Mr. Inspector
SAWHORSE
Where are the white and green wires coming from?
-
Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades
Solar
- Thread starter ICE
- Start date
Mr. Inspector
SAWHORSE
It's frustrating but my third party inspection company tells me they are not insured for me to climb ladders.
conarb
Registered User
Not only are they not doing roof nailing inspections (they do sign off the card by looking from below for shiners) but they are no-longer testing smoke detectors, I've had long step ladders for them but they won't go up for insurance reasons.Rick18071 said:
I do have to ask ICE what he's looking for on solar panel inspections, there is nothing in the prescriptive code about additional weight or anchorage, it seems that engineering should be required on each and every installation. Also, looking at his latest picture I don't see the 3' clearance from hips and valleys for the firemen, the 3' at the ridges and eaves looks suspect too. I heard that clearance requirement went into state law (although I forget where). Here's what the state fire marshal says.
conarb
Registered User
I thought the solar requirements had been codified in the Civil Code but can't find them there, what I do find is that they are included in the Fire Code. My understanding is that an AHJ has to adopt the Fire Code, yet I find that even a solar panel contractor says that since January 1st of this year the Fire Code requirements are mandatory for even residential structures.
¹ http://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2013/12/why-is-california-limiting-your-solar-roof-space/
I guess that means that Tiger has to turn down that entire roof assembly.Solar Power World said:
¹ http://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2013/12/why-is-california-limiting-your-solar-roof-space/
ICE
Oh Well
There's lots of stuff to look for. You mentioned the 3' clear space for the firemen and that has been a problem. The solar companies are surprised to learn that they can't run conduit in the clear space. They are convinced that the solar array is not allowed in the 3' clear space because the firemen don't want to walk on the panels but all else is okay. While they are correct about the array and the firemen not wanting to walk on them, they miss the fact that the conduit, j-boxes, disconnects and combiners present a tripping hazard.conarb said:
The contractors became way unruly when I started enforcing this....so I got it in writing from the fire dept.
In my opinion, 3' isn't enough...especially when it is mostly overhang. Two story and higher better be four feet or I won't walk it.
mark handler
SAWHORSE
Section 605 California Fire Code (CFC).
· A 3-foot-wide clear access pathway from the eave to the ridge on each roof slope where panels/modules are located on a hip roof. (CFC 605.11.3.2.1; also see exception for slopes 2:12 or less)
· Two, 3-foot-wide access pathways from the eave to the ridge on each roof slope where panels/modules are located on a single ridge roof. (CFC 605.11.3.2.2; also see exception for slopes 2:12 or less)
· Panels/modules installed on residential buildings with roof hips and valleys shall be located no closer than 18 inches to a hip or a valley where panels/modules are to be placed on both sides of a hip or valley. (CFC 605.11.3.2.3; also see exception for slopes 2:12 or less)
· Panels/modules installed on residential buildings shall be located no higher than 3 feet below the ridge in order to allow for fire department smoke ventilation operations. (CFC 605.11.3.2.4)
· A 3-foot-wide clear access pathway from the eave to the ridge on each roof slope where panels/modules are located on a hip roof. (CFC 605.11.3.2.1; also see exception for slopes 2:12 or less)
· Two, 3-foot-wide access pathways from the eave to the ridge on each roof slope where panels/modules are located on a single ridge roof. (CFC 605.11.3.2.2; also see exception for slopes 2:12 or less)
· Panels/modules installed on residential buildings with roof hips and valleys shall be located no closer than 18 inches to a hip or a valley where panels/modules are to be placed on both sides of a hip or valley. (CFC 605.11.3.2.3; also see exception for slopes 2:12 or less)
· Panels/modules installed on residential buildings shall be located no higher than 3 feet below the ridge in order to allow for fire department smoke ventilation operations. (CFC 605.11.3.2.4)
conarb
Registered User
Tiger:
If you turn these down you are doing the owners a favor, I posted a letter to the editor above showing that people with solar panels are getting unexpected bills, in today's paper this:
¹ http://www.contracostatimes.com/letters/ci_26725907/oct-15-letters-editor
If you turn these down you are doing the owners a favor, I posted a letter to the editor above showing that people with solar panels are getting unexpected bills, in today's paper this:
I get these calls too, they are all from Solar Contractors trying to sell solar panels and HVAC contractors trying to sell furnace duct cleaning and sealing. They use high pressure salesmen like aluminum/vinyl siding salesmen, this current version of solar is already obsolete due to be replaced by nanotechnology where the roof, windows, or paint will be the solar collector. These victims are in for a rude surprise when they start getting bills, if they lease them the home can't even be sold to a buyer subject to FHA loan requirements, the fine print makes early lease termination extremely expensive.contra Costa Times said:
¹ http://www.contracostatimes.com/letters/ci_26725907/oct-15-letters-editor
conarb
Registered User
Tiger:
What happened, did you make them tear it off and replace it in compliance with the 3' rule? If so did they try to go over your head?
What happened, did you make them tear it off and replace it in compliance with the 3' rule? If so did they try to go over your head?
MASSDRIVER
Registered User
How the world works when you want to convince people that B.S. Is actually beneficial.
Start with a technology that hit its limit in the 70's, and is totally hamstrung and can only be improved by fractional in elements at best.
Make sure the technology performs at its best only under the most ideal conditions, and only part of the year.
Make sure that same system degrades over time and becomes useless after oh, say, 15 years.
Begin propoganda campaign to fool people it is the greatest cost saving benifit ever known to man.
When that fails create conditions to encourage brownout power losses for financial gain.
When panic insues, activate huge government subsidies to pay for the technology that nobody can afford, and enable lease conditions so a third party can soak up any subsidy and tax benefit, being for all intents and purposes a parasite on homeowners, and adding another level of difficulty when selling their home, along with asinine termite inspections that are an absolute racket, and resale inspections, being another government racket, and private home inspections which may or may not be a racket.
When all this does not improve the dumbness of the whole situation, have the govoner proclaim his wishes for a "million solar roof" program.
Don't tell anybody that the manufacture of this technology is an environmental rape, just not right here right. But wait till all that crap has to come off and be disposed of.
Act butthurt when all this crap goes tits up, and state the policy was not implemented properly.
Don't forget to let people install this crap that have no idea how to a single thing correctly.
Enjoy the carnival from the sidelines.
Brent
Start with a technology that hit its limit in the 70's, and is totally hamstrung and can only be improved by fractional in elements at best.
Make sure the technology performs at its best only under the most ideal conditions, and only part of the year.
Make sure that same system degrades over time and becomes useless after oh, say, 15 years.
Begin propoganda campaign to fool people it is the greatest cost saving benifit ever known to man.
When that fails create conditions to encourage brownout power losses for financial gain.
When panic insues, activate huge government subsidies to pay for the technology that nobody can afford, and enable lease conditions so a third party can soak up any subsidy and tax benefit, being for all intents and purposes a parasite on homeowners, and adding another level of difficulty when selling their home, along with asinine termite inspections that are an absolute racket, and resale inspections, being another government racket, and private home inspections which may or may not be a racket.
When all this does not improve the dumbness of the whole situation, have the govoner proclaim his wishes for a "million solar roof" program.
Don't tell anybody that the manufacture of this technology is an environmental rape, just not right here right. But wait till all that crap has to come off and be disposed of.
Act butthurt when all this crap goes tits up, and state the policy was not implemented properly.
Don't forget to let people install this crap that have no idea how to a single thing correctly.
Enjoy the carnival from the sidelines.
Brent
steveray
SAWHORSE
More fine work from the nation's leading solar company.....And I am the jerk that doesn't let them energize.....
conarb
Registered User
Steve:
is that the company with "city" in it's name and owned by the guy who builds electric cars? Most of their installations are leased, not owned.
is that the company with "city" in it's name and owned by the guy who builds electric cars? Most of their installations are leased, not owned.
ICE
Oh Well
That company's work product has improved. The PV side that is. Subcontractors do the service upgrades when necessary and they are the low bidder category of contractor.conarb said:
I recently read an article about Mr. Musk's five billion dollar plan for a battery plant in Nevada. It will start out with a million square feet of factory floor. The crux of the article was that it may be a poor business decision due to sluggish sales of electric cars. I think that he plans on putting the batteries in houses alongside PV systems.
If you own stock in solar companies, you may want to dump it before we get normal rainy weather. I have a hunch that thousands of roofs will be leaking. A new subspecies of contractor will appear. They will be tasked with R&R of PV with roof repairs. I've experienced a couple of these and it's not electricians resorting to roofing. No sir, it's roofers risking their lives.
conarb
Registered User
I read he asked for proposals from California, Nevada, Arizona, and Texas, Nevada offered the least regulation and the best tax incentives, I wonder if he's even going to have to get permits to build there?
I've had two commercial installs in the last two years and when I was on both roofs I verified the solar panels manufacture, stock number and (UL) listing. When I'm off the roof I checked this information with the engineered plans and both contractors switched out the panels with another brand.
I requested new calculations and had no issues with either job after receiving the new info stamped by the engineer. I'm told they run into panel supply issues apparently but as long as the engineering is changed and updated it can be passed.
pc1
I requested new calculations and had no issues with either job after receiving the new info stamped by the engineer. I'm told they run into panel supply issues apparently but as long as the engineering is changed and updated it can be passed.
pc1
ICE
Oh Well
In the past, there has been turmoil in the industry. The panel specified on the plans may not be manufactured when they try to purchase them. Many of the panel manufactures went out of business as soon as their panels started failing en-mass.Pcinspector1 said:
I ask them to bring the plans up on the roof.
steveray
SAWHORSE
That is kind of funny because Texas won't even let him sell cars there because their legislators are bought by the old boy car dealers....conarb said:
ICE
Oh Well
steveray
SAWHORSE
What? That is readily accessible!!!....You don't need a tool to move the rubbermaid shed, just put your back into it!.....And I don't know what is going on with that switch thing!
ICE
Oh Well
Code requires a disconnect within sight of PV inverters. This system incorporates micro inverters on the roof. The switch is the disconnect. This equipment isn't appropriate for a wet location.steveray said:
ICE
Oh Well
The solar a/c disconnect is 40" from the water's edge. Therefor the pool or the electric service is also a violation. My conundrum is that our policy is to ignore ancillary violations when we are there for PV. The other possibility is that the pool or the el. service were inspected and approved. If that's the case, I am absolutely not supposed to say anything.....to anyone.
So here's where it gets sticky. I wrote a correction that states that the disconnect can't be within 5' of the water. The solar contractor wants to know why the service can be there but not the disconnect. I said that the service can't be there. He said that if I am not going to make them move the service, it's not fair to make him move the disconnect. I said, "Okay it's not fair, now move the disconnect".
If I had to bet, I'd say that the pool is the violation and the windows aren't safety glazing either. I need to be reminded to research the file on this one.
So here's where it gets sticky. I wrote a correction that states that the disconnect can't be within 5' of the water. The solar contractor wants to know why the service can be there but not the disconnect. I said that the service can't be there. He said that if I am not going to make them move the service, it's not fair to make him move the disconnect. I said, "Okay it's not fair, now move the disconnect".
If I had to bet, I'd say that the pool is the violation and the windows aren't safety glazing either. I need to be reminded to research the file on this one.
Last edited by a moderator:
ICE
Oh Well
I looked at the file and the pool and service were both done under a permit and approved. The service was done in 1972 and the pool was built in 1977.
steveray
SAWHORSE
Nice.....I get the similar violations and arguments for working clearances and dedicated equipment space on at least 50% of my solar installs.....The state gives them a pass every time, so I do not have to deal with it....The pool seems like a much bigger safety concern...
I've one solar related question to help, on ICE's post on Feb 27, 2013 #4. There's solar sub-panel to combine each solar strings then feed it to main panel with a solar disconnect.
If the solar panels are installed on a detached garage and solar disconnect is on garage existing 60A sub-panel and did not send solar directly back to main panel.
Question 1. Can solar feed to existing sub-panel with other circuits "Not just solar combine panel" then back to main?
2. Does code require a dedicate solar disconnect at main?
If the solar panels are installed on a detached garage and solar disconnect is on garage existing 60A sub-panel and did not send solar directly back to main panel.
Question 1. Can solar feed to existing sub-panel with other circuits "Not just solar combine panel" then back to main?
2. Does code require a dedicate solar disconnect at main?