Senate Bill, No. 2314

In Massachusetts, the careless use and disposal of smoking materials is the leading cause of fire deaths.

Each year an average of 1,370 fires across the Commonwealth are smoking related. In the 1990s, these fires caused 178 deaths, 763 civilian injuries, 677 firefighter injuries, and more than $75 million in property loss in Massachusetts alone.

Nationally, more than 1,000 people die and 3,000 are injured in cigarette-started fires each year. These fires cause more than $400 million in direct property damage annually.

Many of these tragedies have made headlines in Massachusetts:

In November 1999, a fire claimed the life of a visiting priest and destroyed a historic stone castle at the LaSalette Shrine in Attleboro, MA. The fire was started when the priest fell asleep while smoking in bed.

In June 1999, a fire in Hull left an off-duty firefighter paralyzed from the waist down. The fire was started when a burning cigarette was tossed over a porch railing into a backyard. Shrapnel from a propane tank that exploded during the fire severed the firefighter's spine while he battled the blaze.

Cigarette-started fires not only pose a risk to smokers, but also pose a risk to innocent bystanders, such as children and residents of neighboring houses and apartments.

During the last weekend of October 2000, two fires in South Boston erupted within hours of each other, leaving 60 people homeless and causing more than $4 million in property damage. Cigarettes caused both of these fires, the second of which destroyed eight buildings and required more than 160 firefighters to extinguish.

In 1990, a fire in Roslindale killed a family of five, including three young children all under the age of four, and a family friend. The fire started when a lit cigarette was dropped on to a chair and left to burn, igniting the deadliest fire in Boston in more than a decade.

An astonishing 82% of smoking-related structure fires are caused by smoking materials that were abandoned or not safely discarded. Many of these potentially fatal fires could be prevented if cigarettes were designed to extinguish on their own when left burning unattended. At a September 2000 Senate Post Audit and Oversight Committee hearing, testimony from a wide array of fire safety and public health officials clearly established the need for and feasibility of establishing fire safety standards for cigarettes.

The federal government has extensively studied the issue of cigarette fire safety standards for 15 years. Based on a three-year study led by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a 1987 federal report concluded that the manufacturing of cigarettes that are less likely to start fires is technically and economically feasible. The making of less incendiary cigarettes entails employing design modifications such as packing tobacco more loosely, reducing the diameter of the cigarette, or removing chemicals that make the cigarette paper burn faster. A second federal study released in 1993 produced widely accepted standards for testing the fire safety of cigarettes.

At the Committee hearing, Dr. Jeffrey Wigand, former Vice President of Research and Development at Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company, testified that tobacco companies have known how to make a less incendiary cigarette since 1986.

At the federal level, Congressman Joseph Moakley of Boston has been a champion for cigarette fire safety standards for more than two decades. However, lobbying by tobacco companies has thwarted the creation of a federal standard, and states are now beginning to step forward in this area. New York recently became the first state in the nation to enact state-level cigarette fire safety standards.

Cigarettes that are considered less incendiary are already being sold in the United States. According to NIST, five brands of cigarettes on the U.S. market already meet proposed national standards for fire safety in cigarettes. These brands include: Capri Lights 100s, Eve Lights 120s, Virginia Slims Superslims 100s, More 120s and More White Lights 120s. In July 2000, a newer version of Merit cigarettes was brought to market utilizing breakthrough technology in the cigarette paper that makes them less prone to start fires.

After a six-month review, the Senate Post Audit and Oversight Committee has concluded that public safety would be served by establishing fire safety standards for cigarettes that are sold in the Commonwealth.

FINDINGS: A CRITICAL PUBLIC SAFETY PROBLEM

1. Cigarettes are the leading cause of fatal fires in Massachusetts, and during the 1990s accounted for 178 deaths, 763 civilian injuries, 677 firefighter injuries, and more than $75 million in property damage. Many of these smoking-related fires could be prevented through the introduction of fire safety standards for cigarettes.

2. The federal government has clearly demonstrated that it is technically and economically feasible for cigarettes to meet fire safety standards. In addition, NIST and the Consumer Product Safety Commission have developed testing methodologies for cigarette fire safety and smoke toxicity that can be adopted by states.

3. While requiring that cigarettes meet fire safety standards is clearly a necessary step in reducing smoking-related fires, a continued focus on education and prevention is also needed.

RECOMMENDATIONS: CREATING FIRE SAFETY STANDARDS

1. Following the lead of New York State, Massachusetts should establish fire safety standards for cigarettes that can help prevent needless loss of life and property.

· The Department of Public Health, in cooperation with the Office of the State Fire Marshal, should be statutorily required to develop fire safety standards for cigarettes sold in Massachusetts.

· All cigarettes sold in MA should meet fire safety standards no later than 2003.

· The law should include stiff penalties for violation of the standards.

2. Massachusetts standards should include adoption of national testing methodologies for fire safety and smoke toxicity. Tobacco manufacturers should be required to provide certification that cigarettes designated for sale in Massachusetts have passed national tests for fire safety, and that these cigarettes are no more toxic than current brands.

3. To enhance public education about fire safety, Massachusetts should allocate a portion of the funds generated from violations of fire safety standards towards on-going prevention and educational efforts such as the Student Awareness of Fire Education (S.A.F.E.) program, which sends firefighters into schools to educate children about fire prevention and safety.

THE NEED FOR CIGARETTE FIRE SAFETY STANDARDS

Deadly Retreat

On November 5, 1999 a visiting priest from England, Reverend Paul O' Brien, fell asleep in bed while smoking a cigarette at the LaSalette Shrine in Attleboro.[1] Reverend O'Brien died in a fire that was started by a smoldering cigarette. The fire also destroyed the historic stone castle, causing more than $10 million in damage.[2] At the time of the fire, Reverend O'Brien was on a religious retreat with 23 other priests, who were all staying at LaSalette but who escaped unharmed. It took the combined forces of nearly 250 firefighters from 12 communities more than five hours to subdue this fatal cigarette-started fire.[3]

The LaSalette Shrine fire in Attleboro was one of the most expensive structural fires in 1999.[4]

The tragedy at the LaSalette Shrine was not an isolated incident. Each year, across the country, more than 1,000 people die and more than 3,000 injuries occur as a result of fires started by cigarettes.[5] According to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), cigarette ignited fires in the United States result in more than $400 million in direct property damage annually.

In Massachusetts, the careless use and disposal of smoking materials is the leading cause of fire deaths.[6] Each year an average of 1,370 fires across the Commonwealth are smoking related.[7] In the 1990s, these fires caused 178 civilian fire deaths, 763 civilian injuries, 677 firefighter injuries, and more than $75 million in property loss in Massachusetts alone.[8]

Table 1. Massachusetts Fires Caused by Smoking 1990-1999[9]

Year	# of Fires	FF Injuries	Civ Injuries	Deaths	Dollar Loss
1990	1,338	67	96	24	$6,758,211
1991	1,465	83	94	19	$6,096,550
1992	1,293	64	84	14	$6,869,492
1993	1,335	109	86	21	$7,339,540
1994	1,377	87	83	27	$7,046,702
1995	1,499	67	73	16	$7,342,088
1996	1,175	59	73	25	$5,419,172
1997	1,349	39	51	9	$4,596,420
1998	1,261	41	74	13	$7,202,120
1999	1,607	61	49	10	$16,918,733
Total	13,699	677	763	178	$75,589,028
Annual Average	1,370	68	76	18	$7,558,903

Key: "FF": firefighters; "Civ": civilians

An astonishing 82% of smoking-related structure fires are caused by smoking materials that were abandoned or not safely discarded.[10] Many of these potentially fatal fires could be prevented if cigarettes were required to extinguish on their own when left burning unattended. At a September 2000 Senate Post Audit and Oversight Committee hearing, testimony from a wide array of fire safety and public health officials clearly established the need for and feasibility of establishing fire safety standards for cigarettes.[11]

Many fire officials testified that creating fire safety standards for cigarettes was an effective way to reduce the number of smoking-related fires at which firefighters risk their lives.[12]

Three Firefighters Die in New York Cigarette Ignited Blaze

On December 18, 1998, a fire erupted in a 10^th floor apartment of the Vandalia House, a city project for the elderly in Brooklyn.[13] The cause of the fire was a cigarette that was dropped accidentally while an elderly woman smoked in bed. As the fire spread, the woman "fled the apartment and left her front door open, which allowed the fire to spread into a long hallway, turning it into an inferno."[14] The fire tragically claimed the lives of three firefighters who were trying to rescue the woman.

The firefighters were 15-year veteran Lt. Joseph Cavalieri, 42, and three-year veterans Christopher Bopp, 27, and James Bohan, 25, all members of Ladder Co. 170 in Canarsie.

The firefighters entered the building and raced ten flights to the apartment where they believed the woman was trapped. As the firefighters approached the doorway of the apartment, a change in wind caused the flames to blow towards them, instantly engulfing them. Fire officials said the backdraft asphyxiated the firefighters almost instantly and burned the oxygen masks off their faces.[15] Another team of rescuers brought the fallen three to the ninth floor and tried, unsuccessfully, to revive them.[16]

Three other tenants, six additional firefighters, and two medical workers were also injured in the blaze.[17] The Vandalia House fire was the New York City Fire Department's worst since 1978, when six firefighters were killed in a fire at a Brooklyn supermarket.[18]

Cigarette-related fires occur under a variety of circumstances, such as:

Ø house fires started by a burning cigarette butt, carried into rooftop gutters by a bird;[19]

Ø a "flaming haul of garbage," started when a lit cigarette ignited trash in a garbage truck; the trash fire had to be deposited in the middle of the street in order to be extinguished;[20]

Ø a fire that engulfed a popular wharf on Boston Harbor when a dropped, lit cigarette became wedged between wooden planks of the wharf, causing more than $1 million in damage;[21]

Ø a fire in the bed of a pick-up truck that started when the driver flicked a burning cigarette out the window, which landed in a pile of leaves in the bed of the truck;[22]

Ø brush fires started by drivers who toss burning cigarettes out of moving vehicles along a highway; and

Ø numerous "nuisance" fires started by burning cigarettes discarded in landscaped entryways to businesses or on islands at traffic intersections.[23]

Because of fires like these, it is necessary to look beyond stereotypes of the careless smoker in bed or on the sofa, recognize that non-smokers are put at risk by cigarette-started fires, and acknowledge the benefit of marketing less incendiary cigarettes.

Table 2. Smoking Related Fires by Type of Situation[24]

Year	Structure	Brush	Trash	Vehicle	Outside	Other/ Unclassified
1990	792	213	169	122	32	10
1991	797	338	185	105	30	10
1992	744	252	162	93	32	10
1993	730	337	146	81	33	8
1994	731	367	149	81	3	10
1995	693	486	167	78	58	17
1996	689	230	117	73	47	19
1997	672	366	166	70	55	20
1998	598	354	182	65	46	16
1999	580	664	178	62	97	26
Total	7026	3607	1621	830	469	146
Annual Average	703	361	162	83	47	15

The above table illustrates the extent to which cigarettes start fires in a variety of circumstances.
Cigarette-started fires not only pose a risk to smokers, but also pose a risk to innocent bystanders, such as children and residents of neighboring houses and apartments.

Halloween Horror

On the Saturday evening before Halloween night in October 2000, two devastating smoking-related fires broke out within hours of one another in South Boston.[25] The two fires destroyed a total of 11 homes and two businesses, left at least 60 people homeless, and caused $4.6 million in damage.[26]

The first blaze, a five-alarm fire, erupted at 11:30 p.m. in the cupola of an apartment above the Spencer Funeral Home on East Broadway. [27] Fire officials blame a cigarette for the fire that started during a Halloween party at the home. It is believed that one or more cigarettes left on a windowsill were the source of the fire.[28] The fire destroyed three adjacent apartment buildings, and forced 15 people from their homes.[29]

Just two hours later, as Boston firefighters were recuperating from battling the East Broadway fire, they were called to battle what would become a nine-alarm inferno that engulfed eight triple-decker homes and left more than 60 people homeless.[30] It took more than 160 Boston firefighters, 27 engine companies, and eight ladder companies to extinguish the blaze.[31] This fire started on the back porch of a first floor apartment on East Sixth and Swallow Streets.[32] An ember from a lit cigarette or a carelessly disposed cigarette ignited a sofa on the porch.[33]

"It looked like a 747 had gone down there," said Fire Chief Paul Christian about the second fire. "There were heavy balls of smoke roiling above the buildings with flames jutting 40 feet above the rooftops."[34] Speaking about the fire that engulfed his home on East Sixth Street, one resident said, "You always see the people on the news who have lost their home, but you never think it will happen to you."[35]

A week later on Saturday, November 4, another South Boston fire was started by a cigarette. Chief Christian stated that as it is becoming more common for people to smoke outside, cigarette-started fires such as the recent ones in South Boston may also become a trend because people are less careful about dropping cigarette ashes and properly disposing of cigarettes while outdoors.[36]

Firefighter Left Paralyzed in Smoking-Related Fire

In June 1999, off-duty Hull firefighter John Clasby responded to a house fire on Clifton Avenue in Hull.[37] The fire, started by a cigarette carelessly tossed over a porch railing, tragically injured the veteran firefighter, leaving him paralyzed from the waist down.[38] Shrapnel from a propane tank that exploded from the heat of the fire severed Clasby's spine as he battled the blaze.[39]

Clasby was in intensive care for a week after the accident and his total hospitalization lasted more than three weeks.[40] An athlete all his life, he no longer has use of his legs and has a challenging recuperation ahead.[41] According to Clasby, he feels pain "24 hours a day, seven days a week."[42]

The fire also sent four fellow firefighters to the hospital, including firefighter Robert Neal, who received an electrical shock while helping Clasby, then went into cardiac arrest as he was flown to the hospital.[43]

VULNERABLE POPULATIONS

Various experts at the public hearing testified that the availability of a less incendiary cigarette would not only diminish the overall risks of smoking-related fires, but also diminish the risks to certain vulnerable groups, including children, the elderly, and the disabled.[44]

Children, the elderly, and the disabled are among those less likely to be able to save themselves from an indoor fire. According to the Center for Social Gerontology, in one year alone, 50% of fatal smoking-related fires claimed the lives of persons 50 years old and over.[45] Reports of smoking-related fires in nursing homes are "particularly frightening to older Americans because so many residents are bedridden or have serious mobility problems."[46]

Repeated Tragedy in Marlborough

In March 1999, a cigarette-started fire in Marlborough claimed the life of 82-year-old Donald O'Leary, Sr.[47] The fire also injured four firefighters.[48] As firefighters crawled into the house to search for survivors, the floor collapsed and the firefighters tumbled into the cellar.[49]

Fourteen years earlier, two of Mr. O'Leary's grandchildren, ages 5 and 6, perished in a fire that was also started by a cigarette.[50] A burning cigarette was dropped in the cushions of a couch.

Seniors Caught in a Blaze

On Friday, October 13, 2000 a cigarette-started fire broke out in an apartment complex that housed several hundred senior citizens in Winthrop. The fire injured two residents and one of the Winthrop police officers at the scene.[51] The blaze started on the first floor of the complex allegedly as the result of a dropped cigarette that may have been fueled by an oxygen tank.[52] The fire quickly spread to the second floor, surprising residents.[53]

The quick work of firefighters and police officers saved several residents from the fast moving inferno.[54]

Family Perishes in Roslindale Fire[55]

In the U.S., more than 80 children die each year in cigarette-related fires.[56]

Among the children who have perished in cigarette-started fires were the three grandchildren of Mary Kearney. In 1990 a blaze started after the children's father dropped a lit Marlboro Light Cigarette on to an easy chair and headed for bed.[57] The fire took the lives of the O'Neill family -- parents Myles and Maureen, and three girls, 3-year old Charlene, 2-year old Stacy, and 10-month old Leanne -- and Patrick McGovern, a family friend.[58] This fire was Boston's deadliest in more than a decade.[59]

The children's aunt and only survivor of the fire, Deirdre Kearney, summarized the tragedy, "I found out that it was a cigarette (that started the fire) and that my sister never smoked. Those kids had no choice and such a small thing like a cigarette could take away so much so fast."[60]

The societal costs of cigarette-induced fires are clearly demonstrated by the trail of fire deaths, injuries, and economic losses.

THE HISTORY BEHIND THE DEBATE

Legislative efforts to mandate safety standards for cigarettes started in Massachusetts almost 70 years ago. According to an Associated Press story in the March 1932 edition of the Boston Herald American, Massachusetts Congresswoman Edith Nourse Rogers of Lowell urged the National Bureau of Standards (today's National Institute of Standards and Technology, or NIST) to develop a treatment for cigarettes that would cause them to go out as soon as they were discarded.[66] Congresswoman Rogers' efforts to create fire safety standards for cigarettes were unsuccessful but the issue smoldered in state legislatures and Congress throughout the 20^thcentury.

Over the past 25 years a dozen states, including Massachusetts, California, and New York, have considered legislation to develop fire safety standards for cigarettes.[67] In August of 2000, New York became the first state to enact a law establishing cigarette fire safety standards.[68]

In Massachusetts during the 1980s and early 1990s, several bills were proposed to establish fire safety standards for cigarettes. Sponsors of legislation to create fire safety standards for cigarettes have included former Senators John Brennan (D-Malden) and Lucile Hicks (R-Wayland), former Representatives Lawrence Alexander (D-Marblehead) and Kevin Blanchette (D-Lawrence), and Representative Bryon Rushing (D-Boston). None of these bills became law.

In California, a bill to establish cigarette safety standards passed in the Senate, but was defeated in the Assembly Committee on Governmental Organizations in August 2000.[69] Members of the Assembly Committee reportedly have been among the top recipients of tobacco industry campaign contributions in the California legislature.[70]

Moakley Champions Fire Safety Standards

For more than two decades, Congressman Joseph Moakley (D-Boston, 9th District) has championed the establishment of fire safety standards for cigarettes at the federal level, only to be opposed by the tobacco industry.[71] Moakley's interest was sparked by the grim aftermath of a cigarette-started fire in his district, which took the lives of 5 young children and their parents in Westwood in 1979.[72] As a result of this tragedy, Congressman Moakley introduced a bill to require that tobacco companies make self-extinguishing cigarettes.[73] The bill passed in the Senate, but did not pass in the House of Representatives. Since then, Congressman Moakley has passed two laws -- the Fire Safe Cigarette Act of 1984 and the Fire Safe Cigarette Act of 1990 -- that laid the groundwork for creating fire safety standards for cigarettes.

These laws have resulted in the formation of a national comprehensive technical study and advisory group on the issue of cigarette fire safety standards. The group, comprised of 15 representatives of government agencies, the cigarette industry, the furniture industry, public health organizations and fire safety organizations, accomplished the following:[74]

· found that it is technically, economically, and commercially feasible to develop a cigarette that is less likely to cause fires;[75] and

· developed methods for testing the fire safety of cigarettes, which is necessary in order to be able to promulgate a fire safety standard for cigarettes.[76]

During the 106^th Congress, Congressman Moakley introduced a bill (H.R. 1130), the Fire Safe Cigarette Act of 1999, that would authorize the Consumer Product Safety Commission to issue a fire safety standard for cigarettes and give cigarette manufacturers one year to comply with the new standard.[77] The bill is still pending.

INDUSTRY ARGUMENTS

In part, efforts to pass local and national legislation on cigarette safety standards have been impeded by several concerns raised primarily by the tobacco industry. The main concerns include the following:

Ø availability of acceptable testing methods to gauge the fire safety of cigarettes;

Ø creating a cigarette of reduced ignition propensity that is acceptable to the consumer; and

Ø avoiding an increase in health hazards from altering the cigarettes.

In testimony given at the hearing conducted by the Massachusetts Senate Post Audit and Oversight Committee and at other legislative hearings on creating cigarette fire safety standards, some tobacco lawyers, in-house scientists, and fire experts paid by the tobacco companies have argued that cigarette makers are still not able to produce a cigarette that is less likely to start fires, does not increase health risks, and does not taste bad to smokers.[78]

In regard to available methods to test the fire safety of cigarettes, a representative of RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company insisted that "more real-world tests need to be agreed upon to make sure we are actually able to tell whether one cigarette is less likely to start a fire than another."[79]

NATIONAL TESTING STANDARDS

To assist cigarette manufacturers in addressing their concerns, testing methods have been developed by federal agencies for cigarette ignition propensity and toxic potency measurement.[80]

For instance, standards have been created to test the fire safety of cigarettes that counter the industry argument that better and more "real world" testing methods are needed. NIST has developed two testing methods for cigarette ignition propensity, and consider them to have "valid links to many real-world fire scenarios of concern."[81] In fact, some tobacco companies employ the NIST-developed methods in their own studies, including Philip Morris USA.[82]

Standards for testing the toxic potency of cigarette smoke have also been developed. The Fire Safe Cigarette Act of 1990 mandated that the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) develop information on changes in the toxicity of smoke and resultant health effects from cigarette prototypes.[83] As a result, CPSC developed a protocol to measure the toxicity in the smoke emitted by cigarettes.[84]

The CPSC protocol was used by Philip Morris in testing a newer version of Merit cigarettes that are less incendiary.[85] According to Philip Morris officials, the Merit cigarettes did not show any significant increase in toxicity.[86] In addition, Philip Morris market research revealed that consumers found the newer Merit cigarettes acceptable in taste, and that consumers preferred these cigarettes over the conventional Merit brand in a 9:1 ratio.[87]

TECHNICAL ISSUES AND PRODUCT HISTORY

TECHNOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY

For the past 15 years, as a result of the Fire Safe Cigarette Acts of 1985 and 1990, there has been rigorous study of the feasibility of producing a cigarette that is less likely to start fires.[88] It is now clear from these studies that it is technically and economically feasible to produce a less incendiary cigarette. In fact, such cigarettes are commercially available today.

Based on a three-year study led by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a 1987 federal report concluded that the manufacturing of cigarettes that are less likely to start fires is technically and economically feasible.[89] The making of less incendiary cigarettes entails employing design modifications such as packing tobacco more loosely, reducing the diameter of the cigarette, or removing chemicals that make the cigarette paper burn faster.[90] A second federal study released in 1993 produced widely accepted standards for testing the fire safety of cigarettes.[91]

Cigarettes that are considered less incendiary are already being sold in the United States. According to NIST, five brands of cigarettes already on the U.S. market employ the fire safety technology described above. [92] These brands include: Capri Lights 100s, Eve Lights 120s, Virginia Slims Superslims 100s, More 120s and More White Lights 120s.[93] These brands have small circumferences, low-porous paper, and low tobacco density, which help to reduce the likelihood of starting fires in soft furnishings.[94] In July 2000, a newer version of Merit cigarettes was brought to market utilizing breakthrough technology in the cigarette paper that makes them less prone to start fires.[95]

INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT OF A LESS INCENDIARY CIGARETTE

Tobacco companies have spent years researching the development of a cigarette that has a reduced propensity to start fires. For at least a decade, RJ Reynolds claims to have been trying to produce a cigarette with "reduced ignition propensity."[96] Dr. Jeffrey Wigand, who exposed the tobacco industry as having known that nicotine in cigarettes was addictive and a health hazard, also worked on a so-called "fire-safe" cigarette while employed with the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company.[97]

Riveting Revelations

Dr. Jeffrey Wigand is best known for his role as the highest-ranking tobacco company executive to have ever publicly disclosed industry knowledge of safety issues related to smoking. After more than four years as Vice President for Research and Development at Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company, Dr. Wigand assisted governmental agencies such as the Food & Drug Administration in investigating the role and effect of nicotine in tobacco products.[98] As a result of his public disclosures about the industry's efforts to minimize the health and safety issue of tobacco use, Dr. Wigand has been the subject of documentaries and death threats.[99] He received national prominence when he appeared on the popular news program, 60 Minutes, to expose the tobacco industry, and his story has been made into the movie, "The Insider."

Dr. Wigand now works to reduce teen smoking through Smoke-Free Kids, a non-profit organization he founded that provides education and prevention methods to youth about smoking.

At the September 2000 public hearing held by the Senate Post Audit and Oversight Committee, Dr. Wigand testified that based on his review of tobacco industry documents, tobacco companies have known how to make a less incendiary cigarette since 1986.[100] At that time, there was no legislation or regulation requiring tobacco companies to produce a less incendiary cigarette. Due to the absence of legislation, Dr. Wigand said tobacco companies chose not to market a less incendiary cigarette.[101]

McGuire Fights Fire

Andrew McGuire, the executive director of the Trauma Foundation at San Francisco General Hospital has been an advocate for less incendiary cigarettes since the 1970s. At a September 2000 Senate Post Audit and Oversight Committee hearing, Mr. McGuire likened less incendiary cigarettes to a "vaccine that will prevent the most horrendous injury a human being could go through."[102]

Mr. McGuire has served as a member of the technical study and advisory groups established by federal legislation to study the issue of cigarette fire safety standards.[103] Mr. McGuire launched an official campaign in the late 1970s calling on the U.S. Congress to mandate such cigarettes, and was one of the first to educate the public about the tobacco industry's ability to produce a less incendiary cigarette.[104]

Mr. McGuire has testified before more than 13 state legislatures in support of fire safety standards for cigarettes.[105] He has stated that the tobacco companies have been researching how to make a cigarette less prone to start fires for more than 15 years.[106]

In the early 1980s, Philip Morris, the leading manufacturer of cigarettes sold in the United States, started "Project Hamlet," the code name for an effort to create a less incendiary cigarette.[107] As a result of this research, Philip Morris researchers in 1987 sent unmarked packs of Hamlet cigarettes to 77 smokers who rated the prototype "equally acceptable to the smokers in the test and showed no significant differences" between the less incendiary cigarette and a Marlboro brand.[108]

An Idea That Has Merit

Philip Morris has broken ranks with the rest of the tobacco industry by marketing a less flammable version of one of its 350 cigarette brands.[109] In July 2000, Philip Morris released a new version of Merit cigarettes, which are more likely to self extinguish if left burning unattended.[110] The patented technology, dubbed PaperSelect, involves ultra-thin rings of paper, applied on top of the traditional cigarette paper, that act as "speed bumps" to slow down the burn rate of the cigarette.[111] All Merit cigarettes on the national market are now made with PaperSelect cigarette paper.[112]

Philip Morris has conducted toxicological testing on cigarettes made with the PaperSelect paper and found no increased toxicity in the smoke. Philip Morris found that for smokers, cigarettes made with the special paper, when compared with cigarettes made with conventional cigarette paper, "taste the same and the health risks are no different."[113]

In addition, Philip Morris conducted a market survey of its Merit cigarette with the PaperSelect technology and found that nine out of 10 customers preferred the less incendiary PaperSelect version over the non-PaperSelect version.[114]

[1] "Cigarette Started Fire at LaSalette." Patriot Ledger 9 Nov. 1999.

[2]City of Attleboro. Fire and Police Departments. Incident Report. 9 Nov. 1999.

[3]City of Attleboro. Fire and Police Departments. Incident Report. 9 Nov. 1999; Churchill, Ronald. Chief, Attleboro Fire Department. Testimony. Public Hearing. Massachusetts Senate Post Audit and Oversight Committee. Boston, 6 Sept. 2000.

[4] Churchill, Ronald. Chief, Attleboro Fire Department. Telephone conversation. 11 Aug. 2000. Fire incident reports indicate that the LaSalette fire resulted in $10 million in damages.

[5] Hall, John, Jr. National Fire Protection Association. The U.S. Smoking Material Fire Problem Through 1997. December 1999.

[6] Office of the State Fire Marshal. "Smoking Related Fires 1990-1999." Massachusetts Fire Incident Reporting System Annual Report. 1999. This report defines smoking materials in accordance with studies by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), in which "smoking materials refer only to lighted tobacco products, not matches or lighters. Nearly all smoking-material fires involve cigarettes; cigars and pipes collectively are specifically cited in only two percent of these fires. "

[9] Office of the State Fire Marshal. "Smoking Related Fires 1990-1999." Massachusetts Fire Incident Reporting System Annual Report . 1999.

[10] Ibid. 7% of smoking related fires start when the smoker fell asleep; 4% of structure fires caused by smoking were arson.

[11] Public Hearing. Massachusetts Senate Post Audit and Oversight Committee (PAO Committee). Boston, 6 Sept. 2000.

SENATE, No. 2314

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts

In the Year Two Thousand.

Extinguishing Fatal Flames:
A Smoldering Issue
Creating Fire Safety Standards for Cigarettes

Senate Committee on Post Audit and Oversight

FINDINGS: A CRITICAL PUBLIC SAFETY PROBLEM

RECOMMENDATIONS: CREATING FIRE SAFETY STANDARDS

SENATE, No. 2314

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts

In the Year Two Thousand.

Extinguishing Fatal Flames: A Smoldering Issue Creating Fire Safety Standards for Cigarettes

Senate Committee on Post Audit and Oversight

FINDINGS: A CRITICAL PUBLIC SAFETY PROBLEM

RECOMMENDATIONS: CREATING FIRE SAFETY STANDARDS

Extinguishing Fatal Flames:
A Smoldering Issue
Creating Fire Safety Standards for Cigarettes