Document bM7y96QXgvE5aY6xzpxqRemg

From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Cagen, Stuart SZ SCC Wednesday, November 29, 20006:28 PM Briggs, Barnaby D SC-CSEA; Handy, Debra C SCC-PSID; Kirsch, Glenda GH SHLOIL; Reeves, Steve SA SHLOIL; Sullivan, Nancy E SCC-CBAR; Tsai, Shan SP SHLOIL-SPS; Clegg, Patsy M SCC-CHSE-PC Frearson, Jeremy RA SI-PXXI; Hart, Rob R SIPC-OXXI; Liu, Xiaowei X SI-PXP; Wood, Nick N SCHINA-EA RE: Benzene Research Consortium Stakeholders Meeting - December 1 4, 2000 Follow Up Flag: Due By: Flag Status: file in china study Follow up Monday, July 02, 2001 5:00 PM Flagged Barnaby, et al: Your concerns are definitely valid but I think we should withhold a final judgement, either positive or negative, until we addressed your concerns, among the others I have heard. As I mentioned earlier, I discussed some of the ethical issues with Rich Irons and I believe he will be helping address these at the next consortium stakeholders meeting. He feels that the Chinese workers who will be monitored will benefit by having better diagnostic and treatment technology available that would not be there otherwise and the Chinese regulators are on board to the extent that they told Rich they need this sort of data to modify their occupational exposure guidelines. Benefits potentially resulting from the study can include: US residual risk calculations and legal. It is recognized that benefits outside the US are uncertain. I would be happy to discuss, but I would ask that we do not make a final decision until we have to .. Stuart -----Original Message----- From: Briggs, Barnaby SC-CSEA Sent: Wednesday, November 29,2000 1:14 AM To: Cagen, Stuart SZ SCC; Handy, Debra DC SCC-PSID; Kirsch, Glenda GH SHLOIL; Reeves, Steve SA SHLOIL; Sullivan, Nancy NE SCC-CBAR; Tsai, Shan SP SHLOIL-SPS; Clegg, Patsy PM SCC Cc: Frearson, Jeremy RA Sl-PXXI; Hart, Rob R SIPC-OXXI; Xiaowei Liu; Nick Wood Subject: RE: Benzene Research Consortium Stakeholders Meeting - December 1 4, 2000 I am sorry if this note comes rather later, but I have had a number of conversations with PXX colleagues over recent weeks. In these conversations, and with the paperwork that we have seen so far, we have not found it easy to see why Shell needs an involvement in this study. Whether there are advantages that I am not aware of, I don't know, but I thought that you may be interested in why I think this. If there are advantages, I am happy to be convinced. My main questions are: The benefits of the work to the Chinese people - who are going to provide the population for the research - are not clear. In fact it appears that the main beneficiaries - other than the academic community - will be outside China and in the USA. The links to the regulators in China seem not to be there. Is this issue a priority with the Chinese environmental regulator? If not, then why are we supporting the work? Any links to Shell's other work in China seem not to be there either, and I can see - from my limited view - no advantages to our considerable presence in China, in Nanhai and beyond, by SH ELL-MCCLU RG-067962 being involved in the project. In fact I can envision several publicity problems. I am happy to discuss these points further, and to be told that I have missed some vital points. Best regards Barnaby SH ELL-MCCLU RG-067963