ASTM is an abbreviation for the American Society of Testing Materials. It is becoming vital that every fire investigator and insurance claims manager that reads fire investigation reports become familiar with this organization. ASTM Standard E 1397-95 is of extreme importance. The actual name of the standard is STANDARD TEST METHOD FOR IGNITABLE LIQUID RESIDUES IN EXTRACTS FROM FIRE DEBRIS SAMPLES BY
GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY. The title could not be less interesting for most people.

ASTM sets various standards via its committee system much like the NFPA does in its operation. Standard E 1397-95 is classified under Forensic Sciences and sub classified under Criminalistic. The ASTM standards are generally professional in content and scientifically correct. This author submits that an awareness of and an understanding of the standard should be considered a minimum in knowledge of fire investigations for any fire investigator. The day is long gone when a fire investigator was simply a police officer or a fire fighter who is sent to a two week fire investigation school and then sent into the field to conduct investigations. In the "good old days" all one needed to know was that fire burns up, low burns mean flammable fluid, and specific burn patterns and blisters on wood meant arson. Knowledge of electrical fires centered upon wires that were "arced" or "beaded" to make a determination of an electrical fire. Life was much simpler, even if the basis for those conclusions often had no scientific support.

The minimum expectation today is that the fire investigation be able to withstand the scrutiny of SCIENCE
as a basis for the conclusion. Understanding and being able to discuss your lab test results is imperative to understanding the results of the testing, and more significantly the results of your investigation. Above all else, the final; end- product of an investigation should be a conclusion based on scientific certainty. NFPA 921 (GUIDE FOR FIRE INVESTIGATIONS) speaks of levels of certainty using the scientific method. The innocence of
a subject as well as the guilt of a subject is paramount to the investigator. No investigation should be tailored to either stop an insurance claim or to prove an innocent person guilty. One of the things ASTM E 1387 did was to insure that there is a standard that all labs should adhere to in testing fire debris and more importantly, that there is a standard of interpretation of results.

Section 10.6 of the standard clearly notes that "... once a peak starts, it should match a standard until the pattern ends. Peaks missing from the middle of a pattern are usually sufficient grounds for concluding that there is not a match between the sample and the standard."

Section 11.2 speaks to the fact that the lab should describe the material submitted and not simply rely on
the description given by the submitting agency. While the burden is on the submitting agent to accurately
and carefully describe the material submitted, it is incumbent of the lab to insure that the material is the same as described. The matter of accurate lab samples is significant. In working on a case in the Northeast recently, this office read a description of a lab sample submitted in a criminal case for analysis. The sample was sent to the lab in food containers and plastic bags because " the State Police did not have evidence containers." The private lab simply placed the material in "proper cans" and proceeded with the analysis. Aside from the fact that a man was being charged in a criminal case, the general standards of evidence handling were long forgotten in this case. The lab did the correct thing in noting the divergence from minimum standards of evidence handling. Yet, they went on to give a report that noted that even though no flammable fluids were on the sample one could have been there. That final statement while correct was at best gratuitous albeit correct. The unfortunate fact in some cases is that the sample given to the lab is not the same as the one described because of a mix up in the field.

The results of any lab test should state which preparation techniques and which lab techniques were used in reaching the conclusion noted in the report.

One of the most important statements made by the ASTM in connection with the report is found in section 11.5. For the fire investigator, and for the insurance personnel that must read the report after the investigation is complete, the following is paramount.

"Certain words should not appear without explanation in a report. All extracts from organic material are likely to contain "hydrocarbons". The word "hydrocarbon" should not appear in a report unless those hydrocarbons can be specifically identified and classified. The phrase " hydrocarbons from an unidentified source" is expressly prohibited. Similarly phrases such as "consistent with", "in the boiling range of", "similar to", "characteristic of" a particular ignitable liquid should not be used unless the liquid has been positively identified using the methods found in section 10." Section ten is the procedure described in the standard for the analysis of liquids.

The importance of section 11.5 can not be over stated. The investigator should be able to ask the reporting laboratory if they are prepared to get on the stand and say with absolute certainty that gasoline, kerosene, or some other ignitable liquid was found. Simply describing "peaks" on the gas chromatograph as being similar to a particular liquid in various aspects does not answer the question.

A recent fire in a closet investigated by this office brings the problem to light. The closet contained SCUBA equipment, clothing, sports paraphernalia, etc. The closet was consumed in the fire along with its contents. Light in the closet was provided by a drop light that may or may not have been left on several hours before the fire. Most of the components of the light system were destroyed by fire or fire department activity.

Routine lab tests indicated "patterns similar to gasoline". This left the fire investigator in the awkward position of either having to make a decision that could jeopardize speedy payment tot eh assured or put the investigator in an awkward position with the insurance personnel. A decision was made based on the physical evidence to call the fire undetermined based on NFPA 921. Could it have been gasoline? Perhaps, but the information from the lab was not exactly an endorsement for a flammable fluid.

The decision to pay a claim by an insurance carrier is often misunderstood by law enforcement personnel
who ask why the claim is being paid since they are sure the fire was intentionally set. Obviously, if the case had such merit then it is incumbent on the jurisdictional personnel to make an arrest and not rely on a lower standard of evidence by the Civil Courts to stop an insurance claim.

The private fire investigator should be familiar with modern techniques to insure that his conclusions are based on well grounded scientific evidence and not what has been described as "old wives tales".

The author has seen lab samples submitted with notations such as "please confirm the presence of gasoline on the enclosed sample". This is not a particularly good way to receive an unbiased report from a laboratory. Regardless of the ASTM Standards the best advice to any investigator utilizing a lab is to have good communications with your lab technicians. The lab should have both the time and the interest to discuss various results and their meaning. If they are either unwilling or unable to speak with the agent providing the sample for analysis it is time for you to find a new lab. In addition, this office has found it extremely helpful to seek out laboratory personnel that have a knowledge of fire investigations.

MICHAEL LANE is a fire investigator with CORPORATE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES. He is Certified by the National Association of Fire Investigators. He is the author of several articles on fire investigations. Mr. Lane is a frequent guest speaker to professional groups and insurance carriers. In addition, he is also a former instructor in a college program for Criminal Justice Majors. Finally, he holds a Masters Degree and is a member of the Society of Fire Protection Engineers. He has testified in various State and Federal Courts as an expert witness during his career.

Address comments to M. Lane Fax to 914 739 3109.