51 
DR. FREDRICKSON: Yes, you have all the comments in the Yellow Book. 
MR. HUTT: That contains all the comments? Oh, I am sorry, I apologize. 
DR. FREDRICKSON: All of them are there. 
I think then I would like to move on — thank you, Dr. Wright — to the 
last person who asked to be a public witness, and Dr. David Gelfand only 
asked for one minute. Dr. Gelfand, I will be glad to give you that time. 
Dr. Gelfand, would you identify yourself? 
DR. GELFAND: I am a research scientist at Cetus Corporation in Ber- 
keley. 
Most of what I was going to say has been covered by Dr. Singer al- 
ready. I would like to point out that my major problem with the revised 
Guidelines was the absence of the use and reference to synthetic DNA. Dr. 
Berg's redefinition covers synthetic DNA, I think, most adequately, es- 
pecially the last paragraph on page 84, which would, by inclusion of that 
paragraph, remove a technical procedure, dadT tailing for cloning E. coli 
DNA and E^ coli , from bringing it back into the novel category and under 
the Guidelines, and I think that is very essential. 
DR. FREDRICKSON: Thank you, Dr. Gelfand. 
Let us move now to the question of physical containment, and for that 
I would like to ask Dr. Emmett Barkley of the National Cancer Institute 
to open the discussion. 
DR. BARKLEY: Thank you, Dr. Fredrickson. 
The physical containment section does not represent a major shift 
or change in what was previously published in the 1976 Guidelines. It 
does reflect two changes, however, that I think are important. One deals 
with the organization of the material within the Guidelines, and the second 
change reflects a conscious effort to strive for more harmonization in 
physical containment practices among those countries who are in the pro- 
cess of developing guidelines for recombinant DNA work. 
I have a few slides that I would like to 'address, and I apologize 
to those at the front of the table. 
The organization of the physical containment section has been broken 
down into three broad categories, one of laboratory practices, one of con- 
tainment equipment, and one of special laboratory design. This was done 
specifically to identify the importance of these three areas. The earlier 
Guidelines, the 1976 Guidelines, provided narrative descriptions of labora- 
tories, and these were not often clear as to intent of specific requirements 
for laboratory design. The importance of laboratory practices 
[ 255 ] 
