Tommy J. Payne
Executive Vice President
External Relations
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company
P.O. Box 2959
Winston-Salem, NC 27102

April 6, 2006

Dear Mr. Shannon:

Thank you for your letter to Susan Ivey dated February 27, 2006, and your request that we begin producing and selling only reduced-ignition strength ("fire-safe") cigarettes.

I am sure you have taken the opportunity to read our company's opinion on reduced-ignition cigarettes that can be found on our website, www.rjrt.com, by scrolling under Legal & Regulatory to the State & Local Regulation section.

We, of course, are complying with the standards implemented in New York and are making the necessary and required certifications to the State for appropriate testing of products made available to wholesalers doing business in the state. We will also comply with the standards and timeframes recently adopted by Vermont and California.

There are several areas I do want to bring to your consideration and would appreciate your thoughts on these issues as they related to your request.

First, the standard adopted by all three states, although identical, requires a 75% compliance rate for cigarettes made available for sale in the state. We achieve this compliance though the use of paper technology but have yet to see any published date from New York as to any level of enforcement for all manufacturers doing business in the state. I am sure we have identical opinions that all manufacturers, not just a selected few, should comply with the ignition propensity standard. Based on our internal review of products sold in New York, we do not believe there is consistent and across-the-board compliance, particularly by smaller manufacturers and products sold from Native American reservations. This is an ongoing area of concern from both a public safety and competitive standpoint and I would be interested in any information you may have regarding the actions of the state to ensure compliance.

Second, there is a practical reason for not being able to manufacture all domestic products to the ignition propensity standard as it relates to the availability of the paper technology that can meet the adopted standards. We have taken the necessary steps to be able to comply with the cigarette volume associated with the above mentioned states and will continue to try and expand that inventory. However, as the availability of the necessary paper exists today, there is insufficient supply to manufacture all products on a national basis. We expect to see continued improvement in the available paper supply and the possibility of another form of technology that would meet the required compliance.

Third, we do believe that the majority of the fires caused by cigarettes are the result of careless behavior and that no single legislation action exclusively or adequately addresses this issue. We believe it is appropriate, for example, for states such as New York and Vermont to actively consider and adopt other flammability standards for upholstered furniture such as those California approved approximately 15 years ago. In the absence of a more holistic approach that includes furniture, the progress against fires and fire deaths caused by careless behavior will be far less than what could possibly be legitimately accomplished. I would be interested in your Association's position on the adoption of these additional standards.

Finally, we do have a concern in future years on the evolution of the exact standard and testing methodology implemented by the States in this area. The implementation of varying standards between the states could impose unnecessary and unintended consequences for issues not directly related to ignition-propensity. In the interim, we are meeting with elected officials in several states as they consider this legislation to utilize the provisions adopted by New York.

Please don't hesitate to call me directly anytime that you would like to discuss this issue.

Sincerely,

Tommy J. Payne

Mr. Shannon's reply to R.J. Reynolds (4/14/2006)

April 14, 2006

Dear Mr. Payne:

Thank you for your response to my letter urging RJ Reynolds to take a leadership position to enhance public safety by announcing that the company will produce and sell only fire-safe cigarettes in the United States.

I appreciate your reply and your openness with regard to what you see as the issues preventing you from moving forward with the implementation of this lifesaving improvement. We are very encouraged by the initial research out of New York showing reductions in the numbers of cigarette-ignited fire fatalities. I have not seen information on certification but would be very interested in that aspect as well.

Mandating residential smoke alarms, additional codes and standards and increased public education have significantly reduced residential fire deaths and undoubtedly these activities should continue. As you state no single action will fully address the issue. It is important to attack this problem on several different fronts. We feel strongly that fire-safe cigarettes, in conjunction with these efforts, offer us the greatest opportunity to further reduce the deaths, injuries and destruction caused by fire.

It is clear the idea of state-by-state implementation of fire-safe cigarette legislation is taking hold, as is evidenced by the recent passage in Illinois. It is likely other states will follow. The members of the Coalition for Fire-Safe Cigarettes share your view that there should be one standard and that is why we are working to see that all the states use the New York standard.

With 700 to 900 people dying, many of whom are not the smokers, any many more severely injured in cigarette-ignited fires each year, states are taking action to protect their citizens and continue the progress to save lives.

I urge you to reconsider this issue. RJ Reynolds can save lives by deciding to produce and sell only this type of cigarette and joining with the Coalition to say, "The time is now."

Sincerely,
James M. Shannon
President and CEO
NFPA