11 
Dr. Miller disagreed with Dr. Gottesman 's proposed language. He felt directing 
special concern towards recombinant DfSA was irrational, and he did not think the 
working group document should give credence to '■'hat he considered irrational 
concerns. Dr. Pirone felt including the preposed language in the working group 
document would suggest the working group perceives special concerns. Dr. Gottesman 
said the public perceives recombinant DNA as raising special concerns; vhether 
the working group perceives such special concerns is another matter. 
Dr. Sharpies suggested the words "special attention" might be substituted in 
Dr. Gottesman ’s proposed language for the words "special concerns. Dr. Lacy 
felt the working group should not include language in the preamble indicating 
that special concerns might exist. 
Dr. Levin said the considerations in the points to consider document appear to 
apply to all introductions of novel organisms even if the introduced organism 
is not constructed by recombinant DNA techniques. Dr. Gottesman said she 
assumes the data requirements developed by the working group could be pertinent 
in reviewing any introduction of a novel microorganism. 
Dr. Miller suggested the phrase "genetically modified" be substituted for the 
words "recombinant DNA" in Dr. Colwell's preposed language. Dr. Gottesman 
disagreed; although many of these tests would be applied to organisms developed 
by techniques other than recombinant DNA, the charge of the working grcup is 
to deal with organisms constructed using the recombinant DNA technique. 
Dr. Pimentel asked whether the phrase "to evaluate unexpected effects" should be 
substituted for the phrase "to evaluate environmental effects" in Dr. Colwell's 
preposed language. Dr. Gottesman felt the phrase should read "to evaluate the 
potential environmental effects of testing the modified organism." She noted 
that the review would also evaluate the molecular biology of the organism in 
order to attempt to predict the behavior of the organism in the environment. 
Dr. Pimentel moved that the sentences preposed by Drs. Colwell and Gottesman 
be inserted at the end of the first paragraph in the preamble of the working 
grcup document. Dr. Cl ewes seconded the motion. 
Dr. Arntzen proposed to amend Dr. Colwell's language to read as fbllcws: 
"The objective of this review is to approve testing protocols for testing 
of [microorganisms that have been modified using recombinant DNA techniques." 
Dr. Hirano said the responsibility of the working group is to develop procedures 
for evaluating risk to the environment, not to approve proposals for field testing. 
Drs. Clcwes ard Pirone agreed. Dr. Pirone suggested the word "evaluate" be 
substituted for the ward "approve" in Dr. Arntzen 's proposed language. 
Dr. Arntzen pointed cut that RAC would be determining if the field test could 
be performed. Dr. Pr aimer said the purpose of the points to consider document 
is to provide RAC and IBCs with the information necessary to extrapolate to 
the effects of the proposed field test. 
[188] 
