https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/02/f8/final_report_nfpa.pdf said:
Appropriate PPE to be used for responding to fires involving EDV batteries:
a. Is current PPE appropriate with regard to respiratory and dermal exposure to vent gases and combustion products?
All tests were conducted using NFPA compliant turnout gear, helmet, boots, hoods, structural firefighting gloves, and full SCBA. No adverse conditions related to gear were observed by any of the firefighters who suppressed the fires. In addition, water and gas samples collected during testing did not include any compounds or gases that differed significantly from what is typically found in a conventional ICE vehicle fire. No projectiles or other explosion anomalies were observed. In two cases, due to an increase in the total volume of water to control the fire, the associated time was greater than what was available from a single SCBA cylinder. First responders should be prepared to either rotate suppression staff or have provisions to quickly change cylinders.
b. Is current PPE appropriate with regard to potential electric shock hazards?
An analysis of current and voltage measurements recorded at the discharge of the nozzle indicated no significant current or voltage readings in any of the tests. Based on the test data, full NFPA compliant PPE is appropriate during noninvasive suppression operations. However, tests were conducted with batteries placed in a VFT prop. Full-scale tests involving complete vehicle electrical distribution systems were not conducted and evaluated, nor were offensive firefighter tactics involving cutting, piercing, manipulating the vehicle for extraction purposes or to gain better access for suppression purposes.
c.What is the size of the hazard zone where full PPE, including respiratory protection, must be worn?
Based on the data collected, the hazard zone where full PPE, including respiratory protection must be worn was comparable to that of traditional ICE vehicle fires. The fire observed for tests that included the EDV battery as well as interior finishes/upholstery was more intense than the fire observed in the battery alone. Heat flux and temperature measurements recorded around the VFT indicate no data to support changing the 50-foot perimeter standard provided in the NHTSA Interim Guidance for Electric and Hybrid-Electric Vehicles Equipped with High Voltage Batteries