U.S. Department of Homeland Security • U.S. Fire Administration
National Fire Data Center • Emmitsburg, Maryland 21727
www.usfa.fema.gov/statistics/
Topical Fire reporT SerieS
Volume 13, Issue 7 / August 2012
Clothes Dryer Fires in
Residential Buildings (2008–2010)
These topical reports are designed to
explore facets of the U.S. re problem as
depicted through data collected in the U.S.
Fire Administration’s (USFA’s) National
Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS).
Each topical report briey addresses the
nature of the specic re or re-related
topic, highlights important ndings from
the data, and may suggest other resources
to consider for further information. Also
included are recent examples of re inci-
dents that demonstrate some of the issues
addressed in the report or that put the
report topic in context.
Findings
■ An estimated 2,900 clothes dryer res in residential buildings are reported to U.S. re
departments each year and cause an estimated 5 deaths, 100 injuries, and $35 million in
property loss.
■ Clothes dryer re incidence in residential buildings was higher in the fall and winter months,
peaking in January at 11 percent.
■ Failure to clean (34 percent) was the leading factor contributing to the ignition of clothes
dryer res in residential buildings.
■ Dust, ber, and lint (28 percent) and clothing not on a person (27 percent) were, by far, the
leading items rst ignited in clothes dryer res in residential buildings.
■ Fifty-four percent of clothes dryer res in residential buildings were conned to the object of
origin.
F
or many households and other establishments, the
clothes dryer is an indispensable convenience and
necessity. However, damaging fires can occur if clothes
dryers are not properly installed and maintained. Eighty-
four percent of clothes dryer fires that occurred in build-
ings took place in residential buildings.
1, 2
Because the
residential building portion of these fires predominates, the
primary focus of this analysis addresses the characteristics
of clothes dryer fires in residential buildings reported to the
National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS). The focus
is on fires reported from 2008 to 2010, the most recent data
available at the time of this analysis.
From 2008 to 2010, fire departments responded to an esti-
mated 2,900 clothes dryer fires in residential buildings each
year across the Nation.
3
These fires resulted in an annual
average loss of 5 deaths, 100 injuries, and $35 million in
property loss.
For the purpose of this report, the term “clothes dryer
fires” is synonymous with “clothes dryer fires in residential
buildings.” “Clothes dryer fires” is used throughout the
body of this report; the findings, tables, charts, headings,
and footnotes reflect the full category, “clothes dryer fires
in residential buildings.”
The Hows and Whys of a Clothes Dryer Fire
A clothes dryer works by forcing hot air through a turning
drum. Wet clothes placed in the drum are then dried by
moving hot air. It is possible for a full load of wet clothes
to contain as much as one and a half gallons of water. Lint,
consisting mostly of small fibers from the clothes and
debris in or on the clothes, is created from the clothes as
the clothes tumble in the drum. While much of the lint is
trapped by the dryer’s filter, lint is also carried through the
vent system along with moist air.
4
Lint is a highly combus-
tible material that can accumulate both in the dryer and in
the dryer vent. Accumulated lint leads to reduced airflow
and can pose a potential fire hazard.
5
In addition to the accumulation of lint, blockage in dryer
exhaust vents also can occur from the nests of small birds or
other animals or from damages to the venting system itself.
A compromised vent will not exhaust properly to the outside.
As a result, overheating may occur and a fire may ensue.
6
Loss Measures
Table 1 presents losses, averaged over the 3-year period
from 2008 to 2010, of reported clothes dryer fires in
residential buildings.
7
The average number of injuries per
1,000 clothes dryer fires was slightly higher than the same
loss measure for all other residential building fires. The
average number of fatalities per 1,000 clothes dryer fires
and average dollar loss per clothes dryer fire, however, were
notably less than the same loss measures for all other resi-
dential building fires.
TFRS Volume 13, Issue 7/Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings (2008-2010) Page 2
Table 1. Loss Measures for Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings
(3-year average, 2008–2010)
Measure
Clothes Dryer Fires in
Residential Buildings
Residential Building Fires
(Excluding Clothes Dryer Fires)
Average Loss:
Fatalities/1,000 res 1.8 5.5
Injuries/1,000 res 30.5 28.8
Dollar loss/re $9,610 $15,940
Source: NFIRS 5.0.
Notes: 1) Average loss for fatalities and injuries is computed per 1,000 res; average dollar loss is computed per re and is rounded to the nearest $10.
2) When calculating the average dollar loss per re for 2008–2010, the 2008 and 2009 dollar-loss values were adjusted to their equivalent 2010 dollar-loss values to account for ination.
Where Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential
Buildings Occur
One- and two-family residences accounted for 77 percent
of clothes dryer fires as shown in Table 2. Only 17 percent
of clothes dryer fires occurred in multifamily dwellings,
and even fewer occurred in hotels and motels (3 percent).
The remaining 3 percent of clothes dryer fires occurred in
other residential buildings including boarding and room-
ing homes, sororities and fraternities, dormitories, barracks,
and other residences.
8
Table 2. Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings by Property Use (2008–2010)
Property Use
Clothes Dryer Fires in
Residential Buildings (Percent)
One- or two-family dwellings 77.1
Multifamily dwellings 17.4
Hotels and motels 3.0
Other residential buildings 2.5
Total 100.0
Source: NFIRS 5.0.
In addition, as expected, clothes dryer fires most often
started in laundry areas (83 percent) as shown in Table 3.
The next leading areas of origin for clothes dryer fires were
substructure areas such as crawl spaces and garages (each at
3 percent), kitchens (2 percent), and other service or equip-
ment areas (1 percent).
Table 3. Leading Specic Areas of Fire Origin in Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings
(2008–2010)
Areas of Fire Origin
Percent
(Unknowns Apportioned)
Laundry area 82.6
Substructure area or space 2.6
Garage, carport 2.5
Cooking area, kitchen 2.0
Other service or equipment areas 1.4
Source: NFIRS 5.0.
When Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential
Buildings Occur
As shown in Figure 1, clothes dryer fires increased in
frequency beginning in the early morning and occurred
fairly regularly between the hours of 8 a.m. and midnight,
with a slight peak between 1 and 2 p.m. (7 percent).
9
Clothes dryer fires then declined reaching the lowest point
between 3 and 6 a.m., when most people are expected to
be sleeping.
TFRS Volume 13, Issue 7/Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings (2008-2010) Page 3
Figure 1. Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings by Time of Alarm (2008–2010)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
11PM-Mid
10PM-11PM
9PM-10PM
8PM-9PM
7PM-8PM
6PM-7PM
5PM-6PM
4PM-5PM
3PM-4PM
2PM-3PM
1PM-2PM
12PM-1PM
11AM-12PM
10AM-11AM
9AM-10AM
8AM-9AM
7AM-8AM
6AM-7AM
5AM-6AM
4AM-5AM
3AM-4AM
2AM-3AM
1AM-2AM
Mid-1AM
Time of Alarm
Percent of Clothes Dryer Fires
in Residential Buildings
3.0
2.0
1.4
1.0
1.1
0.9
1.7
2.7
3.8
4.7
4.8
5.7
6.1
5.4
5.6
5.2
4.8
4.0
5.7
6.7
6.1
5.7
6.3
5.5
Source: NFIRS 5.0.
Note: Total does not add up to 100 percent due to rounding.
Figure 2 illustrates that clothes dryer fire incidence was
higher in the fall and winter months, peaking at 11 percent
in January. The increase in fires in the cooler months may
be explained by the quantity and type of clothes worn in
these months. In addition, people are less likely to dry
clothes outdoors during the cooler months than during the
warmer months.
Figure 2. Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings by Month (2008–2010)
Month of Year
Percent of Clothes Dryer Fires
in Residential Buildings
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
January
10.6
9.5
9.2
7.9
8.1
7.4
6.9
7.3
6.7
8.1
9.2
9.0
Source: NFIRS 5.0.
Note: Total does not add up to 100 percent due to rounding.
TFRS Volume 13, Issue 7/Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings (2008-2010) Page 4
Factors Contributing to Ignition in Clothes
Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings
Table 4 shows the categories of factors contributing to igni-
tion in clothes dryer fires. The leading category was “oper-
ational deficiency” (47 percent). The leading specific factor
contributing to ignition, which is part of the operational
deficiency category, was failure to clean. This is not sur-
prising as proper clothes dryer maintenance to avoid a fire
hazard involves removing the lint from the traps, vents, and
surrounding areas of the dryer. Failure to clean accounted
for 72 percent of the operational deficiency contributing
factors category. It also accounted for 34 percent of all
clothes dryer fires in residential buildings.
The second leading factors contributing to ignition cat-
egory was “mechanical failure, malfunction” at 29 percent.
“Electrical failure, malfunction” was the third leading
category at 16 percent. Reduced airflow resulting from lint
buildup in the screen or other areas around the dryer can
cause a clothes dryer to not operate efficiently and possibly
overheat. Problems can also occur if improper items, such
as foam-backed rugs or athletic shoes, are placed in dryers,
or plastic or vinyl exhaust materials are used to vent the
appliances.
10
Table 4. Factors Contributing to Ignition in Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings
by Major Category (Where Factors Contributing to Ignition are Specied, 2008–2010)
Factors Contributing to Ignition Category
Percent of Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings
(Unknowns Apportioned)
Operational deciency 46.6
Mechanical failure, malfunction 28.6
Electrical failure, malfunction 15.6
Misuse of material or product 9.5
Design, manufacture, installation deciency 4.0
Other factors contributing to ignition 3.3
Natural condition 0.6
Fire spread or control 0.2
Source: NFIRS 5.0.
Notes: 1) Includes only incidents where factors that contributed to the ignition of the re were specied.
2) Multiple factors contributing to re ignition may be noted for each incident; total will exceed 100 percent.
What Ignites First in Clothes Dryer Fires in
Residential Buildings
Not unexpectedly, dust, fiber, and lint (28 percent) and
clothing not on a person (27 percent) were, by far, the
leading items first ignited as shown in Table 5. Other lead-
ing items first ignited included other soft goods, wearing
apparel or clothing (9 percent), appliance housing or casing
(8 percent), linen other than bedding (6 percent), and elec-
trical wire, cable insulation (also 6 percent).
Table 5. Leading Specic Items First Ignited in Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings
(2008–2010)
Item First Ignited
Percent
(Unknowns Apportioned)
Dust, ber, lint 27.6
Clothing not on a person 27.2
Other soft goods, wearing apparel or clothing 8.8
Appliance housing or casing 7.5
Linen other than bedding 6.0
Electrical wire, cable insulation 5.7
Source: NFIRS 5.0.
TFRS Volume 13, Issue 7/Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings (2008-2010) Page 5
Fire Spread in Clothes Dryer Fires in
Residential Buildings
Fifty-four percent of clothes dryer fires were confined to
the object of origin (Table 6).
11
An additional 32 percent
were confined to the room of origin. The remaining 14
percent extended beyond the room of origin. The average
dollar loss per clothes dryer fire confined to the object of
origin was less than $2,000. The average loss per all other
clothes dryer fires was notably greater, and for those that
extended beyond the floor of origin, the average loss was
over $40,000.
Table 6. Dollar Loss Per Clothes Dryer Fire in Residential Buildings by Fire Spread
(3-year average, 2008–2010)
Measure
Conned to
object of origin
Conned to
room of origin
Conned to
oor of origin
Conned to
building of origin
Beyond
building of origin
Average Loss:
Percent of res 53.5 32.1 5.1 8.7 0.5
Dollar loss per re $1,790 $6,790 $37,170 $49,500 $46,090
Source: NFIRS 5.0.
Notes: 1) Total percent of res does not add up to 100 percent due to rounding.
2) Average dollar loss is computed per re and rounded to the nearest $10.
3) When calculating the average dollar loss per re for 2008–2010, the 2008 and 2009 dollar-loss values were adjusted to their equivalent 2010 dollar-loss values to account for ination.
Suppression/Alerting Systems in Clothes
Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings
Over the past 30 years, technologies to detect and extin-
guish fires have been a major contributor in the drop in fire
fatalities and injuries. Smoke alarms are now present in the
majority of residential buildings. In addition, the use of
residential sprinklers is widely supported by the fire service
and is gaining support within residential communities.
Note that the data presented in Tables 7 to 9 are the
raw counts from the NFIRS data set and are not scaled
to national estimates of smoke alarms and sprinklers in
residential fires. In addition, NFIRS does not allow for the
determination of the type of smoke alarm (i.e., photoelec-
tric or ionization) or the location of the smoke alarm with
respect to the area of fire origin.
Smoke Alarms
Smoke alarms were present in 62 percent of clothes dryer
fires (Table 7). In 16 percent of clothes dryer fires, there
were no smoke alarms present. In another 20 percent of
these fires, firefighters were unable to determine if a smoke
alarm was present. Additionally, smoke alarm presence
status was not reported in 2 percent of incidents.
12
Thus,
smoke alarms were potentially missing in between 16 and
38 percent of these fires with the ability to spread and pos-
sibly result in fatalities.
Table 7. Presence of Smoke Alarms in Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings
(2008–2010)
Presence of Smoke Alarms Percent
Present 62.3
None present 15.7
Undetermined 20.2
Null/blank 1.8
Total 100.0
Source: NFIRS 5.0.
Only one percent of all clothes dryer fires occurred in resi-
dential buildings that are not currently or routinely occu-
pied. These occupancies—buildings under construction,
undergoing major renovation, vacant, and the like—are
more unlikely to have alerting and suppression systems
that are in place and, if in place, that operate.
13
As a result,
the detailed smoke alarm analyses in the next section focus
only on clothes dryer fires in occupied residential buildings.
TFRS Volume 13, Issue 7/Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings (2008-2010) Page 6
Smoke Alarms in Clothes Dryer Fires in Occupied
Residential Buildings
Smoke alarms were reported as present in 64 percent of
clothes dryer fires in occupied residential buildings (Table
8). In 16 percent of clothes dryer fires in occupied resi-
dential buildings, there were no smoke alarms present. In
another 21 percent of these fires, firefighters were unable to
determine if a smoke alarm was present.
14
When smoke alarms were present (64 percent) and the
alarm operational status is considered, the percentage of
smoke alarms reported as present consisted of:
• smoke alarms present and operated—42 percent;
• present but did not operate—16 percent (alarm did not
operate, 8 percent; fire too small, 8 percent); and
• present, but operational status unknown—6 percent.
When the subset of incidents where smoke alarms were
reported as present are analyzed separately and as a whole,
smoke alarms were reported to have operated in 66 percent
of the incidents. Smoke alarms failed to operate in 12 per-
cent of the incidents. In another 13 percent of the subset
where smoke alarms were reported as present, the fire was
too small to activate the alarm. The operational status of
the alarm was undetermined in 9 percent of the incidents.
Table 8. NFIRS Smoke Alarm Data for Clothes Dryer Fires in Occupied Residential Buildings
(2008–2010)
Presence of
Smoke Alarms
Smoke Alarm Operational Status Smoke Alarm Effectiveness Count Percent
Present
Fire too small to activate smoke alarm 484 8.2
Smoke alarm operated
Smoke alarm alerted occupants, occupants responded 2,036 34.5
Smoke alarm alerted occupants, occupants failed to respond 76 1.3
No occupants 135 2.3
Smoke alarm failed to alert occupants 69 1.2
Undetermined 151 2.6
Smoke alarm failed to operate 451 7.6
Undetermined 352 6.0
None present 939 15.9
Undetermined 1,214 20.6
Total Incidents 5,907 100.0
Source: NFIRS 5.0.
Notes 1) The data presented in this table are raw data counts from the NFIRS data set. They do not represent national estimates of smoke alarms in clothes dryer res in residential buildings. They are presented
for informational purposes.
2) Total does not add to 100 percent due to rounding.
Automatic Extinguishment Systems in Clothes
Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings
The analyses presented here do not differentiate between
occupied and unoccupied housing, as extremely few
reported fires in unoccupied housing have Automatic
Extinguishing Systems (AESs) present (occupied housing
accounted for 99 percent of reported clothes dryer fires with
AESs). Full or partial AESs were present in only 5 percent
of clothes dryer fires (Table 9).
15
While the use of residen-
tial sprinklers is widely supported by the fire service and is
gaining support within residential communities, the lack of
AESs is not unexpected as they are not yet widely installed.
Table 9. NFIRS Automatic Extinguishing System (AES) Data for Clothes Dryer Fires in
Residential Buildings (2008–2010)
AES Presence Count Percent
AES present 307 5.0
Partial system present 8 0.1
AES not present 5,467 89.6
Unknown 209 3.4
Null/Blank 110 1.8
Total Incidents 6,101 100.0
Source: NFIRS 5.0.
Notes: 1) The data presented in this table are raw data counts from the NFIRS data set. They do not represent national estimates of AESs in clothes dryer res in residential buildings. They are presented for infor-
mational purposes.
2) Total does not add to 100 percent due to rounding.
TFRS Volume 13, Issue 7/Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings (2008-2010) Page 7
Examples
The following are recent examples of clothes dryer fires
reported by the media:
• March 2012: A family was displaced after a clothes
dryer fire quickly spread and destroyed their two-story
Colonial home in Readington, NJ. The blaze, which
started on the second floor and rapidly spread to the rest
of the house, kept crews from the local fire companies
and a tanker task force on the scene for more than two
and a half hours. No one was injured, and neighboring
homes were not damaged.
16
• March 2012: A load of clothes in a dryer ignited a fire
that displaced residents from their home in Chapel Hill,
NC. The Chapel Hill Fire Department was dispatched
to the 63-year-old home and quickly discovered that
a dryer in the unfinished basement was the source of
smoke reported by the residents. Firefighters extin-
guished a load of clothes in the dryer that had caught
fire and then removed the dryer from the home. No
injuries were reported.
17
• February 2012: Investigators believe a clothes dryer
sparked a fire in a Cornelius, OR home causing approxi-
mately $75,000 in damage. The homeowner had put
clothes in the dryer and was playing with her son in
another room when she heard two loud noises from the
laundry room. After discovering smoke coming from
the dryer, the woman ran upstairs to get her sleeping
daughter, grabbed her son, and got out of the house.
She then called 9-1-1. No injuries were reported, but
the fire caused “serious smoke damage” throughout the
house and “significant damage” in the laundry room
and nearby bathroom and playroom.
18
Clothes Dryer Venting Systems
In order to prevent possible fire hazards, building codes
19
require that clothes dryers be exhausted directly to the
outdoors. Venting a dryer into attics, soffits, ridge vents, or
crawl spaces is expressly prohibited.
The codes require that dryer vents be made of metal with
smooth interior finishes, sections of vent duct be securely
supported and firmly sealed together, and the total length
of the vent duct not exceed 35 feet (shorter if there are
turns or bends). Flexible transition ducts used to connect
the dryer to the exhaust duct system are required to be not
longer than eight feet, not concealed within construction,
and listed and labeled in accordance with Underwriters
Laboratories (UL) 2158A.
20
New construction trends often situate washers and dryers
in nontraditional areas of the house, such as upstairs bed-
rooms, hallways, bathrooms, kitchens, and closets. These
new sites may require longer dryer vent ducts in order to
reach an outside wall. If a dryer vent is too long or has
many bends and turns, moisture in the warm air passing
through it condenses on the vent surfaces, attracting lint.
Eventually, the lint accumulates and creates resistance.
21
Thus, it is crucial for homeowners to regularly inspect and
clean out the dryer vent.
All manufacturers now state in their manuals not to use
plastic, flexible dryer ducts between the vent and the
clothes dryer. Many homes, however, continue to use plas-
tic, flexible ducts.
22
The plastic itself can provide additional
fuel for a fire. Even flexible foil vents are not a good choice
for venting clothes dryers. Flexible vents can twist, allow-
ing lint to build up and catch on fire if it comes in contact
with a sufficient amount of heat. If a fire starts beneath the
dryer when the motor overheats, then the drafts from the
dryer can pull the fire up into the duct, allowing a house
fire to develop.
23
Only flexible transition ducts that are
listed by UL or another approved product safety testing
agency should be used.
Serious hazards occur when dryer vents do not exhaust
directly to the outside. Faulty installations can vent dryer
exhaust into the attic, crawl space, chimney, or interior
walls, which can cause indoor air deterioration and mold
buildup.
24
Small birds and animals that nest in dryer vents
or other debris can obstruct air flow and prevent proper
venting to the outside.
25
By observing a few simple indications of poor system per-
formance, it can be determined whether the dryer compo-
nents need to be examined for any blockage or excessive
heat. If heavy clothes such as blue jeans or towels are tak-
ing a long time to dry, or clothes feel hotter than usual at
the end of the cycle, a clogged dryer vent exhaust is likely
the problem.
26
TFRS Volume 13, Issue 7/Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings (2008-2010) Page 8
Proper Dryer Installation and Maintenance
The installation and maintenance of clothes dryers are an
important part of making sure that a clothes dryer performs
as designed and does not become a fire hazard. Several
recommendations for clothes dryer safety include the fol-
lowing:
27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32
Clothes Dryer Dos
• Have your clothes dryer installed by qualified personnel.
• Clean the lint filter before and after each cycle. Do not
forget to clean the back of the dryer where lint can build
up. In addition, clean the lint filter with a nylon brush
at least every 6 months or more frequently if it becomes
clogged.
• Inspect the venting system behind the dryer to ensure it
is not damaged, crushed, or restricted.
• Outside wall dampers should have a covering that will
keep out rain, snow, and dirt. Do not, however, use wire
screen or cloth as these can collect lint and clog areas of
the dryer vent.
• Make sure the outdoor vent covering opens when the
dryer is operating.
• The interior of the dryer and venting system should be
serviced and cleaned periodically by qualified service
personnel, especially if it is taking longer than normal
for clothes to dry.
• Replace coiled-wire foil or plastic venting with rigid,
non-ribbed metal duct.
• Have gas-powered dryers inspected by a professional
annually to ensure that the gas line and connection are
intact and free of leaks.
• Check periodically to make sure nests of small animals
and insects are not blocking the outside vent.
• Make sure the correct electrical plug and outlet are used
and that the dryer is connected properly.
• Read manufacturers’ instructions and warnings in use
and care manuals that accompany new dryers.
• Keep the area around the clothes dryer free of items that
can burn.
• If you will be away from home for an extended time,
unplug or disconnect the dryer.
Clothes Dryer Don’ts
• Do not operate a clothes dryer without a lint filter or
with a lint filter that is loose, damaged, or clogged.
• Do not dry anything containing foam, rubber, or plastic
(i.e., bathroom rugs).
• Do not dry any item for which manufacturers’ instruc-
tions state “dry away from heat.”
• Do not dry glass fiber materials (unless manufacturer’s
instructions allow).
• Do not dry materials that have come into contact with
anything flammable (e.g., alcohol, cooking oils, gasoline,
etc.). These should be dried outdoors or in a well-venti-
lated room, away from heat.
• Do not leave a clothes dryer running if you leave home
or when you go to bed.
NFIRS Data Specications for Clothes
Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings
Data for this report were extracted from the NFIRS annual
Public Data Release (PDR) files for 2008, 2009, and 2010.
Only Version 5.0 data were extracted.
Clothes dryer fires in residential buildings are defined by
the following criteria:
• Aid Types 3 (mutual aid given) and 4 (automatic
aid given) are excluded to avoid double counting of
incidents.
• Incident Types 111–123 (excluding Incident Type 112):
Incident
Type
Description
111 Building re
113 Cooking re, conned to container
114 Chimney or ue re, conned to chimney or ue
115 Incinerator overload or malfunction, re conned
116 Fuel burner/boiler malfunction, re conned
117 Commercial compactor re, conned to rubbish
118 Trash or rubbish re, contained
120 Fire in mobile property used as a xed structure, other
121 Fire in mobile home used as xed residence
122 Fire in motor home, camper, recreational vehicle
123 Fire in portable building, xed location
Notes: 1) Incident Types 113–118 (conned res) do not specify if the structure is a building.
2) The analyses in this report include all clothes dryer res and do not distinguish between
conned and nonconned res. (See the note on “Special Considerations” at the end of
this section.)
TFRS Volume 13, Issue 7/Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings (2008-2010) Page 9
• Property use 400–464 is included to specify residential
buildings:
Property
Description
Use
400 Residential, other
419 One- or two-family dwelling
429 Multifamily dwelling
439 Boarding/Rooming house, residential hotels
449 Hotel/Motel, commercial
459 Residential board and care
460 Dormitory-type residence, other
462 Sorority house, fraternity house
464 Barracks, dormitory
• Structure Type:
– For Incident Types 113–118:
▪ 1—Enclosed building;
▪ 2—Fixed portable or mobile structure; and
▪ Structure Type not specified (null entry).
– For Incident Types 111 and 120–123:
▪ 1—Enclosed building and
▪ 2—Fixed portable or mobile structure.
• Equipment Involved in Ignition 811:
33
Equipment
Involved in
Ignition
Description
811 Clothes Dryer
Special Considerations
Building fires are divided into two classes of severity in
NFIRS: “Confined fires,” which are those fires confined to
certain types of equipment or objects, and “nonconfined
fires,” which are not. Confined building fires are small fire
incidents that are limited in extent, staying within specic
noncombustible containers such as cooking pots, fireplaces,
or incinerators. In NFIRS, confined fires are defined by
Incident Type codes 113 to 118. Confined fires rarely result
in serious injury or large content losses and are expected
to have no significant accompanying property losses due
to flame damage.
34
From 2008 to 2010, nonconfined fires
accounted for 98 percent of clothes dryer fires, while
confined fires accounted for the remaining 2 percent. It is
believed, however, that the confined fires were miscoded
in NFIRS since a clothes dryer is not one of the specic
noncombustible containers listed under the NFIRS confined
fire incident type codes. In addition, the areas of origin for
the confined fires were locations where a clothes dryer fire
would most typically start, such as laundry areas, laundry
chutes, and ducts. Finally, the items first ignited were items
most typically involved in clothes dryer fires, such as cloth-
ing not on a person, dust, fiber, lint, and linen. Instead of
these fires being coded as confined in NFIRS, it is believed
that they should have been coded as nonconfined fires with
a fire spread that was limited to the object of origin (clothes
dryer). As a result, the analyses in this report include all
clothes dryer fires in residential buildings and do not dis-
tinguish between confined and nonconfined fires.
The analyses contained in this report reflect the cur-
rent methodologies used by the U. S. Fire Administration
(USFA). The USFA is committed to providing the best and
most current information on the United States fire prob-
lem and continually examines its data and methodology to
fulfill this goal. Because of this commitment, data collec-
tion strategies and methodological changes are possible
and do occur. As a result, analyses and estimates of the fire
problem may change slightly over time. Previous analyses
and estimates on specific issues (or similar issues) may have
used different methodologies or data definitions and may
not be directly comparable to the current ones.
To request additional information or to comment on this
report, visit http://apps.usfa.fema.gov/feedback/
Notes:
1
In NFIRS, Version 5.0, a structure is a constructed item of which a building is one type. In previous versions of NFIRS, the
term “residential structure” commonly referred to buildings where people live. To coincide with this concept, the definition
of a residential structure fire for NFIRS 5.0 has, therefore, changed to include only those fires where the NFIRS 5.0 Structure
Type is 1 or 2 (enclosed building and fixed portable or mobile structure) with a residential property use. Such fires are
referred to as “residential buildings” to distinguish these buildings from other structures on residential properties that may
include fences, sheds, and other uninhabitable structures. In addition, confined fire incidents that have a residential property
use, but do not have a structure type specified are presumed to be buildings. Nonconfined fire incidents that have a residen-
tial property use without a structure type specified are considered to be invalid incidents (structure type is a required field)
and are not included.
TFRS Volume 13, Issue 7/Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings (2008-2010) Page 10
2
The term “residential buildings” includes what are commonly referred to as “homes,” whether they are one- or two-fam-
ily dwellings or multifamily buildings. It also includes manufactured housing, hotels and motels, residential hotels, dor-
mitories, assisted living facilities, and halfway houses—residences for formerly institutionalized individuals (patients with
mental disabilities, drug addicts, or those formerly incarcerated) that are designed to facilitate their readjustment to private
life. The term “residential buildings” does not include institutions such as prisons, nursing homes, juvenile care facilities, or
hospitals, even though people may reside in these facilities for short or long periods of time.
3
National estimates are based on 2008–2010 native Version 5.0 data from NFIRS, residential structure fire-loss estimates
from the National Fire Protection Association’s (NFPA’s) annual surveys of fire loss, and the U.S. Fire Administration’s
(USFA’s) residential building fire-loss estimates. Fires are rounded to the nearest 100, deaths to the nearest 5, injuries to the
nearest 25, and loss to the nearest million dollars.
4
Al’s Home Improvement Center, “Venting Clothes Dryers,” http://www.alsnetbiz.com/homeimprovement/dryervent.html.
5
The Laundry Alternative, “Clothes Dryer Fire Prevention,” http://www.laundry-alternative.com/clothes_dryer_fire.htm.
6
Colonial Plumbing & Heating, “Dryer Fire Fact Sheet,” http://www.colonialplumbing.com/webapp/GetPage?pid=113.
7
The average fire death and fire injury loss rates computed from the national estimates do not agree with average fire
death and fire injury loss rates computed from NFIRS data alone. For example, the fire death rate computed from national
estimates is (1,000*(5/2,900)) = 1.7 deaths per 1,000 clothes dryer fires in residential buildings, and the fire injury rate is
(1,000*(100/2,900)) = 34.5 injuries per 1,000 clothes dryer fires in residential buildings.
8
“One- and two-family residential buildings” include detached dwellings, manufactured homes, mobile homes not in
transit, and duplexes. “Multifamily residential buildings” include apartments, townhouses, rowhouses, condominiums,
and other tenement properties. “Hotels/Motels” include those for commercial use. “Other residential buildings” include
boarding/rooming houses, residential board and care facilities, dormitory-type residences, sorority/fraternity houses, and
barracks.
9
For the purposes of this report, the time of the fire alarm is used as an approximation for the general time the fire started.
However, in NFIRS, it is the time the fire was reported to the fire department.
10
Underwriters Laboratories, “Product Safety Tips: Clothes Dryers,” http://www.ul.com/global/eng/pages/offerings/
perspectives/consumer/productsafety/dryers/.
11
Included in these fires were those coded as “confined fires” in NFIRS. Confined building fires are small fire incidents that
are limited in scope, confined to noncombustible containers, rarely result in serious injury or large content losses, and are
expected to have no significant accompanying property losses due to flame damage. In NFIRS, confined fires are defined by
Incident Type codes 113–118.
12
All incidents where smoke alarm presence was not reported were confined fires (Incident Type codes 113–118). NFIRS
allows abbreviated reporting for confined fires, and many reporting details of these fires including smoke alarm presence
are not required, nor are they reported.
13
“Residential Building Fires (2008–2010),” USFA, April 2012, Volume 13, Issue 2, http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/
pdf/statistics/v13i2.pdf.
14
Total does not add to 100 percent due to rounding.
15
All incidents where AES presence was not reported were confined fires (Incident Type codes 113–118). NFIRS allows
abbreviated reporting for confined fires, and many reporting details of these fires including AES presence are not required,
nor are they reported.
16
Cristina Rojas, “Readington Family Displaced Monday After Dryer Fire Damages Home,” www.nj.com, March 27, 2012,
http://www.nj.com/hunterdon-county-democrat/index.ssf/2012/03/readington_family_displaced_mo.html (accessed
April 2, 2012).
TFRS Volume 13, Issue 7/Clothes Dryer Fires in Residential Buildings (2008-2010) Page 11
17
“Chapel Hill Firefighters Put Out Dryer Fire,” www.newsobserver.com, March 6, 2012, http://www.newsobserver.
com/2012/03/06/1909480/chapel-hill-firefighters-put-out.html (accessed April 2, 2012).
18
Kate Mather, “Fire Investigators Blame Dryer for Blaze in Cornelius Home,” www.oregonlive.com, February 27, 2012,
http://www.oregonlive.com/forest-grove/index.ssf/2012/02/fire_investigators_blame_dryer.html (accessed April 2, 2012).
19
2012 International Residential Code
®
, Section M1502, International Code Council, Washington, DC 20001, 2012.
20
International Code Council.
21
Don Vandervort’s Home Tips, “Clothes Dryer Venting (Ductwork) Problems,” http://www.hometips.com/repair-fix/
dryer-vent.html.
22
Al’s Home Improvement Center.
23
Colonial Plumbing & Heating.
24
Builder’s Best, “Do I Have to Vent My Dryer to the Outside?” http://buildersbest.com/indoor.htm.
25
Colonial Plumbing & Heating.
26
Ibid.
27
Underwriters Laboratories, “Product Safety Tips: Clothes Dryers.”
28
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, “Clothes Dryer Fact Sheet,” http://www.aham.org/ht/a/
GetDocumentAction/i/859.
29
CPSC Safety Alert: Overheated Clothes Dryers Can Cause Fires, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, http://www.cpsc.gov/
cpscpub/pubs/5022.pdf.
30
USFA, “Focus on Fire Safety: Appliance Fires,” http://www.usfa.fema.gov/citizens/focus/appliances.shtm.
31
Al’s Home Improvement Center.
32
Colonial Plumbing & Heating.
33
NFIRS has two equipment involved in ignition codes that are applicable to dryers: code 811 (clothes dryer) and 814
(washer/dryer combination in one frame). This analysis is based on equipment that is exclusively clothes dryers, equipment
co d e 811.
34
NFIRS distinguishes between “content” and “property” loss. Content loss includes loss to the contents of a structure due
to damage by fire, smoke, water, and overhaul. Property loss includes losses to the structure itself or to the property itself.
Total loss is the sum of the content loss and the property loss. For confined fires, the expectation is that the fire did not
spread beyond the container (or rubbish for Incident Type 118), and hence, there was no property damage (damage to the
structure itself) from the flames. There could be, however, property damage as a result of smoke, water, and overhaul.