comments needed from professional installers

I need comments from professional installers on an initiative to reform the permitting process for residential PV solar installs. I will be introducing the initiative to local governments in Southern CA. The program is a work in progress, to date the following are the key features with some details to be determined. Please critique.
1) Projects 10kW or less shall be included in the process.
2) Includes grid tie, off grid and grid interactive w/ battery back up systems.
3) Eliminate the current model of making a submittal to a Vermont style 1 page online form.
4) The installer, home owner or PV system owner makes application online with local AHJ.
5) The installer designs and installs the PV system in accordance with the current NEC requirements
6) Structural concerns are addressed by a prescriptive table similar to a second story deck permit, engineering shall be eliminated
prescriptive tables and details will replace requirements for a structural engineer. ie "racking shall be attached 60" O/C min in wind exposure category B etc" Footing tables and cross bracing details for ground mounts will be similar to over the counter second story deck details the Building Departments provide today. These tables and details will be downloadable at the same web presence as the one page permit application form.
7) After the install is complete, the PV system owner NOT the installer hires an independent C10 licensed Electrical Contractor to inspect the completed project, upon passing inspection the inspector fills out a 1 page certification form verifying the install complies with the NEC. (the inspector photographs the project for his and the AHJ record)
8.) Upon certification and commissioning the installer or PV system owner, provides to the AHJ for the record the following :the photographs, an as built drawing and the inspectors certificate. Final approval issued by AHJ.

Benefits of this proposed reform:
1) Completely eliminates City plancheckers and their fees from the process.
2) Provides policing governed by market forces.
3) Reduce permitting time by 95%.
4) Reduce permitting fees by 75%.
5) Reduce paperwork by 75%
6) Provides employment opportunity for licensed electrical contractors.
7) Provides consumer protection.
8.) Prescriptive tables and standard details eliminate engineering fees.

Comments

  • solarix
    solarix Solar Expert Posts: 713 ✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers

    Sounds great to me. We could reduce our costs and charge the customer a lot less, and sell a lot more jobs if this program was in place.
    Although we are in Arizona, I'd be glad to help any way I can.
  • Mike at Energy Commission
    Mike at Energy Commission Solar Expert Posts: 50 ✭✭✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    solarix wrote: »
    Sounds great to me. We could reduce our costs and charge the customer a lot less, and sell a lot more jobs if this program was in place.
    Although we are in Arizona, I'd be glad to help any way I can.

    Thanks solarix, the long term plan is to move this initiative into the Southwest USA region. I am starting locally here, specifically San Diego, because we have a very large and effective grassroots movement already in place, part of which I organized. Hence my handle- LOL, I just spent a year participating in CEC and CPUC hearings which culminated in our victory of stopping a gas power plant from being built next to a school and in a park. We have thousands of people on our email lists ready to push the button on email campaigns to the local politicians, which for the most part are in our camp. This project is a dovetail fit for me, as mentioned I just spent the last year in the energy policy arena (with the gloves off) and as a profession for the last 8 years I have worked as a draftsman and permit processor. We are strongly motivated here as the CPUC decision, in short, said, "you have until 2018 to get some roof tops covered with solar or we will put the gas power plant in". Fortunately for us, unlike the recent ACC elections we have a very favorable political climate to pick some low hanging fruit, like permit reforms and some incentives.

    Anyway, It would help to have comments about the proposed initiative, maybe some contractors could cite unrealistic and burdensome permitting experiences any State is fine, like the contractor that had to pay an engineer to produce snow load calcs for San Diego! Documentation of excessive permitting red tape and costs will help,please share. Thank you for your help.
  • bmet
    bmet Solar Expert Posts: 630 ✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers

    Who determined a PV structural system was similar to a second story deck?
  • Mike at Energy Commission
    Mike at Energy Commission Solar Expert Posts: 50 ✭✭✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    bmet wrote: »
    Who determined a PV structural system was similar to a second story deck?

    Obviously there are differences between a deck and a ground mount, my comments are directed at the permitting process. Building Departments are willing to provide standard details and prescriptive tables that eliminate engineering on second story decks. In short, if they can make permitting a second story deck so easy why can't they make it just as easy for a ground mount? On a similar note, if the City of Los Angeles can provide standard details for foundation seismic retrofits they can certainly do the same for ground mount systems and roof racking. The unnecessary requirement from Building Departments inflicted upon so many of these simple residential PV installs to provide structural calcs doesn't hold water in light of how they are willing to treat foundation retrofits and second story decks. Therefore, treat simple residential PV installs similarly as a deck for permitting purposes and that is with prescriptive details and tables. http://ladbs.org/LADBSWeb/LADBS_Forms/Publications/anchor_bolting.pdf
  • inetdog
    inetdog Solar Expert Posts: 3,123 ✭✭✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    Therefore, treat simple residential PV installs similarly as a deck for permitting purposes and that is with prescriptive details and tables.

    "It seems to me an elephant is very like a rope...." :-)

    ---Old folk tale, The Blind Men and the Elephant.
    SMA SB 3000, old BP panels.
  • jaggedben
    jaggedben Solar Expert Posts: 230 ✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    I need comments from professional installers on an initiative to reform the permitting process for residential PV solar installs. I will be introducing the initiative to local governments in Southern CA. The program is a work in progress, to date the following are the key features with some details to be determined. Please critique.
    1) Projects 10kW or less shall be included in the process.
    2) Includes grid tie, off grid and grid interactive w/ battery back up systems.
    3) Eliminate the current model of making a submittal to a Vermont style 1 page online form.
    4) The installer, home owner or PV system owner makes application online with local AHJ.
    5) The installer designs and installs the PV system in accordance with the current NEC requirements
    6) Structural concerns are addressed by a prescriptive table similar to a second story deck permit, engineering shall be eliminated
    prescriptive tables and details will replace requirements for a structural engineer. ie "racking shall be attached 60" O/C min in wind exposure category B etc" Footing tables and cross bracing details for ground mounts will be similar to over the counter second story deck details the Building Departments provide today. These tables and details will be downloadable at the same web presence as the one page permit application form.
    7) After the install is complete, the PV system owner NOT the installer hires an independent C10 licensed Electrical Contractor to inspect the completed project, upon passing inspection the inspector fills out a 1 page certification form verifying the install complies with the NEC. (the inspector photographs the project for his and the AHJ record)
    8.) Upon certification and commissioning the installer or PV system owner, provides to the AHJ for the record the following :the photographs, an as built drawing and the inspectors certificate. Final approval issued by AHJ.

    I'm not sure 7 and 8 are necessary. Do you think AHJs will willingly hand over electrical inspections to third parties? I mean I'd love to not attend inspections but then what is the customer paying for the third party and how does that affect sales?

    Otherwise I also think it's great. Currently San Francisco doesn't require plan submittal for systems under 4kW, which seems sensible to me. Of course 10kW would be even better but I wouldn't discourage you from compromising on a lower limit.

    Good luck trying to get AHJs to go online. I mean, more power to ya.
  • Mike at Energy Commission
    Mike at Energy Commission Solar Expert Posts: 50 ✭✭✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers

    "Do you think AHJs will willingly hand over electrical inspections to third parties? " right now we have the definite political advantage to rewrite the process locally, this is a 50% possibility. Third party inspection as conceptualized would be done for consumer and public safety protection, ideally it would be nice to simply allow the installer self certify but the historic record of this kind of non oversight in the construction industry in Southern CA has led to some very shoddy and dangerous work. The inspections process would be limited to? Please comment, Licensed Electricians and Licensed Electrical Engineers? This has been proposed because the City employee unions could monkey wrench the process back into requiring plan checks, for example a City union inspector could simply say I need 5 hours at our City rate of $150.00 per hr. to inspect a simple install because I don't have approved plans to look at. This is not far fetched fear I personally have dealt with City Union employees for the last ten years, the City of San Diego is currently charging approximately $2000.00 per hr. for permit processing clerical work. With third party inspections the project is subject to marketplace influences, keeping fees realistic. Will a Licensed electrical contractor inspect a simple install for $200.00? you tell me, what if the word gets out there is a good Electrical Contractor that will inspect for $150.00, could that Electrician do 4 in a day if he built up a reputation and a following? Could we get that kind of performance from unionized AHJ in CA? No doubt we are setting a high bar. FYI this initiative has just gained more inertia as the local Sierra Club has started a corollary working group as well, (this equal 8,000 comments to the City Council from them alone) so we will more than likely see multiple initiatives here and we are all coordinating together.


    "Good luck trying to get AHJs to go online. I mean, more power to ya." at this time things are looking possible.
  • NorthGuy
    NorthGuy Solar Expert Posts: 1,913 ✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    ideally it would be nice to simply allow the installer self certify but the historic record of this kind of non oversight in the construction industry in Southern CA has led to some very shoddy and dangerous work.

    Self-inspection is a great idea. It puts the responsibilty on the installer (where it belongs), not on the government. Yes, some installers will do really bad work, but they will soon have a bad reputation, they will be losing money on repairs, and they will be sued by homeowners. In the end, this will drive them out of business and good contractors will dominate the field. That is a very healthy competition process.

    If a homeowner wants an additional safety, he always can hire a licensed electrician, or whoever he whants, to inspect the job. People routinely hire inspectors to inspect homes when they buy them. But some people decide to take a risk and skip the inspection. It's nothing wrong with that. Solar installation is not any different. Is it really necessary for the government to force people to hire inspectors?
  • westbranch
    westbranch Solar Expert Posts: 5,183 ✭✭✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers

    The concept of 'AUDITING' comes to mind. Our Gov handed off the responsibility to manage our Crown forest lands, after logging, to the INDUSTRY. the intensity of auditing is supposed to be 10% of all cutblocks...

    If they are audited and deficiencies are found, the offender is Fined and Ordered to repair the deficiency or damage caused by the deficiency.

    This might work where public safety (electrical) is concerned... but I think the AHJ would err to the side of 'Policing', ie before the work/install is 'connected'.
     
    KID #51B  4s 140W to 24V 900Ah C&D AGM
    CL#29032 FW 2126/ 2073/ 2133 175A E-Panel WBjr, 3 x 4s 140W to 24V 900Ah C&D AGM 
    Cotek ST1500W 24V Inverter,OmniCharge 3024,
    2 x Cisco WRT54GL i/c DD-WRT Rtr & Bridge,
    Eu3/2/1000i Gens, 1680W & E-Panel/WBjr to come, CL #647 asleep
    West Chilcotin, BC, Canada
  • Cariboocoot
    Cariboocoot Banned Posts: 17,615 ✭✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers

    Got to say I'm of two minds on self-inspection.

    I've seen shoddy work done of all types by cheapskate contractors looking to make a fast buck. The independent inspection should stop this (barring bribery).

    I have also seen government inspectors who don't know their brass from their oboe who make idiotic demands that have nothing to do with proper construction because they have no idea what they are doing.

    A certified installer should do things right. Trouble is, even they can miss something so it's good to have someone else check it over. When things go wrong with electrical wiring it can go very, very wrong.

    But there's no question that many jurisdictions need changes to permitting processes. Some in fact need more oversight. Most need less.
  • jaggedben
    jaggedben Solar Expert Posts: 230 ✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    Third party inspection as conceptualized would be done for consumer and public safety protection, .... This has been proposed because the City employee unions could monkey wrench the process back into requiring plan checks, for example a City union inspector could simply say I need 5 hours at our City rate of $150.00 per hr. to inspect a simple install because I don't have approved plans to look at. This is not far fetched fear I personally have dealt with City Union employees for the last ten years, the City of San Diego is currently charging approximately $2000.00 per hr. for permit processing clerical work. With third party inspections the project is subject to marketplace influences, keeping fees realistic. Will a Licensed electrical contractor inspect a simple install for $200.00? you tell me, what if the word gets out there is a good Electrical Contractor that will inspect for $150.00, could that Electrician do 4 in a day if he built up a reputation and a following? Could we get that kind of performance from unionized AHJ in CA? No doubt we are setting a high bar. ....

    Hmmm... Seems to me you are really making an argument about lowering costs rather than increasing public safety. I can't argue with lowering costs. But I think that the way you've made it out, the incentive would be for contractors and customers to look for the most lenient third-party inspector, and the third-party inspectors would be likewise incentivized to be lenient. Granted, government inspectors are all over the place, but I think this would be pushing things slightly away from increased consumer and public safety. There is something to be said for a) the contractor or customer not getting to choose who the inspector is, and b) the inspector being also accountable to others in the neighborhood (i.e. taxpayers) who might be affected by a project's safety or lack thereof.
    The inspections process would be limited to? Please comment, Licensed Electricians and Licensed Electrical Engineers?

    That seems sensible. I mean you have to have some sort of qualifying criteria, however imperfect.

    NorthGuy wrote: »
    Self-inspection is a great idea. It puts the responsibilty on the installer (where it belongs), not on the government. ...

    If a homeowner wants an additional safety, he always can hire a licensed electrician, or whoever he whants, to inspect the job. People routinely hire inspectors to inspect homes when they buy them. But some people decide to take a risk and skip the inspection. It's nothing wrong with that. Solar installation is not any different. Is it really necessary for the government to force people to hire inspectors?

    Where I live, all the houses touch each other. If my neighbor's house catches on fire because he had unsafe, uninspected work done, then my house catches on fire as well. So yes, at least in urban areas, it is really necessary for the government to force people to have inspections. It probably costs no more than all the lawsuits would, quite possibly less. And it is preventative rather reactive.
  • NorthGuy
    NorthGuy Solar Expert Posts: 1,913 ✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    jaggedben wrote: »
    Where I live, all the houses touch each other. If my neighbor's house catches on fire because he had unsafe, uninspected work done, then my house catches on fire as well. So yes, at least in urban areas, it is really necessary for the government to force people to have inspections.

    What if your neigbour gets drunk and falls asleep while smoking. This will put all the neighborhood on fire. Such occurences are much more common than electric fires. Should the government install a camera in his bedroom to make sure this doesn't happen?
  • Mike at Energy Commission
    Mike at Energy Commission Solar Expert Posts: 50 ✭✭✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers

    Thanks for the comments, gives much grist for the mill. Things are, for the moment, looking up. I attended a Renewable Energy workshop the other night with a couple of local politicos that have the power to make the changes and the word is, put the proposal on their desk they are ready to move forward. Additionally, I found out that the County has been quietly working on a San Francisco model no plans e-permit for up to 4kW projects, additionally, here, they have zero application and permit fees. So when the e-permitting is in place we will be busting the envelope with no fees, no plans e-permit, let's cross our fingers and hope for the best that no spoilers come along. Will know more in a few weeks. I need to create a good argument for bumping the max system size up. One thing I considered is the next round of NEC revisions is likely to allow 1000v per string instead of the current 600v (per Solar Pro mag). Another angle is we have a lot of very large houses and many have accessory structures (pool houses etc) 6kW would make it fair to include the McMansions. Another angle would be, it's simply more cost efficient to increase maximum size and larger systems increase the options for battery bank storage.
  • jaggedben
    jaggedben Solar Expert Posts: 230 ✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    NorthGuy wrote: »
    What if your neigbour gets drunk and falls asleep while smoking. This will put all the neighborhood on fire. Such occurences are much more common than electric fires. Should the government install a camera in his bedroom to make sure this doesn't happen?

    Kind of a red-herring, but actually California has very strict requirements for smoke detectors nowadays. You're required to bring them up to code whenever you do any other work.

    Also, and I didn't know this, but according the NFPA electrical fires are slightly more common than cigarette fires.
    http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/pdf/homesfactsheet.pdf
  • NorthGuy
    NorthGuy Solar Expert Posts: 1,913 ✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    jaggedben wrote: »
    Kind of a red-herring, but actually California has very strict requirements for smoke detectors nowadays. You're required to bring them up to code whenever you do any other work.

    Sorry. I didn't mean to attack you. This was a rethorical qeustion.
    jaggedben wrote: »
    Also, and I didn't know this, but according the NFPA electrical fires are slightly more common than cigarette fires.
    http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/pdf/homesfactsheet.pdf

    If you look at the government's electrical fire statistics, most of them come from human behavoiur, such as a failure to clean a clothes dryer. Even if you look at purely electrical fires, only 4.2% of them start in the Service area. None of the fires are listed as caused by solar equipment. And even in that broad definition of electrical fires, they're a small percentage of all the fires. Most fires come from cooking and heating.

    Even with that small percentage of electrical service fires, it is questionable that government appointed inspectors will do better job than hands-on installers and homeowners, and I would argue that the opposite is true.
  • Cariboocoot
    Cariboocoot Banned Posts: 17,615 ✭✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    it is questionable that government appointed inspectors will do better job than hands-on installers and homeowners

    This is particularly true if the AHJ inspector has no training beyond passing a civil service exam.

    An installer should be a certified electrician (or other area of expertise relevant to the task), and so should an inspector. This is not always the case.

    A homeowner might arguably do a better job because of having a vested interest in the quality of the work, but you'd be amazed how often that does not apply. :roll:

    No amount of regulation can replace common sense, but they keep trying. :p
  • BB.
    BB. Super Moderators, Administrators Posts: 33,431 admin
    Re: comments needed from professional installers

    I would suggest reviewing this thread:

    Panel Fire Question


    Those are the type of installs that you want to "prevent". It is so easy for a person with a slick presentation to pull the wool over the average contractor's and customer's eyes... Let alone that this was a permitted and inspected install in a good sized city.

    There is apparently an ~$80 report from the CPSC available too--It probably would be worth your effort to obtain the report and read it. And see how its findings measure up against the proposals.

    All it take is one bad apple to ruin the good intent of everyone else involved. I fear the charlatans, but oppressive bureaucracy is not a solution (I would like to see) either.

    -Bill
    Near San Francisco California: 3.5kWatt Grid Tied Solar power system+small backup genset
  • mike95490
    mike95490 Solar Expert Posts: 9,583 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    BB. wrote: »
    I would suggest reviewing this thread:

    Panel Fire Question


    ........I fear the charlatans, but oppressive bureaucracy is not a solution (I would like to see) either.

    -Bill

    Lets add GFIC and AFCI to every outlet, not just the branch, and see if the accumulated leakage will cause
    one to trip......... I've got new California smoke alarms, and if a diesel truck drives past my open garage without a stiff wind blowing, I've got the whole house in alarm from the detector in the garage. And if you ever drive a car into a garage with a new detector.... ear bleed time again. And in 5 years, when the CO sensors goe bad, the alarms trigger, and you have to buy a house full of new models. (and hope they didn't sit on a shelf for a year)
    Progress. (Oh, and better replace that 10 year, $12 lithium 9v battery every time you set or remove DST on the clocks, on all 9 detectors) How did anyone survive childhood?
    Powerfab top of pole PV mount | Listeroid 6/1 w/st5 gen head | XW6048 inverter/chgr | Iota 48V/15A charger | Morningstar 60A MPPT | 48V, 800A NiFe Battery (in series)| 15, Evergreen 205w "12V" PV array on pole | Midnight ePanel | Grundfos 10 SO5-9 with 3 wire Franklin Electric motor (1/2hp 240V 1ph ) on a timer for 3 hr noontime run - Runs off PV ||
    || Midnight Classic 200 | 10, Evergreen 200w in a 160VOC array ||
    || VEC1093 12V Charger | Maha C401 aa/aaa Charger | SureSine | Sunsaver MPPT 15A

    solar: http://tinyurl.com/LMR-Solar
    gen: http://tinyurl.com/LMR-Lister ,

  • Cariboocoot
    Cariboocoot Banned Posts: 17,615 ✭✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    mike95490 wrote: »
    How did anyone survive childhood?

    No smoke detectors. No grounded electrical system (much less GFI). No child-proof caps. No seat belts (much less air bags). Obviously we did not survive; we are dead. This explains it because once you become a zombie you last forever.

    Interestingly enough I was having this same conversation in real life just yesterday, explaining about how you can not make anything 100% safe. All you can do is evaluate the most likely risks and take reasonable measures to minimize them.

    Unfortunately we live in an age when the mindset is that we can and must be totally protected from every potential hazard and why doesn't the government do something about it? Then all the new, improved, safer ways add more problems instead ranging from annoying like Mike's diesel-tripped alarms or false-tripped arc fault breakers to increased hazards like the DC GFCI issues or the ground wires running into the house increasing the risk of introducing high Voltage to system.

    How safe is safe?
  • jaggedben
    jaggedben Solar Expert Posts: 230 ✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers

    I think this thread is actually wandering off topic a bit...

    The question was not about the level of safety required. (Are there some codes and laws that are too conservative and stringent? Arguably there are.) The question was about who checks for safety standards and whether they are accountable to everyone who might be affected by a dangerous installation.
  • Cariboocoot
    Cariboocoot Banned Posts: 17,615 ✭✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    jaggedben wrote: »
    I think this thread is actually wandering off topic a bit...

    The question was not about the level of safety required. (Are there some codes and laws that are too conservative and stringent? Arguably there are.) The question was about who checks for safety standards and whether they are accountable to everyone who might be affected by a dangerous installation.

    Not really off topic as the thread is about changing regulations to make installations easier and less costly through reducing the bureaucracy. It is the ever-expanding paranoia about being safe that has generated those regulations that need changing. So if the OP's planned reduction in paperwork is implemented invariably someone will pipe up about it not being safe enough to do it that way and you're right back where you started. Hence my comments about levels of safety. Seems like the more safe we try to be all we get is complex regulations and paperwork (which the OP wants to change) and people still subvert the regs and we have the same problems as before.

    As with criminality, when you're breaking one law what's a dozen more? I feel the OP's plan is sensible and justified because of the level of regulation now in place is not.

    But I will say that inspections should be done independent of the contractor (just in case) and by someone who really is qualified to understand what they are looking at (which is so often not the case). I have had it up to HERE with having work inspected by people who do not know what they are doing but got the job anyway (not just electrical either).
  • solarix
    solarix Solar Expert Posts: 713 ✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers

    Lets take a systems view of this... The local building dept. and its inspectors care little about the economic impact they have on the community or the profitability of contractors, but they are liable if something goes wrong with a job they had authority over. As a result, we have super safe regulations that are not cost effective. Using independent inspectors is not much different except open to more corruption. The key is to match authority with responsibility. The contractor doing the work is best able to exert authority over a job, and just needs to carry the responsibility as well. If they make a mistake, it should be visible to all. Measure twice, cut once.

    What if all the building dept. did was to administrate a forum (like EBAY) where feedback comments are logged on permitted jobs? The "AHJ" would have little authority other than to set standards perhaps. Contractors would register a job, the "official" inspector could post comments, independent inspectors (say representing a homeowner) could post comments, other contractors could post comments, the homeowner could post comments, all in an open forum for everyone to see. Contractors would bend over backwards to protect their reputation, but could of course answer any "bad feedback" posted. Its like this forum. Who would you rather have installing your solar - BB or Cariboocoot, or a nooby that everyone else is correcting? Bad construction would not last long. Homeowners could readily see which contractors know what they are doing, and contractors that know what they are doing would not be hamstrung by AHJ b.s., The trades would be strengthened by a free interchange of advice and help, And inspectors? - well, they wouldn't be near as hated - might even be liked if they restrict themselves to constructive help. Those wanting to build something in secret, go right ahead - just don't expect insurance to cover it. Want to live in a community where you can tell your neighbors what to build? go ahead and start a HOA.
    The foundation and success of this country is freedom and bravery - not regulation and liability.
  • BB.
    BB. Super Moderators, Administrators Posts: 33,431 admin
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    solarix wrote: »
    Who would you rather have installing your solar - BB or Cariboocoot...

    I would put my money on Cariboocoot.

    But I agree with your premise... This is pretty much how State Contractor licensing is performed. And even licensing for doctors.

    However, they tend to be "closed" about complaints and develop their own sets of bureaucracies/rules/corruption. They become "communities" themselves with an "us" (rulers+the ruled) vs the rest of us (just people with, apparently, excessive amounts of money we need to be freed of).

    Look at the history of UL (Underwriter's Laboratories).... Started out by insurance companies looking to reduce their costs by making things safer. Turned into NEC/Quasi Governmental oversight that still are based on the NRTL (nationally recognized testing laboratories) doing the basic equipment listing/traceability (and counterfeit UL marks, etc).

    My concern is that once something is enshrined in law--It becomes very difficult to make any changes (as conditions change, as people learn to game the system, etc.)... At least with a 100% private system (inspection/qualification/etc.)--If the private business is no longer "good" at what they do--Then they go out of business. If the government agency is no longer working well, they double down and do more of the same. :cry:

    -Bill "A government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth." B.
    Near San Francisco California: 3.5kWatt Grid Tied Solar power system+small backup genset
  • BB.
    BB. Super Moderators, Administrators Posts: 33,431 admin
    Re: comments needed from professional installers

    Interesting article:

    How Government Wrecked the Gas Can

    The gas gauge broke. There was no smartphone app to tell me how much was left, so I ran out. I had to call the local gas station to give me enough to get on my way. The gruff but lovable attendant arrived in his truck and started to pour gas in my car’s tank. And pour. And pour.

    “Hmmm, I just hate how slow these gas cans are these days,” he grumbled. “There’s no vent on them.”
    That sound of frustration in this guy’s voice was strangely familiar, the grumble that comes when something that used to work but doesn’t work anymore, for some odd reason we can’t identify.

    I’m pretty alert to such problems these days. Soap doesn’t work. Toilets don’t flush. Clothes washers don’t clean. Light bulbs don’t illuminate. Refrigerators break too soon. Paint discolors. Lawnmowers have to be hacked. It’s all caused by idiotic government regulations that are wrecking our lives one consumer product at a time, all in ways we hardly notice.

    It’s like the barbarian invasions that wrecked Rome, taking away the gains we’ve made in bettering our lives. It’s the bureaucrats’ way of reminding market producers and consumers who is in charge.

    Surely, the gas can is protected. It’s just a can, for goodness sake. Yet he was right. This one doesn’t have a vent. Who would make a can without a vent unless it was done under duress? After all, everyone knows to vent anything that pours. Otherwise, it doesn’t pour right and is likely to spill.

    It took one quick search. The whole trend began in (wait for it) California. Regulations began in 2000, with the idea of preventing spillage. The notion spread and was picked up by the EPA, which is always looking for new and innovative ways to spread as much human misery as possible.

    An ominous regulatory announcement from the EPA came in 2007: “Starting with containers manufactured in 2009… it is expected that the new cans will be built with a simple and inexpensive permeation barrier and new spouts that close automatically.”

    The government never said “no vents.” It abolished them de facto with new standards that every state had to adopt by 2009. So for the last three years, you have not been able to buy gas cans that work properly. They are not permitted to have a separate vent. The top has to close automatically. There are other silly things now, too, but the biggest problem is that they do not do well what cans are supposed to do.
    ...
    Ask yourself this: If they can wreck such a normal and traditional item like this, and do it largely under the radar screen, what else have they mandatorily malfunctioned? How many other things in our daily lives have been distorted, deformed and destroyed by government regulations?

    If some product annoys you in surprising ways, there’s a good chance that it is not the invisible hand at work, but rather the regulatory grip that is squeezing the life out of civilization itself.

    -Bill
    Near San Francisco California: 3.5kWatt Grid Tied Solar power system+small backup genset
  • Cariboocoot
    Cariboocoot Banned Posts: 17,615 ✭✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers

    Thanks for the compliment, Bill. :D

    And my gas cans all have vents. If they didn't I'd poke a hole in them. :p
    Some of the new ones vent through the spout with a "return tube". They don't work very well, frankly.
  • mike95490
    mike95490 Solar Expert Posts: 9,583 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers

    I've got 3 of the new "vapor prevention" gas cans.

    you have to hold a lock tab down, as you open the flow lever. (like the safe tab on a butane lighter)

    Then you insert the spout to the filler. The spout is oversized so as to not activate the sealing flapper in the gas tank neck. This then fills the neck up with gasoline, which then dribbles all over your car and pants. I had to buy an transmission funnel to get the filler neck flap open and then slowly pour the gas out. Refilling the kubota and john deer with diesel is easier, in that there is no extra funnel needed, just hold the can upside down, press the lock tab, flow lever, and wait 10 minutes for 4 gallons (I now fill the 5 gal cans with 4 gallons, because I cant hold the weight of 5 gallons for 10 minutes. ) to dribble out of the can and into the tank. My old cans from the 70's would dump out in just a minute or two.

    Maybe I'll look into race cans for pit stops !
    Powerfab top of pole PV mount | Listeroid 6/1 w/st5 gen head | XW6048 inverter/chgr | Iota 48V/15A charger | Morningstar 60A MPPT | 48V, 800A NiFe Battery (in series)| 15, Evergreen 205w "12V" PV array on pole | Midnight ePanel | Grundfos 10 SO5-9 with 3 wire Franklin Electric motor (1/2hp 240V 1ph ) on a timer for 3 hr noontime run - Runs off PV ||
    || Midnight Classic 200 | 10, Evergreen 200w in a 160VOC array ||
    || VEC1093 12V Charger | Maha C401 aa/aaa Charger | SureSine | Sunsaver MPPT 15A

    solar: http://tinyurl.com/LMR-Solar
    gen: http://tinyurl.com/LMR-Lister ,

  • BB.
    BB. Super Moderators, Administrators Posts: 33,431 admin
    Re: comments needed from professional installers

    Being from California:
    It took one quick search. The whole trend began in (wait for it) California. Regulations began in 2000, with the idea of preventing spillage. The notion spread and was picked up by the EPA, which is always looking for new and innovative ways to spread as much human misery as possible.

    I am very sorry--But I did not vote for any of these folks.

    -Bill "don't blame me" & "self censor" B.

    PS: I will say that these sealed cans get a lot of pressure on summer afternoons--They REALLY FILL the lawn mower FAST when you push open the spout/valve.
    Near San Francisco California: 3.5kWatt Grid Tied Solar power system+small backup genset
  • jaggedben
    jaggedben Solar Expert Posts: 230 ✭✭
    Re: comments needed from professional installers
    Not really off topic as the thread is about changing regulations to make installations easier and less costly through reducing the bureaucracy. It is the ever-expanding paranoia about being safe that has generated those regulations that need changing. So if the OP's planned reduction in paperwork is implemented invariably someone will pipe up about it not being safe enough to do it that way and you're right back where you started. Hence my comments about levels of safety. Seems like the more safe we try to be all we get is complex regulations and paperwork (which the OP wants to change) and people still subvert the regs and we have the same problems as before.

    As with criminality, when you're breaking one law what's a dozen more? I feel the OP's plan is sensible and justified because of the level of regulation now in place is not.

    But I will say that inspections should be done independent of the contractor (just in case) and by someone who really is qualified to understand what they are looking at (which is so often not the case). I have had it up to HERE with having work inspected by people who do not know what they are doing but got the job anyway (not just electrical either).

    Okay, not that off topic. What I meant to refer towas that items 1-6 of the OPs proposal were not controversial, whereas 7&8 were.

    On your last paragraph, I feel you. The issue of who should inspect and how much inspection there needs to be, and how to improve the process, is just a thorny issue in my opinion. If there's one thing I feel I have learned to a certainty while working in this business, it is that you can find the overly cautious and the total screw-ups on both sides of the contractor/inspector divide. How you build a net to catch the screw-ups without overly burdening everyone else is no easy feat.