31 
Dr. Friedman said he had been uncomfortable dealing with proprietary 
information. He canes from academia where doors are unlocked and his mail 
is reed by his students. However, he new believed RAC should continue to 
evaluate proprietary data. He thought the discomfort of dealing with 
confidential information was a small price to pay for the benefits 
recombinant ENA technology could give to society. 
Dr. Clowes said he is uncomfortable with closed sessions. Closed sessions 
to some extent destroy some of RAC's credibility since they give the 
impression that RAC is doing something it doesn't want other people to 
knew about. 
Mr. Daloz felt RAC should continue to review proprietary information in closed 
session. 
Dr. Alexander pointed out that few data exist in the environmental release 
area. He thought the government was currently attempting to anticipate 
problems while possessing no good data base. 
Mr. Mitchell asked if any data on environmental issues had been generated 
by other Federal agencies. Dr. Alexander replied that some data concerning 
the environmental fate of E^ coll and some plant and animal pathogens were 
available. To date NIH has funded this type of research for some organisms 
such as Ejj_ coli , but no data base exists for most organisms in natural 
environments. US DA and EPA with one exception have not yet funded this type 
of research. Or. Fedoroff reiterated that RAC is attempting to build a data 
base by requiring investigators whose field tests are approved to monitor 
the fate of the organisms. She said that putting responsibility on other 
agencies in the absence of a data base does not solve the problem. 
Et. Walters suggested that a special working group on release into the envi- 
ronment be formed. The Plant Working Group could serve as the nucleus for 
this new working group; several additional advisors could supply other 
necessary expertise. 
Mr. Rifkin said he concluded from the discussion that the committee has not 
thought out all the procedures, protocols, and boundaries upon which it 
wants to act in dealing with deliberate release into the environment. He 
thought it was precipitous and premature, therefore, to authorize experiments 
involving release into the environment. 
Mr. Mitchell said in reviewing the ice nucleation bacteria proposed of 
Drs. Steven Lindcw and Nickolas Pancpoulos of the University of California, 
Berkeley, at the October 25, 1982, meeting in open session, the RAC had 
reviewed a 'considerable amount of information. Nonetheless, he himself had 
voted against the proposal. While the RAC recommended approval by a narrow 
margin of seven in favor, five opposed, and two abstentions, the NIH with- 
held approval in a Federal Register notice dated January 10, 1983 (48 FR 
1157). A revised proposal was received by the NIH and reviewed by the RAC 
at the April 11, 1983, meeting in open session. At that time, RAC 
[276] 
