DNA/15 
The information in IBC meetings or project registrations of com- 
mercial' scientists subject to the DNA guidelines should also be re- 
vealed to the public by NIH. 5 U.S.C. 552 allows NIH to 
discl^e trade secrets. Moreover, EDF contends that the information 
EDF suggests should be released to the public, does not meet statutory 
or case law definitions of trade secrets or confidential commercial 
information. (5 U.S.C. §552 (b)(4)); National Parks and Conservation 
Association v. Morton (498 F-2.d 765 (1974)). Only protocols of ex- 
periments will be revealed to the public. Both the results and ob- 
jectives of experiments will not be revealed. There is, therefore, 
no strong likelihood of substantial competitive harm resulting from 
release of this information. 18 U.S.C. §1905 provides a criminal 
penalty for violation of such an explicit prohibition against revealing 
trade secrets or confidential statistical information. However, no 
such prohibition here for information from commercial or non- commercial 
scientists exists. The courts have held that the research designs and 
protocols of non-commercial scientists are not trade secrets and, 
therefore, must be revealed to the public under the Freedom of In- 
formation Act. (Washington Research Project v. Department of Health, 
Education and Welfare, et. a]L . , 504 F. 2d 238 (1974). This decision 
applies to all recombinant DNA activities whether or not the investi- 
gator plans to seek a patent on his research. 
Because of the public policy advantages of releasing the infor- 
mation to the public and the clear legal authority of NIH to do so, 
EDF suggests that NIH establish a policy of making such information 
public. Any individual who feels wronged by such a policy has access 
to the courts for review of particular claims. The burden of proof 
should be placed by NIH on those individuals who wish to withhold 
[A-350] 
