Finally, the impact statement must attempt to weigh 
the alternatives in a serious manner. Each course will have 
its risks and its monetary costs. It is necessary that an 
analysis b© done of the costs of having multiple P3 and P4 
centers throughout the country, given their high cost. This 
cost would probably weigh heavily toward establishing regional 
centers. Other factors will favor different alternatives, but they 
should at least be given a thorough cost-benefit analysis. 
The questions that should be considered in the final 
also 
EIS is not only the wisdom of recombinant research, but /the best 
way to accomplish the goals which NIH seeks to sponsor by its 
grants, namely disease prevention and care. Alternative methods of 
accomplishing the objectives of recombinant research may be 
cheaper and safer. If so, grants should reflect these facts. 
Many medically valucible products presented in the DEIS as 
potential benefits could by synthesized, and some already 
are. These alternative methods of production should be evaluated 
for the benefit of lay readers as well as for internal NIH 
decision-making. 
-24- 
Appendix K — 104 
