The World Fire Safety Foundation
Problems viewing this page? Click  Here > > >sorry.htmlshapeimage_2_link_0
Underwriters Laboratories (UL)  - 4 of 4
The UL Letters
 

After an hour of discussion . . .

Adrian Butler
Chairman, The World
Fire Safety Foundation
A Conversation With UL’s Consumer Affairs Manager: Mr John Drengenberg
January, 2008

Twenty six months after UL had failed to respond to the ‘UL Letters’ (see above), The World Fire Safety
Foundation’s chairman, Adrian Butler, spoke to UL’s Consumer Affairs Manager, Mr John Drengenberg.

The following is an accurate representation of the conversation regarding UL’s alleged Scientific
Misconduct (i.e. fraudulent standards testing) of ionization smoke alarms:

John Drengenberg
UL Consumer
Affairs Manager
Note:
- The essence of the problem always come back to the Standards.  Alleged ‘Scientific Misconduct’ (i.e. fraudulent testing) allows
   ionization smoke alarms to be certified as safe by UL and other Standards organisations globally.  In 1999 UL’s Chief Legal
   Officer and Senior Vice President, Ms Debra Rade declared UL had “set the entire foundation for  product-safety certification”
   and “if we don’t anticipate everything, if there’s a misuse of our product we never thought of, we change our standard.”

- As at March, 2011, UL has failed to correct its dangerously flawed UL217 Smoke Alarm Standard.
- Did Ms Rade’s statement implicate UL in the flawed standard’s testing of ionization smoke alarms globally?sa.htmlsa.htmlshapeimage_10_link_0shapeimage_10_link_1
All World Fire Safety Foundation films are produced by MC2E Productions. 
MC2E’s documentary, ‘Stop The Children Burning’, was inspired by the Washington
Post’s award-winning exposé, ‘How Safe are Products Bearing the UL Mark?’.ul.htmlshapeimage_11_link_0
1st Information Request - 11 Oct, 2005:

1st Response - 13 Oct, 2005:

2nd Information Request - 27 Oct, 2010:

2nd Response - 18 Nov, 2010:

3rd Information Request - 20 Nov, 2010: 

UL Response 3:
“What steps have been taken to change
  the UL217 Smoke Alarm Standard?”

Scroll for all four pages

What steps has UL taken to rectify it’s flawed standard?

States UL’s VP and CEO treating matter with the “utmost seriousness”.

Restates question and re-requests UL to please answer it.

UL responds avoiding question.

Restates question FOR THE THIRD TIME

No Response

Washington Post Questioned
UL’s ‘Seal of Approval’

UL Inc’s Headquarters
Chicago, Illinois, USA

The UL Letters - Summary

John, the bottom line with UL217 (America’s smoke alarm standard) is that you can’t possibly fix it.

Adrian, I can assure you UL will always act in the best interests of the public and
we are working towards changing the standard.

UL has been saying they’re going to fix UL217 since 1978!  The existing testing of
ionization smoke alarms is an indictment on UL.  The problem is UL can’t develop a legitimate test, because if they did ionization alarms will fail and some of the manufacturer could be put out of business and possibly sue UL.
UL always acts in the best interests of consumers, not the manufacturers.
Many people and organisations
do not agree with that!

AB:

JD:


AB:



JD:

AB:

The Foundation thanks Maya Gurry
and the team at FreshPR for their
assistance with the ‘UL Letters’
http://www.freshpr.com.au/clients/default.htmshapeimage_19_link_0

Information about acknowledgement of Australia’s flawed smoke alarm standard:  Here > > >

The UL Letters

Download ‘UL Letters’ Document Here > > >

UL217 - America’s flawed Smoke Alarm Standard

Accusations about UL’s flawed testing of smoke alarms in Albany, California:  Here > > >

The Washington Post article exposed Underwriters Laboratories (UL) flawed smoke alarm standard,
UL217.  MC2E wrote to UL about their flawed smoke alarm standard (UL217) asking:
< < <  UL1 - ‘False Sense of Security’ Interview    |   < < <  UL2 - Washington Post’s ‘How Safe?’ Exposé    |   < < <  UL3 - UL Testimony at Albanyul.htmlul2.htmlul3.htmlshapeimage_25_link_0shapeimage_25_link_1shapeimage_25_link_2
< < <  UL1 - ‘False Sense of Security’ Interview    |   < < <  UL2 - Washington Post’s ‘How Safe?’ Exposé    |   < < <  UL3 - UL Testimony at Albanyul.htmlul2.htmlul3.htmlshapeimage_26_link_0shapeimage_26_link_1shapeimage_26_link_2