• 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

Wood Stoves and Craigslist

T

thekov

Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2011
Messages
5
With the availability of previously owned appliances on Craigslist and homeowners wanting to "save a buck" (who doesn't?), we are seeing stoves (vented room heaters) being applied for without any product specs. We do take the time and try to search any info we can for the applicants but have found one without any available info. The manuf went out of business quite a few yers ago - Russo Mgf. So, was wondering if anyone else has dealt with these appliances and what do you do if there is no listing.

Thanks, The Kov
 
Haven't yet, I would approach the same as you though, try to locate the listing/install info. If it is unavailable, sorry, no permit.
 
you could use the default values in the mechanical code for unlisted woodstoves if your jurisdictiion allows the installation of unlisted stoves. welcome and where are you at and what code is enforced there?
 
Here is a cut and paste of a policy I wrote last year for our department. One issue we have that you may not is the State Dept. of Ecology has a list of emission acceptable wood stoves, with the only exceptions being antique wood stoves from pre-1940. That narrows the field a bit, but their approved list is long.

ISSUE:

The current editions of the International Residential Code (IRC) and International Mechanical Code (IMC), when addressing solid fuel burning devices, state, in part: “Fireplace stoves and solid-fuel-type room heaters shall be listed and labeled and shall be installed in accordance with the conditions of the listing.” (ref. IMC 905., IRC R1414.1). No exceptions are provided. Plainly stated, all solid fuel burning appliances shall be listed and labeled, as described in the code.

The Washington State Building Code Council (SBCC) amends the IRC and IMC for a statewide adoption by local jurisdictions. The amendments to the IRC include the following provision, governing solid fuel burning devices:

R303.8.3 Solid fuel burning devices. No used solid fuel burning device shall be installed in new or existing buildings unless such device is United States Environmental Protection Agency certified or a pellet stove either certified or exempt from certification by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.

Exception: Antique wood cook stoves and heaters manufactured prior to 1940.

The SBCC allows antique woodstoves and heaters manufactured prior to 1940, however, this could violate the requirement of listing and labeling found in the IRC and IMC, as the age of the appliance potentially predates common practice testing and listing. What clearance and clearance reduction requirements should apply to an unlisted appliance installed in accordance with the provision for antique wood stoves and heaters?

ANALYSIS:

The primary concern that exists is establishing a safe clearance to combustibles for the appliance and its chimney or vent. Without the benefit of a manufacturer specification or listing by an approved testing agency, we will examine some historical code provisions for guidance. The 1997 Uniform Mechanical Code was the last adopted code recognizing the installation of unlisted appliances. Recognizing the integrity and safety provided by the 1997 UMC, we find the following provision (partial text):

“304.6 Clearances to Combustible Construction. Unlisted, heat-producing equipment shall be installed in such a manner to maintain the clearances to combustible construction specified in Table 3-A. Clearances to combustible construction for unlisted equipment in Table 3-A may be reduced from the required clearances by using the methods of protection specified in Table 3-B. Clearances from combustibles shall include but not be limited to such considerations as door swing, drawer pull, overhead projections or shelving and window swing, shutters, coverings and drapes. Devices such as door stops or limits, closers, drapery ties or guards and the like shall not be used to provide the required clearances.”

POLICY:

It shall be the policy of San Juan County to allow the installation of an unlisted antique woodstove or heater, manufactured prior to 1940, by utilizing the clearances and clearance reductions provided by 1997 UMC 304.6 and associated tables, with the application of all relevant footnotes. The remainder of the installation shall be in accordance with all other provisions of the IRC, IMC, and WSEC (Washington State Energy Code). This policy is specific to antique appliances manufactured prior to 1940, as defined in SBCC amendment R303.8.3 for 1 and 2 family dwelling units or their accessory structures. It does not presume to modify or waive any other applicable laws, codes, or statues.

ATTACHMENTS:

The following attached documents, as described below, including all associated foot notes, represent the referenced tables of the 1997 UMC and will be used for clearance and clearance reduction determination:

[1] 1997 UMC TABLE 3-A “STANDARD INSTALLATION CLEARANCES, IN INCHES, FOR UNLISTED HEAT PRODUCTING APPLIANCES” (pg. 21)

[2] 1997 UMC TABLE 3-A “STANDARD INSTALLATION CLEARANCES, IN INCHES, FOR UNLISTED HEAT PRODUCTING APPLIANCES (CONTINUED)” (pg. 22)

[3] 1997 UMC TABLE 3-B “CLEARANCES, IN INCHES, WITH SPECIFIED FORMS OF PROTECTION”
 
Permits--we don't need them here if it is replacing an existing woodstove--

Not sure it is what was intended by the language intended to allow for heat pump and electric water heter replacements without permits--but it does create a whale of a loophole for solid fueled appliances in Virginia.

From VA Construction code.

108.2 Exemptions from application for permit. Notwithstanding the requirements of Section 108.1, application for a

permit and any related inspections shall not be required for the following; however, this section shall not be construed to

exempt such activities from other applicable requirements of this code. In addition, when an owner or an owner’s agent

requests that a permit be issued for any of the following, then a permit shall be issued and any related inspections shall be

required.

10. Ordinary repairs that include the following:

10.4. Replacement of mechanical appliances provided such equipment is not fueled by gas or oil in Group R-2

where serving a single family dwelling and in Groups R-3, R-4 and R-5.
 
The Kov -

First off, welcome to the forum.

As to unlisted woodstoves, I will agree with pwood. The code has installation information for unlisted appliances.

From my personal experience and being in CA, I had one person come in wanting to install an earth stove. I got the information on this stove from the ICC-ES (ICC Evaluation Service). This service is online. I called ICC-ES and they dug for the info and found it, then sent me the info. Might want to check with them. A minimal fee might be required for copies of the info.
 
pwood said:
you could use the default values in the mechanical code for unlisted woodstoves if your jurisdictiion allows the installation of unlisted stoves. welcome and where are you at and what code is enforced there?
Click to expand...
There are no clearances for non-labeled solid fuel burning appliances in the mechanical code.

308.7 Solid fuel-burning appliances.

The clearance reduction methods specified in Table 308.6 shall not be utilized to reduce the clearance required for solid fuel-burning appliances that are labeled for installation with clearances of 12 inches (305 mm) or less. Where appliances are labeled for installation with clearances of greater than 12 inches (305 mm), the clearance reduction methods of Table 308.6 shall not reduce the clearance to less than 12 inches (305 mm).
 
mtlogcabin said:
There are no clearances for non-labeled solid fuel burning appliances in the mechanical code.
Click to expand...
Correctomundo.

That is what drove our policy. the 1997 UBC was the last code to have prescriptions for clearances of unlisted wood stoves and other appliances. It seemed reasonable to use these provisions.
 
mtlogcabin said:
There are no clearances for non-labeled solid fuel burning appliances in the mechanical code.308.7 Solid fuel-burning appliances.

The clearance reduction methods specified in Table 308.6 shall not be utilized to reduce the clearance required for solid fuel-burning appliances that are labeled for installation with clearances of 12 inches (305 mm) or less. Where appliances are labeled for installation with clearances of greater than 12 inches (305 mm), the clearance reduction methods of Table 308.6 shall not reduce the clearance to less than 12 inches (305 mm).
Click to expand...
the cal. mech code 303.3 based on the U.M.C. addresses unlisted appliances. that is why i wanted KOV's location and what code ?You must be talking IMC here.
 
IMC and the IRC mechanical sections

CABO required solid fuel burning stoves to be listed in 1990 edition

So the question is the UMC outdated or the I-Codes to restrictive?
 
i like the umc personally. it allows a person to build their own stove or install an unlisted stove without paying You All $100,000 to get it listed :mrgreen:
 
Sorry, welcome KOV.

Yes, the IMC got rid of non-listed equipment. The requirements for unlisted in the UMC were pretty restrictive anyway. If I remember right, an unlisted wood stove would require 36" to combustibles.
 
When does a fireplace become a listed appliance? Fireplace, screen, doors, insert, masonry heater, rocket stove, pappa bear?
 
Many thanks to all for welcoming me and for the responses thus far. For clarification, at times I feel I'm in the same state as pwood, but I am a code official in NJ, using the '09 codes as ammended by our UCC. That said, I see no relief for an unlisted appliance/equipment for any installation, new or replacement, which in this case is a shame as many of those old stoves were quite sturdy. Local adoption is not an option as the state has full jurisdiction for adoptions, we are a lowly local enforcing agency. I was hoping for some type of relief using an older model code or that I may have missed something in the fine print, alas. Their best bet now is to take my decision (denial) to the construction board of appeals($100) and let them decide.

Again, many thanks and I may stop lurking and start contributing.

kov
 
You always have this option, although most code officials are reluctant to use it

105.2 Alternative materials, methods, equipment and appliances.

The provisions of this code are not intended to prevent the installation of any material or to prohibit any method of construction not specifically prescribed by this code, provided that any such alternative has been approved . An alternative material or method of construction shall be approved where the code official finds that the proposed design is satisfactory and complies with the intent of the provisions of this code, and that the material, method or work offered is, for the purpose intended, at least the equivalent of that prescribed in this code in quality, strength, effectiveness, fire resistance, durability and safety.
 
Great thought!! Tho our UCC deletes Chapter 1, it does contain provisions that may be similiar. Even tho I may be from NJ, I do try to keep an open mind regarding materials and methods while keeping my ***** out of a sling. Thanks.

kov
 
mtlogcabin said:
You always have this option, although most code officials are reluctant to use it
Click to expand...
I am in the minority then. I love this section and use it on a regular basis. I feel the administrative provisions of the codes give us enough framework to fix things we preceive as poorly written or confusing. The heart of the code is in CH 1. The intent. That is where independent judgement can provide solutions that wouldn't be letter of the law compliant.
 
righter101 said:
I am in the minority then. I love this section and use it on a regular basis. I feel the administrative provisions of the codes give us enough framework to fix things we preceive as poorly written or confusing. The heart of the code is in CH 1. The intent. That is where independent judgement can provide solutions that wouldn't be letter of the law compliant.
Click to expand...
Dangerous :!: How large is your department / how populous is your jurisdiction?
 
righter101 said:
I am in the minority then. I love this section and use it on a regular basis. I feel the administrative provisions of the codes give us enough framework to fix things we preceive as poorly written or confusing. The heart of the code is in CH 1. The intent. That is where independent judgement can provide solutions that wouldn't be letter of the law compliant.
Click to expand...
There have been times when we have used what is commonly referred to as the God clause(s). I can't say I have always agreed with the judgment, but I have made that known in a few cases, sometimes in writing. I typically leave Chapter 1 to the CBO to make that call, and keep my plan reviews to everything after.
 
I use for allowing air admitance valves on certain remodels where it would be impossible or costly to run a vent (UPC does not permit them) I have the plumber ask in writing and I give him the ES report number to reference.

A non listed wood stove when the ICC states they have to be listed would be harder to document for my satisfaction. Some question come to mind. How long was the company in business? Did they get bought by another company and the product is manufactured under a new name. Is there a history of problems with them.

There are 1,000's of unlisted wood stoves that have and are still operating with no problems. What does listed cover, Distance to combustibles, important, type of chimney required , important, efficiancy, not as important. It is your call just proceed wisely
 
gbhammer said:
Dangerous :!: How large is your department / how populous is your jurisdiction?
Click to expand...
What is dangerous?

I guess maybe "often" isn't the correct word. It would be better to say that I have an open mind on issues that may not meet letter of the code.

Our staff is myself, a CBO/planning director and 2 inspectors. Population 16K.

Very rural remote locations. Very remote. 172 islands make up the county, only 4 of them served by ferry.

We have a lot more outbuildings, rural use, ag stuff.

I find it absurd to require full energy code compliance for a workshop that someone wants to put a woodstove in, for instance. I would much rather have them apply for permit for the installation of the wood stove/heating appliance so we can inspect it properly versus the alternative, if they preceive that the energy code is too strict or complex, they may opt to install a heating device without any inspections, potentially creating a much larger hazard.

I guess that is what I meant. Maybe it came out wrong.
 
gbhammer said:
Dangerous :!: How large is your department / how populous is your jurisdiction?
Click to expand...
I re-read what I wrote, that does sound a bit caviler. Don't hold it against me. I guess I feel "often", because we have the same issues coming up a lot and until I take the time to write a formal policy or interpretation, we are modifying something or applying alternate methods and materials.

Anyway, just don't want you to think I am a zealot or lacking the professionalism to excecute code enformcement in the manner intended.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top