lOOL OF NATURAL SCIENCE 
( 413 ) 549-4600 
January 18, 1982 
Director, Office of Recombinant DNA Activities 
Building 31, 4A52 
National Institutes of Health 
Bethesda, Maryland 20205 
Dear Director; 
I favor strongly the retention IBC oversight and current 
NIH compliance requirements as advocated by Dr. Gottesman (Fed. 
Reg. 46(234); pp. 59734 et seq.). These oversight and compliance 
requirements seem necessary to me for public safety, for public 
confidence in rDNA research, and for the recognition by scientists 
of the responsibilities they have to the rest of society. 
The National Institutes of Health and other federal agencies 
dispensing grants of public monies must continue to be responsible 
to and responsive to society. The proposed change to "admonish- 
ments” is an abandonment of those responsibilities. 
Thanks to the foresight of a few scientists, rDNA research was 
brought before society for conscious evaluation and regulation 
before any ill effects could harm individuals or damage the repu- 
tation of rDNA research with society. For the first time I know 
of, the implications, both good and bad, of a new technology have 
gotten wide debate before injury to society. Without the continua- 
tion of compliance requirements enforceable by the granting agencies, 
public confidence in the ability of our government to rule equitably 
v/ill continue to decline. 
Keep mandatory oversight, compliance, and enforcement in the 
guidelines and you will continue to earn the respect of the public 
you serve. 
Professor of Biology, 
Natural Science, 
LM/nao 
