MINUTES OF MEETING - June 5-6 
27 
first, toxins from other sources could be evaluated at a later date. 
Drs. Maas and Young agreed to prepare a proposal for consideration 
at a future meeting. 
Dr. Nightingale noted that Section I-D-3 had been dealt with earlier 
in the meeting and said that the working group felt the other prohi- 
bitions should not be changed at the present time. 
C. Request for Certification of a Bacillus stearothermophilus Plasmid 
as the Vector Component of an HV1 Bacillus subtilis Host-Vector System 
Dr. Young introduced the request (tab 906) of Dr. David B. Wilson of 
Cornell University for certification of a Bacillus stearothermophilus 
derived plasmid, pAB124, as the vector- component of an HV1 Bacillus 
subtilis host- vector system. He said Bacillus stearothermophilus is 
a non-pathogen ic thermophile found in soil near hot springs, on 
compost, etc. He said Dr. Wilson argues that the plasmid pAB124 can 
be transformed into Bacillus subtilis , and it should be considered an 
endogenous plasmid. Dr. Young recommended approval. 
Dr. Gartland noted that this plasmid could be used with the only HV1 
certified Bacillus subtilis strain, RUB331. He noted that the 
proposal had not been published in the Federal Register . The Con- 
mi ttee agreed that this proposal should be published in the Federal 
Register and discussed at the September 1980 meeting. 
XVIII. PROPOSALS TO AMEND SECTION I-D-6 OF TOE GUIDELINES 
Dr. Walters introduced a series of proposals (tab 877, 881/17/A, 881/17/B, 
881/18/A, 881/18/B, 881/18/C) frcm Dr. Irving Johnson of Eli Lilly and 
Company, to amend the Guidelines. He noted Dr. Johnson, in 881/17/A, 
proposed to amend Section I-D-6 of the Guidelines by deleting the 
sentence : 
"We differentiate between small- and large-scale experiments with 
organisms containing recombinant DNAs because the probability of 
escape from containment barriers normally increases with increasing 
scale." 
Dr. Walters recommended approval of the proposal. He said the generaliza- 
tion about the probability of escape is not accurate, as for example, if 
small-scale work were done in open containers and large-scale work were 
done in a closed system. Mr. Thornton concurred noting that the language 
is a prefatory statement and its deletion would not change the containment 
standards of the Guidelines. Drs. McKinney and Campbell said that any 
single escape may result in more organisms being released, but the pro- 
bability of a single breach occurring need not increase with increasing 
[ 127 ] 
