6 
for this kind of research than the two specially laboratory 
developed varieties here. Moreover, the EIS specifically 
discusses why these particular microbes are the preferred 
experimental mediums, as opposed to all known alternatives 
(EIS pp. 59, 73, 79). The only real alternative is no 
research, which is also discussed in the EIS (EIS pp. 66-67). 
No research is in fact what Mack is seeking by his demand 
for a separate EIS to discuss the undi scussabl e . The effect 
of escape of viable new microbes, demanded in Mack's motion 
for stay, page 5, was discussed in the programmatic EIS, supra . 
It is unlikely, yet possible, and the result is unknowable. 
No separate restatement will change that or provide any 
additional information. Neither will halting this experiment 
stop such work, as the EIS notes in its no-action sections, 
supra . Others will perform these experiments, both here and 
abroad. Nature performs DNA recombinations all the time and 
to an unknown extent (EIS pp. 11-12). Mack cannot hope to 
stop DNA recombination. All he can do is delay the American 
program. It can therefore be seen that Mack has little or 
no case to make on the merits. 
The district court found both factually, and as 
a conclusion of"law, that Mack had failed the tests of 
Virginia Petroleum Jobbers Assoc, v. FPC , 104 U.S.App.D.C. 
106, 259 F.2d 921 (1958), not showing irreparable injury, 
likelihood of success on the merits, or that injunction 
[Appendix C 28] 
