[RE-wrenches] California State Fire Marshal's "Solar Photovoltaic Installation Guidelines

Fri Feb 14 19:42:39 PST 2014

I wholeheartedly concur with the critics here. [rant mode on]

I've long been very critical of certain elements of the Electric code...But the state fire Marshall guidelines are approaching outrageous. 

I feel very let down by the industry advocates, trade groups, and especially those directly involved in the rule making process... They're supposed to have the public's interest foremost in mind---code standards are supposed to be based on the rigorous test that they demonstrably prevent loss of life and loss of property at an economically justified cost. Instead, it seems, the rule-making has advanced to secure a role for continuing stream of proprietary and incrementally more costly "safety" hardware along with a secure role for those in the process to secure themselves a reliable permanent stream of consulting gigs training and retraining ever more complex and unintelligible code rules.

/wk

William Korthof
714.875.3576
Sustainable Solutions
#956904

On Feb 14, 2014, at 2:27 PM, Dan Fink <danbob88 at gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Bill;
That was tongue in cheek about watching my back! But wow I've seen the discussion get heated, even in face to face outreach sessions. The firefighter you refer to is one of the top teachers on the topic in the US. Providing an escape route on the PV side of the structure is really critical. And I think it's fair to say that the larger the percentage of the roof that can't be ventilated, the more difficult and dangerous it is to save the structure, and the less likely the FD will try. 

And -- interior sprinklers! What a concept, not rocket science, and knocks out about 95% of this whole discussion. Mandated in new subdivisions in my area.

Labeling! SHUT DOWN SOLAR HERE in big red letters outdoors, etc.

I'll keep trying to do my best as a go-between betwixt the fire service and RE, one PV installer and one fire department at a time.

Best regards; 

Dan Fink,
Executive Director;
Otherpower
Buckville Energy Consulting
Buckville Publications LLC
NABCEP / IREC accredited Continuing Education Providers
970.672.4342

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Bill Hennessy <bill at berkssolar.com> wrote:
> hi dan--you weren't the firefighter--it was some guy from california given a guest column. no reason to watch your back.
> 
> my point is that there is no real data about fire problems from pv and we're talking two different worlds between a huge cold storage facility in an urban setting and residential rooftop a long ways from the fire station. i don't see the need to rule make for situations that might happen, effectively throwing out the baby with the bathwater. 
> 
> if pv is to blame in some instance for an increased loss of property, so be it. but what about the truck that runs into somebody's living room. do we install bollards in front of the rest of the houses on the street? 
> 
> regards, bill
>  
> Bill Hennessy
> Berks Solar, LLC
> 371 Centennial Rd
> Mertztown, PA 19539
> 
> o 610 682 4300
> c 484 560 4666
> NABCEP certified installer
> PA contractor #44411
> www.berkssolar.com
> 
> From: Dan Fink <danbob88 at gmail.com>
> To: Bill Hennessy <bill at berkssolar.com>; RE-wrenches <re-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org> 
> Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 1:22 PM
> 
> Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] California State Fire Marshal's "Solar Photovoltaic Installation Guidelines"
> 
> Bill H;
> I believe I'm the firefighter you are referring to, and I'm allowed here on the Wrenches list because I've been a professional RE installer since 1994--still my career-- and a firefighter in a rural area  with a large percentage of PV and wind installs. A couple talking points:
> 
> ~Thanks Bill Brooks for explaining here why the roofing class ABC rating system has nothing to do with firefighter rooftop access/egress.
> 
> ~Unfortunately ventilating the other side of the roof doesn't always work, wind from the wrong direction, wrong internal compartment in the structure, etc. Also we use chainsaws with carbide teeth, the axes are for flipping open the roof sections; And egress is a problem...do we hang roof ladders from PV modules to escape a roof collapse to the other side?
> 
> ~A fire commander will *never* risk the lives of his responders to the unknown. Instead the answer will be indirect attack - protect exposures - let it burn. As a RE professional it is *your*  job to provide safe designs and installations, label everything simply, obviously and properly as to what is there and how to shut it off, and more importantly reach out to your local fire department with the details on the systems you have installed in their response area, so if they get a call there, they know exactly what they are dealing with in advance. The more they know, the higher the chance they can save the house.
> 
> ~ There has been at least one high-profile and high-dollar "let it burn" case in the last year. Not good for the PV industry.
> 
> Will see many of you in Denver next month. Somehow I feel like I better keep watching my back.....yikes.
> 
> Dan Fink,
> Executive Director;
> Otherpower
> Buckville Energy Consulting
> Buckville Publications LLC
> NABCEP / IREC accredited Continuing Education Providers
> 970.672.4342
> 
>  
> 
> 
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Bill Hennessy <bill at berkssolar.com> wrote:
> Andrew--Thank-you for your work to dampen the fire hysteria that's sweeping the roofs of residential solar. Between the ridiculous setbacks (out here you'd never see a firefighter on a house roof swinging an axe, but if so inclined, they could go on the other side of the peak).
> 
> And now we need to install mythical products for de-energizing and fire-protection racking. Unless the big leasing companies can beat back the anti-solar "safety" club, rooftop residential is toast. PV leaders and consultants have caved. A short time ago, a firefighter (what was he doing on the wrench page anyways?) urged installers not to look at their bottom line and take in the big picture.
> 
> That is exactly what you are doing in opposing these rules that are set up for problems that don't exist. The firefighting and code making industries are big bucks. 
> 
> Let's see, wrenches and folks who write the code can't figure out what it says. And in our county in PA, there are 90 different permitting agencies that will be reading the same codes and ordering their interpretations before we get a permit.
> 
> The real big issue is sustainability and climate change and we need to have a society that embraces a rush to PV and not smother it with the love of safety. Want to stop fires? Let's go after toaster ovens.
>  
> Bill Hennessy
> Berks Solar, LLC
> 
> 
> From: Solar Energy Solutions <solarenergysolutions at yahoo.com>
> To: RE-wrenches <re-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org> 
> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 3:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] California State Fire Marshal's "Solar Photovoltaic Installation Guidelines"
> 
>  
> Today at 11:41 AM
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> Rooftop real estate available for solar is of unparalleled and monumental importance.  As we head into our 6th great extinction the solar industry needs to fight tooth and nail to gain 100% access to every inch of available roof space.  The fire fighting industry needs to adapt to solar, NOT vice versa. 
> 
> In Oregon, one person, myself, stopped the 12 person BCD committee from adopting the anti solar 3 foot pathway around solar arrays.  The committee would not listen to reason.  I went to the governors office saying and showing that if the Cal. Guidelines were adopted as code 100% of the roofs we had installed systems on would be 100%illegal and unviable.
> 
> Yada yada yada, we got the Koyaanisqatsi Rule.
>  
> 304.9.1 General Pathway Requirements
> Exception
> 1.1. Where the PV array does not exceed 25% as measured in plan view of total roof area of the structure, a minimum 12 inch (305mm) unobstructed pathway, shall be maintained along each side of any horizontal ridge.
> 1.2. Where the solar array area exceeds 25% as measured in plan view of total roof area of the structure, a minimum of one 36 inch (914 mm) unobstructed pathway from ridge to eave, over a structurally supported area, must be provided in addition to a minimum 12 inch (305 mm) unobstructed pathway along each side of any horizontal ridge.
> 
> I still see this as a failure.  I had 40% going into the final meeting and one foot from the peak only on pitches greater than 4:12.  But, by that time everyone hated me soooo badly for holding such a hard lined solar centric perspective, and for succeeding in going over their heads, it was all I could do to get them to meet.
> 
> Unassisted in this battle I was exhausted and unable to follow the proceedings to the end.  And, in the end, a rafter span chart hostile to solar was thrown in and now we are dealing with that.
> 
> Here is the link to the  Oregon Solar Installation Specialty Code:  http://www.cbs.state.or.us/bcd/programs/solar/solar_code/100110_OSISC.pdf
>  
> The concept and good intentions of a statewide code were good.  Unfortunately, the task was left to folk who were not as friendly towards or knowledgeable of solar as one would think would be asked to be part of such a noble cause. 
> 
> Respectfully Submitted,
> 
> 
> 
> Andrew Koyaanisqatsi
> President
> Solar Energy Solutions, Inc.
> Since 1987,
> Moving Portland and Beyond
> to an Environmentally Sustainable Future.
> 503-238-4502
> www.SolarEnergyOregon.com
> "Better one's House too little one day
> than too big all the Year after."
> 
> 
> On Thursday, February 13, 2014 11:45 AM, Mark Frye <markf at berkeleysolar.com> wrote:
> There are so so many well informed people on this list, and I am so lazy.
> 
> I wish someone could just lay it all out":
> 
> We got the 2012 ABC thing nearly identical to NPPA1 with the set backs 
> and labeling
> We got the 2014 NEC with the de-energizing the conductors and equipment
> We got the IBC which appears to say one thing about fire rating ie. 
> needs to be the same as roof
> And we got the UL thing that seems to be based on the combined rating of 
> the module and racking system
> 
> Wow, I commend anyone who is willing to go into a building department 
> and lay down a set of plans.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> On 2/13/2014 10:50 AM, William Korthof wrote:
> > Bill,
> >
> > Thanks for the attached info. I don't see where the fire rating class of solar modules is addressed though...
> >
> > In the IBC, the specific section (I believe 902.4 or close to that) seems to call for solar modules to carry the same fire rating class as the roofing class required of the building. At least that's the interpretation I initially got from my local building and safety office. They've been sitting on my plans for two weeks so far. When they turn them around, I may have more to talk about.
> >
> >
> > /wk
> >
> > William Korthof
> > 714.875.3576
> > Sustainable Solutions
> > #956904
> >
> > On Feb 13, 2014, at 9:34 AM, "Bill Brooks" <billbrooks7 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > Yes Peter,
> >
> > It is called the 2012 International Fire Code. The California guidelines
> > were turned into code in 2012. There is an explanation document I wrote
> > available online at:
> >
> > http://solarabcs.org//about/publications/reports/fireguideline/index.html
> >
> > For those states that are using NFPA 1 as their fire code, it is nearly
> > identical.
> >
> > Bill.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > List sponsored by Home Power magazine
> >
> > List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
> >
> > Change email address & settings:
> > http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> >
> > List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> >
> > List rules & etiquette:
> > www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
> >
> > Check out participant bios:
> > www.members.re-wrenches.org
> 
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
> 
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
> 
> Change email address & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> List rules & etiquette:
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
> 
> Check out participant bios:
> www.members.re-wrenches.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
> 
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
> 
> Change email address & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> List rules & etiquette:
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
> 
> Check out participant bios:
> www.members.re-wrenches.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
> 
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
> 
> Change email address & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> List rules & etiquette:
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
> 
> Check out participant bios:
> www.members.re-wrenches.org

_______________________________________________
List sponsored by Home Power magazine

List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org

Change email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out participant bios:
www.members.re-wrenches.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20140214/eb652a78/attachment-0003.html>