FPE a Code violation?

Status
Not open for further replies.

M_e_l_v_i_n

Member
Location
BC, CANADA
Does any jurisdiction and specifically NYC consider existing FPE or Zinsco panels that were installed legally to be a current code violation? I was told by an unreliable source that this was the case but I can not find any documentation to back this up and suspect they are confusing "our insurance won't cover it" with "code violation."
 
Last edited by a moderator:

tom baker

First Chief Moderator
Staff member
Does any jurisdiction and specifically NYC consider existing FPE or Zinsco panels that were installed legally to be a current code violation? I was told by an unreliable source that this was the case but I can not find any documentation to back this up and suspect they are confusing "our insurance won't cover it" with "code violation."

NEC would continue to allow a product installed per its listed to be continued to be use, I agree with your suspicion.
 

charlie b

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Lockport, IL
Occupation
Retired Electrical Engineer
I don't think ot would be a code violation to install a brand new FPE or Zinsco panel in a brand new residence (if by chance you happen to be able to get your hands on one). The NEC does not place restrictions on which manufacturer can, or cannot, supply equipment for a new installation. There may be an issue with getting a UL (or other lab's) sticker on the equipment. But the NEC does not explicitly require listing.

As to an existing installation, all I can do is invite your attention to Annex H, article 80.9, with a reminder that the Annex areas are not generally enforceable. I agree with your distinguishing "insurance won't cover it" from "code violation." Those are certainly different things, though either one could prevent someone from selling their house.

Welcome to the forum.
 

Dennis Alwon

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Chapel Hill, NC
Occupation
Retired Electrical Contractor
There may be a local amendment that wll not allow an addition from an existing FPE panel. That would be a real possibility but not an NEC violation.
 

renosteinke

Senior Member
Location
NE Arkansas
It seems that I was the only one who stayed awake in science class, when they defined 'science.' Or, more correctly, what was the 'scientific method.'

I bring this up because one of the keystones of 'science' was repeatable results of tests. The much-ballyhooed NY study that found fault with some 2-pole breakers was not repeatable- yet some insisted on applying its' conclusions across the board to anything ever made by FPE.

Say whatever you want about FPE; just don't call it anything but opinion.

Alas, the hysteria and misinformation is not limited to the 'home inspector' crowd. Some of this is the unfortunate practice of the insurance industry to deny the public of any facts as to their position, leaving us to guess.

I've recently obtained a 'claims manual' of exerpts from the ISO (a trade association for insurance carriers) standards regarding 'homeowners' insurance.' This material is simply fascinating.

The only specific 'electrical' specification I've found is a statement regarding anything but the least favorable types of policies: no knob and tube is allowed for the 'better' policies.

Otherwise, there is but a specification that the various utilities (plumbing, electric, etc.) have been upgraded somewhat recently to 'current code.' There's no direct stricture against fuses, or FPE panels, or anything else. It doesn't take a wormtongue to deduce that any FPE or Zinsco panel isn't "recent."

So what is "recent?" Well, 1999 seems to be the watershed year. I think that was when homes started requiring 100-amp services. Again, my information is incomplete.

The real key to understanding the insurance situation is to recognize that there are nearly a dozen types of policies sold as 'homeowners' policies. Not every insurance company offers every type. Nor is your agent likely to tell you in simple terms something like "We sell HO-4, you need an HO-2, and Joe down the street sells those." Nor is he likely to tell you that the type of insurance you're offered WILL be influenced by things that have nothing to do with the house itself.

Existing FPE panels continue to "meet code." There's no pressing need to replace them. Of all the problems you're likely to find in an older home, the brand of panel is probably the least significant.
 

stew

Senior Member
2 of my horror stories are from real life experience. Service call to check fire in wall of dryer area. Melted conductors and balls of copper all over in metal box. Heat from this shorted/grounded condition caused wall to catch fire and thank God the homeowner was home to put it out. My initial tic trace still showed power at the outlet and my suspicions were correct that this house had a Fpe panel. 30 amp 2 pole not tripped. Needless to say replaced panel next day. Second situation was a wall fire at the panel where bussing was melted and a hole the size of your fist thru the back of the panel due to arcing of the buss to the back of the panel. Buss found fused to the panel back. Main 200 amp breaker not tripped and none of the shorted 2 poles connected to shorted/melted circuits tripped either. Again fortunatley homowner was home at the time and fire dept able to save the house. Oh yea this was a FPE panel as well. I never leave a call at a place that has FPE or Zinsco Sylvania/Zinso without at least bringing up my concerns with the homeowner. I also always in writing reccommend replacement of these (IMHO) hazardous panels.Just to cover my backside!
 

coffeebean

Senior Member
Location
Mercer County NJ
I have a notice of a class action law suit dated February 7,2005 that informs me that FPE stab-lok circuit breakers manufactured between June 29,1971and July 1,1980 did not comply with UL Standards
 

jim dungar

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Wisconsin
Occupation
PE (Retired) - Power Systems
I have a notice of a class action law suit dated February 7,2005 that informs me that FPE stab-lok circuit breakers manufactured between June 29,1971and July 1,1980 did not comply with UL Standards
The UL Listing issue only affected a few circuit breaker, not the entire Stab-lok product line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top