228 
DR. 
AHMED: 
Where are you from? 
MR. 
BEATY : 
Corvallis, Oregon. 
MS. 
PFUND : 
Are your meetings open to the 
public? 
MR. 
meet ings 
BEATY: 
, but no 
Yes, they are. I mean, they 
public members have attended. 
are certainly not closed 
DR. FREDRICKSON: Dr. DeRoos, did you have your hand up? 
DR. DE ROOS: Yes, I was getting back to the Miles Laboratory thing, 
and just one point of clarification here. I have no knowledge of it, and 
the first thing I would say is I would hope it was approved by a biohazards 
committee. If it is not, that is the perspective I am coming from. The 
question is that it is not clear to me whether it is or it isn't at this 
point, and I don't think we have sufficient information to know that. 
It could be, if the university where it is going on, has a policy that 
all recombinant DNA research needs to be approved by that institution's bio- 
hazards committee. On the other hand, if that institution has a policy that 
says that just NIH-funded research needs to be approved by the biohazards 
committee, it might not be. I just raise that because it is not clear to me 
that it is not. 
DR. FREDRICKSON: I think we are debating a case in the abstract, be- 
cause we don't know enough about it. 
DR. DE ROOS: That is the point I was making. 
DR. FREDRICKSON: Let me state this, that we have some proposed 
thoughts that we want to see incorporated into the new revisions without 
reference to the precise language. Those thoughts would run something like 
this — that included in Section IV would be wording suitable to achieve these 
two objectives: 
One is that as a condition for NIH funding for recombinant DNA research, 
grantee institutions should ensure that recombinant DNA research conducted 
at the institution shall comply with the Guidelines irrespective of the 
source of funding. That is not now in the implementation section. 
The second would be that all NIH-funded grants or contracts involving 
recombinant DNA techniques must be performed in compliance with the Guide- 
lines, and that violations of the terms of this agreement may result in 
suspension, limitation, or termination of such grants or contracts — again a 
form of statement which is not present in any way in the implementation 
section now. I don't want to get into debate about that, but since you 
asked the question, that is under consideration for inclusion in the revi- 
sion language. 
[ 432 ] 
