NINETY-FIFTH CONGRESS 
PAUL O. ROGERS, FLA., CHAIRMAN 
DAVID E. SATTERFIELD III, VA. 
RICHARDSON PREYER, N.C. 
JAMES H. SCHEUER, N.Y. 
HENRY A. WAXMAN, CALIF. 
JAMES J. FLORIO, N.J. 
ANDREW MAGUIRE. N.J. 
EDWARD J. MARKEY, MASS. 
RICHARD L. OTTINGER, N.Y. 
DOUG WALGREN, PA. 
HARLEY O. STAGGERS. W. VA 
(ex officio) 
TIM LEE CARTER. KY. 
JAMES T. BROYHILL, N.C. 
EDWARD R. MADIGAN, ILL. 
JOE SKUBITZ, KANS. 
SAMUEL L. DEVINE, OHIO 
(ex officio) 
ROOM 2415 
RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING 
PHONE (202) 225-4952 
Congress of tfje ®mteb gbtate* 
J&qu ge of Bepresentattoes 
Subcommittee on ftealtb anb tbe Cnbironment 
of tbe 
Committee on interstate anb Jforeign Commerce 
PlatcrtjinBton, JO.C. 20515 
September 13, 1978 
Dr. Donald Fredrickson 
Director, National Institutes 
of Health 
Room 124, Building 1 
National Institutes of Health 
Bethesda, Maryland 20014 
Dear Don : 
I have finally had a chance to read and digest the 
proposed revised Guidelines for recombinant DNA research 
and the accompanying documents. My immediate reaction 
to them is that, overall , they represent a substantial 
improvement over the present Guidelines. You, Dr. Perpich, 
and the others on your staff are to be commended for a 
highly competent and thorough piece of work, particularly 
in view of the monumental dimensions of the task at hand. 
Viewing the Guidelines as a set of rules which NIH 
has administered as regulations, it was necessary that 
the revisions be much more thorough in scope, more 
precise in its definitions of terms and give the Director 
much more discretion in order to give the Guidelines 
proper administrative flexibility. To these ends the 
Revised Guidelines have largely succeeded. I am left 
with the feeling that NIH is undergoing a continuous 
learning experience in how to write and administer a 
responsive and realistic set of guidelines - or regulations - 
which provide both adequate assurances to the public that 
the conduct of recombinant DNA research does not pose a 
significant risk and allow research to proceed relatively 
unhindered . 
However, in spite of the overall merit of the revisions, 
there still remain - or were created by the revisions - a 
number of weaknesses and ambiguities. I hope that my 
discussion of these points in the following pages will aid 
NIH's learning process. 
[A-128] 
