8 
The effect of this would be to end consideration by the RAC on such 
requests, of details of laboratory procedures, fermentor design, etc. The 
RAC would continue to review the biology of the systems and to set an 
appropriate physical containment level, but would not review whether 
a given facility meets that level. This proposal will be published in the 
Federal Register at least 30 days prior to the September RAC meeting, along 
with details on how NIH proposes to implement it. When the material is sent 
to the Federal Register in August, copies will be sent to each Subcommittee 
member. Comments in response to the Federal Register notice will be welcome 
and will be considered by the RAC and the NIH. During the discussion of 
this issue at the RAC meeting, it was pointed out that final adoption of 
this change could leave a void in the review of such industry proposals. 
It was requested that this Interagency Subcommittee and its federal 
regulatory agency members be apprised of these possible changes. Some RAC 
members who felt strongly that regulatory agencies should step into this 
void proposed various motions to that effect. Other RAC members, however, 
felt that recombinant DNA should not, in their view, be a high priority of 
OSHA, compared with other known hazards, and all such motions concerning 
RAC advice to regulatory agencies were defeated. 
Following Dr. Talbot's summation, Mr. Pauker said that the RAC had 
stressed the importance of medical surveillance in any regulatory process. 
Drs. Lewis and Talbot, however, noted that a motion to this effect had 
specifically been voted down at the RAC meeting. 
[ 362 ] 
