Hi, Rebecca. Based on the numbering systems and language, MN has incorporate NFPA 1: Fire Code requirements at the state level. The language and requirements in the International Fire Code are similar. You can access a free PDF version of NFPA 1 here:
http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/document-information-pages?mode=code&code=1 <http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/document-information-pages?mode=code&code=1> When it comes to enforcement, there are important differences between NFPA 70 (aka National Electrical Code) requirements and those in NFPA 1. If the NEC says you have to provide rapid shutdown, for example, then chances are your AHJ will require that you meet these requirements. However, if the Fire Code says that you need to provide a 3’ setback on residential roofs, there are a number of scenarios where an AHJ might not require this in practice. These include situations where: access to adjacent roof planes provides firefighters with adequate opportunities for roof ventilation [typically determined in real time on a case-by-case basis] the local fire department does not fight residential structure fires by ventilating roofs [typically determined in advance at the jurisdiction level] the roof or structure is smaller than some pre-determined amount [typically determined at the jurisdiction level] the local fire marshall has adopted less restrictive access requirements (perhaps 12” rather than 36”) [typically determined at the jurisdiction level] It’s entirely possible to get stakeholders together adapt the fire code requirements at the city, county or even state level. It is also possible to adapt the requirements on a case-by-case basis. The latter is obviously more work for everyone. The main point is that complying with fire codes can be be more of a conversation than complying with the NEC. Here’s a link to an article that discusses both the residential fire code requirements as well as a variety of compliance and enforcement strategies: http://solarprofessional.com/articles/design-installation/pitched-roof-array-layout-for-fire-code-compliance?v=disable_pagination <http://solarprofessional.com/articles/design-installation/pitched-roof-array-layout-for-fire-code-compliance?v=disable_pagination> If you’d like a PDF copy of the article, just send me a direct message. David Brearley Senior Technical Editor, SolarPro NABCEP Certified PV Installation Professional david.brear...@solarprofessional.com Direct: 541.261.6545 Follow us on Twitter: @SolarPro Check out this AMAZING music video tribute to SolarPro: http://bit.ly/1qfMCCh > On Mar 26, 2016, at 1:04 PM, re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.org wrote: > > Send RE-wrenches mailing list submissions to > re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.re-wrenches.org/listinfo.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > re-wrenches-ow...@lists.re-wrenches.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of RE-wrenches digest..." > When responding to posts within the Digest, be sure to restore the Subject: > line to the original, and please edit out any extraneous lines from the > quoted message. > Today's Topics: > > 1. Access pathways (Rebecca Lundberg) > > From: Rebecca Lundberg <rebecca.lundb...@powerfullygreen.com> > Subject: [RE-wrenches] Access pathways > Date: March 25, 2016 at 10:04:31 PM CDT > To: "re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org" <re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org> > Reply-To: RE-wrenches <re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org> > > > Dear Solar Colleagues, > > I know the building code language regarding PV installations providing 3' > access pathways was proposed and adopted in several states a few years ago. > > "3113.1.2.1 Residential buildings with hip roof layouts. Panels or modules > installed on residential buildings with hip roof layouts shall be located in > a manner that provides a 3-foot-wide (914 mm) clear access pathway from the > eave to the ridge on each roof slope where panels/modules are located. The > access pathway shall be located at a location on the building capable of > supporting the live load of firefighters accessing the roof." (this is just a > partial quote from here https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/?id=1305.3113 > <https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/?id=1305.3113>) > > This is a newly adopted code addition in MN, and there was absolutely no > discussion with the solar industry. In MN we install solar on the > south-facing roof as optimal, with perhaps the SE, SW, or even the east- or > west-facing roof as possible options, but we almost without exception NEVER > would mount solar panels on any roof with an azimuth 270 - 90 degrees (i.e. > north of west or north of east). The requirement to leave a 3' walkway on all > surfaces will in many cases diminish the amount of available roof surface for > a residential solar PV installation to about 40% of previous designs. > > I see how this safety requirement may be necessary in a state where mounting > solar panels on all roof surfaces is an option, but in MN since we can really > only mount on the south-facing roof I don't understand how safety for fire > fighters is a primary concern with this code addition. My understanding is > that if there is another roof surface available, fire fighters would not > choose to vent a roof with solar panels even if a 3' walkway is available -- > so for what purpose are we avoiding that roof space for a solar installation? > > Our local folks at the state level either don't understand these details or > feel that there must be an overriding reason that this building code language > has been adopted in other states. Can any of you give me input, comments, > thoughts on this topic that I could contribute here on a local level? > > Thank you in advance for your comments. > > Sincerely, > Rebecca Lundberg > NABCEP Certified Solar PV Installer ® > Powerfully Green® > 763.438.1976 <> > Powered by the Sun! > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > List sponsored by Redwood Alliance > > List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org > > Change listserver email address & settings: > http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org > > List-Archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/maillist.html > > List rules & etiquette: > www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm > > Check out or update participant bios: > www.members.re-wrenches.org
_______________________________________________ List sponsored by Redwood Alliance List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Change listserver email address & settings: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List-Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/maillist.html List rules & etiquette: www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm Check out or update participant bios: www.members.re-wrenches.org
