20 
Dr. Alexander's second point referring to the sensitivity of counting 
methods could be explicitly included under item 12(e) "monitoring 
procedures." Dr. Alexander's third point could be more explicitly covered 
in item 12. Dr. Alexander's fourth point could be covered under an expanded 
item 11. Information on soils could be requested under iten 12. 
Dr. Gottesman asked if Dr. Alexander's request for a citation of published 
information would be necessary in view of the capability of obtaining such 
information through computer searches . Dr. Alexander thought RAC should 
have such information; he noted that many of these references are dispersed 
throughout the literature and might not be retrieved through conventional 
information retrieval processes. Dr. Tolin thought a list of citations 
would not be very useful, but that the submission guidelines could specifi- 
cally ask for relevant documentation . 
Dr. Gottesman noted that the document (tab 1135) would not be made part of 
the Guidelines and thus could evolve with time. She moved that RAC endorse 
use of the document sis advice from the Plant Working Group to those indi- 
viduals or groups submitting proposals. Hie motion included the notion 
that the Plant Working Group will incorporate the changes suggested during 
the RAC discussion. 
Dr. McKinney seconded the motion. The motion was carried by a vote of 
seventeen in favor, none opposed, and no abstentions. 
VII. PROPOSED ADDITION OF SECTION III-A-4 TO THE GUIDELINES 
Dr. Walters introduced the proposal (tabs 1133/lV, 1139, 1141) to add a new 
Section III-A-4 to the NIH Guidelines. At its April 11, 1983, meeting, the 
RAC endorsed a proposal to form a working group to carment and report to 
RAC on the "Report on the Social and Ethical Issues of Genetic Engineering 
with Human Beings" issued by the President's Cornu ss ion for the Study of 
Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The 
President's Ccnmission began its study in September 1980 in response to a 
request of the President's Science Advisor. Concern had been expressed 
earlier that year by the Nation's three major religious associations that 
ro governmental body was "exercising adequate cversight or control, nor 
addressing the fundamental ethical questions in a major way." The Ccnmis- 
sion' s report, issued in November 1982, concluded that continuing cversight 
of the field is desirable and suggested that one possible mechanism could 
be revising the responsibilities of the RAC. 
The RAC Working Group for Development of Response to President's Ccnmission' s 
Report on Ethical and Social Issues met at NIH on June 24, 1983, and prepared 
a proposal for consideration by the full RAC on September 19, 1983. 
The working group's primary recommendations were: 
[265] 
