Posted
by

The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) program recently embarked on an effort to produce and release to the public work-place safety videos. Its second is a four-minute video that tells the tragic story of a solar panel installer’s 45-foot fall from the roof of a three-story apartment building.

The pre-project plan called for fall protection on the project due to the distance of the sloped roof to the ground and the slope of the roof, including 100% tie off on the sloped roof with single-D anchors, yo-yo type fall restraint life and full-body harness. It was not known how often management surveyed compliance with the fall protection plan on the job sites. On the first day of the particular project, a safety meeting was held by the project manager who told the work crews that fall protection safety equipment would be required when working on the roofs. The employer had an Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP) that included, among other things, safety meetings, training and incentive and disciplinary measures. The IIPP incorporated guidance on the use of pre-project plans and job hazard analyses to evaluate work-place safety hazards. Its training program included new employee orientation, specific on-the-job training, job site orientation and weekly safety meetings.

On the day of the incident, however, none of the employees were tethered to the roof and no other fall-protection safety equipment was in place. One junior solar panel installer, while checking the alignment of the brackets that would hold the panels and walking backwards to get a better view, stepped off of the edge of the roof, falling three stories.The installer had underwent new employee orientation and had been receiving on-the-job training.

The FACE investigator that reviewed the incident determined that in order to prevent future incidents of a similar nature, contractors who install solar panels on roofs should ensure: (A) employees wear fall protection safety equipment when working on sloped roofs with identified fall hazards, and (B) worksite safety procedures and practices for fall protection are developed and implemented. In particular, fall protection safety equipment should be worn by employees working on sloped roofs greater than 30 degrees or whose work exposes them to a risk of a fall of greater that 7 1/2 feet. The two types of fall protection safety equipment typically used on roofs are: (1) a personal fall restraint (PFR) system and (2) a personal fall arrest (PFA) system. The former consists of anchorages, connectors, lanyards, and a body harness configured to prevent the employee from falling. The latter consists of anchorages, connectors, a deceleration device, and a body harness configured to stop the employee during a fall.

The FACE Investigator’s report, California Case Report 10CA003, suggests that a project pre-plan could include (1) a signature page which all employees on the job site were required to sign prior to starting work on the project, verifying that the worker was aware of his/her safety responsibilities and proving the worker with an opportunity to ask questions, clarify any misunderstandings, or request additional guidance, (2) initial and periodic inspections and audits of the job site by management personnel, identifying any safety hazards and correcting any unsafe practices on an ongoing basis. Corrective action could include progressive disciplinary measures, as well recognition or rewards for consistent compliance withe the safety plan.

With the growth in number of solar panel installations over the last number of years and expectation that this will continue due to the call for additional renewable energy sources, FACE recognized that there is an increasing number of solar installation workers exposed to fall hazards. The video explains the events that lead up to the fatal fall, and highlights fall-prevention safety recommendations. Photographs from the investigation supplement the project scenes recreated by the deceased installer’s co-workers. FACE encourages contractors to include its videos in their work-place safety training materials.

FACE has produced and released two other work-place safety videos, one on preventing falls through skylights and preventing wood chipper fatalities.

Additional Solar Work-Place Safety Training Materials: FACE Flash No. 1; FACE Facts No. 20; FACE Facts No. 21

Additional Sources: FACE Facts No. 24; California Licensed Contactor Newsletter (Summer 2012); ISHN Magazine

Posted
by

SolarPermit.org, a website developed by SunShot awardee Clean Power Finance and supported by a Department of Energy grant, “organizes and simplifies the solar permitting process by compiling permitting information in a single location.” The newly redesigned website hosts the National Solar Permitting Database, a free, online database of solar permitting requirements for cities and counties across the country. The website now contains “80% of jurisdictions with 200 or more residential installations per year.”

The website “is an interactive, crowd-sourced website – similar to Wikipedia – for solar permitting requirements.” Solar contractors and others can use the website to collect information from the database that may be helpful to them and to contribute information to the database based upon their experiences that may be helpful to others. Users of the website are able to provide feedback on the information provided by others. The “database contains jurisdictions for over 18,000 United States cities and counties. Each page includes over 100 data fields to give users an easy way to track a wide range of information about permitting requirements and processes.” Information made available on the website includes: (1) contact information, (2) turnaround times, (3) fees, (4) specifications for system designs, (5) inspection processes, and (6) common errors.

The website’s goal is to “minimize the time and resources required to… support the mass-market adoption of solar.”

Additional Resources: August 18, 2013 SunShot Newsletter; California Solar Permitting Guidebook (June 2012, 1st Ed.)

Posted
by

The U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM), as part of the Solar Energy Program, recently approved the establishment of a new Renewable Energy Evaluation Area (REEA) in California’s Imperial Valley. The West Chocolate Mountains REEA creates a new Solar Energy Zone (SEZ), which is part of President Obama’s “administration’s efforts to facilitate solar energy development by identifying areas in six southwestern states with high solar potential, few resource conflicts, and access to existing or planned transmission.” This REEA contemplates “[p]otential development of up to 3,456 megawatts of renewable energy within the REEA (3,306 megawatts of solar power and up to 150 megawatts of geothermal power).”

The Western Solar Plan, approved in October 2012, created 17 SEZs in six southwestern states with incentives for development within those zones and a process for considering additional zones. The Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for solar energy development is a blueprint for utility-scale solar energy permitting in (Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah) by establishing SEZs with access to existing or planned transmission, incentives for development within those SEZs, and a process through which to consider additional SEZs and solar projects.

BLM defines a SEZ “as an area well suited for utility-scale production of solar energy, where the BLM will prioritize solar energy and associated transmission infrastructure development.” A discussion of the criteria used to identify SEZs is provided in Section 2.2.2.2 of the Draft Solar PEIS.

BLM will identify new SEZs in accordance with the Identification Protocol for New or Expanded SEZs. When considering whether to identify new or expanded SEZs, BLM, in most situations, the SEZs should be relatively large areas that provide highly suitable locations for utility-scale solar energy development, and locations where solar energy development is economically and technically feasible, there is good potential for connecting new electricity-generating plants to the transmission distribution system and there is generally low resource conflict. The sequential process for identifying new SEZs includes assessing the demand for new or expanded SEZs, establishing technical and economic suitability , applying environmental, cultural, and other screening criteria, and analyzing proposed SEZs . The four-step process is to occur at least once every 5 years.

The West Chocolate Mountains REEA is the third SEZ in California and brings the national total to 19. The 19 REEAs include:

Arizona:
Agua Caliente SEZ
Brenda SEZ
Gillespie SEZ

California:
Imperial East SEZ
Riverside East SEZ
Western Chocolate Mountains SEZ

Colorado:
Antonito Southeast SEZ
De Tilla Gulch SEZ
Fourmile East SEZ
Los Mogotes East SEZ

Nevada:
Armargosa Valley SEZ
Dry Lake SEZ
Dry Lake Valley North SEZ
Gold Point SEZ
Millers SEZ

New Mexico:
Afton SEZ

Utah:
Escalante Valley SEZ
Milford Flats South SEZ
Wah Wah Valley SEZ

Other Sources: U.S. Department of Energy; U.S. Department of Interior; Solar Energy Development Programmatic EIS Information Center; Bureau of Land Management Solar Energy Program

Posted
by

On Thursday, August 15, the three-member Toll Bridge Program Oversight Committee voted to open the new San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge September 3, as originally planned. On July 8, it had been announced that the bridge opening would have to be delayed beyond the originally planned Labor Day weekend because they didn’t expect the failed bolt retrofit work to be completed until mid-December. Days later, hope was rekindled that a short-fix could be implemented quickly to address the failure of nearly one-third of the 96 bolts that secure earthquake shock absorbers known as shear keys to the deck when they were tightened in March. The August 15 decision followed a ruling by the Federal Highway Transportation Administration that an interim fix to address the bolt failures that occurred in March would allow the new span to open safely while the defective bolts are being retrofitted.

The San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge Seismic Safety Projects website confirms that “The Bay Bridge Will Be Closed Labor Day Weekend 8 P.M. Wednesday, Aug. 28 to 5 A.M. Tuesday, Sept. 3.” During the closure, the original East Span will be taken out of service and efforts made to open the new East Span to traffic. Work will be performed at the east (aka the Oakland Touchdown) and west (aka the Yerba Buena Island Transition Structure) ends of the new bridge to connect it to the existing Toll Plaza and Yerba Buena Island. Other “essential construction activities, including paving, striping and erecting barrier rail” as well as work “on the West Span, replacing lighting fixtures, cleaning and painting the cable, and repairing finger joints” will be performed as well. When the new San Francisco-Oakland “bridge reopens to traffic on Tuesday, Sept. 3, motorists will encounter a new driving experience, as traffic moves from the upper and lower decks of the original bridge to the parallel, side-by-side decks of the new East Span.” “The new side-by-side configuration will open up panoramic views of the San Francisco bay and the East Bay hills.”

The short-term fix will involve “inserting large steel plates, known as shims, into each of four bearings, enhancing their ability to safely distribute energy during an earthquake.” “The long-term solution to fixing the broken bolts on the eastern span is to cover them with an exterior saddle and cable system that is encased in concrete.” Work on the long-term solution will continue after the short-term fix is completed.

Transportation officials decided to close the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge over Labor Day weekend instead of another weekend in September because traffic is lighter at that time and a lot of planning had already been done for that weekend in anticipation of opening the new span after Labor Day weekend.

Other Sources: New Bay Bridge to Open Labor Day Weekend, Sources Tell KPIX 5, CBS San Francisco and Bay City News Service, Aug. 14, 2013; New Bay Bridge Scheduled to Open September 3 After Labor Day Weekend Closure, San Jose Mercury News, Aug. 15, 2013; Toll Authority Confirms New Bay Bridge to Open Labor Day Weekend, CBS San Francisco and Bay City News Service, Aug. 15, 2013

Posted
by

In IAP World Services, Inc.; EMCOR Government Services, B-407917.2 et al. (July 10, 2013), involving a protest challenging an award by the U.S. Department of the Navy (the “Navy”) for base operating support services, the Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) held that the Navy unreasonably credited the joint venture awardee with the corporate experience and past performance of two affiliates of one of the joint venture partners, where the record did not demonstrate that the affiliates would play a role in contract performance.

To learn more about this, click GAO Holds That Agency Improperly Credited Offeror With Past Performance of Affiliates to read the alert by John E. Jensen, Nicole Y. Beeler, and me.

Posted
by

A recent decision by the First Circuit Court of Appeals illustrates the importance of clearly articulating the efficient proximate cause of any insurance loss and the narrow interpretation applied by courts to exclusionary clauses. In Fidelity Co-op. Bank v. Nova Cas. Co., Nos. 12-1572, 12-2150, 2013 WL 4016361 (1st Cir. August 7, 2013), the court ruled that damages to the interior of a building caused by the pooling of water on the building’s roof, which resulted from excessive rain during Tropical Storm Hanna, did not constitute damage “caused by rain” excluded by the insured’s all risk insurance policy. Rather, the court held that the damages were caused by the failure of a drain that resulted in a “flood,” which peril was expressly covered under the policy.

The insured owned a five-story mixed-use rental property in Clinton, Massachusetts. The building, which was approximately 100 years old, had a flat, rubber-covered roof that had been installed a few years before the loss. The drainage system on the roof consisted of a single drain located at the center of the roof with an internal diameter of 2.5 inches. The roof also contained two glass skylights directly above the building’s stairwell.

On September 6, 2008, Tropical Storm Hanna brought heavy rains to Clinton. The excessive rain overwhelmed the rooftop drain on the building, causing the water to pool to such a height on the roof that it flowed over the curbs of the two skylights and entered the building, which resulted in substantial damage to the building’s interior. As a result of the damage, the Town of Clinton ordered the building to be closed, causing forced evacuation of all tenants. The town would not permit reentry until repairs were completed and a structural engineer provided an inspection report confirming that the structure was sound.

The insured sought coverage for the loss under its all risk insurance policy. After investigating the cause of the damage, which the insurer confirmed was the inadequate roof drain causing the rain water to excessively pool, the insurer denied coverage based on the rain limitation contained in the policy. The rain limitation excluded coverage for loss suffered to “[t]he interior of the building . . . caused by or resulting from rain, . . . whether driven by wind or not, unless [t]he building . . . first sustains damage by a Covered Cause of Loss to its roof or walls through which the rain enters.” The insurer argued that the damages were “caused by rain” and, therefore, coverage was excluded.

In a declaratory judgment action regarding coverage, the district court agreed with the insurer, finding that the rain limitation precluded coverage.

On appeal, the First Circuit Court of Appeals reversed. The First Circuit explained that in determining whether a loss is excluded or covered by insurance, courts in Massachusetts must look to the efficient proximate cause of the loss. If the efficient proximate cause of the loss “is an insured risk, there will be coverage even though the final form of the property damage, produced by a series of related events, appears to take the loss outside the terms of the policy.” Applying this analysis, the First Circuit found that the efficient proximate cause of the loss was the blocked or inadequate roof drain that caused the water to accumulate on the flat roof – the efficient proximate cause was not the rain. The court explained that because the inadequate roof drain was a covered loss under the policy, not excluded by any other exclusion, and because the policy expressly covered damages arising from flood, which was defined as “[t]he unusual accumulation of surface waters from any source,” there was coverage.

Photo © Justin Russell, All Rights Reserved – Creative Commons.

Posted
by

Solar Decathlon China, the most recent addition to the international family of Solar Decathlon competitions, commenced on August 2, 2013 and ended today. It was hosted by the National Energy Administration and the U.S. Department of Energy, organized by Peking University, and supported by private companies. Final awards are posted: University of Wollongong (UOW) took first place overall, with South China University of Technology (SCUT) taking second place and Chalmers University of Technology (Sweden) taking third. Winners of the subjective contest awards and objective contest awards are also posted.

Participants in Solar Decathlon China’s included 22 teams from 35 universities with students from over 35 nationalities in 13 countries on 6 continents:
• Abbaspour University of Technology (Iran)
• Peking University and University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (China-United States)
• Tel Aviv University, Shenkar College of Engineering and Design, Neri Bloomfield School of Design and Education, College of Management Academic Studies (Israel)
• Inner Mongolia University of Technology (China)
• Alfred State College and Guilin University of Technology and Alfred University (China-United States)
• London Metropolitan University and Guangzhou Academy of Fine Arts (England-China)
• Shandong Jianzhu University (China)
• Shanghai Jiaotong University (China)
• South China University of Technology and Huazhong University of Science and Technology (China)
• Southeast University (China)
• University of Wollongong (Australia)
• Beijing Jiaotong University and Bern University of Applied Sciences (China-Switzerland)
• New Jersey Institute of Technology and Harbin Institute of Technology (United States-China)
• Chalmers University of Technology (Sweden)
• Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (Malaysia)
• American University in Cairo (Egypt)
• Xiamen University (China)
• Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology (China)
• National University of Singapore (Singapore)
• Worcester Polytechnic Institute and Ghent University and Polytechnic Institute of New York University.
• Tsinghua University and Florida International University (China – United States)
• Middle East Technical University (Turkey)

Additional Sources: U.S. Department of Energy Solar Decathlon Website

Posted
by

Ygrene Energy Fund and Johnson Controls recently announced that they will help Seattle-based Metzler Real Estate cut energy use and utility bills at Sacramento’s Metro Center Corporate Park by $140,000 annually, a 27% decrease. The Metro Center facilities are located at 2700-2720 Gateway Oaks Drive and are comprised of 4 buildings, totaling approximately 250,000 square feet. KN1A7051.JPG

Photo © Ygrene Energy Fund, All Rights Reserved – Creative Commons.

The $3.16 million Property-Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) project will be funded through Clean Energy Sacramento, a program administered by Ygrene that was launched earlier this year. The planned upgrades reportedly include replacement of rooftop units with high efficiency equipment and installation of a Metasys® building management system to control the mechanical equipment and interior and exterior lighting, and the retrofit will enable the Metro Center to register for LEED® certification.

PACE permits local governments to offer long-term, low-interest financing to property owners to implement energy efficiency upgrades. In contrast to traditional loans, the PACE projects are repaid through an annual assessment on a property tax bill that is linked to the property rather than to the owner. To date, 30 states have PACE enabling legislation, including: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Additional Sources: Sacramento Unveils Nation’s Largest Clean Energy PACE Retrofit, Justin Gerdes, Forbes Contributor

Posted
by

Reproduced by permission from Western Legal History, volume 24, number 2 (2011). Copyright © 2011 Ninth Judicial Circuit Historical Society.

This article describes and analyzes the policyholder coverage court decisions and opinions arising from the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and fire, starting with a summary of the factual background and concluding with comments about their historic significance. By showing that policyholders could recover even under strict policy language, these cases helped to spur settlements by reluctant insurers and determined the pace at which the city’s rebirth was completed in the years immediately following the disaster.

But these century-old cases are also important today. They are still relevant to the issue of “ensuing loss”–whether fires or other covered perils, stemming from earthquakes or other excluded perils, are nonetheless insured. This broader question is as current as Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy, and as imminent as the next calamity.

Click here to download the article in its entirety.

Posted
by

In the U.S. Department of Energy Solar Decathlon, 20 collegiate teams compete to design, build, and operate solar-powered houses that are affordable, attractive, and easy to live in, maintains comfortable and healthy indoor environmental conditions, supplies energy to household appliances for cooking, cleaning, and entertainment, provides adequate hot water, and produces as much or more energy than it consumes. The winner of the Decathlon will be “the team that best blends affordability, consumer appeal, and design excellence with optimal energy production and maximum efficiency.”

The free and open to the public 2013 Decathlon & XPO that will be held October 3-13, 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. daily, at Orange County Great Park in Irvine, California, will include “a clean, renewable, and efficient energy exposition, featuring visionary and innovative companies, products, and educational opportunities.” SolarDecathlon.jpg

The Decathlon’s purpose is to educate students and the public about the money-saving opportunities and environmental benefits presented by clean-energy products and design solutions, to demonstrate to the public the comfort and affordability of homes that combine energy-efficient construction and appliances with renewable energy systems available today, and to provide participating students with unique training that prepares them to enter our nation’s clean-energy workforce. Through fun, interactive exhibits and activities, the Decathlon & XPO will also help “educate visitors about the broad spectrum of energy efficiency in home design, transportation, consumer products, food production and education.” Exhibitors will showcase their company and energy-efficient products, resources, and ideas to consumers, homebuilders, municipalities, government agencies, businesses, and more, and speakers will showcase their work, research, and expertise in clean, efficient, and renewable enterprises.

The 2013 Decathlon teams are:
Arizona State University and The University of New Mexico
Czech Republic: Czech Technical University
Kentucky/Indiana: University of Louisville, Ball State University and University of Kentucky
Middlebury College
Missouri University of Science and Technology
Norwich University
Santa Clara University
Southern California Institute of Architecture and California Institute of Technology
Stanford University
Stevens Institute of Technology
Team Alberta: University of Calgary
Team Austria: Vienna University of Technology
Team Capitol DC: The Catholic University of America, George Washington University, and American University
Team Ontario: Queen’s University, Carleton University, and Algonquin College
Team Texas: The University of Texas at El Paso and El Paso Community College
Tidewater Virginia: Hampton University and Old Dominion University
University of Nevada Las Vegas
The University of North Carolina at Charlotte
University of Southern California
West Virginia University

The first Solar Decathlon was held in 2002; the competition has since occurred biennially in 2005, 2007, 2009, and 2011. In October of 2007, the Spanish and U.S. governments signed a memorandum of understanding to create Solar Decathlon Europe, a complementary competition to the U.S. Department of Energy Solar Decathlon. Spain hosted the first two of these competitions in 2010 and 2012. In 2014, Solar Decathlon Europe will move to Versailles, France. Solar Decathlon China is the most recent addition to the international family of Solar Decathlon competitions. The first Solar Decathlon China began on August 2 and will continue through August 13, 2013, at in Datong, China.

Information for schools interested in participating in the 2015 U.S. Department of Energy Solar Decathlon is also available. A U.S. Department of Energy funding opportunity announcement is tentatively expected on the following timeline: (1) Issue date: Aug. 26, 2013, (2) Due date: Nov. 4, 2013, and (3) Notification date: Jan. 15, 2014.

Additional Sources: SD Europe; SD China

Photo © October 13, 2007, JoshBerglund19 – creative commons.