CODE OF
FEDERAL REGULATIONS
TITLE 1--GENERAL
PROVISIONS
CHAPTER
III--ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED
STATES
PART
305--RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE
CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES
1 C.F.R. s 305.89-7
s 305.89-7 Federal
Regulation of Biotechnology (Recommendation
89-7).
New biotechnology
techniques promise great benefits in fields such as
medicine, agriculture, and manufacturing. However,
these new techniques, which involve alteration of
the genetic structure of an organism, have raised
concerns that some new organisms or products may be
dangerous to individuals or detrimental to the
environment. This recommendation addresses
coordination of federal regulation in this area and
the procedures agencies use to regulate
biotechnology development, testing and use.
Genetically-engineered
organisms are regulated under a variety of statutes
enacted to prevent or reduce society's exposure to
unsafe or harmful products or substances. The
agencies with such statutory authorities currently
share responsibilities for regulation of
biotechnology in accordance with policy statements
issue in 1986 by the agencies and by the Director
of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (who
serves as the President's Science Adviser).
[FN1] In its policy statement, the Office
of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) attempted
to clarify the responsibility of each agency where
more than one agency shared jurisdiction to
regulate biotechnology areas.
[FN1] OSTP,
Coordinated Framework for Regulation of
Biotechnology; Announcement of Policy and Notice
for Public Comment, 51 FR 23302 (1986).
The Conference recommends
a continuation of interagency coordination under
the auspices of the OSTP. Experience does not
currently indicate that new legislation is needed
for effective interagency coordination of
biotechnology regulation. On the other hand, the
Conference believes that both the President and the
Congress should monitor closely the coordination
process because of the importance of this area to
the nation's economic and social well-being.
The Conference also
recommends that the President and the Congress,
through the OSTP and the Office of Technology
Assessment (OTA), survey biotechnology developments
and agency regulation of biotechnology under
existing statutes to determine whether current law
and regulation provide adequate authority to
protect public and private interests or whether in
particular instances current regulation is
unnecessary. The survey should identify whether
nonregulation of any particular area reflects an
agency decision not to use its authority to
regulate or an absence of regulatory authority.
The Conference also urges
changes in the coordination role for biotechnology
regulation performed by the President's Office of
Science and Technology Policy. Most importantly,
the Conference urges the President to make the work
of the Office's Biotechnology Science Coordinating
Committee (BSCC) a high priority. A revitalized
BSCC can help agencies coordinate their activities
concerning biotechnology development, regulation,
funding, and biosafety research. To fulfill this
mandate, the Conference believes the BSCC's role
should emphasize fact-finding, reporting, and
serving as a clearinghouse for information relating
to biotechnology.
The Conference recommends
that agencies engaged in biotechnology regulation
articulate their policies through generic rules and
policy statements to the extent possible. Since
public acceptance of agency decisions is especially
important in this area and because of the novelty
and uncertainty of the risks associated with
biotechnology, the Conference encourages agencies
to adopt appropriate procedures to allow public
participation. Agencies are also encouraged to seek
ways to make biosafety information available to the
public to the maximum extent consistent with
protection of the proprietary interests of
submitters of confidential business
information.
Recommendation
1. Biotechnology
Regulatory Structure
(a) Interagency
coordination is critically needed to mitigate
problems caused by concurrent regulation of
biotechnology by two or more agencies. The Office
of Science and Technology Policy's Biotechnology
Science Coordinating Committee (BSCC) should have
primary responsibility for identifying issues,
exchanging information and preparing reports
concerning issues common to several agencies.
Responsibility for establishing uniform government
policies should be retained by the Office of
Management and Budget working in coordination with
the BSCC.
(b) The President and
Congress should survey biotechnology developments
and agency regulation of biotechnology under
existing statutes to consider whether and in what
respects current regulation of biotechnology is
inadequate or excessive. To facilitate this, the
President's Office of Science and Technology Policy
(OSTP) and Congress' Office of Technology
Assessment (OTA) should, jointly or separately,
identify all areas of biotechnology activity and
determine the extent to which they are being
regulated. OSTP and OTA should assess whether or
not additional or diminished regulatory authority
is desirable in such areas and furnish their
findings and recommendations to the President and
Congress.
2. Regulatory
Coordination
(a) The President should
make coordination of the government's activities
relating to biotechnology a high priority. This
should include:
(1) Monitoring the
effectiveness of interagency coordination;
(2) Directing the Science
Adviser to enlarge the membership of the BSCC to
include all federal agencies that have substantial
responsibilities for biotechnology research,
development, or regulatory policy; and
(3) Directing the Science
Adviser to invite representatives of other agencies
to participate in the BSCC's activities, as
appropriate, such as when their regulatory or other
official responsibilities may be affected.
(b) The BSCC should have a
broad subject-matter mandate, including issues of
biotechnology development, regulation, funding, and
biosafety research. The Committee's role should
emphasize fact-finding, reporting, and serving as a
clearinghouse for information relating to
biotechnology.
(c) The Science Adviser
should establish a policy for the BSCC that will
foster opening its proceedings to the public.
(1) Meetings of the BSCC
should be open to the public unless they involve
confidential information.
(2) Members of the public
should be allowed to provide comments to the BSCC
either orally or in writing.
(3) The BSCC may invite
advice from experts outside the government.
(4) The BSCC should keep
minutes or other records of its proceedings,
including the reasons for closing any meetings.
3. Regulatory
Procedures
(a) Agencies should, where
appropriate, seek opportunities to promulgate
generic biotechnology rules to address recurring
regulatory issues.
(b) Agencies should
consider the adoption of rules or policy statements
to enunciate the principles or criteria they will
include in their risk assessment and management
decisions. When adopting policy statements,
agencies should follow the public participation
procedures set forth in Conference Recommendation
76-5. [FN2]
[FN2] ACUS
Recommendation 76-5, Interpretive Rules of General
Applicability and Statements of General Policy, 1
CFR 305.76-5 (1989).
(c) Agencies should
consider adopting appropriate procedures to allow
public participation and other forms of input when
making regulatory determinations concerning
biotechnology. Such procedures might include:
(1) Giving notice to the
public with an invitation to submit comments
concerning the determination;
(2) Providing additional
notice of pending regulatory actions to persons who
live near sites where proposed activities would
take place;
(3) Holding informal
public hearings to supplement written procedures;
or
(4) Utilizing advisory
committees under the Federal Advisory Committee
Act. [FN3]
[FN3] See ACUS
Recommendation, 82-5, Federal Regulation of
Cancer-Causing Chemicals, Part IV, 1 CFR 305.82-5
(1989).
(d) Agencies should seek
ways to meet the public's need for biosafety
information about substances or organisms produced
through biotechnology, without divulging
confidential business information. [FN4]
Such steps might include:
[FN4] See ACUS
Recommendation 82-1, Exemption (b)(4) of the
Freedom of Information Act, 1 CFR 305.82-1
(1988).
(1) Requesting submitters
of confidential business information to focus their
claims for confidentiality as much as possible;
(2) Requiring submitters
of data that include confidential business
information to identify those portions that are
claimed to be confidential and to substantiate
their claims at the time of submission; and
(3) Summarizing or
aggregating confidential data in a manner that does
not compromise confidentiality.
[54 FR 53494, Dec. 29,
1989]
Authority: 5 U.S.C.
591-596.
SOURCE: 38 FR 19782, July
23, 1973; 57 FR 61760, 61768, Dec. 29, 1992, unless
otherwise noted.
[Previous
Part] [Next
Part]
|