Secondary impacts on other industries, such as paper,
fertilizer, container, manufacturing equipment, chemical, trans-
portation, and advertising, and on cigarette industry product
liability are not included. Human effects (deaths, injuries) are
discussed separately from financial impacts.

The possible change in health effects is a serious issue.
There is a concern that the composition of the smoke in less
ignition-prone cigarettes might be more toxic than smoke from
current cigarettes. Prior to marketing a future low ignition
propensity cigarette, an analysis of its smoke composition
needs to be carried out to determine if that composition has
the potential of increasing the toxicity over its present level. In
addition, future product modifications might affect such heaith-
related factors as the consumption rate of cigarettes or the age
at which people start smoking.[28,29,30] The TSG is
concerned about the smoke toxicity issue, but could not
resolve it within the scope of this project.

The economic impact model has a place to include
changes in smoke toxicity. Since the per puff tar, nicotine, and
carbon monoxide yields from the better-performing
experimental cigarettes were not appreciably different from the
best-selling commercial cigarettes [19], the present use of the
model assumed that the less ignition-prone cigarette of the
future would not produce smoke of toxicity different from
present cigarettes.

A large number of calculations have been made using the
five cigarette modifications mentioned earlier with different
effectiveness in eliminating ignitions.[22] The calculations are
based on a complex set of data and require broad assump-
tions. In each case, care was taken to select the most
appropriate, These cases produced a range of economic and
human impacts.

The model, as constructed using these broad
assumptions, predicts that any of the modifications
considered would result in only small changes in the
cost of cigarettes, unemployment, health care costs, life
expectancy, and the financial status of the affected
industries and professions.


None, Citrates, Ammonium,
phosphate

Low, medium, high

Bright. Burley, Oriental types
Low, medium, high

28 and 60 cuts per inch

Cigarette paper additives

Cigarette paper porosity
Tobacco filler composition
Tobacco density

Tobacco particle size

Cigarette geometry Round, oval
Cigarette circumference 19 and 25 mm
Cigarette length Short, long

Cigarette filter With and without
This list comprises nearly 1,000 possible cigarette variations, a
number that is large relative to the capability of measurement

B, Resources

The TSG estimates that 100 variations should be sufficient to
explore most of the major effects. The tobacco industry will
supply the samples. The cost of quality assurance testing is
$4 per sample, for a total cost of $400 k. A first series of
samples could be prepared within six weeks after specification

Ill. Data Analysis and Projections

A. Objective

The purpose is to acquire, compile, and analyze data for (1)
estimates of potential reductions in fire incidents, and (2) other
specific purposes identified by the Technical Study Group.

B. Approach

Current and historic market data and fire data related to
cigarettes. upholstered furniture and mattresses will be
obtained. These will be analyzed and trends projected into the
future to estimate potential reductions in fire losses as a func-
tion of the various physical properties and burning charac:
teristics of cigarettes. All data will be evaluated as to its degree
of reliability.

Much of this effort will support the cost/benefit analyses
described below. Thus, specific needs are expected to arise
regularly as that project evolves.

Some already anticipated tests are:

1. Develop comparabi

if possible, among various data sets.
2. Obtain fire data, including:
a. Current national estimates of fires, deaths, injuries, prop-
erty loss associated with the Acts mandate (primarily
NFIRS sources)

b. trends associated with item a. above.

35

c. materials first ignited in these fires (primarily NFIRS.
sources)

d. age and other demographic characteristics of victims
(primarily NFIRS sources)

e. risk of ignition with various kinds of upholstered furniture
(primarily CPSC data)

{tisk of ignition with various kinds of mattresses (primarily
CPSC data)

3. Obtain market data including

a. profile of current cigarette sales and characteristics of
interest and trends (industry and government sources)

b. profile of upholstered furniture currently in American
households, currently being marketed and future trends
(industry sources such as UFAC)

c. profile of mattresses currently in American households,
currently being marketed, and trends (industry sources
such as NABM)

In addition, the TSG envisions the possibility of needing some
form(s) of data not yet available. This will be commissioned as
necessary.

C. Resources
Data analysis and projections will be generated throughout the

TSG's existence. In addition to TSG members contributions,
contract support will be needed for an 18 month period:

Senior investigator 15 SY. $ 180 k

Junior investigator 15 SY. 90 k
Secretarial support 05 SY. 20 k
Materials, travel, etc. 10k

$ 300 k

New data project 100 k

Total $ 400 k

IV. Cost/Benefit Analysis

A. Objective

This task is to develop a framework for evaluating the impact
of possible changes in cigarette ignition potential, and to apply
that methodology to a variety of reasonable possibilities.


aA

September 10, 1987

Principal Topic: Presentation of (third) draft TSG findings to
public for comment. Comments by LaHue, Schaenman,
Meisel. Discussion of third draft of TSG final report.

Important Decision: Continued consensus on content of
TSG final report.

September 21, 1987
Principal Topic: Discussion of fourth draft of final report

Important Decision: Unanimous approval of TSG final
report

31


{f an inventor desires to have his or her cigarette invention considered for testing on this program, the inventor must:

1. Select the single embodiment of his or her patent(s) believed to be most effective for consideration.

2. Submit documents which show that a patent has been issued or that the application for a patent has been filed.

3. Supply information as to the specific nature of the particular modification or additive employed in the cigarette
invention in quantitative terms.

4, Provide evidence of significantly reduced propensity of the cigarette invention to ignite substrates found in
mattresses and upholstered furniture.

5. Provide free of charge 300 invention cigarettes and 300 control cigarettes that are identical to the invention
cigarettes except for the feature that comprises the effective ignition repression. The patented cigarettes and the control
cigarettes should be clearly differentiated on their packages. The cigarettes should be packed so as to safeguard
against damage during transport and should identify a person to contact if the shipment has been damaged

6. Supply uniformity data (mean value plus standard deviation) for both the patented and control cigarettes with
regard to the following properties:

cigarette mass.

cigarette length and diameter

mass burning rate (in air)

magnitude of modification (eg., concentration of additive)

Additionally, the TSG requests inventors submitting cigarettes for testing to provide information showing the absence of
any obvious toxicity problems associated with the invention, and an analysis of the tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide
content of the smoke produced by the cigarette invention. However, the failure to provide this information will not
preclude consideration of the cigarette invention for testing,

Samples of the cigarette invention, control cigarettes, and the information described above must be received by Dr.
Richard G. Gann, Center for Fire Research, National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899, not later than
September 30, 1986. Materials received after September 30, 1986, will not be accepted.

Inventors who submit their cigarettes for consideration as candidates for testing are advised that there will be abso-
lutely no payment or reirnbursement for the samples of cigarettes provided for testing. These samples will not be
returned. Further submission of test sample cigarettes which meet the criteria above does not necessarily mean that the
sample cigarettes will be selected for testing. Selection of cigarette inventions for testing will be made by the TSG,
whose decision will be final. While the TSG desires to iest ail cigarette inventions meeting the criteria set forth above,
lack of funds, time constraints and other factors may limit the amount of testing which can be done.

The results of this testing program will be included in the TSG's final report to Congress. The TSG will not report
results of testing individual cigarette inventions to patent holders. The TSG intends to report results of this testing
program in a format which will not disclose results obtained from any individual cigarette invention. Selection of any
cigarette invention for testing in this program does not constitute any form of endorsement or approval of the invention
by the government of the United States.

Dated: June 3, 1986

Colin B. Church

Federal Employee Designated by the Interagency Committee on Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety.
[FR Doc. 86-13483 Filed 6-13-86; 8:45 am]

Billing Code 6355-01-M

40



Several properties reduce the likelihood of ignition: low
tobacco density, smal! circumference, low paper
porosity, and in some cases elimination of citrate addi-
tion to the paper. Considerably larger reductions were
achieved with combinations of these properties. Within
the limits tested, the tobacco type had little effect.[19]
Because only two values of each property were studied, the
effect on ignition propensity of intermediate or more extreme
values of those properties is unknown,

Table 3. Ignition Propensity as a
Function of Cigarette Characteristics

[19]
Number
of Ignitions/

Cigarette Parameters Tests Ignitions
Tobacco Density

High 282/320 88

Low 153/320 48
Cigarette Circumference
(mm)

25 243/320 76

21 192/320 60
Paper Porosity

High 256/320 80

! Low 179/320 56

Paper Citrate Conc. (%)

08s 231/320 72

0.0 204/320 64
Paper Citrate Conc. (%)
Low Ignition Propensity
Cigarettes)

08 47/100 47

0.0 23/100 23
Tobacco Type

Flue-cured 222/320 69

Burley 213/320 66

Testing, on only one substrate, of seven of these
experimental cigarettes with the filters removed showed
some increase in ignition propensity.[19] No such difference
between filter and non-filter commercial cigarettes was
found.[18] However, only in the experimental cigarettes were
all other features of the cigarette held constant.

During the last century, approximately one hundred
patents have been issued for claims of fire-safe cigarettes.
The TSG decided to examine some of these for potential

effectiveness. Accordingly, notices were placed in the
Federal Register (Appendix F) requesting patent holders to
submit the single best embodiment of their ideas, along with
identical cigarettes without the patented feature (controls). A
total of five such submissions was made from four sources.
The cigarettes were coded immediately upon receipt. The
submitters have been notified of the code for their cigarettes
only, and the code has since been destroyed

The five patented design features, as provided by the
patent holders, were:

Very low porosity, high weight paper with a high citrate
level, then electrostatically perforated to a high porosity;

Sodium silicate added to 5 mm in the center of the
tobacco rod;

* Two 65 mm bands, 15 mm apart, of low porosity paper
attached at fixed intervals to the inside surface of the ciga-
rette wrapper, which has a medium porosity and 0.8%
sodium potassium citrate (sic);

Application to the exterior surface of a water suspension
containing non-fat dry mitk and mono-ammonium phos-
phate; and

Addition to the tobacco column of an intumescent silicate.

All these cigarettes and their controls were tested in the
same manner as the cigarettes above, including some more
ignition-prone substrates. All five of the patented
cigarettes showed distinct improvement over their
submitted controls (Table 4) and the typical current
commercial cigarettes. (19]

Table 4. Ignition Propensities of
Patented Cigarettes [19]

Cigarette No. Ignitions/ Percent
Designation _No. Tests Ignitions
301-Control 25/25 100
301 29/50 58
302-Control 24/25 96
302 10/50 20
303-Control 25/25, 100
303 32/60 53
304-Control 25/25 100
304 33/50 66
305-Contro! 25/25 100
305 13/60 22



Final Report

Technical

Study Group
Cigarette Safety
Act of 1984




B. Approach

A general contractor will analyze the existing literature to
develop a detailed framework for a cost/benefit analysis. Where
possible, the contractor will use the capabilities obtained in the
Data Analysis and Projection task to estimate the individual
components.

The existing literature will be reviewed to assess the relation:
ship between health effects and the tar, nicotine, carbon
monoxide, and where appropriate, other components in smoke.
In the event such a report does not already exist, contributory
papers will be compiled

It is anticipated that the task on !gnitability Measurement and
other technological advances will identify certain improved-
performance cigarettes. The smokes frorn certain of these will
be tested to determine their carbon monoxide, tar, and nicotine
contents, and may be subjected to more detailed chemical
analyses and/or a possible limited biological screening, for
evaluation of the effects of suspected changes in smoke
composition and/or health risk

For a sampling of cigarettes showing reduced ignition
propensity, the TSG will evaluate the commercial manufacturing
feasibility with particular input from its tobacco industry
members. To be considered are the following elements of ciga-
rette construction

1. cigarette paper properties and its manufacture,
2. tobacco composition and its availability,
3. tobacco particle size and its processability,

4. cigarette dimensions with tax weight limitations and friability
considerations, and

5. filters with their construction, material, processability, and
dimension limitation.

A format will need to be devised for assessment of
consumer acceptability of new products.

The contractor will combine the information with the output
of the other tasks to apply the cost/benefit methodology to a
variety of reasonable possibilities. Some hypothetical cases
may be included for comparison.

36

C. Resources

Cost/benefit framework and operation $ 350 k
Cigarette testing 200 k
$ 550 k

V. Managerial and Administrative Support

To assist the Interagency Committee and the Technical Study
Group. CPSC will provide program management and adminis-
trative support services. This includes program planning and
monitoring, logistical support of meetings, and liaison with
interested state and local governments. In addition, some
services will be contracted, eg., obtaining transcripts of
hearings, report preparation and printing. These will require an
additional $200 k.

VI. Travel Cost Reimbursement

Non-Federal members (10) of the Technical Study Group are
reimbursed for their travel and communication costs, as are
any invited speakers. The cost per meeting for members is
estimated at $8000. We estimate there will be sixteen more
meetings. An additional $20,000 is estimated for solicited
speakers. The total, which needs to be specifically designated
as travel funds, is $150 k.

Resource Summary

Ignitability Measurement $1000 k
Experimental Cigarettes. 400 k
Data Analysis and Projections 400 k
Cost/Benefit Analysis 550 k
Management and Secretariat Support 200 k
Travel Cost Reimbursement 150 k
TOTAL $2700 k


Contents

List of Tables . .

List of Figures . .
Executive Summary
Introduction oe
United States Fire Loss Profile...

The Cigarette Safety Act of 1984 ..

Technical Feasibility, Including the
Identification of the Different Physical
Characteristics of Cigarettes and Little
Cigars Which Have an Impact on the Ignition
of Upholstered Furniture and Mattresses .
Background Knowledge . bees
Small-Scale Tests . :

Validity of Small- Scale Test Data :
Commercial Feasibility, Including Analysis of
Feasibility of Altering Any Pertinent
Characteristics to Reduce Ignition
Propensity

Manufacturing Feasibility .........

Consumer Acceptance .

Monitoring ignition Propensity

Economic Impact and Other Consequences,
Including Analysis of the Possible Costs and
Benefits, Both to the Industry and the
Public, Associated with Any Such Product
Modification................

Conclusions cee
Recommendations for Further Technical Work. .

Acknowledgments . ns
References.........................
APPENDIX A: Cigarette Safety Act of 1984
APPENDIX B: Technical Study Group
Membership bebe ence eee eee eee
APPENDIX C: Chronology of Technical Study
Group Meetings : a
APPENDIX D: Working Paper on Resource

Needs Assessment a see

APPENDIX E: Update to Working Plan for
Technical Study Group Program.........
APPENDIX F: Text of Federal Register
Solicitations for Submission of Patented
Cigarettes .

wows

ouan

13
15

rT)
“24

23

27

29

33

37

39


Appenaix Cc
Chronology of Technical Study
Group Meetings

January 3, 1985

Principal Topics: introductions of participants; delineate
iegal requirements; select operating procedures; establish
objectives; formulate plan to collect background literature;
review of UFAC work on furniture ignitions and CPSC work
on mattress ignitions; election of Chairman and Vice-
Chairman.

important Decisions: Follow Roberts Rules of Order where
practical: all issues to be decided by majority vote, except
that the mandated status and final reports would require a
two-thirds majority; elected Richard G. Gann Chairman
and Edward Press Vice-Chairman.

January 28-29, 1985

Principal Topics: Rules for TSG alternates, guest speakers,
and confidential meetings and materials; presentations on
physical characteristics which affect ignition (Spears),
assessing health effects (Cullen, Hoffman), elements of
economic impact analysis: proposal from NBS on ignition
propensity measurement using experimental cigarettes
(Gann); subgroup activity to develop a project plan.

important Decisions: Accepted offer from CPSC of Colin
Church to be TSG Secretariat; little cigars not to be studied
due to very small market share and ordinary fire hazard;
working plan to be balloted and sent to the IAC.

. March 4-5, 1985

Principal Topics: Report that the TSG had submitted the
"Working Plan on Resource Needs Assessment’ to the IAC
on February 12 and that the IAC and OMB had reviewed
it, presentations on mattress flammability (Klancnik), vari-
ables affecting ignition (Norman), candidate ignition test
method (Krasny), test procedure for self-extinguishment ot
cigarettes (Selke), cigarette ignition testing (Rayburn);
discussion of proposal to test current commercial
cigarettes; report on state activities; tour of Philip Morris
cigarette manutacturing plant

29

Important Decisions: Voted to test commercial cigarettes:
subgroup commissioned to propose plan (Cohen, Damant,
Klancnik, Krasny, Spears, Sharman, Ziolkowski).

April 15, 1985

Principal Topics: No funding yet: presentation of furniture
ignition testing in California (Damant); discussion of
subgroup report on testing commercial cigarettes; presen
tation and discussion of NBS ignition propensity measure-
ment project (Gann).

Important Decisions: Referral of media contacts to ISG
Chairman or Secretariat; approval of commercial cigarette
testing project; future meetings not to be held without
travel reimbursement.

. July 1112, 1985

Principal Topics: First Public Meeting presentations by
inventors of “fire-safé’ cigarettes (Cohn, LaHue, Waco,
Canavor) and others (Martin, Stamm, Grannis); noted that
funding for commercial cigarette testing had been trans-
ferred from CPSC to NBS; further discussion of NBS igni
tion propensity measurement project; establish three
subgroups for further project delineation.

Important Decisions: Approval of revised plan for commer
cial cigarette testing. cigarettes and materials available for
possible parallel studies; Gann to draft status report to
Congress for TSG approval.

September 5, 1985

Principal Topics: Noted that $0.5M had been added to the
CPSC FY 1985 budget for Cigarette Safety Act activities
($475k to NBS to begin ignition propensity measurement
project, $25k for TSG travel); progress report on commer:
cial cigarette testing; discussion of data subgroup report
(Cohen); discussion of economic impact analysis needs
and possible contractors.

Important Decisions: Congressional status report text
approved for forwarding to the IAC.


Conctusions

The Technical Study Group finds that it is technically
feasible and may be commercially feasible to develop
cigarettes that will have a significantly reduced propen-
sity to ignite upholstered furniture or mattresses.
Furthermore, the overall impact on other aspects of the
United States society and economy may be minimal.
Thus it may be possible to solve this problem at costs
that are less than the potential benefits, assuming the
commercial feasibility of the modified cigarettes.

The particular conclusions of this study are as follows:

There are cigarette characteristics whose variations in the
laboratory reduced the ignition propensity of the cigarette.
These are: reduced circumference, lower density tobacco,
less porous paper, and reduction of citrate addition to the
paper. Considerably larger reductions were achieved with
combinations of these. Several patented approaches also
offer directions for further investigation. Limited evidence
suggests the presence of a filter may also have some effect
on ignition propensity.

The differences in ignition propensity among selected
current commercial cigarettes are unimportant.

Measurements of cigarette ignition propensity on upholstered
furniture mockups are reasonable indicators of performance
on full-scale furniture made of the same materials. However,
the wide lot-to-lot variation in those materials limits the use of
such mockups for cigarette testing over a long period of
time and by different laboratories.

A valid and reliable measurement method is needed to
determine that a cigarette is less ignition-prone. It is also
important to collect information on cigarette-initiated fires to
determine how successfully future cigarettes perform.

The manufacture of less fire-prone cigarettes may require
some advances in cigarette design and manufacturing tech-
nology.

« No cigarettes were tested for their acceptability to the
smoking public. However, some physical characteristics
which decrease a cigarettes propensity to ignite soft
furnishings are incorporated individually in some commercial
cigarettes. Combinations of all characteristics of the lowest
ignition propensity cigarettes have not been incorporated in
any commercial cigarettes.

The overall effects of the cigarette modifications considered
may result in only small changes in the price of cigarettes,
unemployment, health care costs, life expectancy, and the
financial status of the affected industries and professions.
This conclusion involves a number of broad but necessary
assumptions.

The per puff tar nicotine, and carbon monoxide yields from
some of the least ignition-prone experimental cigarettes were
within the ranges of yields from the best-selling commercial
cigarettes. These cigarettes have a significantly higher resis-
tance to puffing and a marginally lower number of pulfs
than do current commercial cigarettes. The toxicity of smoke
from a future low ignition propensity cigarette needs to be
addressed, as would the smoke from any substantially modi-
fied commercial cigarette, before its introduction into the
marketplace.


Reterences

{6]
td]

(8)

{9]

[10]

(1)
[12]

(13]

(14)

Karter, MJ., “Fire Loss in the United States During 19847

Fire Journal, 79 15, September, 1985.

Washburn, A.E., Harlow, DW., Fahy, R.F., “US. Fire

Fighter Deaths; Fire Command, 52 21, June, 1985.

Karter, Jr, M.J., Harlow, D.H., and Washburn, AE., “US.

Fire Fighter Injuries 1984? Fire Command, 52 24,

November, 1985.

Estimated from Hall, Jr, J.R., “The Total Cost of Fire in

the U.S.A.) Fire Journal, 80 83, May, 1986.

a. Schaenman, P. §., International Concepts in Fire
Protection, Ideas From Europe That Could Improve
US. Fire Safety, IriData, Arlington, Virginia, 1982.

b. Schaenman, PS., and Seits, E.F., International
Concepts in Fire Protection, Practices from Japan,
Hong Kong, Australia, and New Zealand, TriData,
Anington, Virginia, 1985.

Karter, M.J., “Fire Loss in the United States During 1985”

Fire Journal, 80 26, September, 1986.

Maxwell, Jr, J.C., ‘The Maxwell Report: Revised 1985

Year-End Sales Estimates for the Cigarette Industry’

Furman Selz Mager Dietz & Birney, Inc., 1985.

Hall, Jr J.R., “Expected Changes in Fire Damages from

Reducing Cigarette Ignition Propensity’ Report No. 5,

Technical Study Group, Cigarette Safety Act of 1984,

1987.

“Eighth Annual Flammable Fabrics Report? U.S.

Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, DC.,

December, 1980.

Harwood, B., “Trends in Cigarette-Ignited Fires’ U.S.

Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, DC.,

March 1, 1985.

“Standard for the Flammability of Mattresses and Mattress

Pads’ 16 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1632, 1973.

“Cigarette Ignition Resistance of Components of Uphol

stered Furniture’ NFPA 260A1983, National Fire Codes,

National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, Mass.,

published annually.

“Resistance of Mock-up Upholstered Furniture Material

Assemblies to Ignition by Smoldering Cigarettes} NFPA

260B-1983, National Fire Codes, National Fire Protection

Association, Quincy, Mass., published annually.

Ray, D., Consumer Product Safety Commission. private

communication.

ai

{15}
[16]

(7)

(18)

[19]

(20}

(21]

Spears, A., Lorillard, Inc., private communication.
Maxwell, Jr, J.C., “Cigar Sales Still Slumping! Advertising
Age, p. 26, August 4, 1986.

Krasny, J.F, ‘Cigarette Ignition of Soft Furnishings--A
Literature Review With Commentary; Report No. 2, Tech
nical Study Group, Cigarette Safety Act of 1984, and
NBSIR 87-3509, U.S. National Bureau of Standards,
Gaithersburg, MD, 1987.

Krasny, J.F. and Gann, RG., ‘Relative Propensity of
Selected Commercial Cigarettes to Ignite Soft Furnishings
Mockups; Report No. 1, Technical Study Group, Cigarette
Safety Act of 1984, and NBSIR 86-3421, US. National
Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, MD, 1986.

Gann, R.G., Harris, Jr, R.H., Krasny, JF, Levine, RS.,
Mitler, H.E., and Ohlemiller, TJ., ‘The Effect of Cigarette
Characteristics on the Ignition of Soft Furnishings; Report
No. 3, Technical Study Group, Cigarette Safety Act of
1984, 1987.

Damant, G.H., McCormack, J.A., and Claire, B., “Tests of
Smoldering Ignition of Chairs and Reduced-Scale Mock-
ups by Various Cigarettes’ Report No. 7, Technical Study
Group, Cigarette Safety Act of 1984, 1987.

Harwood, B. and Fansler, L., “Feasibility Study of
Obtaining Field Data on Cigarette-Initiated Fires? Report
No. 8, Technical Study Group, Cigarette Safety Act of
1984, 1987

Ruegg, RT., Weber, S.F, Lippiatt, BC., and Fuller, S.K.,
“Improving the Fire Safety of Cigarettes: An Economic
Impact Analysis; Report No. 4, Technical Study Group,
Cigarette Safety Act of 1984, 1987.

Sumner, D.A., ‘A Study of the Impact of Cigarette Modifi-
cations on the Tobacco Production Industry in the United
States’ in Report No. 6, Technical Study Group, Cigarette
Safety Act of 1984, 1987.

Lago, A.L., and Shannon, J.A., “Cost Analysis of Options
for SeltExtinguishing Cigarettes’ in Report No. 6, Tech:
nical Study Group, Cigarette Safety Act of 1984, 1987.
Oster, G.O., “Estimates of the Economic and Non-
Economic Health Consequences of Smoking, Smoking
Cessation, and Reduction in the Amount Smoked? in
Report No. 6, Technical Study Group, Cigarette Safety Act
of 1984, 1987.


Recommendations for Further
Technical Work

* A standard test method is needed to determine cigarette
ignition propensity. Such a method should be developed as
soon as possible and validated using the current set of
experimental cigarettes.

Performance data for current market cigarettes should be
generated using the new test method. These data could
then be compared to future year cigarette performance.

A study to collect baseline and follow-up data about the
characteristics of cigarettes, products ignited, and smokers
involved in fires should be designed and implemented.

* Systematic knowledge should be developed (from existing or
new sources, as appropriate) on (a) changes in the toxicity
of smoke and resultant health effects from modified
cigarettes, and (b) societal costs of injuries from cigarette-
initiated fires.

Both the laboratory studies on and computer modeling of
ignition physics should be continued to develop a valid,
user-friendly predictive capability. This would enable inexpen-
sive screening for ignition propensity of future cigarette
concepts. (The authors of reference 19 have offered more
detailed recommendations for further research.)


/ October 21-22, 1985

Principal Topics: Noted that the Federal Emergency
Management Agency had provided $150k for the NBS
ignition propensity measurement project; proposal for
economic impact analysis (Ruegg); tour of NBS fire
research facilities; discussion of TSG data needs to support
benefit/cost analysis; presentation of preliminary results of
commercial cigarette testing: progress report on ignition
propensity measurement of experimental cigarettes.

Important Decisions: Approved NBS to perform the
economic impact analysis.

@

January 9, 1986

Principal Topics: Noted that $1M added to FY 1986 CPSC
budget for Cigarette Safety Act work and that IAC
supported 6-month extension and request to Congress for
remaining $600k; noted that funds had been transferred
from CPSC to NBS for completion of the ignition propen-
sity Measurement project and the economic impact anal-
ysis, discussion on testing patented cigarettes and the
selection criteria.

Important Decisions: Voted to include the testing of
patented cigarettes in the NBS ignition propensity meas-
urement project.

9. May 8, 1986

Principal Topics: Discussion of draft report on commercial
cigarette testing; progress reports on NBS ignition propen:
sity measurement project (Gann) and economic impact
analysis (Ruegg):; discussion of solicitation for submission of
patented cigarettes for testing; brief presentations by data
contractors for economic impact analysis: fire loss data
(Hall), health care (Ruegg for Oster), labor (Greenberg),
consumer acceptance (Brown and Ford), and production
costs (Lago).

Important Decisions: Voted to hold a second public
meeting; voted to prepare a second status report to the
Congress.

July 10-11, 1986

Principal Topics: Sumner (tobacco farming) added as data
source for economic impact analysis, CPSC report on
identifying cigarettes involved in fires (Cohen); status
reports on ongoing contracts; Second Public Meeting
presentations by LaHue, Myers, Briese, Scholl

Important Decisions: Text of second status report to the
Congress approved for forwarding to the IAC; approved
text of NBS report on commercial cigarette testing.

30

1.

September 9, 1986

Principal Topics: Noted that the IAC had approved the
TSG Chairman forwarding press releases to the IAC
Chairman for issuance following meetings: commercial
cigarette testing report issued by NBS; progress report on
ignition propensity measurement project— second set of
experimental cigarettes requested; discussed draft plan for
TSG operations for the remainder of the program.

Important Decisions: Approved operating plan for the
remainder of the program (approved by IAC 10/7/86).

January 6, 1987

Principal Topics: Noted that Congress had approved both
the 6-month extension to the Act and the remaining $600k;
discussion of progress on ignition propensity measurement
project; cigarette ignition literature survey distributed for
comment; discussion of American Tobacco Company
testing of three patented cigarettes; review of status of all
TSG contracts

Important Decisions: Approved schedule for remainder of
program.

. February 12-13, 1987

Principal Topics: Noted that pilot field data study is
underway in conjunction with the International Association
of Fire Chiefs and nine cities; presentations and review of
six completed studies in support of economic impact anal-
ysis; tour of NBS cigarette study laboratories.

Important Decision: Selection of values of variables for
case studies of the economic impact analysis.

June 29-30, 1987

Principal Topics: Discussion with authors of reviewed tech-
nical reports by TSG members and peer reviewers; distri-
bution of first draft of TSG final report.

Important Decisions: First draft of TSG final report to be
held confidential.

July 16-17, 1987
Principal Topic: Discussion of first draft of TSG final report.

Important Decisions: Second draft of TSG final report to be
held confidential

August 17, 1987

Principal Topic: Discussion of second draft of TSG final
report.

important Decisions: Approva! of text of all technical
reports; consensus on content of TSG final report.


to determine how successfully the modified cigarettes
have performed. A pilot study was conducted by the
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) staff to assess.
the feasibility of identifying critical contributing factors in
cigarette-initiated fires: the kinds of cigarettes involved (and
their physical characteristics), the furnishings ignited, and
characteristics of the smokers.[21] Working with the International
Association of Fire Chiefs, fire incidence data were collected by
nine fire departments. Data on the physical characteristics of
virtually all 247 current cigarette packings were obtained from
the manufacturers to allow determination of the importance of
cigarette physical property factors in the fires.

In the ten weeks of the project, 100 cases were reported.
This is about half of these fires expected from the nine cities.
A positive identification of the cigarette packing was obtained
in 59 of these. In most cases, the smokers age, sex and race
were obtained, but other demographic data was frequently not
recorded. In 57 of the cases, samples of the ignited furniture
were obtained and sent to the CPSC for fabric and padding
material identification.

The study showed that it is possible to identify the
characteristics of cigarettes involved in fires.

Within this small, non-random sampling, there was a preva-
lence of nomfiltered cigarettes and cigarettes with a high
amount of tobacco, compared to the national averages. The
appearance of a non-random distribution of packings further
encourages the creation of a full-scale study.

12


A roster of the TSG members and their affiliations appears
as Appendix B. A chronology of TSG meetings is included
as Appendix C. All meetings of the TSG were announced in
the Federal Register and, except for one brief period where
industry-confidential material was discussed, were open to
the public. The TSG initial and refined work plans appear as
Appendices D and E. With the exceptions noted later, the
IAC approved the TSG plans. The cost of this program was
2.1 million dollars.

This report now continues with the findings of the TSG
under the three charges in the Act.


Member and Affiliation

Richard G. Gann, Ph.D., Chairman
Center for Fire Research
National Bureau of Standards

Edward Press, M.D., Vice-Chairman
Public Health Consultant

Charles M. Carey
Upholstered Furniture Action Council

James L. Charles, Ph.D.
Philip Morris U.S.A.

Joseph W. Cullen, Ph.D.
National Cancer Institute

John C. Gerard
National Fire Protection Association

James F. Hoebel
Consumer Product Safety Commission

Preston H. Leake, Ph.D.
American Tobacco Company

Michael D. McGibeny
Daytona Beach Fire Department

Andrew McGuire
Trauma Foundation

Wendy H. Poel
Herman Miller, Inc.

Alexander W. Spears, Ill, Ph.D.
Lorillard, Inc.

Henry Tovey
Federal Emergency Management Agency

David E. Townsend, Ph.D.
RJ. Reynolds Tobacco Company

Judith P. Wilkenfeld, Esq.
Federal Trade Commission

Appendix B
Technical Study Group Membership

Sponsor

Center for Fire Research’
National Bureau of Standards

American Medical Association &

American Public Health Association

American Furniture Association

Tobacco Institute

National Cancer Institute

National Fire Protection Association

Consumer Product Safety Commission

Tobacco Institute

International Association of Fire Chiefs

American Burn Association & Trauma Foundation

American Public Health Association
Business and Institutional Furniture

Manufacturers Association
Tobacco Institute
Federal Emergency Management Agency

Tobacco Institute

Federal Trade Commission

a7


eral Emergency Management Agency, the appointment of
whom shall be made by the heads of those agencies;

(2) four scientific or technical representatives appointed by
the Chairman of the Interagency Committee, by and with the

98 STAT. 2926 PUBLIC LAW 98-5

Study
Tse 2
note

TASC

nets

‘Termination.

7-—-OCT. 380, 1984

advice and consent of the Interagency Committee, from a list of
individuals submitted by the Tobacco Institute:

(3) two scientific or technical representatives appointed by the
CI airman of the Interagency Committee, by and with the
advice and consent of the Interagency Committee, who are
selected from lists of individuals submitted by the following
organizations: the American Burn Association, the American
Public Health Association, and the American Medical
Association;

(4) two scientific or technical representatives appointed by the
Chairman of the Interagency Committee, by and with the
advice and consent of the Interagency Committee, who are
selected from lists of individuals submitted by the following
organizations: the National Fire Protection Association, the
International Association of Fire Chiefs, the International Asso-
ciation of Fire Fighters, the International Society of Fire Serv-
ice Instructors, and the National Volunteer Fire Council; and

(5) one scientific or technical representative appointed by the
Chairman of the Interagency Committee, by and with the
advice and consent of the Interagency Committee, from lists of
individuals submitted by the Business and Institutional Furni-
ture Manufacturers Association and one scientific or technical
representative appointed by the Chairman, by and with the
advice and consent of the Interagency Committee, from lists of
individuals submitted by the American Furniture Manufactur-
ers Association.

(b) The persons appointed to serve on the Study Group may
designate, with the advice and consent of the Interagency Commit-
tee, from among their number such persons to serve as team
leaders, coordinators, or chairpersons as they deem necessary or
appropriate to carry out the Study Group's functions under
section 4.

Sec. 4. The Study Group shall undertake, subject to oversight and
review by the Interagency Committee, such studies and other activi-
ties as it considers necessary and appropriate to determine the
technical and commercial feasibility, economic impact, and other
consequences of developing cigarettes and little cigars that will have
a minimum propensity to ignite upholstered furniture or mat-
tresses. Such activities include identification of the different physi-
cal characteristics of cigarettes and little cigars which have an
impact on the ignition of upholstered furniture and mattresses, an
analysis of the feasibility of altering any pertinent characteristics to
reduce ignition propensity, and an analysis of the possible costs and
benefits, both to the industry and the public, associated with any
such product modification.

Sec. 5. The Interagency Committee shall submit one year after the
date of enactment of this Act a status report to the Senate and the
House of Representatives describing the activities undertaken under
section 4 during the preceding year. The Interagency Committee
shall submit a final technical report, prepared by the Study Group,
to the Senate and the House of Representatives not later than thirty
months after the date of enactment of this Act. The Interagency
Committee shall provide to the Congress, within sixty days after the
submission of the final technical report, any policy recommenda-
tions the Interagency Committee deems appropriate. The Inter-
agency Committee and the Study Group shall terminate one month

24


Executive Summary

The Cigarette Safety Act of 1984 created the Technical Study
Group on Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety (TSG),
directing it to “undertake such studies and other activities as
it considers necessary and appropriate to determine the
technical and commercial feasibility, economic impact, and
other consequences of developing cigarettes and little cigars
‘hat will have a minimum propensity to ignite upholstered
turniture or mattresses’ Less ignition-prone cigarettes would
significantly reduce fire losses. Since its formation in
January, 1985, the TSG has carried out a program of consul-
tation, deliberation, and research. This text is the final report
on that program.

The Technical Study Group finds that it is technically
feasible and may be commercially feasible to develop
cigarettes that will have a significantly reduced propen-
sity to ignite upholstered furniture or mattresses.
Furthermore, the overall impact on other aspects of the
United States society and economy may be minimal.
Thus it may be possible to solve this problem at costs
that are less than the potential benefits, assuming the
commercial feasibility of the modified cigarettes.

The particular conclusions of this study are as follows:

* There are cigarette characteristics whose variations in the
laboratory reduced the ignition propensity of the cigarette.
These are: reduced circumference, lower density tobacco,
less porous paper. and reduction of citrate addition to the
paper. Considerably larger reductions were achieved with
combinations of these. Several patented approaches also
offer directions for further investigation. Limited evidence
suggests the presence of a filter may also have some
effect on ignition propensity.

The differences in ignition propensity among selected
current commercial cigarettes are unimportant

* Measurements of cigarette ignition propensity on uphol-
stered furniture mockups are reasonable indicators of
performance on full-scale furniture made of the same
materials. However, the wide lotto-lot variation in those
materials limits the use of such mockups for cigarette

testing over a long period of time and by different labora
tories.

A valid and reliable measurement method is needed to
determine that a cigarette is less ignition-prone. It is also
important to collect information on cigarette-initiated fires
to determine how successfully future cigarettes perform

.

The manufacture of less fire-prone cigarettes may require
some advances in cigarette design and manufacturing
technology.

No cigarettes were tested for their acceptability to the
smoking public. However, some physical characteristics
which decrease a cigarettes propensity to ignite soft
furnishings are incorporated individually in some commer-
cial cigarettes. Combinations of all characteristics of the
lowest ignition propensity cigarettes have nat been incor-
porated in any commercial cigarettes.

* The overall effects of the cigarette modifications consid-
ered may result in only small changes in the price of
cigarettes, unemployment, health care costs, life expec-
tancy, and the financial status of the affected industries
and professions. This conclusion involves a number of
broad but necessary assumptions.

¢ The per puff tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide yields
from some of the least ignition-prone experimental
cigarettes were within the ranges of yields from the best-
selling commercial cigarettes. These cigarettes have a
significantly higher resistance to puffing and a marginally
lower number of puffs than do current commercial
cigarettes. The toxicity of smoke from a future low ignition
propensity cigarette needs to be addressed, as would the
smoke from any substantially modified commercial ciga-
rette, before its introduction into the marketplace.

The Technical Study Group recommends the following
technical activities be pursued:

* A standard test method is needed to determine cigarette
ignition propensity. Such a method should be developed
as soon as possible and validated using the current set of
experimental cigarettes


List of Tables

Table 1. Description of Experimental
Cigarettes

Table 2. Ignition Propensities of Selected Test
Cigarettes os

Table 3. — Ignition Propensity as a Function
of Cigarette Characteristics . .

Table 4. — Ignition Propensities of
Patented Cigarettes

Table 5. | Comparison of Ignition Propensities
of Tested Cigarettes at Full- and
Reduced Scales

Table 6. —_Interlaboratory Comparison of
Number of Ignitions for Various
Cigarette Packings and Substrates. .
Table 7. Potential 11-Year (1986-1996)
Savings from Avoided Cigarette-Initiated

Fires of Upholstered Furniture and
Mattresses

List of Figures

Figure 1. Cigarette Ignition of Upholstered
Cushion ... oe sees

Figure 2. Furniture Mockup for Ignition Testing . .


Economic Impact and Other
Consequences

Including Analysis of the Possible Costs and
Benefits,’ Both to the Industry and the Public,
Associated with Any Such Product Modification

The Technical Study Group finds that adaptation (if commer-
cially feasible) of the cigarette-modification concepts described
earlier would reduce the number of fire deaths and injuries.
The next step is to calculate how large the life and property
savings would be. It is also necessary to estimate the (possibly
interactive) effects on those parts of the economy and society
that would be affected by changes in the cigarette design and
construction. Then, the overall societal effects can be
appraised. To do this, a model to predict economic impact
was constructed by the Center for Applied Mathematics of the
National Bureau of Standards [22]

A projection of future fire losses was developed for the
model by the Fire Analysis Division of the National Fire Protec-
tion Association (NFPA).[8] The projection used assumptions
regarding both the recent trends in fire losses and potential
future contributing factors. This projection was then changed
by the introduction of several less fire-prone cigarettes of
varying effectiveness. The performance of each improved ciga:
tette was based on the NBS-CFR laboratory findings. The test
performance of each cigarette on selected substrates is linked
to a reduction in fire losses using a method developed by
NFPA.[8] This method also defines the laboratory data needed
for future predictions of the effectiveness of cigarette modifica-
tions. Potential savings are shown in Table 7, which presumes
the manufacture of a cigarette which does not start fires. This
also assumes that approximately 600 billion cigarettes will be
consumed annually.

While the assumptions introduce large uncertainties in the
projections, the magnitudes of the potential savings are likely
correct for future cigarettes of very low ignition propensity.

Five different cigarette modifications were selected for the
economic impact model based on consultation with experts
early in the TSG project. (They therefore do not necessarily
correspond to the tested experimental cigarettes.)

* Reduction in cigarette circumference,
* Decrease in the tobacco packing density,
* Additive to the tobacco to cause self-extinguishment,

positive economic changes resulting from modifications in cigarettes. It
does not imply any benefit from the use of cigarettes.

193-852 0 - 87 - 2

13

Table 7. Potential 11-Year (1986-1996)
Savings from Avoided Cigarette-Initiated
Fires of Upholstered Furniture and
Mattresses [8]

Ds
Potential
Savings
Fires 250,000
Civilian Injuries 34,000
Fire Fighter Injuries 16,000
Total Fire Deaths 15,000
Property Damage 26 billion

* Increase in the weight of the paper, and
* Decrease in the porosity of the paper.

Because these cover the major physical descriptors of the
cigarette and involve the major variables in the production of
the cigarettes, the model can accommodate many other
modifications that might be proposed at a later time.

The potential effects included in the economic impact model
are as follows. Input data for each of these were provided by
experts hired by the Technical Study Group based on a broad
consultation.
Fire Losses [8] changes in lives lost, injuries, and
direct property damage
Tobacco Farming [23] tobacco price, domestic sales,
tobacco revenue
Cigarette Industry [24] __ cigarette price, domestic sales, ciga-
rette revenue

Health [25] medical costs, life-years

Tax and Consumer [26] Federal excise tax revenue, consumer
surplus
Employment [27] tobacco sector, cigarette sector, other
sectors


Introduction

United States Fire Loss Profile

The fire loss record in the United States is among the worst
in the industrialized world. In 1984, there were 5,400 civilian
and fire fighter deaths, 130,000 serious injuries, and a direct
property loss of $6.7 billion resulting from 2.3 million
reported fires.[1,2,3] The Nation's total annual cost of fire was
nearly $40 billion.[4] The fire death rate is double that of
most countries on a per capita basis.[5] The numbers of
fires and casualties, which declined over the last decade,
now appear to have levelled off from 1982 to 1985.[6]

Cigarette ignition of upholstered furniture and mattresses is
by far the leading cause of fire deaths. For the 600 billion
cigarettes sold annually 7], the probability of one being
dropped, igniting these soft furnishings and leading to a
death or injury is small. Yet in 1984, 67000 cigarette-initiated
fires resulted in 1,570 deaths, 7,000 serious injuries, and
$390 million of destroyed property.[8] These most often
happened in residences when a lit cigarette was dropped
onto bedding or an upholstered chair. The fabric and/or
padding smoldered slowly, and often then burst into flames.
The victims succumbed either to burns or to inhaled toxic
smoke.[9] Cigarettes are involved in a constant percentage
of all fire deaths [10] and thus are a continuing threat to our
society.

For nearly two decades, efforts have been devoted to
reducing the susceptibility to cigarette ignition of both uphol-
stered furniture and mattresses (soft furnishings). A manda-
tory standard for mattresses [11] and voluntary standards for
upholstered furniture [12,13] have resulted in the manufacture
of less readily-ignited soft furnishings. Yet. even these highly-
productive efforts are not enough to end the losses from
cigarette-initiated fires quickly. These commodities have
average lifetimes of about fifteen years [14], so the full
impact of the improved furniture and mattresses on fire
safety will not be realized for decades to come. Moreover,
the risk of death per fire is increasing.{10] By contrast,
cigarettes are consumed within a few months of their
production [15], leading to the possibility that fire deaths and
injuries could be reduced sooner if the cigarette were
suitably modified

The Cigarette Safety Act of 1984

To guide possible legislative action on the prevention of
cigarette-initiated fires, Public Law 98-567, the “Cigarette
Safety Act of 1984,” was passed by the 98th Congress and
signed into law on October 30, 1984. The Act established an
Interagency Committee (IAC) to provide appropriate policy
recommendations based on the work of a Technical Study
Group on Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety (TSG). The
TSG was directed to:

“undertake such studies and other activities as it
considers necessary and appropriate to determine the
technical and commercial feasibility, economic impact,
and other consequences of developing cigarettes and
little cigars that will have a minimum propensity to ignite
upholstered furniture or mattresses.

Such activities include:

identification of the different physical characteristics of
cigarettes and little cigars which have an impact on the
ignition of upholstered furniture and mattresses,

an analysis of the feasibility of altering any pertinent
characteristics to reduce ignition propensity, and

an analysis of the possible costs and benefits, both to the
industry and the public, associated with any such product
modification.

The full text of the Act appears as Appendix A. The TSG
chose not to study little cigars, since they accounted for only
about 0.2% of sales [16] and all cigars accounted for less
than 1% of aif fires and fire deaths [8].

The approach of the TSG included research with a range
of fabric and padding materials and systematically-varied
(experimental), as well as commercial, cigarettes. Existing
economic, mathematical, and computer modeling methods
were used where possible and adapted as needed. Exten-
sive use was made of experts in the various fields of
concern to supplement the knowledge of the TSG members
and to support the work of its contractors. The technical
reports resulting from this research are listed as references
(8,17-27] and accompany this document.


Acknowledgements

The Technical Study Group is pleased that so complex a
project with so short a lifetime has progressed so successfully.
This is in large part due to the enthusiastic contributions of a

large number of people.

Critical technical support was provided by a variety of

organizations and key individuals:

National Bureau of Standards
Center for Fire Research
Richard H. Harris, Jr
John F. Krasny
Robert S. Levine
Henri E. Mitler
Thomas J. Ohlemiller

National Bureau of Standards
Center for Applied Mathematics
Rosalie T. Ruegg
Steven F. Weber
Barbara C. Lippiatt
Sieglinde K. Fuller

National Fire Protection Association
Fire Analysis Division
John R. Hall, Jr

Consumer Product Safety Commission
Beatrice Harwood
L. James Sharman
Dale Ray
Charles Smith
Margaret Neily
Linda Fansler

University of Maryland
David Greenberg
John E. Calfee

North Carolina State University
Daniel A. Sumner

19

Ecosometrics, Inc.
Armando M. Lago
Jennifer A. Shannon

Bureau of Home Furnishings
State of California
Gordon H. Damant
John A. McCormack
Bernadette Claire

Policy Analysis, inc.
Gerald O. Oster

American University
Gary T. Ford

Chase, Brown, and Blaxall, Inc.
John P. Brown

Sealy, Inc.
Alvin Klancnik

Kimberly Clark, Inc.
William Selke

Guilford Laboratories
James Rayburn

Lorillard, Inc.
Arthur M. thrig
Vello Norman
A. Leonard Rhyne


Toward a Less
Fire-Prone
Cigarette

Technical
Study Group
Cigarette Safety
Act of 1984

October 1987

Final Report

of the Technical
Study Group

on Cigarette
and Little Cigar
Fire Safety




Table 1. Description of Experimental Cigarettes

ree
Circum- Second
Tobacco Paper Citrate ference Paper
No. Tobacco Density __Porosity Added (mm) Wrapping‘
101 Burley High Low Yes val No
102 Burley High Low No a1 No
103 Burley High High Yes 21 No
104 Burley High High No 24 No
105 Burley Low Low Yes 21 No
106 Burley Low Low No a1 No
107 Burley Low High Yes 21 No
108 Burley Low High No al No
109 Flue-Cured High Low Yes eal No
110 Flue-Cured High Low No 21 No
WW Flue-Cured High, High Yes ai No
112 Flue-Cured High High No 21 No
113 Flue-Cured Low Low Yes a4 No
114 Flue-Cured Low Low No at No
115 Flue-Cured Low High Yes 2i No
116 Flue-Cured Low High No a1 No
117 Burley High Low Yes 25 No
118 Burley High Low No 25 No
119 Burley High High Yes 25 No
120 Burley High High No 25 No
121 Burley Low Low Yes 25 No
122 Burley Low Low No 25 No
123 Burley Low High Yes 25 No
124 Burley Low High No 25 No
125 Flue-Cured High Low Yes 25 No
126 Flue-Cured High Low No 25 No
127 Flue-Cured High High Yes 25 No
128 Flue-Cured High High No 25 No
129 Flue-Cured Low Low Yes 25 No
130 Flue-Cured Low Low No 25 No
131 Flue-Cured Low High Yes 25 No
132 Flue-Cured Low High No 25 No
201 Flue-Cured Low Very Low No ai No
202 Flue-Cured Low Very Low No 26 No
203 Fiue-Cured Low Very Low? No 25 No
204 Flue-Cured Low Very Low’ No 25 No
205 Flue-Cured Low Very Low*? No 25 No
206 Flue-Cured Low Very Low No 25 Yes
207 Flue-Cured Low Very Low* No 25 Yes
208 Flue-Cured Low Very Low> No 25 Yes
209 Flue-Cured Low Very Toma.b No 25 Yes

ically perforated to “high” permeability after manufacture
(to separate the burning tobacco from the substrate)
“Two paper layers; inner wrap is extremely porous.



Technical Feasibility,'

Including the Identification of the Different
Physical Characteristics of Cigarettes and Little
Cigars Which Have an Impact on the Ignition of
Upholstered Furniture and Mattresses

Background Knowledge

A cigarette is a cylinder (column) of tobacco strips wrapped
in paper, usually with a filter tip at one end. A cigarette can
be characterized by the type of tobacco, the density of that
tobacco in the column, the length and circumference of that
column, the thickness and porosity of the wrapping paper,
and any additives to either the tobacco or the paper. The
tobacco density may be decreased by expanding the
volume of the tobacco strands or by cutting them wider.
Citrates are conventionally added to the paper to produce
an even, clean-appearing burn

Cigarette ignition of furniture occurs when the burning
cigarette heats the furniture fabric or padding to the point
where it begins to smolder. (Figure 1) Therefore, a less
ignition-prone cigarette must generate less heat (i.e, burn
less fuel or restrict access of oxygen to the fuel), or heat the
fabric less efficiently.

A literature search, conducted by the National Bureau of
Standards Center for Fire Research (NBS-CFR) showed little
information relating the cigarettes characteristics to the
propensity of the cigarette to ignite substrates.*[17] Most
earlier studies were of cigarettes burning while suspended in
air, often while being puffed. This differs markedly from
cigarettes dropped onto furnishings.

A few laboratory studies did find differences in the ignition
propensities of some commercial or experimental cigarettes
on selected substrates. These suggested that some combi-
nations of cigarette properties might lead to less ignition-
prone cigarettes.[17]

‘Technical feasibility addresses whether cigarettes with reduced ignition
propensity can be created.
?The term “substrate” is used to mean a piece of upholstered furniture,

a mattress, or a laboratory mockup of one of these. It means one com-

bination of a specific fabric and padding, in either a flat or crevice con
figuration, with or without a cover sheet. (The cover sheet simulates,
e.g., a sheet pulled over the reatlife dropped cigarette.) For example,
one substrate would be the flat area of a piece of polyurethane foam
covered with an olefin fabric, with the cigarette covered by sheeting.
The fiat area with the same materials, but with the cigarette not cov-
ered would be a different substrate

Figure 1. Cigarette Ignition of
Upholstered Cushion

Cigarette
Tobacco
Filter column

Substrate

Coal
Fabric —-
Padding
nnn le red
/ \
\
i \
Oxygen
(air)
Heat

Charred (igniting)
fabric and padding

Small-Scale Tests

An inexpensive, rapid procedure was adopted for evaluating
a variety of test cigarettes. The reduced-scale mockups of
furniture (Figure 2) that were used also provided a link to the
bulk of previous testing of this ignition process. Fabrics and
padding materials were selected to represent furniture
having a range of susceptibility to cigarette ignition. These
included some of the most ignition-prone materials available.
The ignition criterion used was a clear appearance of igni-
tion, confirmed by a significant weight loss of the ciga-
rette/substrate assembly.

The TSG first looked at whether a solution already existed
to the ignition problem among existing cigarettes. Twelve


H. $50k Writing Final Report

A review of the material to be considered for the final report to
the Congress indicates that outside writers would have difficulty
delivering a top quality product in the permitted time frame.
This funding is for the Chairman of the Technical Study Group
to prepare the draft report and subsequent revisions. This
becomes especially important if the Technical Study Group
cannot meet or meets infrequently due to travel fund limi:
tations.

1. $30k Publication Costs

This covers the design, preparation and printing of the final
report and associated appendices.

Il. Additional $600k

A. $290k Extensive Field Ignition Data Base

These funds would establish a long-term component of
gathered and compiled fire data on cigarette ignitions and
provide for the monitoring of trends as modified cigarettes
assume a larger market share. The results would not be avail:
able for our final report. Monitoring of the project would be
continued by the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the
National Bureau of Standards and/or the US. Fire Adminis-
tration.

NOTE. This project was disapproved by the IAC.

B. $50k Travel

This would enable the Technical Study Group to meet in FY
1987 as we assess the program's results and prepare a final
report. It also includes a small amount of funds for interactions
with laboratories and experts not located in the Washington,
DC. area.

38

C. $30k Updated Furniture Materials Survey

The survey information on furniture types in households gener-
ated by UFAC and CPSC needs to be updated and refined to
increase the accuracy of fire incidence predictions with
improved cigarettes. If appropriate, a statistically representative
furniture ‘census’ could be defined.

Note: This was not pursued

D. $100k Full-Scale Furniture Testing

The cigarette ignition data from the bench-scale testing
currently underway and the (new) test method to be recom-
mended need to be validated against real furniture items.
Selected furniture items indicative of the construction types that
occur most in households or that are particularly at risk would
be obtained. Their relative susceptibility to ignition by various
experimental cigarettes would provide a more accurate assess-
ment of the impact of the changes in cigarette manufacture
and more realistic input for the benefit/cost model. The data
will also provide a figure of merit for the cigarette ‘gnition test
method to be proposed. This cost presumes significant furni-
ture industry assistance in obtaining the test items.

E. $50k Ignition Probability Analysis

At present, there is no methodoiogy for calculating the impact
on fire losses of an incremental improvement in lab test results
for cigarette ignition propensity. This would establish such a
formalism, including guidance for which bench-scale and full-
scale ignition test data are needed for the desired accuracy in
the prediction of fire losses.

F. $80k Upgrade of Benefit/Cost Analysis

The methodology and input data would be improved to treat
more thoroughly the impact of those cigarettes (including
tested patented cigarettes) found in the Technical Study Group
program to have the lowest ignition propensity.






PUBLIC LAW 98-567---OCT. 80, 1984 98 STAT. 292

after submission of the policy recommendations prescribed by this
section.

Sec. 6. (a) Any information provided to the Interagency Commit-
tee or to the Study Group under section 4 which is designated as
trade secret or confidential information shall be treated as trade
secret or confidential information subject to section 552(b\4) of title
5, United States Code, and section 1905 of title 18, United States
Code, and sha!I not be revealed, except as provided under subsection
(b). No member of the Study Group or Interagency Committee, and
no person assigned to or consulting with the Study Group, shall
disclose any such information to any person who is not a member of,
assigned to, or consulting with, the Study Group or Interagency
Committee unless the person submitting such information speciti-
cally and in writing authorizes such disclosure.

(b) Subsection (a) does not authorize the withholding of any infor-
mation from any duly authorized subcommittee or committee of the
Congress, except that if a subcommittee or committee of the Con.
gress requests the Interagency Committee to provide such informa-
tion, the Chairman of the Interagency Committee shall notify the
person who provided the information of such a request in writing

(c) The Interagency Committee shall, on the vote of a majority of
its members, adopt reasonable procedures to protect the confiden-
tiality of trade secret and confidential information, as defined in
this section.

SEc. aA As used in this Act, the terms “cigarettes” and “little 15 USC 054
cigars” have the meanings given such terms by section 3 of the rte
Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act.

Approved October 30, 1984.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY HER. 1s80 15. 11835¢

HOUSE REPORT No. 98-917 (Comm. on Energy and Commerce!
accompanying, 8. 1935 (Comm, on Governmental

ESSIONAL ye RD, Vol 130 19848

considered assed House
conside! d passed Senate, amended, in tiew of S. 195.
yuse concurred in Senate amendment with an amendment
te concurred in House amendment
O°

25



.

Performance data for current market cigarettes should be
generated using the new test method. These data could
then be compared to future year cigarette performance.

A study to collect baseline and follow-up data about the
characteristics of cigarettes, products ignited, and smokers
involved in fires should be designed and implemented

Systematic knowledge should be developed (from existing
or new sources, as appropriate) on (a) changes in the
toxicity of smoke and resultant health effects from modi-
fied cigarettes, and (b) societal costs of injuries from
cigarette-initiated fires.

Both the laboratory studies on and computer modeling of
ignition physics should be continued to develop a valid,
user-friendly predictive capability. This would enable inex-
pensive screening for ignition propensity of future ciga
rette concepts. (The authors of reference 19 have offered
more detailed recommendations for further research.)





Appenaix D
Working Paper on Resource Needs
Assessment (February 15, 1985)

Executive Summary

the Cigarette Safety Act of 1984 instructed a broad based
group of 15 experts ‘to determine the technical and commer-
cial feasibility, economic impact and other consequences of
developing cigarettes and little cigars that will have a minimum
propensity to ignite upholstered furniture or mattresses’ This
“echnical Study Group has prepared the attached plan
outlining specific projects and their costs which are necessary
to fulfill the requirements of the Act.

The projects include identification of the different physical
characteristics of cigarettes and little cigars which have an
impact on the ignition of upholstered furniture and mattresses,
and analysis of the feasibility of altering any pertinent charac.
teristics to reduce ignition propensity, and a cost-benefit anal-
ysis (including both industry and public factors) associated with
any such product modification, The estimated total cost is $2.7
million over 30 months.

As mandated by the Act, an Interagency Committee
comprised of the Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety
Commission, the United States Fire Administrator in the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, and the Assistant Secretary
of Health in the Department of Health and Human Services
has reviewed and approved this plan subject to obtaining the
necessary funding.

Introduction

On October 4, 1984, the 98th Congress passed the Cigarette
Safety Act of 1984. Within this law is the establishment of an
Interagency Committee on Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety
(AC) and a Technical Study Group on Cigarette and Little
Cigar Fire Safety (TSG). The charge to the TSG is to “under-
lake, subject to oversight and review by the Interagency
Committee, such studies and other activities as it considers
necessary and appropriate to determine the technical and
commercial feasibility, economic impact, and other conse-
quences of developing cigarettes and little cigars that will have
a minimum propensity to ignite upholstered furniture or
mattresses. Such activities include identification of the different

33

physical characteristics of cigarettes and little cigars which have
an impact on the ignition of upholstered furniture and
mattresses, an analysis of the feasibility of altering any pertinent
characteristics to reduce ignition propensity, and an analysis of
the possible costs and benefits, both to the industry and the
public, associated with any such product modification” The |AC
is directed to submit a status report to the Congress in
October 1985 and a final technical report, prepared by the
TSG, in April 1987.

Following its expeditious formulation by the Interagency
Committee, the TSG first met on January 3, 1985. During that
meeting the Study Group began delineating the scope of its
studies. That process was continued at a meeting January 28-
29, 1985. This document represents the consensus of the
Study Group and our assessment of the resources needed to
carry out that stated objectives in response to the Act.

Our activities over the next 25 months will provide a rational,
documented basis for solutions to the national problem of the
ignition of soft furnishings by smoking materials. These activi-
ties have the goals of defining the current knowledge of the
phenomenon, describing an approach to quantitatively meas-
uring the phenomenon, and assessing the impact of proposed
solutions, leading to a judgment of the feasibility of cigarettes
with improved ignitability performance. Independent verification
of the output of these activities is not possible within the given
time frame.

While the Act specifically directs studies related to cigarettes
and little cigars, the TSG feels that the latter may well be of
little concern. Preliminary information, to be confirmed, indi-
cates that little cigars represents ca. 0.2 percent of cigarette
sales. Unless evidence is obtained that this small fraction
represents a highly disproportionate contribution to fire losses,
the TSG deems it appropriate to concentrate its limited
resources on the cigarette.

No such simplification of the Act appears possible with
regard to furniture vs, mattresses. Current data indicate that
deaths from bedding fires and approximately one half those
from upholstered furniture fires, and thus neither component
can be neglected.

With these boundaries in mind, the following sections
describe the anticipated areas of activity and the quantity and
nature of resources currently deemed necessary to meet our
objectives. We realize that en route to these, new ideas will
emerge and that further or redirected resources may be
necessary.



|. IGNITABILITY MEASUREMENT

A. Objective

The purposes of this study are: (1) to report the state-of-the-art
in understanding cigarette ignition of soft furnishings; (2) to
elucidate the thermal conditions existent about lit smoking
materials, their energy transfer to various substrates, and the
ensuing substrate ignition process; and (3) to identify the
characteristics of cigarettes that affect ignition propensity. The
resulting apparatus and model will then be capable of realisti
cally demonstrating differing propensities of the smoking
materials to ignite upholstered furniture and bedding

Ignition is defined as the sustained smoldering or flaming of
upholstered furniture or mattress substrate. This may or may
not lead to flaming. Substrate is defined as the combination of
covering fabric, padding, bedding, etc. in one or more
selected geometries.

B. Approach

Previous studies on the ignitability of soft furnishings by
smoking materials will be compiled. This will cover all
published information and as many industry-contidential papers
as are made available. The diverse approaches to measure-
ment will be analyzed. Tables will be composed of the various
test methodologies used, parameters that have been varied
and the impact of these changes on ignitability, on other
factors that relate to ignition, and on health effects (eg., smoke
yield and composition). If its contents warrant, this report will
be labeled ‘confidential’, and its distribution will be limited to
the Technical Study Group, the Interagency Committee, and
the appropriate members and staff of the Congress.

Existing literature on the energetics of cigarette burning will
be supplemented by laboratory measurements on experimental
and current commercial cigarettes. Combined, these will form
the input for a computer model of the thermal properties of lit
cigarettes. A range of possible stages of smoking will be
represented (eg., newly lit, mid-length, near-butt). The physical
and combustion properties of the cigarette will be included as
variables, This list would likely include: diameter, length,
tobacco density, linear burning rate, length of burn zone,
temperature distribution in burn zone, relative burn rate of
paper, paper porosity, etc.

The heat transfer from the cigarette to a variety of substrates
will then be studied, since the net energy balance on the
heated portion of the substrate determines whether it will
sustain smoldering. The three-dimensional, time-dependent
temperature distribution that the cigarette heat flux and
substrate reactions produce will be examined experimentally
and modeled.

Building on prior studies, an extensive series of experiments
will be performed to guide and verify the ignition model. These
will employ cigarettes that have been systematically varied with
regard to the properties listed above. The ranges of those vari
ables will be determined by the available data, the model
predictions, and the existing manufacturing capability. The

34

substrates will be selected to represent realistic best, and worst
hazards, both with regard to materials and geometry. During
these experiments, measurements will include such macro-
observables as time to ignitions and mass loss rate, as well as
some of the more elementary parameters described earlier.

Based on the fire and market data described in Section III
and a sensitivity analysis, the complex experimental program
will then be simplified to a streamline protocol. This limited
sequence of materials, geometries, and measurements may
serve as a screening tool for assessing the effectiveness of
cigarette modification or other new technology in reducing the
propensity for ignition.

During the course of this study, and after acceptable meas
urement methods have been developed, the appropriate
procedures will be applied to a blind sample of current market
cigarettes. This will constitute a baseline performance level of
ignitability for use in the cost/benefit models.

Cc. Resources

It is estimated that this project can be completed in 21 months
elapsed time, including preparation of the final report. This time
interval would start upon receipt of the funds. The literature
review is estimated to be completed in 12 months. The timely
completion of the experimental portion of the study would be
contingent upon the availability of the specially-designed
cigarettes and on the absence of unexpected developments.
The TSG identifies the National Bureau of Standards Center for
Fire Research as uniquely qualified to carry out this study.

In order to complete the study in so short a time, the
needed resources are:

Literature Compilation and Review. $ 200 k
Experimental and Theoretical Study:

Senior staff 40 SY. $ 460 k

Technicians 40 SY. 160 k

Programmer 1.0 SY. 65 k

Secretary 02 SY. Bk

Equipment 105 k

Travel, etc. 2k

$ 800 k

Total Cost: $1000 k

ll. EXPERIMENTAL CIGARETTES

A. Approach

Samples for the program with maximum uniformity can best
be obtained from the major cigarette manufacturers. The
sample size will be on the order of 10,000, as a minimal run.
An independent quality assurance laboratory will be used to
verify sample specifications and uniformity.

The independent variables that could be evaluated in this
program are as follows:


(26)

(27

(28]

[29]

(30}

Ford, GT., Brown, J.P, and Calfee, JE, ‘The Costs and
Benefits to Smokers of Reduced Flammability Cigarettes?
in Report No. 6, Technical Study Group, Cigarette Act of
1984, 1987.

Greenberg, D., “The Employment implications of
Proposed Cigarette Design Modifications to Reduce
Cigarette Ignition Propensity’ in Report No. 6, Technical
Study Group, Cigarette Safety Act of 1984, 1987.

The Surgeon Generals Report, Office of the Surgeon
General, U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, Washington, DC., 1986.

Evaluation of the Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to
Humans: Tobacco Smoking, International Agency for
Research on Cancer, World Health Organization, Lyon,
France, pp. 203-244, 1986.

Environmental Tobacco Smoke: Measuring Exposures

and Assessing Health Effects, National Research Council,

National Academy Press, Washington. DC., 1986.

22


We, the undersigned members of the Technical Study Group
on Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety, approve our final
technical report

Toward a Less Fire-Pront Cigarette

for transmittal to the Interagency Committee for submission
to the Congress.

Richard G. Gann, Ph.D.
Chairman

aD. oon
Edward Press, M.D. Michael D. McGiber

Vice-Chairm;

Afidrew McGuire

L. Charles, _
Cull WAAL 177

JoSeph Ws) Cullen, Ph.D. WMegcukec W. fee) y
Ph.D.

Awd Ly Me

Ph.D.

Tus

=>

ohn C. Gerard

James F. Hoebel _ David E. Townsend, Ph.D. =
Jedka Mh —

Preston H. Leake, Ph.D.

Henry] Tovey

udith P. Wilkenfeld,


Federal Register, Vol. 51, No. 148, August 1, 1986:
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

Interagency Committee on Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety; Ignition Propensity Testing of Patented,
Non-Commercial Cigarettes

Agency: Interagency Committee on Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety, CPSC.

ACTION: Notice

SUMMARY: In the Federal Register of June 16. 1986 (51 FR 21790), the Technical Study Group on Cigarette and
Little Cigar Fire Safety (TSG) invited inventors of cigarettes which are not produced commercially but which are claimed
to have reduced propensity to ignite upholstered furniture and mattresses to submit samples of such cigarettes for igni-
tion propensity testing. That notice described the testing program and requirements for consideration of cigarette inven-
tions as candidates for testing in this program. That notice specified that only cigarette inventions for which a patent had
been issued or for which a patent application had been filed by June 16, 1986, would be eligible for consideration as
candidates for testing in this program. The TSG has revised its criteria for selection of candidate inventions to include
any cigarette invention for which a patent has been issued or for which a patent application has been filed by
September 30, 1986.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colin B. Church, Office of Program Management, Consumer Product
Safety Commission, Washington, DC. 20207; telephone: (301) 492-6554

Dated: July 18, 1986

Colin B. Church

Federal Employee Designated by the Interagency Committee on Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety.
[FR Doc. 86-17348 Filed 7-31-80; 8:45 am]

Billing Code 6355-01-M

4 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1987 0 - 193-852


Appendix F
Text of Federal Register Solicitations for
Submission of Patented Cigarettes

Federal Register, Vol. 51, No. 115, Monday, June 16, 1986:

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

Interagency Committee on Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety; Request for Samples of Patented, Non-
Commercial Cigarettes for Ignition Propensity Testing

AGENCY: Interagency Committee on Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety.

ACTION: Notice

SUMMARY: The Technical Group on Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety invites inventors of cigarettes, which are not
produced commercially but which are claimed to have reduced propensity to ignite upholstered furniture and
mattresses, to submit samples of such cigarettes for ignition propensity testing. A description of the testing program and
how inventors may participate follows.

DATE: Inventors who desire to participate in this testing program should submit samples of cigarette inventions and the
information specified in this notice not later than September 30, 1986.

ADDRESS: Samples and information concerning cigarette inventions should be sent to: Dr Richard G. Gann, Center
for Fire Research, National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. Tawanna Segears, Office of Program Management, Consumer
Product Safety Commission, Washington, D.C. 20207; telephone: (301) 492-6554,

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Cigarette Safety Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-567, 98 Stat 2925, October 30, 1984)
created the Technical Study Group on Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety (TSG) to investigate the technical and
commercial feasibility of developing cigarettes and little cigars with minimum propensity to ignite upholstered furniture
and mattresses. The TSG has developed an ignition propensity test and has tested some commercial cigarettes. The
TSG also has decided to test the ignition propensity of some cigarettes which are not commercially available but which
are claimed by their inventors to have less propensity than commercially available cigarettes to ignite upholstered furni-
ture and mattresses. A limited cigarette ignition propensity testing program will be conducted by the Center for Fire
Research at the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) at no charge by NBS to inventors whose inventions are selected
for testing. Testing will be blind to the extent possible. Cigarette inventions which are patented or for which a
patent has been filed will be candidates for testing. Cigarette inventions for which a patent has not been
issued or for which a patent application has not been filed as of the date of this Federal Register Notice,
will not be tested.

39


Neither the patented cigarettes nor their submitted controis
were analyzed to verity their composition. Therefore, their
measured effectiveness may not have the same validity as
the results on the experimental cigarettes. Nonetheless, the
TSG feels that the concepts embodied in these patents
offer promising directions for pursuit, despite some
concerns about the difficulty of mass manufacturing
such cigarettes and possible adverse changes in the
toxicity of the smoke.

A computer model of the smoldering combustion of a
cigarette and the response of an idealized substrate was
devised [19] to screen future combinations of characteristics
for their effect on ignition. To guide the model and to identify
the right input data, the ignition process was studied in
depth.[19] This included measuring the temperature and
energy flux while cigarettes smoldered on different
substrates. Infrared imaging was used to map the tempera-
ture of the substrate.

Ignition was found to depend on both the cigarette and
the substrate. Therefore, an accurate ignition propensity
model and measurement apparatus must involve the two
components. Important features include the area of the
cigarettes burning coal, the smoider velocity of the cigarette,
and the heat absorbance of the substrate. By contrast,
oxygen depletion in the fabric does not vary with the ignition
propensity of the cigarette.

The prototype computer program, with all its simplifica-
tions, is sufficiently realistic to (1) calculate the most impor-
tant and most sensitive physical features of the ignition
process and (2) reproduce some of the cigarette charac:
teristics that do and do not affect ignition propensity. At
present, however, the model is very slow, expensive to run,
and not user-friendly.

Validity of Small-Scale Test Data

Reduced-scale flammability test results need to be checked
using full-scale items to assure the accuracy of the tests. Two
such comparisons with full-scale data were performed. In the
first, NBS-CFR tested chairs made of the same materials as
the mockups using some of the best and worst experimental
cigarettes and commercial cigarettes. (Table 5) The furniture
was supplied by the furniture industry (Upholstered Furniture
Action Council and the Business and Institutional Furniture
Manufacturers Association) at no cost to the Technical Study
Group.

There is a strong, but not perfect, correlation (coefficient =
0.86) between the mockup and chair data.[19]

In a second series, the California Bureau of Home
Furnishings (BHF) tabulated data on a hundred pieces of
furniture and mockups made from those pieces, one
commercial cigarette was used.[20] In over 90% of the
cases where ignition occurred with the mockup, ignition also
occurred on the chair

The TSG concludes that mockup measurements are
a reasonable indicator of the performance of full-scale
furniture made of the same materials. In addition, the
mockup measurements are a good screening tool for

Tabie 5. Comparison of ignition
Propensities of Tested Cigarettes at
Full- and Reduced-Scales [19}

Cigarette Percent Ignitions__
Number, ‘Bench-Scale Full-Scale
6 74 73
129 13 23
114 6 14
106 3 6
201 0 6

low ignition propensity cigarettes.

To check the repeatability of the mock-up measurements,
sample cigarettes and substrate materials were shipped by
ihe NBS-CFR to the BHF for testing using the same proce.
dure. The first of the two substrates was moderately easy to
ignite; the second was one of the easiest. Table 6 shows the
results of those tests.

The interlaboratory agreement is excellent. The TSG
concludes that, with careful control of materials and
testing procedures, test results can be reproduced in
different laboratories.

The combined results from these studies demonstrate
the importance of the following properties in reducing
the ignition propensity of cigarettes: low tobacco
density, small circumference, low paper porosity, and in
some cases elimination of citrate addition to the paper.

Table 6. Interlaboratory Comparison of
the Number of Ignitions for Various

Cigarettes and Substrates [19,20]
(flat surface/uncovered cigarettes; 5 tests each)

Cotton Batting Polyurethane Foam
Cigarette California Fabric Splendor Fabric

Number = CFR BHF “CFR” BHF
3 5 5 5 5
102 2 1 5 5
105 0 0 3 4
106 ie) 0 1 1
108 3 4 4 5
4 1 2 3 0
118 5 4 5 5
122 3 4 2 3
126 5 5 5 5
201 ie} 0 ie) e)



Commercial Feasibility,‘

Including Analysis of the Feasibility of Altering
Any Pertinent Characteristics to Reduce Ignition

Propensity

Manufacturing Feasibility

Most of the experimental cigarettes were manufactured on
current hardware at reduced production rates. Many of their
features have been incorporated individually in commercial
cigarettes. Therefore, no fundamental changes in cigarette
manufacturing are needed to produce some types of less
ignition-prone cigarettes. However, there are a number of
barriers that need to be overcome to produce them in suffi-
cient quantity to meet current demand. The patented additives
and the special papers appear to require more severe modifi
cations to the manufacturing process, The current limitations,
as presented by the cigarette industry, are:

© Insufficient manufacturing capacity to produce enough
cigarettes at the slower rates used for the experimental
cigarettes;

* Inadequate supply of expandable tobacco;

Limits as to how far the packing density of current tobacco

blends can be reduced; and

* Need for new processing technology for inclusion of any
new additives to the tobacco or paper.

Consumer Acceptance

The experimental cigarettes tested by the TSG were designed
to have wide ranges of physical characteristics. While the best
of these showed significant reduction in ignition propensity, the
represented cigarette manufacturers state that all of these
cigarettes have one or more characteristics that will make them
difficult to sell; for example:

* Excessive resistance to puffing;
© Offensive taste or aroma;
* Unusual size or appearance;

“Commercial feasibility addresses whether the cigarettes can be eco-

nomically manufactured in sufficient quantity to meet consumer de-
mand and whether smokers will buy them.

Difficulty of lighting the cigarette or keeping it lit
Higher price;

Reduced number of puffs,

Changed tar and nicotine yield;

Collapse of the partially-smoked cigarette, and
Dropping of hot embers.

ee reese

Certainly, a range of variations are possible on the few indica-
tive samples of experimental cigarettes tested in this program.
This project has identified a variety of fire safety factors to be
added to the ‘equation’ for cigarette design.

The TSG has not tested any cigarettes for acceptability to
the smoking public. However, some physical characteristics
which decrease a cigarettes propensity to ignite soft furnishings
are incorporated individually in some commercial cigarettes.
The combination of all the characteristics of the lowest ignition
propensity cigarettes have not been incorporated in any
commercial cigarettes.

Monitoring Ignition Propensity

A valid and reliable test method is needed to measure
the reduced ignition propensity of improved cigarettes.
Accordingly, the Technical Study Group commissioned both
analysis and laboratory trials of several proposed approaches
for potential standardized test methods for cigarette ignition
propensity.

The TSG concludes that the current mockup method
is usable for research measurements of the relative igni-
tion propensity of cigarettes. However, because of the
lot-to-lot variability of the fabrics and paddings used,
this method should not be used as the standard test
method.

None of the several alternative candidate test
methods for measuring the cigarette ignition propensity
of soft furnishings was usable in its current state of
development. Two approaches to cigarette testing are
proposed. The first modifies the existing mockup procedure
using specially-prepared, well-controlled fabrics and paddings.
The second uses a non-reactive substrate at variable tempera-
ture to determine the minimum needed cigarette heatloss rate
for extinguishment. Both need further development.[19]

It is also important to characterize the cigarettes
involved in cigarette-initiated fires over a period of time


Toward a Less
Fire-Prone
Cigarette

Technical
Study Group
Cigarette Safety
Act of 1984

October 1987

Final Report

of the Technical
Study Group

on Cigarette
and Little Cigar
Fire Safety




The Technical Study Group also wishes to thank those
individuals who provided critical reviews of the several reports:
Gordon H. Damant, James V. Ryan, Giuliana Tesoro, Robert D.
Tollison, Eugene M. Lewit, Dietrich Hoffman, David Burns, Paul
Gottfried, Philip S. Schaenman, Ron Darrah, Robert Crandall,
David Lucht, Carleton Currens, and Frederic B. Clarke Ill

This project relied heavily on the timely contributions of non-
production cigarettes and upholstered furniture from those two
industries. Those critical donations are most appreciated.

The Technical Study Group credits the members of the 98th
and 99th Congresses for their perception of the importance of
reducing cigarette-initiated fires and their persistence in
providing the necessary funding to carry out this study. The
Consumer Product Safety Commission and the Federal Emer-
gency Management Agency also applied appropriated funds in
support of this program.

Appreciation is due to the members of the Interagency
Committee for their participation and support.

Appreciation is also expressed for the efforts of Marilyn
Ugiansky, Brenda Thompson, and Kay Villa of NBS, Linda
Sherman Design, Inc., and Word Design, Inc. for their prepara:
tion of the TSG reports for publication.

Last, but far from least, the TSG thanks Colin B. Church of
the Consumer Product Safety Commission who, as Secretariat
to the Group, tended to all the crucial administrative functions
that often go unnoticed, but without which programs like this
could not succeed.

20


M ission and Members

The Technical Study Group on Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire
Safety was established by Public Law 98-567, the Cigarette
Safety Act of 1984, on October 30, 1984. Its mission is to

“undertake such studies and other activities as it considers
necessary and appropriate to determine the technical and
commercial feasibility, economic impact, and other conse-
quences of developing cigarettes and little cigars that will
have a minimum propensity to ignite upholstered furniture or
mattresses. Such activities include identification of the
different physical characteristics of cigarettes and little cigars
which have an impact on the ignition of upholstered furniture
and mattresses, an analysis of the feasibility of altering any
pertinent characteristics to reduce ignition propensity, and
an analysis of the possible costs and benefits, both to the
industry and the public, associated with any such product
moditication.”

Copies of this or any other reports of the Technical Study
Group may be obtained from Mr. Colin B. Church,
Secretariat, Technical Study Group, Consumer Product
Safety Commission. 5401 Westbard Avenue, Washington,
DC., 20207.

MEMBERS:

Richard G. Gann, Ph.D., Chairman
Edward Press, M.D., Vice-Chairman
Charles M. Carey

James L. Charles, Ph.D.

Joseph W. Cullen, Ph.D.

John C. Gerard

James F. Hoebel

Preston H. Leake, Ph.D.

Michael D. McGibeny

Andrew McGuire

Wendy H. Poel

Alexander W. Spears, III, Ph.D.
Henry Tovey

David E. Townsend, Ph.D.

Judith P. Wilkenfeld, Esq

PAST MEMBERS:
Howard Beales, III
Harry 1. Cohen

Craig G. Drummond
Max Hausermann, Ph.D.
Alan Rodgman, Ph.D.




Past Members
Howard Beales, lil
Federal Trade Commission

Harry I. Cohen
Consumer Product Safety Commission

Craig G. Drummond
os Angeles County Fire Department

Max Hausermann, Ph.D.
Philip Morris U.S.A.

Alan Rodgman, Ph.D.
RJ. Reynolds Tobacco Company

Sponsor

Federal Trade Commission

Consumer Product Safety Commission
National Fire Protection Association
Tobacco Institute

Tobacco Institute

28


Appendix E

Update to Working Plan for
Technical Study Group Program
(September 12, 1986)

|. Total Available Funds — $353k

A. $68k Quality Assurance of Experimental Cigarettes

Atter considerable solicitation, CFR has determined that the
quality assurance measurements and analysis of the
experimental cigarettes will be significantly less costly than
anticipated. This sum covers the in-house effort and subcon-
tracting to obtain the data and the statistical treatment of the
results.

B. $10k California BHF Test Data

The California Bureau of Home Furnishings is generating
mock-up and full-scale data on furniture ignition by the stan-
dard test cigarette. A small grant would enable them to
prepare an interim report (>400 items) comparing the two sets
of results, thus helping us determine the degree to which the
small scale results can be used to predict real-life ignitability.

C. $15k Cigarette Performance Data

Current research at NBS has identified some traits of the
experimental cigarettes that correlate with reduced ignition
propensity. This project would involve the confirmation of those
results at an independent lab, such as the California Bureau of
Home Furnishings.

D. $65k Alkali Metal lon Effects

It has long been known that compounds containing alkali
metal ions promote the smoldering of fabrics and padding.
The concentration of such compounds is not controlled in the
manufacturing process and may account for the poor reprodu:
cibility of laboratory results. Furthermore, such compounds
could be deposited on furniture fabrics during use, especially
from people sweating. To predict the reduction in cigarette igni-

37

tions using laboratory test results, the effect of the alkali ion
concentrations in the test materials must be quantified.

E. $50k Field Data on Cigarette Ignitions

It is important that we set in place a process for obtaining data
from actual cigarette ignitions of soft furnishings. The Interna
tional Association of Fire Chiefs has volunteered leadership. In
addition, to be durable, the process must be integrated with
an existing national system, such as the National Fire Incident
Reporting System. Thus, this pilot effort would also involve
representatives of the U.S. Fire Administration, the National Fire
Protection Association, the Consumer Product Safety Commis-
sion, and the National Bureau of Standards. An initial meeting
is being scheduled for October.

F. $25k Cost Data on Cigarette Injuries

The Department of Health and Human Services has
performed a massive survey of burn injury data. This data
needs to be reviewed and summarized for use in the
benefit/cost model. Analyses are to be performed considering
the fraction of fire-caused injuries included in the HHS bank
and the fraction of fire injuries that are burns.

NOTE: Hall contacted Massachusetts principal investigator. The
data is both complex and inaccessible. TSG agreed not to
pursue.

G. $40k Improved Fire Loss Analysis

John Hall of NFPA has provided an excellent analysis of
expected fire losses for the next decade, applying far more
effort than required by the contract. This effort should be
augmented to (a) better address the superposition of the fire
performance of less ignition-prone cigarettes on the overall fire
loss profile and (b) revisit his identified limiting factors in his
current fire loss projection methodology.


Appendix A
Cigarette Safety Act of 1984

PUBLIC LAW 98-567 —OCT. 30, 1984 98 STAT. :

Public Law 98-567
98th Congress
An Act

To establish an interagency committee and a technical study group on cigarette — Oct 80, 1984
safety. {HER Isso

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may
be cited as the “Cigarette Safety Act of 1984".

Sec. 2. (a) There is established the Interagency Committee on
Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety (hereinafter in this Act
referred to as the “Interagency Committee”) which shall consist of— — Fstablishin

(1) the Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commis- 1° USC
sion, who shall be the Chairman of the Interagency Committee; "°“

(2) the United States Fire Administrator in the Federal Emer-
gency Management Agency, who shall be the Vice Chairman of
the Interagency Committee; and

(3) the Assistant Secretary of Health in the Department of
Health and Human Services.

(b) The Interagency Committee shall direct, oversee, and review
the work of the Technical Study Group on Cigarette and Little Cigar
Fire Safety (established under section 3) conducted under section 4
and shall make such policy recommendations to the Congress as it
deems appropriate. The Interagency Committee may retain and
contract with such consultants as it deems necessary to assist the
Study Group in carrying out its functions under section 4. The
Interagency Committee may request the head of any Federal depart-
ment or agency to detail any of the personnel of the department or
agency to assist the Interagency Committee or the Study Group in
carrying out its responsibilities. The authority of the Interagency — Contracts with
Committee to enter into contracts shall be effective for any fiscal S.
year only to such extent or in such amounts as are provided in
advance by appropriation Acts.

(c) For the purpose of carrying out section 4, the Interagency
Committee or the Study Group, with the advice and consent of the
Interagency Committee, may hold such hearings, sit and act at such
times and places, take such testimony, and receive such evidence, as
the Interagency Committee or the Study Group considers
appropriate.

Sec. 3. (a) There is established the Technical Study Group on
Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety (hereinafter in this Act
referred to as the “Study Group”) which shall consist of—

(1) one scientific or technical representative each from the
Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Center for Fire Re-
search of the National Bureau of Standards, the National
Cancer Institute, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Fed-

ent

51-139 0 - 84 (621)

23



Figure 2. Furniture Mockup for Ignition
Testing

commercial cigarette packings? were chosen that fit the
following criteria: (a) high, low, or middle expected ignition
propensity; and/or (b) large market share. The cigarettes
were supplied gratis to the NBS-CFR by their manufacturers
without brand identification. With much difficulty, NBS-CFR
found fabric-padding combinations that would differentiate
among the ignition propensities of the twelve cigarettes.
Cigarettes were tested in both the flat and crevice configura
tions, both covered and uncovered by a cloth sheet.[18] The
results indicated that the differences in ignition
propensity among current commercial cigarettes are
unimportant.

To identify which cigarette characteristics could reduce
ignition probability, 41 types of experimental cigarettes were
obtained whose properties were varied one at a time. The
properties included tobacco density, tobacco type, circumfer-
ence, paper porosity, number of paper layers, and paper
burning additive (sodium/potassium citrate). Two values of
each of these properties were selected. All of the cigarettes
were 100 mm long with filter tips. Variation of the length or
removal of the filter was achieved by cutting off one end.
The properties of the 41 cigarette types are summarized in
Table 1. The cigarettes were manufactured (at no cost to the
TSG) by the cigarette industry mostly on commercial equip-
ment operated under less than production conditions. Those
with double-wrapped or embossed paper were made using
research equipment. Independent laboratories determined
that each cigarette type was as ordered and of little vari
ance. The cigarettes’ tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide
yields were determined by the Federal Trade Commission,
as well as by the cigarette industry. The two sets of results

3A cigarette packing is defined as a commercial cigarette, described by
its name, its diameter, its length, whether menthol or non-menthol,
whether filter or non-filter, and by its package type (e.g., soft pack).

were in excellent agreement. Both sets of data showed
marginally lower than normal puff counts; the industry data
also showed a higher than normal resistance to puffing. The
properties of these cigarettes are described more fully in
Chapter 2 of reference 19.

Each of these cigarette types were tested for ignition
performance on a variety of substrates. These
fabric/padding/geometry combinations represented
commonly in-use and both intermediate and easy to ignite
furnishings. The resulting fractions of ignitions were
compared with each other and with similar data tor
representatives of the commercial cigarettes. (Table 2)

Table 2. Ignition Propensities of
Selected Test Cigarettes [19]

i ree
No. ignitions
Designation in 20 Tests %
Experimental
Cigarettes 201 ie} 0
106 1 5
202 2 10
130 4 20
4 4 20
105, 6 30
13 6 30
108 7 35
122 7 35
129 10 50
107 WW 55
120 20 100
127 20 100
Least Ignition-
Prone
Commercial
Cigarettes 2 12 60
1 16 80
Typical Ignition
Propensity
Commercial
Cigarettes 3 18 90
6 20 100

The data show a wide range of ignition propensities. Many
of the cigarettes burned their entire length without igniting
the substrate. Several of the experimental cigarettes
performed distinctly better than their peers or the
commercial cigarettes, even on the easiest-to-ignite
substrates. [19]

Table 3 summarizes the results by cigarette property.