researchers' 

 report of his or her results or findings. (As stated above, the Council has not as- 

 serted any privilege with respect to such results or findings; and my understanding 

 is that none of the Council's sponsors have done so.) No communications with sci- 

 entific researchers are being withheld on privilege or work-product grounds. 



[Subcommittee Note: On October 19, 1994, the Council for Tobacco Research sub- 

 mitted to the subcommittee the list of special projects administered by the Council. 

 This list is part of the public record of the hearing and is available for public review 

 in the office of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the office of Rep. 

 Henry A. Waxman.] 



Mr. Waxman. Now, in the Haines case Judge Sarokin said he 

 had 1,500 CTR documents in his possession. Will you provide any 

 of these Haines documents that are in your possession, and will 

 you ask the tobacco companies for them and then submit them to 

 us? 



Mr. Glenn. Mr. Waxman, you will have to ask the tobacco com- 

 panies. None of the 1,500 documents to which Judge Sarokin re- 

 ferred were CTR documents. None of them. 



Mr. Waxman. They were identified as CTR documents. 



Mr. Glenn. I am sorry? 



