Internal tobacco industry documents related to ventilated filters

***HTML Error flagged***

You are fully familiar with all of the efforts which we as a company and which this Region and the EEMA Region have exerted in order to attempt to ensure that the BARCLAY brand cigarette is accurately measured for "tar" and nicotine and that the correct readings of "tar" and nicotine be available to consumers through brand advertising and package markings so that consumers have a uniform basis of comparison of cigarette brands on the market place.

Should we on a worldwide basis or on a selected geographical basis seek to have applicable cigarette testing norms changed so as to have adopted a method which will accurately test the BARCLAY-type filter? What are the advantages and what are the disadvantages and risks of attempting to do this and, in the end, do you recommend that we proceed on this basis? Would we be able to overcome in practice any opposition by B.A.T. (and perhaps of others), to such an objective? Do we risk and if so can we control the problem of "opening Pandora's box" of other problems? How "quietly" can any attempt to change international or local norms and related laws be made, so that undesirable public interest (including so-called anti-smoking groups) is not aroused which might result in unfavourable publicity for the industry (or for us in particular) and which could give such interested parties an opportunity to seek and perhaps to obtain severe and undesirable changes to internationa1 or local norms and related laws?

Improved "DIN Vornorm"

This method has exactly the same principle as DIN, double smoking with channels open and closed [...]

Advantages :

• Would give the same figures for Barclay and SAUNA

Disadvantages :

• Double smoking
• Will be a specific method for CVC only
  [...]
• Would open the door to future averaging methods
• Support from CORESTA more difficult to obtain.

***HTML Error flagged***

• that the protocol should also measure and publish information on the range of "tar", nicotine, and carbon monoxide yields that most smokers should expect from each cigarette sold in the U.S. and that such information should be clearly communicated to smokers.
  [...]
• that smokers should be informed of the presence of other smoke constituents in to addition to "tar", nicotine, and carbon monoxide with each package and all advertisements."

***HTML Error flagged***

STRATEGY

OBJECTIVES

• Preserve our ability to:
  • market and advertise brands at different points on the spectrum of "tar" yields,
  • advertise low tar/light and ultra low tar /ultra light cigarettes as such;
• avoid changes in the FTC method for as long as possible,
• minimize changes in the FTC method to the extent possible and
• make certain that any changes affect our brands no more adversely than competing brands.

4.14 Cigarette holders

4.14 Cigarette holders

14.1 Characteristic data about the cigarette.

***HTML Error flagged***

10.5 Smoking Process

10.5.1 The cigarettes should be fitted into the cigarette holders, avoiding leaks and deformations by insertion to the standard depth of 9 ± 1 mm. If the cigarettes have ventilated tips care must be taken to ensure these are open to atmosphere during smoking.

We recommend that the Board approve the expenditure of approximately $7,000,000 to purchase machinery to enable Philip Morris U.S.A. to use perforated tipping on all filter brands not now ventilated. This program will give us the capability to better control and reduce the tar and nicotine delivery of our products.

In addition, in June of this year the FTC is expected to begin reporting the carbon monoxide (CO) content of cigarette smoke by brand. At this time ventilation through perforated tipping is the only effective means of reducing CO delivery. We feel we must be able to control CO to position our brands competitively and to respond quickly to any public reaction that may develop over CO.

Although equipment for this program will cost approximately $4,500,000, we feel the capital expense to do it in-house is justified for the 'following'reasons:

1. Flexibility - In-house capability will allow us to vary our dilution levels at will. We will not be bound by suppliers' capacity, capability (or lack of it), and inventory.
2. Competitive Advantage - We feel it is important to keep any moves we make in this area secret for as long as possible. Any order we place for perforated tipping for Marlboro would be impossible to disguise and would tip our hand to our competitors.
3. Proprietary Secrets - Our current research into perforated tipping has yielded significant results. Our electric perforating process is truly invisible. This and other proprietary developments must be kept in-house and secret if they are to be a significant competitive advantage.
   [...]

Because of the urgent nature of this project we are requesting the Board's permission to commit funds now before detailed investigations have been'completed.

1. Mechanical Perforation
2. Laser Perforation
3. Electrostatic Perforation

I recommend that the Board of Directors approve the Supplemental Capital Appropriation request to provide perforated tipping capacity for all Philip Morris U.S.A. filter brands.

Our ability to vary the dilution of our filter brands without delay is important for product leadership. There is little doubt that as the years go by, all filter brands will be ventilated. Our capability to do this in house will give us a competitive advantage.

Subect: Marlboro Smoke Delivery Levels in Europe

1. The basic aim is to standardize numbers throughout the Region at 18 mg DPM with the relative reduction in smoke nicotine, and at the same time to prepare ourselves to get lower than 18 if necessary.
   [...]
3. The first step in reduction in smoke deliveries will be achieved by a 10% to 15% filter dilution, by the use of either porous tipping or non visible zone perforated tipping paper. [...]

First Step :

• The filter dilution is at present the only efficient way to reduce NO and CO. A 15 % reduction in NO and CO would allow us to have average figures for CO at about 12 mg/cig., and for NO below 0.3 mg/cig.
  [...]
• Filter dilution wi11 be carried out with a porous or zone perforcted tipping paper. Zone perforated tipping paper is the easier and more elegant solution, but at present, we have no assurance regarding the supply of materials. Consequently, we are working with porous tipping paper as an alternative.
  [...]

Second Step 

• To reduce CO delivery below 10 mg.
• To reduce condensate (K) to 12 mg and smoke nicotine (N) to 0.7 mg if so requested. The further reduction in K and N will be relatively small as we have to modify the filtcr (less efficient) and the blend (stronger) in order to keep the taste.
  [...]

1. PRODUCT OBJECTIVES Except for the UK and Germany, the objectives are to standardize smoke deliveries throughout Europe at 18 mg DPM, with the relative reduction in smoke nicotine and, at the same time, to prepare ourselves to get lower than 18 mg DPM if necessary. In achieving these objectives, the existing Marlboro taste profile will be maintained.
2. PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT FTR and PMH are undertaking an extensive development program covering the use of both porous and zone perforated tipping paper. PMG has started a development program. First results indicate that the product objectives can be achieved by using zone perforated tipping paper.
   [...]
3. TIMING
   1. FRANCE is the top priority as product identification has to be put on the packs by July 1, 1978, and DPM and SN numbers will definitely be required. The area advises that it is not yet absolutely certain whether or not CO will also have to be included, but we have to be prepared for it.[...]