Authors: Victor Chang & Theoh Kwong-Jen
Malaysia’s Fire Department, a.k.a. Bomba Malaysia released their latest Fire Safety Guidelines for Solar Photovoltaic Systems on Roofing on 18 September 2024. In the 4 months since their release, these guidelines have caused a mixture of concern and confusion among Malaysia’s solar community as well as potential businesses and homes looking to install solar systems for their premises.
The Malaysian Photovoltaic Industry Association (MPIA), which serves as the voice of Malaysia’s solar community, has had numerous conversations with Bomba Malaysia since the release of these guidelines. Unfortunately, Bomba Malaysia has not provided much additional clarity to date. The purpose of this article is therefore to highlight the key changes introduced by these guidelines while attempting to distinguish what we know for sure from what still remains to be clarified by Bomba Malaysia, hopefully sooner rather than later.
Key guidelines
The key fire safety guidelines can be distinguished between Design Guidelines and Electrical Guidelines, each of which we will explore in turn.
Please note that we will not go through every single one of the guidelines, but only those we think are especially notable and pertinent.


(A) Design Guidelines
These guidelines pertain to roof access, perimeter offset and the arrangement of solar panels on roofs. These have come to the public’s attention lately due to one of Malaysia’s higher profile fire incidents involving solar panels. Due to the dense arrangement of solar panels, these firefighters were unable to access certain areas on the roof to make manual holes to help to detect the fire.
The guidelines have now distinguished between small residences and other buildings:
For small residences:
- there should be at least two access routes with minimal obstruction (e.g. ventilation or water heaters), which have a width of at least 1m from the eaves to the ridge of the roof.
- In terms of displacement (setback) on the ridges of the roof:
- PV systems covering less than 33% of the roof, at least 500mm setback shall be provided;
- PV systems covering more than 33% of the roof, at least 1m setback must be provided.
For other buildings:
- In terms of routing:
- a clear perimeter route of at least 1.2m must be provided around the edge of the roof for buildings with a roof width of less than 76.2m (250ft);
- a perimeter offset of at least 1.8m must be provided for any roof widths wider than 76.2m (250ft).
- The area of each solar PV array (islands) should also be no larger than 46m (150ft) x 46m (150ft) in distance on both axes.
- A path with a minimum width of 1.2 m (48 in.) shall also be provided adjacent to all sides of smoke and heat vents.
- All access routes should be located in areas with minimal obstacles to reduce the hazards while maximizing ventilation opportunities.

(B) Electrical Guidelines
The most basic of electrical safety measures is the need for an Alternating Current (AC) isolating switch which should be installed at the fire control centre or any easily accessible location. This would usually already be installed as a matter of standard practice within the Main PV Switchboard (PV MSB) in the form of a circuit breaker. The function of the switchboard is to automatically trip in the event of a short circuit, otherwise it can be manually tripped to break the circuit. Hence, a dedicated AC isolating switch could also be installed especially for installations where the PV MSB is less accessible.
Direct Current (DC) emergency shutdown switches are now also mandatory between the inverter and the PV modules. This refers to a standard DC circuit breaker, which are also generally incorporated already as standard practice for all PV installations. However, the new Bomba guidelines also state that an additional DC emergency shut-off switch capable of lowering the system voltage below 80V should also be installed and it should be remotely controllable. Fortunately, most quality inverters already have this functionality built in which can be remotely controlled via an app. Therefore, this further emphasises the importance of choosing the right solar providers who can supply equipment which fulfil the requisite standards.
The electrical guidelines which have caused the most controversy and furore are in relation to the need for Rapid Shutdown Devices (RSDs). In the event of a fire, if the sun is still shining, the solar panels will still be generating DC voltage. This means that DC voltage will still be live in the cables connected to the panels, even if the circuit has been cut off to the rest of the building by the DC emergency shutdown switches, as mentioned above. The function of an RSD is to rapidly lower the voltage at the solar panel level, thereby reducing the risk of electrical shocks for the firemen putting out the fires.
On the topic of cables, each solar DC cable must now comply with IEC 60332-1-2 fire-resistant standards for single cables and IEC 60332-3 for bundled cables. It is therefore important to verify and confirm with your solar providers that their cables comply with these standards and can provide the relevant certificates as proof.
So what do we actually know for sure?

Although the manner of enforcement of these Bomba guidelines is still uncertain, what we do know is that the these guidelines reflect the best practice for all solar PV installation from the perspective of Bomba Malaysia. However, it is worth noting that although a lot of these guidelines are for the purpose of mitigating or preventing fires, such as the AC and DC isolating switches and cable standards, a significant number are primarily catered towards the safety for our fireman.
Statistics show that most solar PV related fires in history are caused by poorly connected DC cables, resulting in DC arcing that generates hotspots, which in turn escalate into fires as materials melt or fail. DC and AC isolators prevent the fire from igniting further, while fire-resistant cables prevent fires from escalating and getting carried into the building through the cables. However, contrary to popular belief, the primary purpose of RSDs is not to mitigate fires since they are not designed to prevent arcing, which is the main cause of fires. Instead, the real purpose of RSDs is to protect the firemen who are attempting to put out those fires as any high live voltage could potentially electrocute the fireman through the water they use to put the fires out.
The problem with RSDs is that they are expensive and are tedious to install, thereby further delaying and increasing the costs of every solar PV installation. There are now also 50% more individual points of failure which would make operation and maintenance (O&M) more difficult in the long run. Fortunately, the requirement for RSDs is systemic and not product-specific. This means that as long as RSDs have been properly incorporated into the PV system, that would be sufficient to satisfy these guidelines. No particular brands have been mandated, which means that solar EPCCs are able to opt for more affordable RSDs for their clients as long as they are able to perform their rapid shutdown functions effectively. Premium options tend to include optimiser functionalities or even be incorporated with microinverters, which may be more costly and unnecessary if performance enhancement is not required (due to shading, multiple different orientations of solar panels or otherwise).
What do we need clarity on ASAP?

Whenever an existing client speaks to us about the Bomba Guidelines, their main concern is whether they need to make changes to their existing solar system to comply with these new guidelines. Thankfully, we understand that these guidelines are not retrospective and will only apply from their date of publication (i.e. 18th September 2024 onwards). However, this has not been explicitly confirmed by Bomba and certainty on this is of paramount importance due to the sheer cost of retrospective compliance.
Secondly, to what extent do these guidelines apply to residential property? The only mention of residential property in the guidelines is in relation to roof access and setback, somehow the guidelines appear to have made a clear distinction between residences and other properties. We have been led to understand that the guidelines do not in fact apply to residential properties, other than where explicitly stated. However, once again, there has been no written confirmation from Bomba on this. We also understand that the guidelines may also distinguish between self-consumption (SELCO) systems and net-energy metering (NEM) solar systems, but this is also yet to be confirmed.
Finally, given the additional cost and labour that would result from compliance with these new Bomba guidelines, the question is whether there is any grace period for compliance. Time is needed for solar EPCCs to source for more suppliers of RSDs and fire-resistant cables who can fulfil these new requirements at a price that is not too onerous for their clients. This is important for solar to continue being a viable means for people to go green and for Malaysia to meet its ambitious emissions targets.
Cost is one thing, but safety is always paramount. Malaysia’s solar industry and its people urgently need clarity and certainty so that these guidelines can be properly implemented to ensure the safety of all PV installations going forward, but in a way that also addresses the commercial and practical needs of those involved.
Official Published Announcement: https://www.acem.com.my/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/20240918-Garis-Panduan-Keselamatan-Kebakaran-Bagi-Pemasangan-Sistem-Solar-Fotovoltaik-di-Atas-Bumbung.pdf