Chapter 6 : The Environmental Impact Statement and the Polyoma Experiment 1976–77

MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.

Preview this chapter:
Zoom in

The Environmental Impact Statement and the Polyoma Experiment 1976–77, Page 1 of 2

| /docserver/preview/fulltext/10.1128/9781555818029/9781555812225_Chap06-1.gif /docserver/preview/fulltext/10.1128/9781555818029/9781555812225_Chap06-2.gif


Within National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) are several variations that may permit escape from what is known to be a tedious preparation and submission of an environmental impact statement (EIS). The generic analysis can be directed to the totality of an agency’s activities. Recombinant technology in animal and plant populations was also sufficient to warrant an environmental impact assessment (EIA). The public comments on the Draft EIS were rebutted; some of the rebuttals were: First, the funding of research was never considered as the major action. NIH had no formal program of recombinant DNA research; rather, it supported a number of uncoordinated studies of a technique adaptable to numberless explorations of molecular genetics. Second, the draft EIS was described as inadequate because it had neglected pertinent information on this research which was readily available in the literature. This argument neglected the fact that for 2 years a large fraction of the authors of that very literature had been laboring to create guidelines so that they might once more begin to contribute factually to the present debate. Third, the character of , strain K-12, may indeed fool all of the world of bacteriology, but the chances of that had been debated at length and expressed in the construction of the guidelines, which were the subject of the draft EIS. This does not mean that risks are not being undertaken.

Citation: Fredrickson D. 2001. The Environmental Impact Statement and the Polyoma Experiment 1976–77, p 105-132. In The Recombinant DNA Controversy. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555818029.ch6
Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...



This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error