^2 



Mr. Waxman. Two weeks seems a reasonable time. Without ob- 

 jection, that will be the order. 



Mr. Greenwood. Would you yield? 



Mr. BILIRAKIS. I can't yield. 



Mr. Greenwood. I ask unanimous consent to pose a question to 

 the chairman about process. 



Mr. Waxman. Any objection? If not, Mr. Greenwood. 



Mr. Greenwood. As a new member of this committee, if the 

 members of this committee knew that Dr. Kessler and his agency 

 were in possession of all the documents that he has revealed to us, 

 and we want them as part of our study here, and he refused to 

 yield them to us because of his need to protect confidentiality, what 

 would the Chair and the members of this committee do in an in- 

 stance like that? 



What are our procedures? Would we subpoena those records? 



Mr. Waxman. Dr. Kessler? 



Mr. Greenwood. My question is to the Chair. 



Mr. Waxman. There are evidently procedures. 



Mr. Kessler. Mr. Greenwood, the information I can furnish you 

 on Y-1, we have. 



Mr. Greenwood. I know that you can do that. My question is, 

 what do we do? 



Mr. Kessler. We have asked the Patent Office and received the 

 patent application. 



Mr. Greenwood. That is not my question. My question has to do 

 with the access of members of this committee to documents that 

 you have and I want to make sure that we are not selectively mak- 

 ing sure that the documents that are useful arrive at the commit- 

 tee and the documents that are not useful don't arrive because we 

 don't have a consistent policy. 



I need to know what is the policy that determines how we get 

 documents that we want? 



Mr. Waxman. Mr. Greenwood, if there are documents that we are 

 requesting as a subcommittee that are not given to us, we will have 

 the option of subpoenaing those documents. I think that is some- 

 thing that the members of this subcommittee need to talk through, 

 because there are times when confidentiality ought to be respected 

 and there are times when the committee just should know because 

 it is our right to know. 



But let me use as an example, not something that is theoretical, 

 but Brown & Williamson in May of this year told Dr. Kessler and 

 his people that there was no feasible way to develop a genetically 

 altered kind of tobacco that increases the nicotine level. Through 

 Dr. Kessler's investigation, he found out that was not true; that he 

 was being misled by Brown & Williamson, and then finally Brown 

 & Williamson, once the information was laid out to them, admitted 

 it as of last Friday, in anticipation, I presume, of Dr. Kessler com- 

 ing before us. 



Would any member of this panel want Dr. Kessler to not be able 

 to get that information because he couldn't protect the confidential- 

 ity of sources? I would hope nobody on this committee would want 

 that result. 



Mr. McMillan. Would the Chair yield? What is the difference 

 between Dr. Kessler protecting the confidentiality of sources and 



