Letter from John Kerry to CPSC in 2008 to ban ionization alarms

Since the letters sent in 2008 and more recent presentations made last year to the CPSC Board, CPSC has not recalled dangerous ionization alarms or at the very least mandated warning labels be placed on packaging of ionization alarms despite these devises having caused 100's of 1000's of smoke inhalation deaths and severe burn injuries over last 40 years in U.S. alone. In 2008 both Deputy Fire Chief of Boston Massachusetts Jay Fleming and then Senator John Kerry sent letters to the CPSC regarding the dangers of ionization alarms that are in most homes. The letter John Kerry sent below clearly expresses concerns regarding these ionization alarms which are very dangerous when used in habitable structures. In an effort to gain John Kerry and his supporters involvement once again, please contact Mr. Kerry with your own personal concerns at https://register.state.gov/contactus/contactusform In regards to comments made on several face book pages last week , please consider sharing this comment on your face book pages about CPSC recalling 29 million McDonalds fitness trackers due to burns. Yet how ironic it is and extremely negligent the CPSC has yet to recall dangerous ionization alarms or at the very least mandate warning labels be placed on packaging of ionization alarms despite use of these devises having resulted in 100's of 1000's of smoke inhalation deaths and severe burn injuries over last 40 years in U.S. alone and likely millions worldwide. In 2008 both Deputy Fire Chief of Boston Massachusetts Jay Fleming and then Senator John Kerry sent letters to the CPSC regarding the dangers of ionization alarms that are in most homes. The letter John Kerry sent below clearly expresses concerns regarding these ionization alarms which are very dangerous when used in habitable structures. Also Dean Dennis who lost his daughter in a dorm fire that claimed the lives of 4 other students despite 17 ionization alarms in dorm, made a presentation to the CPSC board informing them of the dangers of ionization alarms which can be seen on the supporters of effort page at www.smokealarmsafety.org ( recent name change ) June 12, 2008 Chairman Nancy Nord US Consumer Product Safety Commission 4330 East-West Highway Room 419, Bethesda, MD 20814 Dear Chairman Nord: I am writing as a follow-up to a letter sent to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) by Deputy Fire Chief Joseph Fleming of the Boston Fire Department on March 12, 2008 regarding the safety of smoke alarms. It is my understanding that there are multiple unresolved issues concerning ionization detectorsʼ inability to detect smoke or sound an alarm. In fact, it is my understanding that the CPSC expressed serious concerns regarding ionization detectors as early as 1995. These concerns mirror those put forward by Chief Fleming, an outspoken advocate for removing ionization detectors from the marketplace. Yet, the CPSC still has not acted to remove the alarms from the market, nor has the CPSC warned consumers as to the potential drawbacks of ionized detectors. The issues that appear to be the most prescient and that were addressed by Mr. Fleming in his letter to you, still remain unsettled. I ask that you address, the questions in Chief Flemingʼs letter in detail, and respond to the following concerns: 1. The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) has found that, on average, a photoelectric detector is 30 minutes faster in detecting a smoldering fire than an ionized detector. The highest percentage of deaths caused by smoldering fires occurs while people are sleeping, when the operation of a smoke detector is critical. In fact, this percentage may be as high as 100 percent. Four years ago NIST reached the conclusion that ionization detectors sometimes fail to alarm in smoldering fires, even when visibility is significantly degraded by smoke. 2. While ionized detectors alarm sooner in “ultra-fast” flaming fires by an average of 50 seconds, those seconds appear to be negligible considering that most people are awake when flaming fires occur. In addition, in what appears to be the most common type of flaming fires (i.e. cooking fires) the photoelectric detector was providing more than enough time for an occupant to escape. 3. Several studies show that the ionization smoke detector is many times more likely to be disabled than photoelectric detectors. 4. The ionization smoke detector is being used by the vast majority of Americans. The ionization smoke alarms susceptibility to nuisance alarms (leading to disablement) and inadequate response to smoldering fires could be responsible for hundreds of needless deaths each year. Recently, due to the efforts of Chief Fleming of the Boston Fire Department to educate the authorities to these facts, the states of Massachusetts and Vermont have taken steps to restrict the use of ionization smoke detectors in residential occupancies. In response to the available evidence that suggests the inherent danger of ionization detectors, I ask that you promptly investigate the issues raised by Chief Fleming, and that you respond to his letter of March 12, 2008. Fire safety and the use of working fire alarms are vital to the protection of our children, seniors, adults and families around the United States. I strongly urge you to provide a timely response to the above concerns and to consider the potential loss of life should it become clear that a large percentage of Americans are using inadequate smoke detectors. I appreciate your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, John F. Kerry