He would like to see it extended even further. Rather than 
s pecif ical ly citing only exemption III-D-2, he would like all 
organisms which are already exempt from the NIH Guidelines for 
laboratory work to also be exempt for deliberate release to the 
environment. This would then include all recombinations made 
between organisms that freely exchange genetic material in nature 
and thus where nothing new is likely to arise from the 
recombinant DNA technique. 
Dr. Gottesman said that Dr. Sharpies had pointed out that 
Appendix L currently provides for review by the RAC Plant Working 
Group in lieu of the full RAC. She said that in writing the new 
Appendices M, N, and 0, “you could imagine putting into those 
appendices some mechanisms whereby a proposed experiment would 
revert to the laboratory experimentation level, seme that would 
require working group review and some that would continue to come 
before the entire RAC." She felt that an important part of 
constructing the new appendices would be to decide what the 
appropriate mechanism should be for dealing with any particular 
class of "deliberate release" experiment. 
Dr. Gottesnan then moved that the RAC accept the proposed 
revision of the NIH Guidelines as contained in tab 1286/11. Dr. 
lpstein seconded the motion. 
Dr. Korwek noted Dr. Sharpies' objections to the revision were on 
the basis that Appendices M, N, and 0 were not in place. 
However, he replied that the status quo was not being changed in 
that even were the proposed reference to these appendices added 
to the NIH Guidelines, the approval process for any deliberate 
release experiment would not change until the actual text of the 
appendices was incorporated into the NIH Guidelines. 
Dr. Davis then made a motion to remove from tab 1286/11 the 
following sentence: "The term 'deliberate release' is defined as 
a planned introduction of recombinant DNA-containing micro- 
organisms, plants or animals into the environment. - He said this 
sentence did not add anything to the understanding of what is 
meant by "deliberate release." 
Dr. Walters seconded the motion so that discussion of this motion 
could take place. Dr. Johnson said he felt the wording should be 
looked at in an historical context in that at the last meeting 
the RAC asked the Working Group on Definitions to look again at 
this wording. The working group had come to agreement that the 
RAC is concerned with planned experiments. Therefore, the words 
“planned introduction" were appropriate. Further, he added that 
the votes in the working group on this issue were virtually 
unanimous resulting in this wording being a consensus of the 
working group. 
Mr. Mitchell then put Dr. Davis' motion to a vote. The motion 
Recombinant DNA Research, Volume 1 1 
[173] 
