of P. syrinqae that have been shown to be pathogenic may warrant the 
designation of pv. syrinqae or other pathovar epithet. 
"Page 23. l.l. F\ syrinqae and P^ syrinqae pathovars are common 
plant epiphytes. None of these taxa has ever been shown.... and do 
not grow. . . 
"Paragraph two: L. 1. Certain strains or isolates of a pathovar 
of syrinqae ( pv. syrinqae ) have been... 
"Page 24. Last paragraph: In summary, there are both non-pathogenic 
and pathogenic strains of P^ syrinqae . Some strains of P. s_^ pv. 
syrinqae have... (This is analogous, for example, to the sTtuation of 
the well-known Escherichia col i , which consists of both pathogenic and 
non-pathogenic strains. However, pathogenic strains of this bacterium 
are not given a latinized infrasubspecific epithet). 
"Page 25. L. 3. P. syrinqae colonizes the leaf surfaces of different 
plants; some of tFese strains seem to be specific for certain host 
plants. 
"Page 33. Paragraph one. It should not be implied that all naturally- 
occurring syrinqae have arisen due to deletion mutations. There is no 
evidence for tnis that I know of; i.e. it is likely that many, if not 
most, INA- P. syrinqae never were INA+ (e.g. see Gross, reference above)." 
In his May 17 letter, Dr. Suslow makes a point very similar to Dr. Vidaver's 
first point, as follows: 
"My only specific comment on the EA is that I disagree strongly with 
the use of Pseudomonas syrinqae pv syrinqae for epiphytic bacteria 
of this species which have no known pathogenicity to standard host plants. 
Until a host is found these strains could be referred to as P. syrinqae 
thus avoiding the confusion as to their pathogenic associations'!" 
Ill -A-3-a- ( 2 ) . My Response to Comments in Section III-A-3-a-(l) 
I recommend that you accept the first proposed change given above in Section 
III -A-3-a- ( 1 ) of this memorandum, i.e., a proposed change on page 22 In the 
January 21, 1985, EA-FONSI, In the Section entitled "Nomenclature and Taxonomy." 
Although the January 21, 1985, EA-FONSI states that "the original and altered 
bacteria to be used in the experiment have been shown not to be pathogenic..." 
(page 2 of EA-FONSI), the change in text proposed by Dr. Vidaver makes even 
more clear the non-pathogenicity of the strains being worked with. 
I recommend that you accept the second through fifth proposed changes given 
above in Section III -A-3-a- ( 1 ) of this memorandum, with the caveat that the 
fifth proposed change headed "Page 25, L. 3." Is in fact a change proposed 
for the third line from the bottom on page 25 of the EA-FONSI, rather than 
the third line from the top. (I discussed this with Dr. Vidaver on the 
telephone and she agrees.) These proposed changes follow from the first 
proposed change given above in Section III -A-3-a- ( 1 ) , and continue to clarify 
9 
[ 173 ] 
