FPE

[Epalmateer]

I have a buddy that inspects for a municipality, and he has to go out and do meter inpections. If a house has been out of power for 6 months or more, the service has to checked out to make sure it's safe to be energized. Hes thinking about going in front of city council and trying to get an ordinance in place making homeowners replace FPE equipment. What do you guys think?

 

[ActionDave]

What about all the other failed, dangerous, obsolete equipment out there that is still in service but doesn't have the mark of Cain status that FPE has? Some of that old Sq D stuff is worse but doesn't get the same buzz on the internet that FPE does.

 

[Epalmateer]

What about all the other failed, dangerous, obsolete equipment out there that is still in service but doesn't have the mark of Cain status that FPE has? Some of that old Sq D stuff is worse but doesn't get the same buzz on the internet that FPE does.

I'm definitely interested. I'm going to research

 

[Epalmateer]

What about all the other failed, dangerous, obsolete equipment out there that is still in service but doesn't have the mark of Cain status that FPE has? Some of that old Sq D stuff is worse but doesn't get the same buzz on the internet that FPE does.

I'm seeing a lot about the dangers of using classified breakers in square d panels. Do you have any references to anything I could read?

 

[jaggedben]

Making the homeowner replace the FPE if they are pulling a permit for related electrical work is within the realm of reasonable. Pre-emptively singling out FPE and forcing homeowners to replace them just because they are there is unnecessary and financially punitive. Let the insurance companies require that. For government it's overreach. There's probably also a lot of other old appliances and such in homes that the same logic applies to. It's like knob and tube, if they are opening the walls they should replace it, but if not they shouldn't have to open the walls.

 

[Hv&Lv]

I have a buddy that inspects for a municipality, and he has to go out and do meter inpections. If a house has been out of power for 6 months or more, the service has to checked out to make sure it's safe to be energized. Hes thinking about going in front of city council and trying to get an ordinance in place making homeowners replace FPE equipment. What do you guys think?

At what point do you stop?
Challenger panels, Zinsco, FPE, Sylvania, etc…
Do you simply say the panel needs to be less than 20 years old? 40 years old??

IMHO it’s a bad idea with good intentions.

 

[Epalmateer]

At what point do you stop?
Challenger panels, Zinsco, FPE, Sylvania, etc…
Do you simply say the panel needs to be less than 20 years old? 40 years old??

IMHO it’s a bad idea with good intentions.

Yea its a tough one. What if a house is out of power for 6 months or more requiring a meter inspection, and he lets it get turned back on with fpe equipment. 2 years later a breaker fails causing an electrical fire. Homeowner does their research and decides to sue the city because they allowed the power to be restored while knowing the risk of danger with fpe?

 

[Hv&Lv]

Yea its a tough one. What if a house is out of power for 6 months or more requiring a meter inspection, and he lets it get turned back on with fpe equipment. 2 years later a breaker fails causing an electrical fire. Homeowner does their research and decides to sue the city because they allowed the power to be restored while knowing the risk of danger with fpe?

But that risk doesn’t stop at FPE. You make a rule about FPE, but pass a challenger panel..
There are others out there also that have just as bad a reputation.
A fire could also start in A panel with brand new breakers.

 

[Epalmateer]

But that risk doesn’t stop at FPE. You make a rule about FPE, but pass a challenger panel..
There are others out there also that have just as bad a reputation.
A fire could also start in A panel with brand new breakers.

Yea. If you were in that position what would you do? How would you cover your bases in the case of a future lawsuit?

 

[ActionDave]

Yea. If you were in that position what would you do? How would you cover your bases in the case of a future lawsuit?

You don't accept the premise that FPE is any more dangerous than other electrical equipment just because it gets more hype.

 

[hbiss]

Homeowner does their research and decides to sue the city because they allowed the power to be restored while knowing the risk of danger with fpe?

He bought the house. He should have done due diligence, could of had an electrical inspection. Don't go blaming anybody else.

-Hal

 

[jaggedben]

What is the purpose of the city inspection after 6 months anyway? Electrical distribution equipment doesn't go bad from disuse. If the purpose of the inspection is for example to look for illegal utility side taps made to get free electricity then that should be the scope of the inspection. If lawsuits are the concern perhaps the city should write up a form to give to the homeowner that simply states what the inspection does and does not look for.

Like a lot of the electrical code, this seems like idle worry over a problem that will rarely if ever happen.

 

[paulengr]

I have a buddy that inspects for a municipality, and he has to go out and do meter inpections. If a house has been out of power for 6 months or more, the service has to checked out to make sure it's safe to be energized. Hes thinking about going in front of city council and trying to get an ordinance in place making homeowners replace FPE equipment. What do you guys think?

Just because it says FPE does not automatically mean it’s bad. UL only delisted the 15 and 20 A one pole breakers and there are retrofits. In addition with very rare exceptions electrical Codes have always taken a stance that you inspect based on the Code that applied at the time it was installed.

NFPA actually did a project where they sampled components and wiring from all over the country on 50+ year old houses and reported on it. What they found is that most of the issues did not meet Code at the time the work was done. Leaving that aside the worst problems weren’t so much breakers as old BX had some issues.

So I see this as a legal trap just begging for a bunch of law suits since there isn’t much legal ground to stand on.

 

[Epalmateer]

What is the purpose of the city inspection after 6 months anyway? Electrical distribution equipment doesn't go bad from disuse. If the purpose of the inspection is for example to look for illegal utility side taps made to get free electricity then that should be the scope of the inspection. If lawsuits are the concern perhaps the city should write up a form to give to the homeowner that simply states what the inspection does and does not look for.

Like a lot of the electrical code, this seems like idle worry over a problem that will rarely if ever happen.

It's a very sketchy area where people are constantly yanking all the wiring out of the house

 

[Epalmateer]

What is the purpose of the city inspection after 6 months anyway? Electrical distribution equipment doesn't go bad from disuse. If the purpose of the inspection is for example to look for illegal utility side taps made to get free electricity then that should be the scope of the inspection. If lawsuits are the concern perhaps the city should write up a form to give to the homeowner that simply states what the inspection does and does not look for.

Like a lot of the electrical code, this seems like idle worry over a problem that will rarely if ever happen.

Very good idea writing up a scope of inspection

 

[Tulsa Electrician]

I worked in an area that required an insp before power was restored. Their main items were GEC and a main breaker. They also would red flag any issues they could see with the service it's self and wiring inside the panel.
They would give the owner a red tag and require an licensed electrician make any correction with a permit. Than reinspect and release.

There goal was to have the service and panel in a safe condition. Prior to restoring the service.
Basically, no more 60 amp service to a residence, 100 amp minium per city requirements, no split bus used as service equipment and the meter equipment per power company requirements and an proper GEC and bonding.
Then the same for commerical.
There was time we simply unhooked all branch wireing. Installed a GFCI receptacle made sure service was good grounded/ bonded per code and a release would take place.
Than a separate permit could be pulled for any related work from there. This way we had power to structure to resolve any more issues.

I see no issue with them doing that as long as there fair across the board and have written rules so all knew what needed to be done.

We found insurance company's were stricter than code enforcement panel types. At the time if the FPE had a main. They had no issue with it. If not we sub feed it and treat it as a sub panel and make all necessary changes. Which most of the time it require four wire to range dryer etc. Which we pulled from new panel any way.

 

[Tulsa Electrician]

I would like to add that if the home owner requested a courtesy inspection. The city would do it for free.

 

[Epalmateer]

I worked in an area that required an insp before power was restored. Their main items were GEC and a main breaker. They also would red flag any issues they could see with the service it's self and wiring inside the panel.
They would give the owner a red tag and require an licensed electrician make any correction with a permit. Than reinspect and release.

There goal was to have the service and panel in a safe condition. Prior to restoring the service.
Basically, no more 60 amp service to a residence, 100 amp minium per city requirements, no split bus used as service equipment and the meter equipment per power company requirements and an proper GEC and bonding.
Then the same for commerical.
There was time we simply unhooked all branch wireing. Installed a GFCI receptacle made sure service was good grounded/ bonded per code and a release would take place.
Than a separate permit could be pulled for any related work from there. This way we had power to structure to resolve any more issues.

I see no issue with them doing that as long as there fair across the board and have written rules so all knew what needed to be done.

We found insurance company's were stricter than code enforcement panel types. At the time if the FPE had a main. They had no issue with it. If not we sub feed it and treat it as a sub panel and make all necessary changes. Which most of the time it require four wire to range dryer etc. Which we pulled from new panel any way.

Pretty much same thing here. Poco requires it.

 

[jeff48356]

I have a buddy that inspects for a municipality, and he has to go out and do meter inpections. If a house has been out of power for 6 months or more, the service has to checked out to make sure it's safe to be energized. Hes thinking about going in front of city council and trying to get an ordinance in place making homeowners replace FPE equipment. What do you guys think?

I'm ALL for that idea! Livonia already does just that on initial and annual rental inspections, as well as VABO properties. VABO is "Vacant or Abandoned Building Ordinance". It has been in effect since 2009. If a property is vacant for more than 28 days, and the building dept. becomes aware of it, then they will red-tag it. The owner or purchaser is then responsible for bringing everything up to Code, including electrical. If they see a dangerous or obsolete panel (FPE, Zinsco, Pushmatic, screw-in fuses, etc.), they will call for a service upgrade to be done by a licensed electrician. I've done many service upgrades under that ordinance.

 

[hillbilly1]

A few years ago the city of Conyers was going to retroactively inspect all buildings. That lead to a big uproar, so I think that idea got shelved!