- 4 - 
without the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement, which 
was the primary basis upon which the Appellant sought to have the 
experiments enjoined in the first place. Appellees later filed an EIS, 
but one which dealt with the guidelines for Recombinant DNA Research, 
not one which dealt with the subject experiments, which are designed 
2 
to attempt to create a bio-hazard. The only reference in the EIS to these 
experiments is at page 101 of Volume 1, as follows: 
"Virologists of the National Institute of Allergy and 
Infectious Diseases are preparing to conduct experiments 
at the Frederick Cancer Research Center, Frederick, 
Maryland, which should provide data to help determine 
if recombinant DNA research could result in real hazards. " 
5. Appellant in this action seeks very limited relief. He does 
not seek to enjoin general DNA research. Nor does he claim that Risk 
Assessment Studies — indeed attempts even to create bio-hazards — should 
not take place. What he claims is that before such risky experiments 
take place in his backyard, an EIS as to the experiments should be 
prepared, so all persons will have an opportunity to fully express 
themselves on the issue, and the real hazards to the health and 
welfare of Appellant and his community can be ascertained. Appellees 
Biohazard: A contraction of the words "biological hazard"; infectious 
agents presenting a risk or potential risk to the well-being of man, 
or other animals, either directly through infection or indirectly 
through disruption of the environment. National Institutes of Health 
Environmental Impact Statement Part Two, October 1977, Appendix A-l 
[Appendix C — 18] 
