Inre: Copy Cloth Advisory Opinion Request

Inre: Copy Cloth Advisory Opinion Request Dear Ms. Cavanagh:

Attached for your file is a copy of the Report of Test Number

LA-60913 dated November 3rd, 1972 conducted by United States Testing Company, Inc. ;

Said test report concludes that COPY CLOTH, “......... meets the requirements of the Flammable Fabrics Act, and is considered suitable for wearing apparel use.” As you know, the aforesaid testing was accomplished for our own information only and we still contend that COPY CLOTH and its use is not within the scope of said Act nor subject to regulation thereunder. To more fully explain our position, the term “article of wearing apparel” means any costume or article of clothing worn or intended to be worn by individuals (see Section 1191(d) of the 1967 amendment to the Act). In part, this amendment eliminated the prior exceptions of hats, gloves and footwear from the definition of ‘wearing apparel.” The legislative history reveals that the need for the legislation, as to wearing apparel, arose from the wearing of highly flammable cowboy playsuits and the so called torch or explosive sweaters. The catalog of tragedies and near tragedies in the congressional hearings by Dr. Fredric Bonnet, the National Fire Protective Association and others included tulle dress, plastic raincape, costume at lodge entertainment, grass dress, three (3) childrens costumes, bathrobe, pajamas, pants and various other articles of ordinary clothing and clothing accessories. Inasmuch as said Act expressly limits the meaning of the term “article of wearing apparel” to any costume or article of clothing, the said legislative history reveals the congressional intent in enacting the Flammable Fabrics Act and aids in interpretation of the above limitation. In part we submit that said Act express terms as well as the legislative history circumscribes the meaning of “article of wearing apparel” so as to exclude COPY CLOTH or its uses from operation of said Act or regulations. COPY CLOTH is never intended to be worn as a costume or clothing. It is a pattern material applied to only part of a person’s body at a time by another, e.g. one half bodice, one sleeve, at a time, etc. Within minutes of application, COPY CLOTH becomes a semi-rigid mold, is marked and removed from that part of the body, reduced from three dimensional to planar form for subsequent pattern making sequential steps. The Presidential message giving rise to said amendment to the Act in 1967 called for legislation to keep “extremely flammable clothing out of the nation’s stores’ ....... “current law does

ADVISORY OPINIONS AND REQUESTS THEREFOR 1877 not cover many articles of clothing which can be consumed by fire instataneously,” (sée Wilfred H. Rommel letter to Hon. Harley O. Staggers of April 4th, 1967). The Attorney General’s letter to Hon. Staggers of April 5th, 1967 states in part, “The bill implements the recommendations contained in the President’s message.”

The 1967 legislative history reveals that the intended victims to be protected by the Act, “are very largely concentrated among the very young and the aged. The former often have not learned the significance of what is happening to them; the latter often suffer from disabilities and cannot protect themselves rapidly enough.”

We submit that COPY CLOTH or its uses are not within any reasonable definition of the language used in the said Act which is even more clearly made evident when considering the provisions of the Act in the context of the legislative history and Presidential statements at the time of enactment. We trust that the above brief outline satisfactorily describes at least the nature of our thinking as to these matters. It was our aim to give a reasonable interpretation to the documents reviewed. In a spirit of cooperation and with respect to this particular situation, subject to reservation of our position stated hereinabove, we are pleased to make the aforementioned test report available to you.

It is our understanding that within the next few days you will recommend to the Commision that a favorable advisory opinion issue with respect to COPY CLOTH, its uses and our proposed course of action.

We appreciate the attention you have given to this matter and request to be advised at the earliest possible date of the advisory

opinion and its content.
Very truly yours,
/8/ John N. MacDonald

First Supplemental Letter Relative to Request