Revision of the Guidelines Subcommittee - 06/22/87 
06/22/87 
Dr. McGarrity spoke for the animal group. He said four point* were discussed. The Tint, a minor point, involved the 
substitution of 'disposed of* for ‘destroyed* , in Appendix Ql-C, when dealing with sacrificed or dead organisms that contain 
recombinant DNA. Text to read: 
'-.disposed of to avoid its use as food for human beings or for domestic animals, unless specifically authorized by an 
appropriate federal agency*. 
Dr. McGarrity turned to transgenic animals. He suggested the new sentence, *Transgenic vertebrate animals generated by 
DNA insertion in the absence of eukaryotic viral vectors,* be placed under Section III-C of the Guidelines. A long discussion 
between Drs. Korwek, Fedoroff, S. Hughes, and Wagner ensued regarding a definition of 'transgenic*. The result of which 
was to leave it as defined in the document at the bottom of page 2. 
The discussion then turned to BL2-N solid and liquid wastes. Dr. McGanity cited the proposed Appendices Q-D-B-l and Q- 
n-B-2-g; 
'reasonable precautions should be taken to prevent horizontal transmissions.' He suggested striking the proposed 
Appendices Q-D-B-l-b and Q-II-B-2-g and replacing them with the following paragraph on horizontal transmission: 
'Appropriate steps should be taken to prevent horizontal transmission or exposure of laboratory personnel If the 
agent used as a vector is known to be transmitted by a particular route, such as an arthropod, special attention 
should be given to preventing spread by that route. In the absence of specific knowledge of a particular route of 
transmission, all potential means of horizontal transmission, including arthropods, contaminated bedding, animal 
waste, et cetera, should be prevented.* 
The discussion turned to BL3-N and the feeling that some proposed measures were too specific, such as the proposed 
Appendix Q-I-C on the disposal of animals. The recommendations should be more gcneraL Dr. Richardson asked if these 
measures will apply to traditional labs as well as clinical labs. He expressed cooccrn about across-the-board applications. 
These measures differed significantly from standards in the Laboratory Safety ManuaL Dr. Wagner said that the Department 
of Agriculture had apparently used their own internal guidelines. Dr. Richardson volunteered to rewrite BL3-N. 
Finally, the working group discussed BL4, with similar ooodusioas to the plant group. 
A point-by-point discussion of the proposed document followed. 
Dr. Fedoroff suggested, in p.2, to change 'normal* to 'moderate*. A discussion ensued among Dn Miller , & Hughes, 
Fedoroff, and Gartland regarding the sizes of animals to be included in the Appendices. It was decided to continue with the 
plant discussion and resolve animal considerations later. 
Dr. Fedoroff continued with plants. She suggested the deletion of the last sentence in the proposed Section III-B-5 because, 
she argued, some experiments do not require the level of stringency currently required. In addition, she proposed replacing 
the proposed Section UI-B-5-a with: 
'Plant* containing sequences from plant pathogens are exempt if the investigator can demonstrate that the 
sequences do not lead to transmissible infection either directly or indirectly as a result of pathogen genomic 
complementation in plants. * 
Dr. Miller, being concerned about the role of insects in the horizontal transmission of pathogens, volunteered to add wording 
to the proposed Section III-B-5-b as (v). He would also add changes to and rewrite the proposed Section III-B-5-c He felt 
the proposed Section III-C needed to be reworded as welL 
Recombinant DNA Research, Volume 13 
