I do not think it was thought of by the person lighting the fire. He will know better next time. Under the NFIRS program they would call this an intentional act. If it is believed this act was done to cause harm then the codes from the Arson section would be used. In this section it identifies, the case status (open, closed, etc.), was the material first ignited at the scene or brought to the scene, possible motive factors, group involvement if any, point of entry to the building, extent of fire involvement when department arrived, incendiary devices found, possible ignition devices, and a number more. If the fire cause is other than to cause harm, the reporting systems goes into areas such as misuse of material or product, mechanical or electrical failure or malfunction, installation or operation deficiency, natural conditions, etc.

Maybe there needs to be a better coordination on the development of classification between the Fire Administration and the 921 committee so that we are all talking the same language. In many states the city and state investigators or mandated to use the NFIRS system of reporting. The NFIRS system does not correlate well with the classification system being used in 921.

The simpler classification system of incendiary and accidental may be quick answers for the legal aspects in determining where the investigation should go, but I just think it is outdated an we, as a profession, need to move on to better methods of explaining our findings.