EPA watchdog issues second stinging report on the EPA’s wood heater program

The EPA’s Office of Inspector General found continued lack of enforcement of the EPA wood heater regulations, more than a year after its first major investigative report found similar issues. Unlike that in-depth report, this new report cites very specific details of instances where manufacturers and labs have violated EPA regulations.  It found that even when the EPA knew of significant violations, it did not take action to correct the problem.  

The wood heater manufacturing and test lab industry is a collegial community where members rarely publicly criticize other members, even when major violations of the EPA regulations are widely known. However, manufacturers often relay private complaints about their competitors to the EPA, putting the EPA on notice of a wealth of compliance issues.

“We call on EPA leadership to provide more resources toward the wood stove program and address systemic enforcement issues,” said John Ackerly, President of the Alliance for Green Heat. “Its also vital for the public to know that pellet stoves are not involved in much of this controversy and that many wood stove manufacturers make good products, follow the law and are being undercut by those who knowingly skirt regulations,” Mr. Ackerly said.

Over the last 15 years, the only entity that has consistently published specific instances of non-compliance is the Alliance for Green Heat (AGH) in its monthly newsletter, and on its website.  Like the EPA, AGH is often contacted by industry members who are troubled by the conduct of other members.  The OIG listed five instances of abuse that the EPA overlooked and failed to take sufficient action, but there are scores more.  For instance, the internet continues to be rife with the sale of uncertified wood heaters, including outdoor wood boilers, which the EPA has known about for years, and appears not to have done anything.

  

US Stove sold 4,321 stoves before they were certified

This week’s report from the OIG follows up on several high-profile cases that AGH has pressed the EPA to address, including widespread fraud at US Stove Company which the EPA has been silent on for 5 years. In that case, an employee of US Stove was outraged and blew the whistle on his company.  US Stove then sued the whistleblower, getting a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against him to shut him up, which the local Tennessee court said was “in the public interest.” 

 This week’s OIG report described how US Stove manufactured and sold 4,321 stoves before they were certified, and d859 of them were sold even before the test lab started testing the unit. Though the EPA had all of these details, it did lead to further action.

The stove in question was never officially recalled by the Consumer Product Safety Commission.  A list of wood and pellet stove recalls can be found here.

A second whistleblower came forward, providing extensive details of fraud to the EPA, imploring them to take action.  That person wrote: “To those of us who refused to cooperate with this fraud [at the US Stove Company], we had hoped that the EPA would step in, enforce its regulations, and thus provide some level of protection and dignity to whistleblowers. I expect US Stove may come after me, and possibly file a lawsuit against me, as they did with the first whistleblower. The company has dragged that man through the mud, and forced him to hire expensive lawyers, just because he was willing to stand up for EPA regulations.”

False advertising of efficiency

Another major issue that AGH has pursued over the years is false or misleading advertising of efficiency levels, often telling consumers that the unit is eligible for the IRS tax credit, which requires stoves to be 75% efficient, using the higher heating value (HHV). In one case, a test lab listed the stove at 70% efficient, but the manufacturer told consumers it was 75% efficient and eligible for the tax credit. The EPA sent the manufacturer a cease-and-desist request via email, which the manufacturer did not act upon.  The OIG report said the EPA could have revoked the certification of the stove but has not taken further action.  

 

False and misleading efficiency advertising was widespread up until 2021, when most manufacturers began to advertise the efficiency as reported by test lab, and listed in the EPA database of certified stoves. US Stove continued to falsely represent some of its units and declined to comment on the record. Stove Builder International, a large Canadian manufacturer insists that various interpretations of efficiency were acceptable until and unless the IRS defined “efficiency” more clearly. For example, some experts argue that if a stove reaches 75% efficiency on any official test burn, it can qualify even if the average efficiency of all four burns is less than 75%.

 

While the OIG vigorously raises the issue of false advertising of stove efficiencies, it is far from clear whether OECA even believes it has the authority to address efficiency.  Efficiency testing became mandatory in 2020 but the EPA began listing efficiencies in 2012. The EPA does not regulate efficiency, as most European countries do, allowing stoves as low as 51% efficient to be certified.

 

EPA lab served as own third-party certifier

One of the 5 incidents of concern in the OIG report included an EPA approved lab serving as its own third-party certifier of a test report it has produced.  Again, the EPA knew about this but did not revoke the certification and “the lab remained approved by the EPA.”  

 

Test labs are allowed to be third party certifiers and most of them are.  However, they cannot certify the results of stoves tested in their own lab.  PFS-TECO, Intertek, OMNI, RISE (Sweden) and SZU (Czech Republic) are both test labs and third-party certifiers.  PolyTest (Canada), ClearStak and the Danish Technological Institute are approved test labs but are not third-party certifiers. 

 

Deviation from test methods

A fourth concern raised by the OIG, which has already been resolved, involved Lamppa manufacturing who makes Kuuma wood furnaces.  Lamppa had obtained an alternative test method, but the test lab deviated from that method, due to complications.  The manufactured disclosed the deviation and explained why, and the EPA certified it anyway.  After 5 years, the EPA informed Lamp it would not recertify the unit, and Lamppa had to retest and recertify the unit.  

 

Recommendation to the EPA

 

The OIG listed several significant recommendations, some of which could be incorporated into the next set of wood stove regulations, known as New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), which the EPA is currently working on.

 

·      Including a federal criminal false statement clause into the wood heater certification application process, which would require manufacturers, but not necessarily retailers, to not make false statements in their advertising.

·      Develop procedures to revoke the approval of test labs that do not follow NSPS requirements.

·      Develop procedures to revoke the certification of wood heaters that do not coply with NSPS requirements.

·      Inform the OIG of investigations into fraud or abuse of the wood heater NSPS.

 The  OIG report can be found here. 

Safety recalls of wood and pellet stoves

Updated: July 2022 - There have been at least seven recalls of wood and pellet burning products since 1979 and one certification revocation.  Four of those were in 2015-2016.  While there are few reports of any injuries, recalls are expensive and time consuming for stove manufacturers.

(In addition to stove recalls, the Consumer Product Safety Commission recalled a camping tent sold by Cabellas in July 2022 because the "stove jack ring" where the stove pipe exits the tent, can deteriorate.)

Almost all recalls are voluntary, which is usually to the benefit of the company.  A successful recall effort often reaches about 65% of consumers, and it the case of wood or pellet stoves, it may depend on who sold them and how much effort the company actually made.  Its easier for some stove manufacturers to track down who purchased a particular stove if it was purchased through a specialty retailer compared to stoves purchased through hardware chains.  For the following seven recalls of wood and pellet stoves, there is no data about how effective each recall was.

The dangers posed by some of the stoves subjected to recalls are significant but may pale in comparison to the ongoing dangers of self-installed stoves that never get inspected.  The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)'s 1982 survey of more than 2,000 households indicates that 70% of stoves in use were installed by the consumer, and half of these "do-it-yourself" installations were never inspected by a building or fire inspector.  A very high percentage of self-installed stoves remains a high probability in the US, in part because of the increasingly high volumes of stoves sold through hardware chains and on-line.  The percentage of self-installed stoves purchased on the second-hand market could be even greater than the 70% figure found in 1982.  In addition to dangerous self-installation practices, the other main cause of stove-related house fires is excessive creosote build-up in chimneys that are not regularly cleaned.

 

The highest volume recalls have been pellet stoves, which pose less of a fire risk when self-installed, or from lack of chimney cleaning.

 

1. The recall impacting the most devices was the 2015 recall of the US Stove HomComfort pellet stove that could be mounted in a window or wall.  This recall involved 4,400 units, which provides one of the few insights into volumes of particular units.  The Chinese-made stove was sold at Northern Tool, Rural King, Home Depot and Lowes from 2010 to 2012.  There were 16 reports of fires and property damage, but the recall did not happen until three years after the product run.  US Stove offered $868 cash or $1,200 credit towards the purchase of another US Stove product. Those amounts are still available from US Stove.  An updated version of the stove is 2020 certified but only supposed to be mounted in walls, not windows.

 

2. The next largest recall was England Stove Works pellet Smartstove.  The US-made unit was only sold for a few months in the fall of 2015. After the company received four reports of incidents and one minor injury, it initiated recall the following year.  Englander sent consumers a free repair kit to remedy the issue.  An updated version of the stove is 2020 compliant and on the market.

 

3.The next largest recall was for 2,000 Mt. Vernon pellet stoves made in the US by Quadrafire, a subsidiary of Hearth & Home Technologies.  The $4,000 stove was sold for almost a year between 2014 and 2015.  There were eight reports of glass breaking after excessive pressure built up in the firebox but no reports of injuries.  The company remedied the issue by offering to arrange for free installation of an enhanced control board. The firm's dealers contacted known purchasers.  An updated version of the Mt. Vernon is also 2020 compliant and on the market.

 

 

4. The following year saw a much smaller recall of a Quadrafire device. This time it was a wood stove, the Explorer III, and involved 650 units.  The US-made unit was sold for about a year and a half for $3,000.  The danger was that the handle of the top lid could disengage and the lid could fall.  There were five reports of incidents, two of which involved minor injuries to fingers. The company offered to fix the problem through its dealer network. The Explorer is off the market.

 

 

 

5. A small recall of 200 Scan Andersen wood stoves made by Jotul occurred back in 2010.  A faulty door hinge led to the door falling off, and of the three reported incidents, one consumer received a bruised foot.  The stove was made in Norway and the fix was a free hinge repair.

6. Going back a bit further in time, there was a recall of 1,300 EPA certified, catalytic Vermont Castings Sequoia wood fireplaces in 2006.  At the time, Vermont Castings was owned by the CFM corporation and the units were made in Canada and the US.  They sold from 2003 to 2006 for about $2,200.  This was a more serious recall, as it involved insufficient insulation or a missing weld, and could cause these fireplaces to pose a fire hazard, though no incidents were reported.  Consumers were advised to stop using the product immediately, and it is not clear if the company offered any remedy after 2008 when they went bankrupt. 

 

 

7. The final recall listed on the CSPC database dates back to 1979, and involved glass for stove doors that posed a breaking hazard. The glass doors were in “Hearth-Glo” wood burning circulators made by the Jackes Evans Manufacturing Company. These sold in 1977 and 1978, right before the EPA began requiring wood stoves to be certified. One thousand stoves were involved and customers could get free replacement doors.

8.  While not yet a formal recall, the EPA is taking an unprecedented step of revoking the certification of a wood stove because the lab did not do the test correctly and the EPA certified the stove because it did not carefully read the lab test report.  The stove in question is the England Stove Works Model 50-T tested by Intertek, and the wood they used was too dry. It appears that Englander tried to test it again but couldn't get it under 2 grams an hour. Englander had requested a hearing, but they pulled out of the hearing process and the EPA is finalizing revocation of the model line in April 2022, which apparently will mean those models will have to be recalled from retailers.  

Update on the Mt. Vernon Pellet Stove Recall

About 2,000 Quadra-Fire Mt. Vernon E2 pellet stoves and inserts are being recalled and repaired, due to high pressure that can lead to explosions that shatter the glass in the door. The company says the stove is safe if properly operated. The Consumer Product Safety Commission issued a voluntary recall on July 9, 2015. Problems were first reported to the company by consumers in the winter of 2015.

The problem is unique to this model and does not present a safety issue in other models sold by Quadrafire or any other manufacturer, according to pellet stove experts. If you own a Mt. Vernon, follow instructions in the voluntary recall notice and the company will repair the stove free of charge.

Some consumers and stove retailers contend that the stove was poorly designed and even if a stove is not operated properly, it should not build up pressures that can lead to explosions. At least 6 stoves have malfunctioned, leading to glass in the front door shattering, sometimes sending flying glass through rooms. No injuries have been reported. AGH believes the EPA should ask that this stove be re-certified since changes to it are substantial.

A number of discussions in independent chat rooms have raised the issues and include commentaries by affected consumers about how Quadra-Fire has responded.

The Alliance wrote to HHT asking for clarifications about what caused the malfunction and whether the stove would be 3rd party tested again for safety. We formally asked for information for our newsletter, which may have led to a less responsive reply, which is reproduced below.

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Mathis, Kristen (HHT) ‪
Date: Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:34 AM

Subject: RE: questions about the Mt Vernon E2 for wood heat newsletter

To: John Ackerly

Hi John,

I wanted to send these responses as promised, although I see the newsletter has already gone out. The responses below in RED are provided by our VP Product Engineering, Gregg Achman.

1. Will HHT be sending this stove back to any 3rd party lab for safety testing?

When a modification is made to a Hearth & Home Technologies product, all necessary certification bodies are informed and the required testing is completed. Updates and notifications are published as necessary, and in accordance with the respective entities.

2. In your certification testing with OMNI, did any of the tests involve running the stove as the consumer might do it, instead of following the owner's manual?

OMNI follows the testing protocols set forth in the test standard that the appliance is being certified to. The test standards follow ANSI protocol, and go through a revision process that allows for review and comment from interested parties to address future requirements and enhancements for performance and safety.

3. From your website and from talking to various HHT dealers, its confusing as to whether you consider this mainly a problem with incorrect operation by consumers, or whether its a flaw in the stove operating system. Your site says that the stoves in question will receive an enhanced control board "if necessary." Are there some stoves that are not getting an enhanced control board or do all stoves in the recall get the enhanced control board?

HHT issued this recall proactively and in conjunction with the CPSC to reinforce our commitment to consumer safety. No injuries related to the Mt. Vernon E2 stove or insert have been reported. Issues of glass breakage are only related to Mt. Vernon E2 stoves and inserts when not maintained as outlined in the owner’s manual.

This recall affects an isolated set of units; if the unit is verified to be within the select group of recalled stoves or inserts, the control board should be replaced. HHT dealers have proactively contacted all consumers with affected stoves to have them repaired.

Lastly, you mention being unable to connect with someone at HHT. While I can’t speak to previous relationships, I do want to open the door for you to connect with me when you have questions moving forward. We always appreciate the opportunity to share factual information about our products and/or to share our passion and enthusiasm for the industry, and I can typically turn around responses in 2-3 business days.

Sincerely,
Kristen Mathis
Hearth Expert
Sr. Communications Manager