Document kOEOMepDVdjrG6GqemnjbaDq

From: Clegg, Patsy PM SCC Sent: Thursday, February 22,2001 12:21 PM To: 'Twerdok, Lorraine'; 'Beatty, Pat' Subject: Questions about the Shanghai Q&A Document and Ethics document Sent the Q&A out to some Shell folks for review and comments. Below are exerts. Hopefully, we can answer questions and address concerns. 1. Patsy, would you ask them if their legal counsel reviewed this document before they sent it out? 2. From a formatting standpoint, who are the intended recipients and/or audience? From the nature of the questions, its sounds like a promo piece for industry from industry in support of the expense and not a Q and A that could be used when talking to press, Chinese officials, labor orgs. or NGO's, etc. 3. Q. Why is this being undertaken primarily by the petroleum industry, and why have other industries and/or international companies not been approached to help fund this research? A. API has played a lead role in getting this study underway, because the petroleum industry has a major interest in better understanding risks to human health due to benzene exposure. Other industries are being approached to help in this effort, as are international petroleum companies and trade associations. Presentations have been made to CONCAWE, IPIECA, and CEFIC. At least one of our major supporters, BP, is headquartered outside the United States. Why have the researchers not asked co-operation with an independent international organization such as WHO or IARC? EtbiQ!LD9qH]J~nt. Who prepared it - API or Dr. Brody? Shell will be forwarding comments on the (1) Summary paper, (2) the Q&A, and the Ethics document to API. Patsy Patsy M. Clegg Product Steward, HSE Shell Chemical Company PO Box 4320 Houston, TX 77210 Phone: 713-241-2521 FAX: 713-241-3325 e-mail: pmclegg@shellus.com SH ELL-MCCLU RG-065534