37 
statement is necessary. Mr. Rogers suggested that it should be spelled 
out in the Guidelines for the benefit of applicants that an EA or an 
EIS will be required. 
Mr. Rogers said he favored NIH maintaining its "regulation" of deliberate 
release experiments until there is a good substitute apparatus in force. 
He said there would be no way for NIH to back off from its "regulation" 
of deliberate release experiments without preparing an environmental impact 
statement for this action, because NIH withdrawal fran oversight responsi- 
bilities would have a potential environmental impact. 
Dr. Alexander said he has spoken of the need for information which is 
consistent with the needs under NEPA, but that he agreed completely with 
Dr. Krause that RAC does not have the responsibility to determine what is 
or is not required by NEPA. RAC may indicate what kinds of data are needed 
for scientific judgements but not interpret the law. 
Dr. McGonigle said the request that RAC advise the NIH to conply with NEPA 
presupposes that NIH is not in compliance. RAC is not in a position to 
make such a judgement. 
Dr. Holmes said, he agreed with Or. Krause's position. He thought, however, 
that a great deal must still be done to define the generic issues of environ- 
mental risk in releases of recombinant HA containing organisms to the 
environment. For this reason, he supported the concept of a working group 
examining issues on release of modified organisms into the environment. 
Ct. Fedoroff said RAC had determined after reviewing the proposals ultimately 
approved by NIH that these cases presented no significant environmental 
impact. 
Mr. Edward Korwek asked Messrs. Rifkin and Rogers why they had brought this 
issue to RAC since it is currently the subject of litigation. He pointed 
out that RAC has no jurisdiction to address questions of law. He questioned 
whether Messrs. Rifkin and Rogers were attempting to moot the case. 
Mr. Rogers said RAC on advice of legal counsel could rule the discussion 
out of order. 
Dr. McKinney called the question. By a vote of fourteen in favor, none 
opposed, and two abstentions, the question was ceil led. 
By a vote of sixteen in favor, none opposed, and no abstentions, Dr. McKinney's 
motion was accepted. 
XIII. ADJOURNMENT 
Mr. Mitchell said a RAC Working Group on Release to the Environment would be 
instituted. He thanked the RAC members for their service. 
Mr. Mitchell adjourned the meeting at 3:55 p.m. on February 6, 1984. 
[282] 
