CO detectors & Minnesota's "Sophia's Law"

M

mobocracy

Active Member
Jun 29, 2014
541
United States
Boat Info
310 Sundancer
Engines
350 Mag & Bravo III
We have a new law in Minnesota that requires CO detectors in boats with an "enclosed accommodation compartment".

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/safety/boatwater/sophias-law.html

I'd wager the CO detector on my 2007 310 DA (listed in the parts manual as the Firebox-Xintex CMD-4-RLY) is expired and needs to be replaced (boat is new to me and awaiting splash on April 25th). It looks like I can just replace the existing CO detector with a new Fireboy one and meet state law since except for the bathroom, the 310 DA is basically just one cabin with no bulkheads separating it into multiple spaces.

I'm interested enough CO detection to consider more of them and I'm curious what the collective opinion is on using battery powered household ones on boats as supplementary detectors. In theory the one in the cabin will suffice to meet state law, as it meets the requirements of AYBC which the state law requires. But adding a couple of more battery operated models as backups (mid-berth, kitchen) seems like a good idea and it would sure be simpler to use battery powered home models.

Any reasonable brand of home battery monitor meets UL 2034 standards which AYBC A-24 references. I'd guess the only risk might be nuisance alarms due to differences in time-weighted averaging.
 
I'm working with some legislators to get that changed for next year to allow for the battery operated ones. The officials I've talked to had no idea that you'd be looking at a $500+ bill to have a marina install these things when they voted for it. Ridiculous that you can have battery powered ones in your house, but you're expected to run wires all over your boat to have it hooked up to your battery. It also limits where you can put one due to the layout of your cabin.
 
The Xintex CO detectors last about 5 years and beep when they are starting to go bad. The prior owner of your boat likely replaced the CO detector at least once.

I have a battery powered CO detector in addition to the hardwired one. Redundancy doesn't hurt on something so important.
 
Be careful ordering a Fireboy replacement on some sites like Amazon. As JimT said, they have a shelf life, and could be sitting for years before bought. We replaced ours and got 1 year out of it.
We also keep a battery powered one on board.
Mike
 
Treats said:
I'm working with some legislators to get that changed for next year to allow for the battery operated ones. The officials I've talked to had no idea that you'd be looking at a $500+ bill to have a marina install these things when they voted for it. Ridiculous that you can have battery powered ones in your house, but you're expected to run wires all over your boat to have it hooked up to your battery. It also limits where you can put one due to the layout of your cabin.
Click to expand...

Greenwood Marina sent out their first newsletter and had this as a topic and said that battery powered models meeting the standard would be available "soon". I don't see anything at the DNR info page or the actual state law that says they *have* to be hard wired, only that they have to meet ABYC A-24 (2015) standards, unless that standard says they have to be hard wired.

The MN DNR web page is both overly verbose *and* unclear whether bathrooms need separate CO detectors from main cabin areas. If they have to have one AND it has to be hard wired than the bathroom will be a real problem on my boat.

I expect there will be a lot of unintended consequences with this law -- fires and electrical risks from crappy wiring jobs trying to avoid spending $500 on installation jobs, as just one example, along with a ton of non-compliance as people figure screw it, I'm not spending the extra money unless I get fined. Had they allowed UL-standard home battery powered units and not required ABYC-compliant units they could probably avoid a lot of side problems and get a lot more compliance.
 
I have a First Alert battery powered unit on our boat and it will go off if I idle the boat at the slip for a few minutes with little to no wind. I don't understand the need for more than one unit in a boat cabin, it's not that large an area. Think about it, how many units do you have in your house? And the volume of a home is vastly greater than the volume of even a spacious boat. Now if you have a big boat with multiple cabins separated by bulkheads, then yes I can see the need for more than one but most cruisers these days are like a cave.
 
SCORPIO said:
I have a First Alert battery powered unit on our boat and it will go off if I idle the boat at the slip for a few minutes with little to no wind. I don't understand the need for more than one unit in a boat cabin, it's not that large an area. Think about it, how many units do you have in your house? And the volume of a home is vastly greater than the volume of even a spacious boat. Now if you have a big boat with multiple cabins separated by bulkheads, then yes I can see the need for more than one but most cruisers these days are like a cave.
Click to expand...

Since it's a state law and Minnesota's marine environment is all fresh water, and mostly smaller lakes and rivers, I think they could have relaxed the standard from AYBC compliance to allow mere UL2034 CO detection standards, which would allow for the use of home battery powered units.

This would support the intent of the law and gain greater compliance. I predict now the law will be ignored because of the cost of compliance to individual boaters, with the possible exception of more modern boats which merely need upgrading of existing CO detectors (expired, etc). Because of our shorter boating season and fresh water, there are a lot of older cruisers around here and a lot of these won't magically become compliant unless there is draconian enforcement.

I also wonder if there will be a run on CO detectors, with new units meeting the standard unobtainable.
 
66pony said:
I was able to get a new one for a reasonable price. Kind of a no brainer to when you think about safety.
http://www.boatstore.com/catalogsearch/result/?q=Fireboy-Xintex+cmd
Click to expand...

Did you get one of the apparently new Xintex-Fireboy CMD5 battery operated models? This must have been what the marina guy mentioned. These don't look widely available and even Xintex-Fireboy doesn't show them on their web site.

My 310 is already hardwired for a CO detector, I just need to see if its expired or not. I agree that CO detectors are a no brainer, and I had planned to add some home battery models anyway in addition to the Sea Ray OEM one installed already.
 
Last edited:
i got a wired one as it is a snap in replacement for my existing one.
If you look at the law, they state that the detector must be manufactured after 2012. (Less than 5 yrs old).
I chose hard wired so it will run off my battery and shut my generator down if needed. As far a bathroom goes that should not need one as that is not a living quarters, for most of us anyway.
 
Last edited:
I replaced all 3 of mine last year and added 2 battery ones with digital readouts of the CO level. We sometimes sleep on the hook with the generator (gas) running and I'm ultra cautious about monitoring the fumes.
 
Replacing all 3 of ours now.. About $200 each, we also will stay out with the genset on all night. $600 is cheap. My CO detectors will never be out of compliance.
 
I don't have a generator - what model CO Detector should I be getting? Current one is hardwired - and likely original.
 
West Marine in Minnetonka has them on the shelf with a 2017 date. That's where I picked mine up.
 
West Marine was sold out, I ordered off eBay - they said they are new units with current manf. dates on them... CMD5-MD-R
 
trdehmer said:
West Marine was sold out, I ordered off eBay - they said they are new units with current manf. dates on them... CMD5-MD-R
Click to expand...

I must have lucked out when I got mine about a month ago. They had a few on the shelf back then - boating season has arrived in MN. :thumbsup:
 
The one I got online was a 2017 date also. also got it for less that 1 BOAT buck.
 
You guys sure take being told what to do by the nanny state government way better than I do. This law is an outrageous violation of reasonable rights as the only way to enforce it is to board the boat to confirm compliance. Are they claiming the right to enforce it on international vessels on Lake Superior, such as great loopers?

MM
 
MonacoMike said:
You guys sure take being told what to do by the nanny state government way better than I do. This law is an outrageous violation of reasonable rights as the only way to enforce it is to board the boat to confirm compliance. Are they claiming the right to enforce it on international vessels on Lake Superior, such as great loopers?

MM
Click to expand...

Good question Mike. On a smaller note, I wonder if every time I'm on the Mississippi or St. Croix River, if I'll be boarded?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,241
Messages
1,429,121
Members
61,123
Latest member
Tim Duncan
Back
Top