Reginald B. Simmons

Reginald B. Simmons was an environmental consultant for Healthy Buildings International (HBI), a tobacco industry-backed air quality analysis company.

Testimony in U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit against Philip Morris, et al, 1999
Reginald Simmons testified in the United States Department of Justice racketeering case against Philip Morris et al. Simmons worked for HBI in 1986, when the company first started associating with the Tobacco Institute. He notes that HBI experienced a vast increase in workload after that time, hiring and training many more workers to inspect buildings all over the world. Simmons describes the ground rules were laid down for sampling air in all of the buildings inspected for the Tobacco Institute:

"Mr. Binnie [Vice President of HBI] had a number of instructions and ground rules for us to follow that applied to all of the buildings we inspected, private and public: (1) when taking air samples for nicotine tests, we were instructed to take air samples in lobbies and other easily accessible areas where the circulation was best, thus reducing the readings; (2) if asked, always recommend to clients that any air pollution problem could be solved by better ventilation; (3) banning or restricting tobacco use or smoking was never to be recommended; and, (4) every inspection report was to be reviewed and undergo final editing by either Mr. Binnie or Mr. Robertson before it was sent out."

Simmons stated that the results of his reports were altered after he submitted them to his superiors:

Q. Were your reports ever edited or changed after you submitted your reports to Mr. Binnie or Mr. Robertson? A. It is my understanding that the reports were always edited by Mr. Binnie or Mr. Robertson. Q. How do you know that your reports were changed after you submitted them to Mr. Binnie or Mr. Robertson? A. On many occasions involving inspections of both public and private buildings, I would later see the inspection reports in the main files and note that Mr. Binnie or Mr. Robertson had changed the data and the conclusions. For example, when I had recommended a restriction or banning of smoking, Mr. Binnie would edit it out of the final inspection report. It was also a standard practice for Mr. Binnie to reduce the actual results of two significant tests that were done on buildings: (1) the test for airborne particle count ("APC"); and (2) the test for weighing airborne particles ("WAP")... Q. Are the results of these tests important? A. Yes. These two tests are critical for providing accurate information about airborne particles in the final inspection reports for buildings. Q. To your knowledge, did clients ever learn that the results of these tests were reduced? A. No. The clients, both public and private buildings owners and tenants, were never advised of the alteration of the data. "

Simmons testified that the Tobacco Institute and its members sent HBI employees all over the world to perform building inspections, and that money was no object

"...we stayed in the most exclusive and expensive hotels and were told we could have anything and everything we needed. We were provided drivers that took us to each city and took care of all of our personal needs... On weekends, we were allowed to go anywhere we wanted at the expense of Philip Morris. For example, one weekend they took some of us, myself included, to the St. Moritz Resort where we all went skiing; other team members went to Venice and Florence, Italy, for the weekend...I personally turned in, for my group's two weeks in Scandinavia, approximately $12,500 of expenses for hotels, meals, and miscellaneous purchases. Money was never an issue when working for the Tobacco Institute or its members..." Simmons further noted that Philip Morris representatives were always present during building inspections. Later, after he left HBI, Simmons noted that HBI was not telling the truth about the results of building inspections the company had performed:

"In 1990, after I had left HBI, I heard Mr. Simon Turner of HBI give a presentation on the results of the Swiss study at the International Conference on Indoor Air Quality held in Toronto, Canada. In his presentation, he asserted that environmental tobacco smoke was only a minor problem in the buildings we surveyed. In my opinion, this was not an accurate characterization of what we observed.  Contrary to his presentation, some buildings we observed in the study had high levels of environmental tobacco smoke.'"

Simmons' deposition is instructive about how the industry constructed its deception on the issue of secondhand smoke.

Sourcewatch resources

 * Healthy Buildings International
 * Gray Robertson
 * Secondhand smoke