SEPTEMBER 6-7 - MINUTES OF MEETING 
22 
with these problems are already available, i.e., OSHA, and these mechanisms 
do not reside in the RAC. He stated that the AFL-CIO is very concerned 
about possible misuse of the RAC and delineated the reasons why the 
AFL-CIO is conceded about recombinant DNA technology. He conceded that 
one could argue that it is a limited technology, that it is well contained, 
and that there is no need for alarm. However, Dr. Chamot would answer 
that the AFL-CIO is a student of history; in other areas the potential 
dangers of technology have not been perceived, and many peqple have 
been injured by a lack of concern on the part of their employers. He 
stated that recombinant DNA technology is no longer an intellectual 
curiosity. It is now becoming commercially viable. He emphasized that 
at the present level of knowledge of this vast new scientific area, all 
of the problems that may arise cannot be predicted. There are many 
uncertainties; the technology is moving in a direction where the numbers 
of people using it are going to increase, and precautions must be taken. 
He reiterated his statement that there presently exist agencies which 
have the authority and the obligation to act. 
Dr. Parkinson then turned to document 725 (the NIH Intramural Health 
Surveillance Program) and made several comments on it. Document 725 
requires the Principal Investigator (PI) to notify the Occupational 
Medical Services of an injury to a laboratory worker. Dr. Parkinson 
expressed concern that a worker may be inhibited from notifying his PI 
of an injury. He feels there should be a direct line to the medical service 
toe worker must not be inhibited from exercising his right to see the 
medical service. Dr. Parkinson stated that, in addition, if someone 
gets contaminated this should trigger a mechanism to investigate the 
accident. He then brought up the question of record keeping. He stated 
that OSHA requires the maintaining of records for a certain period of 
time and he believes that in some cases the records must be sent to 
NIOSH. Dr. Parkinson asked Dr. Hatch to comment on the requirements of 
NIOSH. Dr. Hatch answered that all American workers are protected under 
the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970; it is true, however, 
that implementation is fragmentary. NIOSH makes recommendations to 
OSHA. Dr. Logan added that OSHA is actively considering protection of 
workers in this field of recombinant DNA technology. He added that OSHA 
has a mandate to protect the worker and is concerned about the increasing 
use of recombinant DNA technology and commercial large scale applications 
of this technology. OSHA standards, however, are based on recognized 
hazards to the worker and all regulations to date have been based on 
recognized hazard. Dr. Logan further stated that this is one of the 
most fundamental problems in considering regulation of recombinant DNA 
technology; i.e., a recognized hazard is not well established or defined. 
He assumes that OSHA will eventually come out with recommendations and 
will want RAC involvement. To date, however, OSHA has not yet taken a 
formal position on this issue. 
[ 171 ] 
