35 
Policy Act (NEPA) and any additional safeguards to be stipulated by EPA. 
Others urged that full Environmental Impact Statements be filed on most 
exceptions to the prohibitions. As I noted in my decision accompanying 
the PRG on July 28, 1978, all waiver decisions will include a careful 
consideration of the potential environmental impact. Same decisions 
may be accompanied by a formal assessment or statement - a determination, 
however, that can only be made on a case-by-case basis.'" 
Mr. Mitchell said he agreed with Dr. Krause's statement. Dr. Gottesman 
thought the proposal to amend the title of Section III "Containment Require- 
ments for Covered Experiments" to "Guidelines for Covered Experiments" was 
appropriate. She could not, however, support the proposed amendments of 
Section III-A. She agreed with Dr. Krause's assessment that RAC should 
not put into the Guidelines what does or does not require an environmental 
impact statement. Dr. McKinney concurred. 
Dr. McKinney moved that RAC accept the proposal to amend the title of 
Section III by deleting the word "containment" so that the title would read 
"Guidelines for Covered Experiments," and that RAC reject the proposed 
amendments to Section III-A. Dr. Gottesiman seconded the motion. 
Mr. Rifkin said the National Environmental Policy Act was designed so that 
government agencies would conform with environmental standards specified by 
that act. The act states that \henever an agency considers authorizing any 
significant release into the environment of a substance which could have an 
impact on the environment, the agency must provide an environmental assessment 
and/or impact study. Mr. Rifkin said his group was requesting that RAC 
advise the NIH to conform with NEPA. 
Mr. Rogers, legal counsel to the Foundation on Bsonamic Trends in its law- 
suit against NIH, said he agreed with Dr. Krause's contention that it is 
not RAC's responsibility to determine what is required under NEPA. He 
said his group is not requesting that RAC "determine" but rather only 
discuss, consider, and advise the NIH on questions of compliance with NEPA 
and, thus, not go beyond its advisory role as specified in its charter. 
Mr. Rogers said it is clear from RAC discussions earlier in the meeting that 
RAC has the ability, the capability, and the interest in wrestling with 
NEPA issues. He quoted from the RAC charter that RAC's role is to recommend 
guidelines for the conduct of recombinant DNA experiments and to rec amend 
programs to assess the possibility of spread of specific CNA recombinants 
and the possible hazards to public health and to the environment. He said 
NEPA mandates Federal agencies to adopt procedures for assessing such 
hazards and to ensure the participation of other Federal agencies and the 
public in the review of proposed actions that may have environmental impacts. 
Mr. Rogers said NEPA is implemented by two basic mechanisms; these are 
environmental assessments (EA) and environmental impact statements (EIS). 
He argued that if a scientist knows his proposed action will have a significant 
[ 280 ] 
