14 
1 decision is strong or NIH wishes to avoid public scrutiny. 
2 The guidelines enable the agency to make decisions in 
3 secret. 
4 As an example of how public participation 
5 mechanisms should be constructed, EDF proposes the fol- 
6 lowing for decisions concerning exceptions from prohibited 
7 experiments. Within ten days of receipt of an application 
8 for exception from a class of prohibited experiments, NIH 
9 should publish in the Federal Reg ister notice of the 
10 receipt, details of where the material submitted in support 
11 of the application can be obtained by the public, and the 
12 closing date of the public comment period. At minimum, the 
13 comment period should be 45 calendar days. Final notice of 
14 agency action should also be published in the Federal 
15 Register , and all materials submitted to NIH should be 
15 available to the public. 
17 The third area of our concern is the membership 
18 of the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee, RAC. RAC deci- 
19 sions involve weighing both social and scientific risks 
20 and benefits. This is especially true for allowing excep- 
21 tions from classes of prohibited experiments. Such decisions 
22 are clearly not purely scientific ones. As such, RAC must 
23 include nonscientist members who adequately represent the 
24 interests of the general public. The guidelines do not 
25 provide for this. 
[106] 
