Page 4 of Attachment J 
4 
Such judgments can more appropriately be carried out by them, especially 
when they are related to a regulatory mission. 
From these considerations, I believe that the RAC should consider at 
least two options as it deliberates upon its procedures for handling 
industrial or private requests: 
01 to continue as it is until more experience dictates some new 
mode. Here keep in mind that an Industrial Practices Subcommittee 
of the IAC is actively studying the problem and will report to the 
IAC in the fall. 
(2) to restrict its review and decisions to questions concerning 
biology and related issues of laboratory containment*, and when 
physical containment for large-scale use is the issue, to judge 
only whether the specified P-LS level is appropriate (referring 
to the model designations in the April 11, 1980, Federal Register ). 
The regulatory agencies will be fully apprised of such actions. 
They can make on-site evaluations if they deem them to be appropriate 
to their regulatory mandate. 
With regard to the second option, I would note here that past actions of 
the RAC have included the insertion of a provision for visits by an NIH-designated* 
person to industrial facilities that have been the subject of a RAC decision. 
If such visits are for purposes of correlating scientific information relevant 
to the duties of the RAC, they would seem to me to be still appropriate. Inspec- 
tions for regulatory purposes shall be carried out by 0SHA/NIOSH or other 
regulatory agencies having relevant authority, 
[ 485 ] 
