- 2 - 
column 2). Newly mandated activities, such as approving the initiation of 
proposed rDNA experiments, considering and acting upon requests for approval 
of single-step reductions in containment levels for experiments with purified 
DNA and characterized clones, and participating in the development of emergency 
plans for accidental spills and personnel contamination, represent significant 
scientific and social responsibilities. To fulfill these larger functions 
effectively, biosafety committees must be procedurally sound and broadly 
representative . 
While the revised guidelines present a more explicit outline for IBC 
composition than did the original guidelines, the wording is still general 
enough to permit great variation in the structure, and hence in the function, 
of these committees. The present composition of IBCs — the representation 
of groups such as rDNA scientists, scholars in other fields, health and 
safety personnel, workers, and members of the public, remains largely 
unknown. Yet such information is essential in assessing the current operation 
of IBCs and in improving their future function. 
II . Findings from Preliminary Sample of Thirty IBCs 
Data 
Data for a preliminary analysis of the membership composition of 
thirty of the approximately 150 IBCs throughout the country were obtained 
from the Office of rDNA Activities (ORDA) by Michael Maniates . and Pamela Lippe 
of Friends of the Earth, and Phillip Bereano, Professor in the Social 
Management of Technology Program at the University of Washington. These 
thirty IBCs were selected on the basis of available data; they are listed 
in Appendix A. They represent research institutions as well as public and 
private universities, including many of the institutions receiving the 
[ 388 ] 
