You say, Example, data as to the presence of a trailer or the presence of an ignitable liquid. Again, see the chapter on incendiary fires in 921.

I gave you an example where the presence of an ignitable liquid was present along with what one would call a trailer. If one would have determined this was sufficient evidence as to the person’s intent to burn the structure down, they would have been wrong. By me in one case being able to prove that specific hypothesis wrong it invalidates that hypothesis.

I guess we will just agree to disagree as to the removal of that chapter and what it means to the fire investigation community.

I also disagree that the fire investigation community is now relying on law enforcement for the classifications. The public sector has all the tools necessary to classify an incident. Nothing has changed for them. Their classification system was not the one found in NFPA 921 but the one found in in NFIRS. If you take time to review what is required in NFIRS to classify you will see it offers a better process than the one found in NFPA 921.

The determination as to the cause is different from the classification. The process for determining the cause is still part of NFPA 921. Nothing has changed. Determination as to the cause is still made by the fire investigator. The investigator will use the same evidence, of which some is found in NFPA 921, and some is from other sources. The qualifications for the person conducting this task will depend on the specific job he holds and the laws and policies of the jurisdiction. NFPA 921 does not set qualifications for a person to be an investigator. Where NFPA 1033 does, that is not the requirement in most jurisdictions.

The reliable methodology for the public sector for classification of the cause is in NFIRS for the public sector. There is nothing preventing the private sector from following the same methodology.

Jim Mazerat
Forensic Investigations Group