S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc.

Private and voluntary organisations · Company

Pin Request correction

First report 18 Sep 2017•Latest report 18 Sep 2017

Reports, concerns and published responses

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Reports
1

Naming this recipient

Published responses
100%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
3

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
6

Described in responses

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc. linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Cumbria

    AI-generated summary

    Kathleen Erica Holme · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Kathleen Erica Holme died after a fire at her home in the early hours of 26 March 2017, having been rescued from the property. The fire involved candles and a Glade automatic air freshener, and she died from burns and smoke inhalation. Concerns were raised about the extent and prominence of warnings about using the air freshener near naked flames, including the lack of warnings on the device itself.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc.; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of naked-flame danger warnings to be sufficiently large and prominent

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) Whilst there are both warning signs and wording on the box containing a new spray and on the aerosol to be fitted to it, I am concerned that the words warning of the dangers of use near a naked flame is not sufficiently large and prominent to draw the dangers to a users attention. ”
    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc.; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of manufacturer awareness and understanding of the extent of naked-flame risks

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Whether the manufacturer is aware and understands the extent of the risks of the use of a Glade Automatic Air Freshener Spray near to naked flames, and specifically the distance which the flame can extend. ”
    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc.; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Absence of naked-flame danger warnings on the body of the automatic air freshener

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) There were no warning signs on the body of the automatic air freshener. Once the box containing the new air freshener was discarded a user would have only the information printed on the aerosol as a warning. ”
    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Assess the product labelling against applicable regulatory requirements, guidelines and industry standards.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The labelling on the Glade® Automatic Air Freshener has been assessed against the regulatory requirements and guidelines and industry standards to address Concerns 2 and 3 in the Report:”

    Source location

    2017-0212-Response-by-SC-Johnson
    Page 5 · response
    Published 25 September 2017

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Test the refill canister for flammability, rupture, corrosion, weight loss, gasket swelling and other mechanical-safety hazards.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Similarly, the air freshener refill canister has been thoroughly tested to a comprehensive test plan that includes tests for flammability (ASTM D 3065⁶ - Flame Projection and Closed Drum tests, UN 31.4 & 31.5⁷ - Ignition Distance & Enclosed Space Ignition tests, and ASTM D93-08⁸ – Flash Point Measurement), canister rupture (FEA 621 E⁹ – can pressure test), general product safety (ASTM F963 – consumer safety¹⁰), as well as corrosion and weight loss (ASTM G1 and G46)¹¹, and gasket swell (ISO 500-011 – solvent immersion)¹² testing. The tests evaluate the air freshener refill canister for the risk of fire, canister rupture, and mechanical hazards such as laceration.”

    Source location

    2017-0212-Response-by-SC-Johnson
    Page 2 · response
    Published 25 September 2017

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Test and use a metered valve that limits each refill actuation to 90 microlitres to reduce inadvertent leakage and flame extent.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The air freshener refill canister has a metered-valve that was tested for flame projection (ASTM D 3065¹⁴ - Flame Projection) to minimize the risk to consumers of inadvertent leakage of the canister contents. The metered-valve design dispenses just 90μl (equivalent to less than 2 drops) of the refill contents every 9, 18 or 36 minutes.”

    Source location

    2017-0212-Response-by-SC-Johnson
    Page 3 · response
    Published 25 September 2017

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Apply high-contrast safety warnings, hazard pictograms and labelling to the refill canister and product packaging.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To educate and warn consumers about the dangers of using the air freshener refill canister near to naked flames, we mark the refill with safety warnings and labelling.”

    Source location

    2017-0212-Response-by-SC-Johnson
    Page 3 · response
    Published 25 September 2017

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Existing packaging and refill labelling is considered sufficient; labelling the dispenser is not required and could mislead consumers.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The labelling on the Glade® Automatic Air Freshener has been assessed against the regulatory requirements and guidelines and industry standards to address Concerns 2 and 3 in the Report:”

    Source location

    2017-0212-Response-by-SC-Johnson
    Page 5 · response
    Published 25 September 2017

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Existing testing, regulatory compliance and safe-use history are considered sufficient to address risks from the air freshener near naked flames.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The air freshener device has been thoroughly tested to a comprehensive test plan, based on tests taken from standards UL 283², IEC 60335-1³ and IEC 60335-2-10¹⁴ that included tests for drop, over-temperature conditions, motor locked rotor, and electromagnetic compatibility & radio-frequency emission testing (EN 55014-1 and EN 55014-2)⁵, chemical compatibility, and other tests to verify that the device meets all of the electrical device physical safety requirements. All the tests performed on the device had acceptable results. The purpose of the test plan was to minimize the fire, thermal burn, and mechanical hazards (such as laceration) of the newly developed Glade® air freshener device.”

    Source location

    2017-0212-Response-by-SC-Johnson
    Page 2 · response
    Published 25 September 2017

    Open published response
Back to top

Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026