It seems appropriate that 'finster' is the German word for 'sinister'. When Finster takes it upon himself to act as the whole committee, he violates regulations and guidance and probably the code of conduct of his facility. It is not necessarily the IACUC's responsibility to determine scientific value of protocols, as outlined in the Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (PHS Policy)1 and the Animal Welfare Act and Regulations (AWARs)2.

The IACUC Chair does not have the authority to reject a research protocol outright before it reaches the committee. The Chair's responsibilities are limited to overseeing the coordination and implementation of effective, efficient systems for protocol and program review by the IACUC in compliance with the PHS Policy and the AWARs. These review activities can be carried out only at a properly convened meeting of the IACUC3. The IACUC determines whether the proposed work is duplicative in nature2 (section 2.31, d, 1, iii). Newsome's protocol should have been sent out for committee review to allow the IACUC to evaluate whether the protocol was duplicative and, if so, whether duplication was justified. Before IACUC review, each member of the committee should be given a list of proposed activities. Written descriptions of all proposed activities that involve the care and use of animals should be available to all IACUC members, and any member may request full committee review of those activities2 (section 2.31, d, 2).

In addition, Finster should have recused himself from the review process once he initially read Newsome's protocol and found it to be nearly identical to his work. The AWARs2 (section 2.31, d, 2) state, “no member may participate in the IACUC review or approval of an activity in which that member has a conflicting interest (e.g., is personally involved in the activity), except to provide information requested by the IACUC, nor may a member who has a conflicting interest contribute to the constitution of a quorum.”

Newsome is correct in taking her complaint to the Institutional Official, as Finster is operating outside of his defined responsibilities as Chair of the IACUC. When Finster copied Newsome's protocol as his submission, he violated the AWA (regardless of the animal species involved in the protocol) and should be removed as the IACUC Chair. The AWA2 (section 2157) states, “it shall be unlawful for any member of the committee to (1) to use or attempt to use to his advantages any information which is entitled to protection as confidential information and include penalties of removal from the committee and a fine of not more than $1,000 and imprisonment of not more than one year; or if willful, a fine of not more than $10,000 and imprisonment of not more than three years.”

Return to Protocol Review