Recombinant DMA Advisory Committee - 5/30-31/91 
geographically more distant from the NIH at a disadvantage. Thirdly, if a deadline were to 
be set the committee would oftentimes have to spend time deciding whether to enforce the 
deadline when important information comes to light after the deadline. 
Dr. Anderson said he felt that the investigators understood this problem and he called 
attention to the fact that no new information had been supplied to either committee except 
for information directly pertaining to stipulations put down by the HGTS. 
Dr. Schaechter suggested a one week cut-off for submission of data prior to a RAC meeting. 
There was general agreement on this issue. Dr. McGarrity said that he wanted to raise other 
general policy issues for the future which could be addressed and asked for comment from 
the committee. Mr. Mannix said he believed the RAC had passed a motion to schedule a 
special meeting for a discussion of these issues. Dr. Wivel said the RAC had considered such 
a meeting, possibly in the form a retreat, and asked for guidance from the committee on when 
members felt their schedules would allow for such a meeting. 
Dr. McGarrity suggested that 3-4 members be asked to begin to formulate a long-range plan 
for the committee, looking at perhaps a 3-5 year period for strategic planning purposes. Dr. 
Schaechter said he felt it was important to have NIH involvement in this process as well. Dr. 
Wivel noted that the Director of NIH had an advisory committee which meets on an as- 
needed basis and he suggested that this may be a legitimate issue for that committee to 
discuss and formulate a series of recommendations that the RAC could then take up as action 
items. 
Dr. Anderson said he felt the purpose of his proposed amendment had been well served by 
the discussion. He apologized to Dr. Walters for not having informed him of his proposal in 
person. He noted that the proposed amendment had been written before the last 
subcommittee meeting and he underlined his regrets for not having informed Dr. Walters of 
his intentions at that time. 
Dr. McGarrity said he felt the spirit of the proposal was not meant to be any kind of criticism, 
but that it document meant to stimulate thinldng on the part of the committee as to its role 
and the role of the subcommittee for the future, and he thanked Dr. Anderson for bringing 
these issues to light. 
There being no further discussion, at this point Dr. McGarrity adjourned the committee and 
asked them to reconvene at 9:00 a.m., the next morning. 
9:00 a.m., May 31, 1991: 
Dr. McGarrity called the committee to order at 9:00 a.m. He presented a certificate of 
service to Mr. Brewer, who had not been attendance on May 30, and thanked him for his 
service on the conunittee. 
Recombinant DNA Research, Volume 14 
[637] 
