17 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
the public. EDF's reading of applicable statutes, 
5 U.S.C. 552 and 18 U.S.C. 1905 indicates that such 
information submitted to IBC's or to NIH is not exempt 
from provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. 
5 U.S.C. 552 gives NIH the discretion to withhold trade 
secrets from the public; 18 U.S.C. 1905 provides a 
criminal penalty for violation of an explicit prohibition 
against revealing trade secrets or confidential statis- 
tical information, but no such explicit prohibition 
exists in any of the regulations or statutes applicable 
here. Moreover, the courts have held that the research 
designs and protocols of noncommercial scientists are not 
trade secrets, and therefore must be revealed to the public 
under the Freedom of Information Act. 
This decision, Washington Research Project v. 
DHEW , applies to all recombinant DNA activities, regardless 
of whether the investigator plans to seek a patent on that 
research . 
In addition, none of the information EOF main- 
tains should be available to the public meets the test for 
confidential commercial information contained in the 
National Parks and Conservation Association v. Morton. 
EDF maintains that no changes in ongoing recom- 
binant DNA experiments subject to the guidelines should be 
allowed without NIH approval. The error rate of institutional 
[109] 
