36 
MINUTES OF MEETING - June 5-6 
have procedures for instituting regulatory processes, and RAC plays no 
role in these processes. Dr. Baltimore said the NIH Guidelines provide 
a flexible framework for evaluating potential hazard associated with 
recombinant ENA technology; he feared Federal regulations would prove 
to be inflexible. He said that the NIH Guidelines, are appropriate for 
the NIH and RAC, but inappropriate for regulatory agencies. Dr. Williams 
said that the first two items of the proposal conformed to the directives 
of yesterday's sense of the Committee vote. He said the additional lan- 
guage beginning "While the RAC will focus..." was inappropriate; since 
it seems to be directing the regulatory process of another agency. 
Dr. Walters concurred. Dr. Krimsky disagreed; he said it was appropriate 
for the RAC to express the sentiment that some type of ongoing surveil- 
lance should exist. Dr. Goldstein supported Dr. Krimsky' s position. He 
said the language was intended to urge the Interagency Committee to deal 
with the problem of industrial compliance. 
Dr. Bems said he agreed with Drs. Williams and Baltimore, but suggested 
in addition to deleting the text beginning with "While the RAC will 
focus..." that the last sentence of item two "Adherence to the specified 
containment conditions is the responsibility of the local IBC and 
appropriate regulatory agencies-" also be struck. Dr. Williams agreed 
with Dr. Bems; he said it was not reasonable to try to state two dis- 
similar objectives in one document, viz.: (1) clarification of the 
RAC role in voluntary compliance and (2) an attempt to catalyze action 
by other agencies. Dr. Nightingale suggested that a vote be taken sepa- 
rately on each of these issues. In order to separate the two issues. 
Dr. Gottesman moved to delete the end of the proposal beginning with 
"While the RAC will focus...." The RAC accepted Dr. Gottesman' s motion 
by a vote of fifteen in favor, three opposed. 
Dr. Bems then moved to delete the second sentence of item two "Adherence 
to ...and appropriate regulatory agencies." Dr. Goldstein opposed this 
motion. He felt it important to have oversight of physical containment. 
Dr. Campbell proposed an amendment to Dr. Bern's motion, he suggested 
that the last four words of item two " . . .and appropriate regulatory 
agencies" be deleted rather than the whole sentence. This would leave 
the sentence as "Adherence to the specified containment conditions is 
the responsibility of the local IBC." Dr. Bems accepted this amendment. 
Dr. Goldstein said he preferred to see some surveillance beyond the 
local IBC. Dr. Baltimore said he supported Dr. Campbell's amendment. 
The RAC then accepted Dr. Campbell's motion to delete the last four 
words of item two by a vote of thirteen in favor, three opposed, and one 
abstention. 
The question was then called on a motion to approve paragraph one (with 
the editorial modification) and paragraph two as modified above. The 
RAC accepted the motion by a vote of seventeen in favor, none opposed, 
and one abstention. 
[ 136 ] 
