Tobacco Documents Online

SENT BY:RJR NABISCO ; 5- 6-94 ; 15:02 ; 2026267208-+ 919 741,7977;# 6 SE17 f BY':'xHE TQB:4CC0 I NST 1 TUPE ; 5- e-u% ; 1'l; uu • . Y (1) (2) QUESTIONS FOR CRS WITNESS JANE CiRAYELLE ON CR.4 STUDY FOR SBNATE ETS H'BARING Iu yrour Cogreulona2 Research Service report, entitled 'C.'igarett. Toxes to >hmd Health Cre R.focra: An Econonsio Apalyaie" it was eoneIudad that srnoltGrs pay ti:eir ovrA vr+ty. They do not impose uW net wxtal ur extnrngl costs on non-amokers. Your study alw includcs an analysis of the potentzei sociaW costi of tha M issue. Yat, you still r ~ the sa~e conclusion • satakers pay their own way. Does this not Imply that 's risk aa~essment is very unxrtain and subf ect to considerabie c!i d be La3r to ss {sb (not thc aati-snmoker oul C t110t 31gA0 ~ A iaosi-belierl iL[uUWy) AftCr revlCWbS the M y tvmat ksa~tne conclusion that you derived that tho ETS 1t'teranu~o would ovlden eory is really too weak snneer,t~ to attribute the very hi~h social to it that EPA ba!? - EPA oconomiats ere tetimeting that actunpretcntoire imiakf g ban would reault In net beneilts to sodety of from $39 billion to i'13 biUum. However, this cost-btaetit aDarysia asawaes the origi;naE EPA ETS risk asaeament 6 correct If tha original rlsk t Is assesscae,At Is hi" uncertain, would this net mean that the cost benefit ana~rt {t uneertain also? (3) 8wteal on ywr analysls of BrA's BTS risk assessment, would you say that the svldeace and theory on thif ls:4e Is strong endqgh to coadude that ETS Lmposes frora $39 billion to ST2 blilion each ytai in soclal eoRtR. ('an yau tell us why your own CRS report appears to attribute only vazy minor or zero oosta to >'rTS? (4) If we tvuk a ranclcun sample of 100 economists and asked them to invest[gate the EPA E15 risk assessment afnular to the way that you did in your CRS report would they tend to agree with you that the FTS risk assessment ii too weak and uncertain to use it ss confident basis for t:ooiaU cost projectional (5) Apart ftom the weak statistics behind the EPA ETS risk asseument, is the theory correct? Is ETS, even in extreme spdusai sattingu, at levels that are above socepta.d diseaso thresbolds? For example, snme have arViaci that eattrmg peanut butter or drinldng tap water involves highar levels of risk than BTS, is that possibly true? 3