Thread: Kentucky Home Inspectors and FPE panels

I just received this letter from the State Board of Home Inspectors in KY. Read it! It would be comical if it was not so serious. The bad thing is that other states might follow if we as home inspector do not take a stance on this subject.

FPE stands for Fire Producing Equipment!

Similar Threads:

• Without any guidelines for inspectors, how do you know your home ... - Nashua Telegra
• Critics say NH lags on regulating home inspectors - Foster's Daily Democrat
• From the old board, Sprayed Panels
• Regulate builders,inspectors of houses - Nashua Telegraph (subscription)
• Saving Money With Home Inspectors

Somebody peeved a Realtor.

Captain

This has "realtor lost a sale" all over it.

The sad thing is they realtor convinced some other jack-o-lantern that there was no proof "anywhere" (i.e.; documented evidence).

rr

Originally Posted by Mitchell Captain

Somebody peeved a Realtor.

Captain

Ya think!

I have already fired off a letter to the board. It will take some KY folks to get involved. My fear is that it might creep south to my area!

"There is no current documentation from any source that states the FPE panels and breakers are a hazard to life and property solely because of the name of the manufacturer. To assume so without current documentation is incorrect and irresponsible."

Wait a minute, isn't that just what Wright VM Malta stated in their findings? Just because the CPSC stopped short of condemning all FPE, does not mean that the test results were invalid. Of course, the documentation is not actually "current".

Can someone link CSPC information on these panels, if any?

"If a visual inspection of the interior of the panel or breakers indicates arcing or extreme heat then the licensed home inspector should most certainly recommend further evaluation by a Kentucky licensed
electrician."

Does this mean that this is the only time you can recommend an electrician when you come across an FPE or does it mean that you need to tell your client that when their panel (and maybe their house) catches fire you will then be able to warn them about the FPE?

"To assume all FPE devices are unsafe and a fire hazard without current evaluation by a Kentucky licensed electrician is not within the scope of a home inspection."

I don't know about you guys, but I try not to assume anything on my inspections, which includes not assuming that a product believed to be defective by many reputable professionals won't fail just because it hasn't yet. Not to mention problems in the panel that might not be evident in a visual only inspection.

Somebody needs to send whoever wrote that letter some info on these panels other than the CPSC statements. The CPSC are not the only definitive voice in this issue.

Eic

Originally Posted by Eric Shuman

Somebody needs to send whoever wrote that letter some info on these panels other than the CPSC statements. The CPSC are not the only definitive voice in this issue.Eic

I'm sure it's not the only source.
Do insurance companies have any issues with FPE panels?

Here is what our gov says.

Commission Closes Investigation Of FPE Circuit Breakers And Provides Safety Information For Consumers

I think grease, payola maybe?

There is no current documentation from any source that states the FPE panels and breakers are a
hazard to life and property solely because of the name of the manufacturer. To assume so without
current documentation is incorrect and irresponsible.

More info but this is not DATA:
Federal Pacific Electric FPE Circuit Breakers and Electrical Panels Stab-Lok Testing Update J Aronstein Stablok Stab Lok Test Results as of May 2007 - see the PDF file cited here

Let me share an email I just received:

Re: Kentucky board statements, one by one…

There is no current documentation from any source that states the FPE panels and breakers are a

hazard to life and property solely because of the name of the manufacturer. To assume so without

current documentation is incorrect and irresponsible.

The first statement is incorrect. The findings of the New Jersey court, and of Dr. Aronstein, constitute ample “current documentation.” To assume the opposite, or deny the existence of such documentation, is incorrect and irresponsible.

To require or recommend the removal of FPE panels and breakers solely on the basis of the

manufacturer's name and without visual evidence of a specific hazard is irresponsible and could

cause the homeowner undue financial hardship.

I guess it depends how they define “the homeowner.” If they mean the one moving out, perhaps such a shield would be in their financial interest. If they mean the one moving in, the opposite is true, both in terms of the cost liability and the safety hazard they are being forced to accept.

If a visual inspection of the interior of the panel or breakers indicates arcing or extreme heat then

the licensed home inspector should most certainly recommend further evaluation by a Kentucky

licensed electrician.

Quite often the only place where arcing is visible is behind the breakers, on the bus stabs or sockets, and to see this one must remove the breakers. I can’t imagine they want inspectors to do that.

The Kentucky licensed electrician is the only authority to determine the appropriate action.

We would need to look at the licensing law for Kentucky electricians. I’m going to be very surprised if it says they are the only ones with authority to interpret the existence of a hazardous condition. Aside from the fox and henhouse issues, I would not be amused to read such a sentence if I were a fireman or the municipal inspector.

To assume all FPE devices are unsafe and a fire hazard without current evaluation by a Kentucky

licensed electrician is not within the scope of a home inspection.

As the problem with FPE was in part due to the well-documented and admitted fraud in the laboratory testing of the devices, the home inspector licensing board is now asking the electricians in Kentucky to assume the role of a testing laboratory, such as UL, based solely on visual examination. From the electrician’s standpoint, that’s just not possible.

ALL KENTUCKY HOME INSPECTOR LICENSEES SHALL REVIEW THEIR INSPECTION

REPORTS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THIS ADVISORY BULLETIN.

Well, if I was inspecting in Kentucky, and I ran across an FPE panel, I would inspect it like I do any other (excepting for not taking the cover off panels with “E” breakers jammed into “F” slots) and I would hand my client the New Jersey Supreme Court ruling, the free download article from the Code Check web site, and a copy of the Kentucky home inspector licensing board position paper. For a little icing on the cake, perhaps Aronstein’s later testing (20 years after the testing for Wright-Malta and the CPSC) where the failure rates went up dramatically with age. In other words, there is a way around this, and it doesn’t reflect well on the consumer-protection role of that board.



Douglas Hansen

How about, As a Personal Safety issue Electrical Panel containing FRE was not Inspected
as these breakers have a History of dislodging and Energizing the panel cabinet.

Originally Posted by Michael Larson

I'm sure it's not the only source.
Do insurance companies have any issues with FPE panels?

Yes, some do.

Allstate, Farmers and USAA. They have a question on their application about FPE and Zinsco panels. Also I think the IRC form ask if a home has an FPE panel.

Here is my take on two cover-their-butts-parts of that letter.

"To require or recommend the removal of FPE panels and breakers solely on the basis of the manufacturer's name and without visual evidence of a specific hazard is irresponsible and could cause the homeowner undue financial hardship."

First, "solely on the basis of the manufacturer's name" - recommending replacement is not based "solely on" that, it is based on that name being tied to panels which are tied to the other information posted regarding their failures and problems, thus, that statement is easy to get around ... writing it up *IS NOT* based "solely on" the name.

Second, "without visual evidence of a specific hazard" - recommending replacement because the breakers jump out at you when the cover is removed represents a "specific hazard". As do all the other things which go along with FPE panels and breakers. Thus, again, that statement is easy to get around ... writing it up is not based on the lack of visible evidence.

"If a visual inspection of the interior of the panel or breakers indicates arcing or extreme heat then the licensed home inspector should most certainly recommend further evaluation by a Kentucky licensed electrician."

Along with the other items I listed above, add the evidence of arcing and extreme heat and recommend having a Kentucky licensed electrician evaluate the FPE panel *ON THEIR WORKBENCH* where it can be dis-assembled.

Now, I don't know how that Kentucky licensed electrician is going to keep power on the house while they dissect that FPE panel on their workbench without first also installing a new panel.

An HOA in the near North Dallas area (I think Highland Park or close by) put out a letter to all current homeowners this past Spring advising them that if their home still had FPE panels installed and they were planning on selling the home ... the FPE panels had to be replaced "before" they could list the home for sale.

I'll reach out and see if I can get a copy of the notice.

Rich, Rick, Jim, Barry & other DFW-area HI's ... do you have a copy?

Kudos for Kentucky!

Despite sundry internet hysteria, Kentucky is absolutely correct - on two counts.

The first regards FPE. Not only did the IAEI -the Electrical Inspectors' trade group- publish along these same lines just a few years back .... the exact same breakers and panels continue, to this day, to pass UL testing. (That the vendor choses to restrict his business to Canada is another matter entirely).
The CPSC studies, for whatever value they might have, managed to find fault with only some 2 pole breakers; the single pole breakers worked fine.

The second count ..... one which was recently discussed at IN ... regards the professional competence of Home Inspectors. "Work" does not require the use of tools. Looking at, examining, inspecting .... then offering an opinion IS 'work.' The only parties deemed, by law, to have the competence are those holding electrical licenses.

That's not to confuse 'safety' with 'quality.' Just as a Yugo had too meet the exact same minimal standards as a BMW .... FPE also met the same standards as everyone else. Yet, no one would ever argue that a Yugo was 'the same' or 'as good as' a Beemer.

Driving a Yugo might be a sin to some - but it's not a crime. Nor is the mere presence of FPE equipment a problem. The presence might suggest problems, related to both the age and economy of the building - but the panel is not the problem.

John,

How about filling out your User CP?

Where are you from?

What do you DO?

Thanks,

Added: If We are talking about MY SAFETY/ verses quality I am the JUDGE not you/politician, state,broker or off site Electrician.

Originally Posted by John Steinke

Kudos for Kentucky!

Despite sundry internet hysteria, Kentucky is absolutely correct - on two counts.

The first regards FPE. Not only did the IAEI -the Electrical Inspectors' trade group- publish along these same lines just a few years back .... the exact same breakers and panels continue, to this day, to pass UL testing. (That the vendor choses to restrict his business to Canada is another matter entirely).
The CPSC studies, for whatever value they might have, managed to find fault with only some 2 pole breakers; the single pole breakers worked fine.

The second count ..... one which was recently discussed at IN ... regards the professional competence of Home Inspectors. "Work" does not require the use of tools. Looking at, examining, inspecting .... then offering an opinion IS 'work.' The only parties deemed, by law, to have the competence are those holding electrical licenses.

That's not to confuse 'safety' with 'quality.' Just as a Yugo had too meet the exact same minimal standards as a BMW .... FPE also met the same standards as everyone else. Yet, no one would ever argue that a Yugo was 'the same' or 'as good as' a Beemer.

Driving a Yugo might be a sin to some - but it's not a crime. Nor is the mere presence of FPE equipment a problem. The presence might suggest problems, related to both the age and economy of the building - but the panel is not the problem.

So John,

Are you saying that FPE Stab-Loc breakers and FPE panels do not have any problems associated with their design? I just want to understand where you are coming from.

What about ZINSCO panels? Personally I have more of a problem with the design of ZINSCO and their friction attachment to the aluminum buss bars

I know that you have a tendency to like things as they are and to not rock the boat, so to speak. This is from a thread on Inspection News about K&T wiring and your response.

John Steinke
Member


Posts: 190
From:Reno, Nv.
Registered: Jul 2003

Sponsors keep
InspectionNews.com FREE.
Have you clicked on a
banner ad today?

If you don't click,
who will?
posted March 16, 2007 06:19 PM


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This forum has been over the issue many times, and this time is not likely to change anyone's opinions one bit.

The fact remains that the NEC allows the continued use of K&T wiring. You are even allowed to continue existing circuits with this method. K&T, by itself, is not bad, defective, unsafe, or have anything wrong with it.

That said....

K&T is very likely to have other issues. When you see K&T wiring, it is these other issues that need to be explored, and possibly called out.

The first few are matters of maintenance. Insulation is likely little more than dust near light fixtures, as the result of over-lamping. There is likely a fusebox, which is likely to be over-fused. The wires are likely buried in insulation. Wires may have been damaged if the attic was used for storage.

The next area to examine is one of "improvements." New receptacles and circuits are likely to have been added, as the place was remodeled over the years. These efforts often result in the incorrect joining of different wiring methods, and 'double lugging' at the fuse box. Two prong receptacles are likely to have been replaced with three prong ones.

The final area of concern is the way our needs have changed over time. The original kitchen may have had but one receptacle (mine does). This is certainly not enough for a modern kitchen. The bath may not have any receptacles at all. And so on...
Again, if the place has been remodeled, it is not likely that the electrical was properly updated.

These are things to look for, and report. Simply stating "K&T is bad" is neither correct, nor likely to impress anyone.

There are many other issues associated with older homes; it's better to focus on those issues, and not simply assume that }old" = "bad."

Here's my take on FPE panels:

In the past two years, I have found overheated wires with melted insulation on three FPE panels with Stab-lok breakers.

In this same time period, I have found no overheated wires in any other panels made by other manufacturers. And I only see ten or so FPE panels a year, while I see more than 400 panels each year made from other manufacturers.

I always recommend replacement.

"To assume all FPE devices are unsafe and a fire hazard without current evaluation by a Kentucky licensed electrician is not within the scope of a home inspection."
and I would add in my report, "recommend a current evaluation of this FPE panel by a Kentucky licensed electrician as per KSBHI determination. "
I think that about covers it. The Kentucky State Board of Home Inspectors in KY itself recommends the panel be evaluated by an electrician,,,,and so do I.
At that point, your client can make a determination for themselves; simple.

John
And what to you say about this. http://bradfeldt.com/LandAm/Document...s%20action.pdf

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

So John,

Are you saying that FPE Stab-Loc breakers and FPE panels do not have any problems associated with their design? I just want to understand where you are coming from.

What about ZINSCO panels? Personally I have more of a problem with the design of ZINSCO and their friction attachment to the aluminum buss bars

I know that you have a tendency to like things as they are and to not rock the boat, so to speak. This is from a thread on Inspection News about K&T wiring and your response.

Scott,

Not only is John (based on his posts here) a "professional electrician" but he likes to leave things as they are unless they are currently on fire when he sees them, regardless how close they are to being on fire when he sees them.

Oh, and he never fails to remind us that HIs don't know crap about anything, much less "electricity" and that as HIs we should not make any decisions, we should, for electrical, call in people like himself - so they can let the place burn down - recommending repair only when they see the fire.

Regardless of who reports Zinsco & FPE panels as safe/unsafe I pity the inspector who fails to recommend further evaluation by a state licensed electrical contractor when they happen to run into one those culprits during the course of their inspections.
All of the EWs out there know that that sort of failure will at the very least destroy the inspector's credibility in the eyes of the court and/or arbitrator that will be deciding the amount of their culpability.

A very good article written by Douglas Hansen, entitled "FPE Panels Hazard or Hype?"

By the way... I absolutely agree with J-Mc. I would not want to be on the recieveing end of that law suit.

Richard

Great article Richard.

Maybe its just me but I'm starting to see a trend in several states where home inspectors are being told not to report certain items (FPE Panels) or recommend any safety upgrades (GFCI's for whirlpools). The next legislative year will begin in January and I believe we will see more attempts at controlling what home inspectors can say and inspect. Look for a push for "standardized" home inspection reports that will be pushed by the Realtors and homebuilders. These "standardized" home inspection report will not come from home inspectors and will leave many items out. Kentucky tried to have a "standardized" home inspection report 10 years ago. I received a copy. It was the size of a large index card and had check boxes (i.e. heating system - working - not working).

Originally Posted by Donald Merritt

Kentucky tried to have a "standardized" home inspection report 10 years ago. I received a copy. It was the size of a large index card and had check boxes (i.e. heating system - working - not working).

Then it is up to the HI to define "working" and "not working", unless that is also defined in the law, and, if so defined, then that definition would have to be massive to cover all conditions ... meaning I doubt it will be anything other than:
'working - operating, and installed, in the manner and/or for the purpose for which it was designed and intended'

'not working - not operating, and installed, in the manner and/or for the purpose for which it was designed and intended'

Which would put it right back into the HI's lap to define it in the critical way ... i.e., if it is 'rusted' ... and it was not designed or intended to be 'rusted' ... then it is 'not working'.

Years ago in South Florida that debate went on and I began using the term 'not working or installed in the manner and/or for the purpose it was intended'. After a few years of real estate agents trying to beat that around the bush, they thought they solved the problem by writing in the contracts that it must be 'working - in the manner and for the purpose it was designed and intended' ... meaning I has been right all along and now it was in the contract, the agents could not argue about it anymore (they thought they were 'fixing' the contract to exclude most 'not working because' cases but instead made it work better for the HI to say 'not working as designed or intended' and the contract was word the same, so it was included in the contract as a 'covered item'.

Mitchell,

You're document is merely a notice that some lawyers are suing someone. As anyone can sue anyone at any time, such notices mean little.

However, heres a link to:

FPE Class Action Lawsuit Results - 2002:

which holds a little bit more weight.



As for John's IAEI magazine article, well, wasn't it written by some "unidentified FPE consultant". Getting published in such a magazine is usually a big deal and the author wants the appropriate credit, but not this one. Hmm.


A refutation to that "unidentified consultant" was published by Dan Friedman (if you don't know who he is, you should) but the IAEI refused to publish it. Makes you wonder about a magazine that'll publish "unidentified consultants" but won't publish a nationally recognized person.

You'll have to scroll a bit down the page, because it doesn't link directy but it's there.

Federal Pacific Electric FPE Stab-Lok Panel Circuit Breaker Hazard, Repairs, Electrical Panel Replacement Electricians Directory for Stab-Lok Repairs


And the CPSC study carefully read yields a little different result than you state:

A Summary of the Federal Pacific Electric FPE Stab-Lok Panel Circuit Breaker Hazard, - FPE Repairs, Electrical Panel Replacement Electricians Directory for Stab-Lok Repairs


We'll see how it all plays out.

From several years ago.

And it only gets better! this was sent to me by a NACHI member, it is a response by Mr. Green on the NACHI board. Mr. Green sits on the KY Board. He brings up the point that he and the other members are paid only $35 per meeting. Well, they understood this when they volunteered and were appointed to this board. I did when I served on the MS State Board of Home Inspectors, and we only got $25 and that was taxable under state law! Most folks do this type of work for either themselves or to better the profession and not for the money.

I do not know the folks on the board, I have met Ralph only a couple of times for a few minutes and that is the extent of my involvement with the board. But I have had many years of experience serving on a true home inspector regulatory board and I do understand how they work and the influences that other outside groups can have on the decisions that are made.

12/8/07, 7:13 PM
D. Michael Green
InspectorUSA, Inc.
NACHI Member
User Name: dgreen1
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 45

Re: Attention Kentucky Licensed Home Inspectors:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Erby

Although we spoke the other night I did want to go ahead and address your question as well as try and put this subject to bed. I will say that I appreciate the professionalism of most of the people on this message board. Here there has been plenty of spirited discussion on an important matter. This compared to TIJ where all they want to do is throw insults and call the Board members names. Just so everyone knows, the members of the Kentucky Board of Home Inspectors are paid $35 per meeting...that is $35 for each day we meet. All the members basically volunteer their time to try and make the profession better here in Kentucky. They are all hardworking people who care about the consumer on all sides of the transaction. The Board is not controlled by the Realtors as has been suggested to the contrary it is extremely independent and bows to no one when they feel they are right.

Now lets look at the Bulletin and see what it really says....and how it will be enforced.


There is no current documentation from any source that states the FPE panels and breakers are a hazard to life and property solely because of the name of the manufacturer. To assume so without current documentation is incorrect and irresponsible.

To require or recommend the removal of FPE panels and breakers solely on the basis of the manufacturer's name and without visual evidence of a specific hazard is irresponsible and could cause the homeowner undue financial hardship.

If a visual inspection of the interior of the panel or breakers indicates arcing or extreme heat then the licensed home inspector should most certainly recommend further evaluation by a Kentucky licensed electrician.

The Kentucky licensed electrician is the only authority to determine the appropriate action.

This means that the home inspector needs to actually remove the panel and inspect the interior of the panel as is required by ALL STANDARDS OF PRACTICE! Kentucky State Law requires home inspectors to report ACTUAL DEFECTS not defects that may exist even though there is no evidence of them. To report something as defective where there is no evidence of such could be considered a false and misleading representation regarding the true condition of that system which is a violation of the Home Inspectors Standard of Conduct.

It is the intention of the Bulletin to inform Kentucky Licensed Home Inspectors that they are expected to follow the approved Standards of Practice when inspecting FPE panels not just walk up and recommend removal based solely on the nameplate without even removing the panel and inspecting them. Also State Law allows only Licensed Electricians to diagnose problems and repairs to electrical components. A home inspectors license does not provide the authority to call for replacement of the panel only to recommend further evaluation and repair as needed by a qualified Licensed Electrician.

It should be understood that nothing in the Bulletin prohibits an Inspector from providing information concerning the history of problems with any system including FPE panels. But the inspector may not call out a panel as defective that shows no evidence of problems nor call for replacement of a panel whether defects are present or not. Doing so would be a violation of 815 KAR 6:030 Home Inspectors Standard of Conduct,Sections 3,4, and 10(a) (See Below) and WILL SUBJECT THE LICENSED HOME INSPECTOR TO SANCTION BY THE BOARD!

Section 2. Additional Standards. In addition to the affirmative duties imposed by Section 1 of this administrative regulation, a licensed home inspector or an entity under which the licensee conducts business, shall not:

(3) Provide a home inspection to the client that does not conform to the Standards of Practice selected on the initial application for licensure or the application for renewal submitted pursuant to 815 KAR 6:010;

(4) Provide services that constitute the unauthorized practice of any profession that requires a special license if the home inspector does not hold that license;

(10) Make a false or misleading representation regarding:
(a) The condition of a residential dwelling for which the licensee has performed or contracted to perform a home inspection;


The purpose of the Bulletin is to give Kentucky Licensed Home Inspectors fair notice of the position of the Kentucky Board of Home Inspectors on this matter and it’s intention to take action to enforce State Regulations concerning it if necessary.
--
D. Michael Green
KY Licensed Home Inspector # HI-2003
1-877-INSPECT-InspectorUSA, Inc.
Chairman, Compliance Review Committee -KY Board of Home Inspectors

(4) Provide services that constitute the unauthorized practice of any profession that requires a special license if the home inspector does not hold that license.


So if you see a PIG with lipstick( But are not a Licensed Hair Twirler ) Don't call it a PIG.

I have always written up FPE panels as follows: "Pacific (FPE) Stab-Lok™ service entrance panel. FPE breakers have a reputation among electricians of not tripping when needed causing electrical fires other problems in the panels. A class action lawsuit against Federal-Pacific and several previous owners of the brand is pending. I consider this panel to be potentially hazardous and strongly recommend that it be replaced at the earliest opportunity".

It appears that the HI's in Kentucky can no longer use this language in their reports. How are they to tell their client the history of these panels with out going against the licensing board?

Before the Kentucky Board of Home Inspectors made it's ruling I would say that "Pacific (FPE) Stab-Lok™ service entrance panel. FPE breakers have a reputation among electricians of not tripping when needed causing electrical fires other problems in the panels. A class action lawsuit against Federal-Pacific and several previous owners of the brand is pending. I consider this panel to be potentially hazardous and strongly recommend that it be replaced at the earliest opportunity".
Now because of their ruling I can only tell you to contact an electrician for determination on the panel. You should hire an electrician familiar with FPE panels.

To paraphrase Mitchell:

I used to be able to tell you that FPE breakers were know for their use at making circuits into arc welders as they are know for not tripping and burning things down, and that the panel design is such that the breakers do not make good contact with the bus bar and would jump out into your face instead of staying plugged into the bus bar when you removed the cover ... I also used to be allowed to tell you that you really need to replace that FPE panel ... HOWEVER ... the Kentucky Home Inspectors Board says I am not allowed to tell you those thing anymore, so I'm not ... now you must now pay more money to have a Kentucky Licensed Electrician tell you that, ... so, ... this is all I am allowed to tell you now - find an electrical contractor familiar with the problems with FPE breakers and panels and have that electrician tell you that you really need to replace the FPE panel.

There is one part of the Kentucky HI standard that I agree with...

That is, that the HI can no longer just walk-up to the panel, look at it, walk-away while writing down FPE-replace.

I really don't see how anyone can say they performed an electrical inspection without taking the cover off and determining if there are any imminent hazards. Now, some may say the fact that it is a FPE makes it alright to just walk away from it without taking the cover off.

B.S.-- you could save the life of the folks living there now.

Rich

Originally Posted by Richard Rushing

There is one part of the Kentucky HI standard that I agree with...

That is, that the HI can no longer just walk-up to the panel, look at it, walk-away while writing down FPE-replace.

I really don't see how anyone can say they performed an electrical inspection without taking the cover off and determining if there are any imminent hazards.

Rich,

Either you are I are missing the point here.

The Kentucky standards DO NOT ALLOW the HI to recommend replacing the FPE panel EVEN THOUGH there are imminent hazards there - the HI is only allowed to point out *the defects which are visible*, and, short of finding a burned up panel, in panels other than FPE those would be 'repairable' item, but in an FPE, there is no need to 'repair' those items, the need is to 'replace' the panel, and the Kentucky HI is not allowed to recommend replacing the FPE panel based on imminent hazards, or any hazards - the HI may only recommend it be evaluated by a Kentucky licensed electrician - say, one who thinks like John S. who posts here from another state beside Kentucky - but there are other like him, who think like Tony Mount does, that anything above absolute minimum is not only *not required* but is *not to be done*.

The whole joke here is that the Kentucky HI is not allowed to recommend replacing the panel ... period.

No one is talking about 'not' taking the cover off. We all (the majority of HIs) recognize that FPE panel should be replaced ... regardless ... regardless of what "is" or *IS NOT* found inside it.

Except that ... in Kentucky ... the HI is not allowed to do that.

I know some here support licensing by the state. BTW-I am in a licensed/regulated state.

But the Kentucky situation may arise in any state that regulates home inspectors.

Licensing may have some benefits.
But with these benefits also comes the potential for harm.

Good luck to us all.

I just found this over on the NACHI Electrical board. It is a reply to a question that was directed to Michael Green. Michael Green serves on the KY board.
This is how Michael is going to report an FPE.

Sounds like Michael is trying his best to get the point across about FPE panels and Stab-Loc breakers.

D. Michael Green
InspectorUSA, Inc.
NACHI Member
User Name: dgreen1
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 52

Re: Attention Kentucky Licensed Home Inspectors:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tracey,

I'm sorry I just saw your post this morning... Here is the statement that I use concerning FPE panels. This is in conjuction with the actual rating of either Acceptable if no visible problems are observed or Evaluate/Repair if problems are observed.

House is equipped with a Federal Pacific Electric (FPE) main service/sub panel. There are reports questioning the safety of these panels and its Stab Lok circuit breakers, in some cases breakers have failed to shut off or trip in response to an overload resulting in arching inside the panel box. Because it is sometimes difficult for this condition to be identified during a visual non-technical inspection, it is recommended that client consider having panel evaluated by a qualified licensed electrician. For additional information please visit Federal Pacific Electric FPE Stab-Lok Panel Circuit Breaker Hazard, Repairs, Electrical Panel Replacement Electricians Directory for Stab-Lok Repairs.

I hope this helps...
--
D. Michael Green
KY Licensed Home Inspector # HI-2003
1-877-INSPECT-InspectorUSA, Inc.
Chairman, Compliance Review Committee -KY Board of Home Inspectors

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by dgreen1 : 12/10/07 at 7:28 AM.

Originally Posted by Richard Rushing

There is one part of the Kentucky HI standard that I agree with...

That is, that the HI can no longer just walk-up to the panel, look at it, walk-away while writing down FPE-replace.

I really don't see how anyone can say they performed an electrical inspection without taking the cover off and determining if there are any imminent hazards. Now, some may say the fact that it is a FPE makes it alright to just walk away from it without taking the cover off.

B.S.-- you could save the life of the folks living there now.

Rich

In this area of PA, an Electrician would point out the fact the Panel is Federal Pacific.

He would then go on to suggest that the Home Owner should contact the Home Inspector to Pay the Replacement Cost due to being deficient in not reporting that the Panel was in need of Replacement.

I guess the ruling in Kentucky will also be sent to all Electricians in that State letting them know as well that Stab-Lok Panels are NO Longer Deficient unless found to be Ablaze.

Jerry,

I'm not missing a thing...

I think it is irresponsible for people to NOT open the cover of *ANY* panel, irrespective of what brand it is. I have read several times that folks will not even open the panel cover *just* because it is an FPE. That would certainly fall under the payment plan of your E&O insurance (O-- meaning omission).

I have never agreed with the few who will not take a panel cover off and inspect for defects based solely on the name of the panel. It is my opinion that we are paid to tell the client what the present condition of the home is-- yes that includes identifying the type and previous history of/with this type of panel. But, also... the HI should tell the buyers (and sellers) if there is an issue in the panel the represents an *immediate* and *imminent* fire hazard if visible and accessible.

Now, there are many FPE panels out there that are immediate and imminent fire hazards which require immediate action. I think that the Kentucky HI standard is not right and I do not agree with what they have done. However, I do agree with them in requiring the inspectors to remove the cover and report what they see and (get this) actually perform an inspection in lieu of seeing what brand it is and then walking off *without* removing the cover.

Do FPE panels need to have the breakers removed and the buss bars examined by an electrician-- Yes... but, that does not mean that the inspector should not open the panel and report (as he/she is being paid to do) the *VISIBLE* conditions present. Failing to do so, is *NOT* following most states standards of practice.

If you follow your standards requirements, you can still be wrong in your assessment (if you are incompetent). But, failing to follow your standards of practice makes you wrong every time.

It's not hard to figure out what the minimum requirements are in Kentucky;

• Perform a visual inspection of the panel and report what is wrong (to your level of inspection).
• Report that; "FPE panels have a history of overheating and/or breaker related failures that are inherent to the breaker-to-buss-bar connections and or physical design."

Historical data should be researched by the buyer by going to and reading information regarding this type equipment.
Federal Pacific Electric FPE Stab-Lok Panel Circuit Breaker Hazard, Repairs, Electrical Panel Replacement Electricians Directory for Stab-Lok Repairs


I would add to my report (in KY): "Since we, as professional home inspectors, are now prohibited from recommending replacement of a panel based solely on it's name, I recommend that the homebuyer have a licensed and qualified electrician conduct a complete and invasive-type inspection, which requires removal of breakers to examine the condition of the contacts and buss bars, then upon the completion of the examination, the licensed and qualified electrician should make all appropriate repairs and or replacements in order to warranty the unit against a potential fire hazard. It is also my recommendation that this action be taken prior to the expiration of all buyer options."

Richard

This residence is equipped with an Federal Pacific (FPE) Stablok brand electrical main panel, sub panel or both. Although this panel does not visually appear to have any problems other than what may be noted in the electrical sections of this report, this brand of panel has been known to fail to provide the proper current protection when needed. The following are a couple of the problems associated with this panel: Circuit Breakers will not trip, circuit breakers become loose. Many fires have been linked to this brand of panel. A licensed electrician should be consulted for further inspection.
See this site for further info: Federal Pacific Electric FPE Panel/Breaker Failure Rates
Further evaluation by an electrical contractor is recommended.

I have been using the above verbage for several years. Works for me.

Edit: I stole that from someone - don't remember who.

Originally Posted by Joseph P. Hagarty

In this area of PA, an Electrician would point out the fact the Panel is Federal Pacific.

He would then go on to suggest that the Home Owner should contact the Home Inspector to Pay the Replacement Cost due to being deficient in not reporting that the Panel was in need of Replacement.

I guess the ruling in Kentucky will also be sent to all Electricians in that State letting them know as well that Stab-Lok Panels are NO Longer Deficient unless found to be Ablaze.

Joe, what I have found is that inevitably, there will be *SOME* electrical contractors who do-no/ will-not recommend replacement based soley on just the (FPE) name. I submit that those folks who do not recommend replacement are also one's who will not remove the breakers and then turn right-around and say, "Looks o.k. to me". That's why I would recommend removal of the breakers by a licensed and qualified electrician. The, (and only then) the licensed and qualified electrician should warranty against future failure.

It's obvious to me that the Kentucky HI committee has found just such an electrical contractor to advise them. Just plain goofy...

Rich

So, assuming you are a good HI and remove the FPE panel cover, and one of the Stablok breakers jumps out of the box and hits you in the face, are you allowed to then call it out as a possible hazard and recommend replacement? At least the replacement of the fallen breaker???
This actually happened to me a few months ago... darn thing almost hit me!

Yep... I've had'em fall out on me also!! Kinda makes you wanta change your britches afterwards.

Well, according to the good folks in the Commonwelth of Kentucky, they aren't going to be allow to recommend replacing the panel. Seems that short of a visual fire (rate of spread to be determined at a future date), No can do.

But I would highly advise some strong language to get the point across;
"SOB'in no-good fer nuttin slock-cucking panel attached my azz and danm near soiled my britches. While considering retribution with a friggin sledge hammer, I thought I'd give the home owner first crack at dismantling the MF with the first hit.

My recommendation is to disconnect all power and swing-away with a 10#pounder"
(or something to that effect).

RR

Originally Posted by Richard Rushing

Yep... I've had'em fall out on me also!! Kinda makes you wanta change your britches afterwards.

Well, according to the good folks in the Commonwelth of Kentucky, they aren't going to be allow to recommend replacing the panel. Seems that short of a visual fire (rate of spread to be determined at a future date), No can do.

But I would highly advise some strong language to get the point across;
"SOB'in no-good fer nuttin slock-cucking panel attached my azz and danm near soiled my britches. While considering retribution with a friggin sledge hammer, I thought I'd give the home owner first crack at dismantling the MF with the first hit.

My recommendation is to disconnect all power and swing-away with a 10#pounder"
(or something to that effect).

RR

Have you ever had Zinsco breakers slide down and off the buss bars! Talking about wishing you had pair of Depends on! I find more problems and burn marks on buss bars with Zinsco than with FPE.

An idea, ideal, or argument ought to be able to prevail on it's own merits. It ought not matter that the speaker is either Pope or pauper.

No one man can know everything, or be 'all wise.' That's why the opinions of more expert professionals are sought, especially if the experts sought have no iron in that particular fire.

Whenever possible, theory needs to be tested, both by experiment, and by comparison to reality.

Finally, one needs to separate personal bias, or religion, from objective fact. One also needs to recognize that everyone is subject to our laws and traditions. Ours is not a society where you get to make things up as you go along.

Despite all manner of assertions and web hysteria, the real experts in the matter have not found the FPE design to be inherently unsafe. That UL continues to list them (after passing the same tests as everyone else), and that the parent company of Square D continues to manufacture them, attests to this.
Is one breaker design better than another? That is clearly a matter of engineering opinion ... and one I am not qualified to make. As far as I'm concerned, if it's listed, it's legal.

Might I wish to do things differently? That is often the case. Yet, that does not mean everyone else is wrong. Or that other approaches are automatically bad.

I did note a few focused upon my comments regarding Knob & Tube wiring. What was left out of those references ...IIRC ... is that, in the very same thread, another poster produced opinions from the Ontario, Canada electrical authority that said almost exactly the same thing. While my view on that subject, as this one, may not be the sentiments of the mob, they're pretty close to the opinions of the responsible authorities.

Another matter needs to be addressed .... whether I have a poor opinion of home inspectors. I have no such view.
I do see personal bias, ignorance, and simple error sometimes expressed. It would be irresponsible for me not to speak up.
There are two major areas of ignorance that keep cropping up: technical ignorance, and political ignorance.

"Technical ignorance" is simply not knowing what you're looking at. It is commonly expressed as "I never saw this before, and it can't be right." Well, sometimes it is just a fine example of a different method.

"Political ignorance" is not understanding the context of our laws, and the way our system operates. We are a land of citizens, not appointed experts. Our focus has been upon restricting the role of government ... not grasping the passion of the day, to extend authority as far as possible.

It's not enough to say something is old, and must therefore be bad. One must also distinguish between the "classic" and the 'junker." An HI isn't hired to tell the customer that the painter used the wrong shade of beige; he's hired to discern whether someone tried to spackle over a cracked foundation.

An HI should always keep in mind what George Bernard Shaw said (albeit in a different context): It is far easier to be critical than correct.

I should probably elaborate... I never tell a client that a panel needs to be removed or replaced. FPE panels are very common in this area, and I haven't seen any Zinsco panels. Any time I see an FPE StabLok panel, I tell the client that this manufacturer has had a great deal of controversy and even though the panel may have given years of service, and may not have any problem now, they are prone to failure. I recommend they have a licensed electrician evaluate it.
And even though I've had a breaker fall out, I still remove the cover (though more carefully now!) and I look for any signs of failure. I agree that it is less than responsible to simply see the manufacturer's name and recommend replacement based solely on that. If nothing else, I might be able to alert the current homeowner to a dangerous situation if one is found...

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

Have you ever had Zinsco breakers slide down and off the buss bars! Talking about wishing you had pair of Depends on! I find more problems and burn marks on buss bars with Zinsco than with FPE.

Scott--
Noooooo.... never had one of those slide down the buss bar!!! Hope I never do, either!!

I have seen many, many of the Zinsco buss bars arch'ed and actually burned a section of the aluminum bar where a breaker had been removed. Some jack-arse simply pulled the old breaker and re-located it to another open slot (or so it would appear since all the breakers were present and in original condition). Yikes.

Rich

Originally Posted by Billy Stephens

Added: If We are talking about MY SAFETY/ verses quality I am the JUDGE not you/politician, state,broker or off site Electrician.

Originally Posted by Billy Stephens

How about, As a Personal Safety issue Electrical Panel containing FRE was not Inspected
as these breakers have a History of dislodging and Energizing the panel cabinet.

If the Roof is to Steep,Icy, Shot,--- Crawl Space wires laying on the ground, hazardous fumes,bunch of Bad ares Fire ants,--- Decks rotted,unsupported,--- Bathroom toilet,sink,tub full of weeks old feces,---Big ares Pack of Dogs in the yard,---Drunk Boy Friend in the Bedroom,ect.

No Go, You what another Inspector fine.


If your SOP says at least one window in a Room is required to be operated and the only
window in the room has the glass busted and hanging( Do you still bang on that Double Hung to make sure it's serviceable as an Emergency Method of Egress ? )

a Jpeg is worth more than legalese.....

Victor,

Looks like a case of "A Delayed act of Arson."

Fortunately SC DOES NOT prohibit me from telling my clients about FPE panels.

I have used this for quite a while for the Stab-loks with no visible defects. So far no one has threatened suit.

All electric panels present are Federal Pacific Electric panels. They are outdated and have some features no longer permitted by the National Electric Code. At today’s inspection there were no breakers loose at the buss bars and there was no visible evidence of arcing or heat fatigue as a result of breakers failing to trip when over heated. Be aware that no disasembly for inspection occured beyond removal of the cover panel.

Though no local authority will require changing the panels, for the safety of your occupants, I strongly urge that you do so. A plethora of information concerning FPE is available on the internet, YOU are encouraged to do further reading concerning these panels and the arguments for changing them. A licensed qualified electrician should be able to provide cost estimates for replacement of the panels or provide responsible documentation as to why they should remain in service.

I have noticed that the numbers of licensed electricians defending the continued use of FPE Stab-Locs have diminished markedly. I don't know if it's political ignorance or technical ignorance that is causing the change.

I especially like the way you got the word "plethora" in an inspection report!

Go Dallas Cowboys!

I thought the problem is associated with the FPE Stab Lock Breaker Panel and replacing this breaker will decrease the problem?

Originally Posted by Tim Connors

I thought the problem is associated with the FPE Stab Lock Breaker Panel and replacing this breaker will decrease the problem?

Tim,

The problems with FPE are many, with the two main problems being: a) the breakers are known to not trip when needed under overcurrent conditions; b) the 'stab' tab does not always make a good mechanical (or electrical) contact with the bus bar it is 'stabbed' into, thus allowing the breakers to fall out when the cover is removed.

The first issue a) can cause fires in the circuits from not tripping, the second issue b) can cause arcing and fires in the panel and can lead to shock when working on or inspecting the FPE panels.

There are many more issues with them, but those are the two greatest issues, thus, replacing the breakers with known good breakers would only solve one of those two issues, and not address any of the others at all.

Due to good luck and good fortune, the house we had in South Florida had a Zinsco panel, which I replaced, and the house up here has an FPE panel, which is on my list of things to replace. Yep ... I got to have both of them! Oh lucky me! I do know, however, that at least ONE of my FPE breakers will trip ... 'cause I've tripped it with my screwdriver replacing the kitchen receptacles when I gutted and re-did the kitchen (I know, I know, I'm supposed to turn the power off before working on it - my wife tells me that all the time - she says 'And your life in$urance is paid up ... right?').

On FPE and Zinsco panels, I report them as Panel is outdated and reported to be unsafe - have a licensed electrician further evaluate and make corrrections as needed. What is an average cost to upgrade, I've been told its under a $1,000.

I think it's time to listen- rather than run around screaming like you sat on a pin.

Contrary to the internet hysteria, the 'evidence' against GPE has always been week. Even the much-cited New York report only found fault with certain two-pole breakers.

Far more recent than that report was the article in the IAEI news, where FPE defended it product .... quite well in my opinion.

Most vindicating is the continuing success of the design in Canada, where it is made by an entirely different firm.

Some folks may not like the design, but that's a design opinion - not anything more.

So, what can be said about FPE panels? Pretty much the same that can be said for XO or Zinsco panels: that they haven't been made for a while, and you may not be able to find GFCI or AFCI breakers for them.

The real 'key' is the age of the equipment. Simply put, the older the house, the more likely that various attempts have been made to 'improve' things, and THAT is where you invariably find any manner of problems, far more serious than the brand of the panel.

When the UL / NFPA study of older homes came out, they found little 'wrong' with the old equipment itself. They did find plenty of stuff that was clearly not proper, even given the date of construction. These are the things you need to focus on.

Otherwise, look at that Ky letter todether with their previous letter: The State is again reminding you that HI's are just that, HI's, and are not qualified to do electrical work or make electrical judgements.

A two year old thread resurfaces.

Note that effective Nov. 10, 2009, all advisory bulletins issued by the Kentucky Board of Home Inpsectors have been rescinded.

Kentucky: Board of Home Inspectors - Advisory Bulletins

John, you may want to check out the source of the IAEI whitewash.



-

Holy cow this thread is old, looks like I got some reading to catch up on here!

-John
www.advancedhomeinspectionsllc.com

Not really.
Little has changed.

Two manufacturer's
Federal Pacific and Federal Pioneer.

FPE Stab-loc

InspectApedia.

Originally Posted by John Thomsen

Holy cow this thread is old, looks like I got some reading to catch up on here!

-John
www.advancedhomeinspectionsllc.com

Yep, you can do a lot reading and learning here. Best part is that it is FREE. No dues or fees of any king, the true meaning of free with membership to the forum.

Take some time and you will be amazed on the vast number of subjects that you will find.

Have fun..

Originally Posted by Nolan Kienitz

An HOA in the near North Dallas area (I think Highland Park or close by) put out a letter to all current homeowners this past Spring advising them that if their home still had FPE panels installed and they were planning on selling the home ... the FPE panels had to be replaced "before" they could list the home for sale.

I'll reach out and see if I can get a copy of the notice.

Rich, Rick, Jim, Barry & other DFW-area HI's ... do you have a copy?

hey Nolan when i ignore you this long you may want to call me...
sorry i had that info on another 'puter yrs ago that was scrapped & went to 1 of the grandmonsters
since then we've had at least 3 houses burn down in our hood
very evident by the absent roof burn pattern all fires started around garage installed fpe stab-lok panels...any pix i had were also on the above 'puter
another local FPE issue was addressed in the attached '10 news letter
WNA_Sample_News a.pdf

Originally Posted by John Thomsen

Holy cow this thread is old, looks like I got some reading to catch up on here!

-John
www.advancedhomeinspectionsllc.com

John-thanks for resurecting