In an extensive analysis, one court has established a high threshold for demonstrating a reliable methodology, straight from the text of NFPA 921. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. v. Tecumseh Products Co., 767 F.Supp.2d 549 (D. MD 2011) is an excellent illustration of how a court thoroughly contrasts an expert's methodology to NFPA 921.
"Facts about the characteristics of the fuels and materials involved in an electrical fire are thus part of the data set that an investigator must assemble in order to carry out the process prescribed in Chapter Four." Id. at 554. Testing of the expert's hypothesis is a key component of the Daubert inquiry and "the failure to properly test a hypothesis is often grounds for excluding expert testimony in this jurisdiction." Id. at 554. The expert "must demonstrate not only that his hypothesis is plausible, but that it, and not some alternative hypothesis, best explains the event in question." Id. at 555.
"Finally, courts have also required experts to demonstrate that objects and materials are capable of behaving in the manner they hypothesize under the conditions of the event in question." Id. at 555. The court excluded the expert’s testimony for failing to meet these standards.