 The Federal Pacific Electric (FPE Stab-Lok® ) Electrical Hazards Website
|
InspectAPedia tolerates no conflicts of interest. We have no relationship with advertisers, products, or services discussed at this website.
FPE Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Lok® Electrical Panel & Circuit Breaker Hazards Home Page: here we explain the fire and shock hazards associated with Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Lok® circuit breakers and service panels,
provides a complete history of the FPE Hazard, and we provide and cite independent, unbiased research on FPE failures, and recommends replacement of the panels. Photographs are provided to aid in identification of Federal Pacific FPE Stab-Lok® equipment. The current status of FPE Stab-Lok®equipment hazards, recalls, product safety research, and consumer warnings can be found here.
Replacement FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers are unlikely to reduce the failure risk of this equipment. We recommend that residential FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panels be replaced entirely or the entire panel bus assembly be replaced, regardless of FPE model number or FPE year of manufacture. We do not sell circuit breakers nor any other products.
Green links show where you are. © Copyright 2013 InspectAPedia.com, All Rights Reserved. Author Daniel Friedman.
Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Lok® Circuit Breaker Hazard Current Status, Failures, Research, & History
For information on FPE Stab-Lok® equipment that can be copied to any website, see FPE Stab-Lok® Hazard Summary Page for Public Use
Federal Pacific Electric "Stab-Lok® " service panels and breakers are a latent hazard and FPE circuit breakers can fail to trip in response to overcurrent, leading to electrical fires. The breakers may also fail to shut off internally even if the toggle is switched to "off."
Some double-pole (240-Volt) FPE circuit breakers and single-pole FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers simply do not work safely.
There are other FPE panel-defects independent of the breaker problems, panel and panel-bus fires and arcing failures in some equipment. The failure rates for these circuit breakers were and still are significant. In some cases failure to trip occurs 60% of the time - a serious fire and
electrical shock hazard.
Failures are documented in the CPSC study and by independent research. Additional independent testing and research are on-going and are reported here. FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panels should be replaced. Do not simply swap in some replacement breakers. (Details are at FPE REPLACEMENT BREAKERS).
A Summary of the Problem: Federal Pacific Stab-Lok® ® Electric Panel and Circuit Breaker Hazards
Please see SUMMARY OF PROBLEM for the full detail of this FPE topic.
Having reviewed documentation regarding this issue, and having discussed the issue with forensic experts in the field, we are convinced that a latent hazard exists where FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers continue in use. The hazard is worst for double-pole breakers. Published reports of actual tests that were performed indicate that under certain conditions it is possible for one leg of these circuits to attempt to trip the breaker, resulting in a jammed breaker which will afterward not trip under any load condition. A reader might infer from the CPSC 1983 press release that the manufacturer and some Commission members were of the opinion that these conditions would not occur in the field.
This is an erroneous conclusion. Some very common household appliances operate are powered by a two-pole 240V circuit (protected by the type of breaker under discussion) but use two or more independent 120V sub-circuits inside the appliance. Two obvious cases are electric clothes dryers and ranges. If, for example, the low-heat (110V) heater in a dryer were to short to the dryer case, a serious overcurrent would occur on one "leg" of the circuit.
Another wiring practice, using a single two-pole breaker to power a split circuit which uses a shared neutral, such as may be installed in kitchens in some areas, is nearly certain to have each leg of the circuit loaded independently and thus subject to single-leg overloading and subsequent breaker jamming. A breaker which jams and then fails to trip under this condition is, in our opinion, a serious fire hazard.
A more careful reading of the CPSC press release of March 3, 1984 suggests that the authors were careful NOT to conclude that there is no hazard, but simply that the information at hand did not prove the hazard, and that the Commission did not have funds to pursue testing. In this document, the representation that no real hazard exists is made by the manufacturer of the device - not exactly a neutral party, and even that wording is cautious in tone: "FPE breakers will trip reliably at most overload levels." Readers should see the failure rates cited in the IAEI letter below.
FPE Stab-Lok® Equipment Means Latent Fire Hazards
It's the exceptions that cause fires. An FPE circuit breaker will appear to "work just fine" in passing along current to
the circuit it feeds, until there is an overcurrent, short circuit, or similar condition. When those exceptional conditions occur,
this equipment fails to protect the circuit and the building from overheating and fires, in some cases at a failure rate around 60% of the time.
I estimate that the normal industry failure rate on circuit breakers is less than .01%.
Consumers should read and follow the Commission's advice regarding circuit breakers. But this advice is insufficient. The Commission's admonition to avoid overloading circuits and to turn off and
have examined devices which seem to be creating a problem is a poor substitute for reliable, automatic, overcurrent protection. It is precisely because dangerous conditions can and do occur without
adequate recognition and action by a consumer that circuit breakers and fuses are installed to provide overcurrent protection in the first place.
Therefore it is hardly an adequate "fix" for FPE breakers to just tell consumers to handle these cases manually.
It is possible that some individual FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers may perform with adequate reliability, possibly those manufactured after the companies discovered safety defects and improper practices in listing the product, and possibly those manufactured in Canada.
However, in absence of an explicit statement from the manufacturer and/or the US CPSC indicating that newer stock equipment is defect free, and considering that defects occur in both breakers and the
panels themselves, and finally, that testing showed failures in both in-use equipment and new off-the-shelf devices, our advice to consumers and electricians is that these
panels be replaced with newer equipment, particularly those which use 240-volt double-pole breakers described in the
literature. In our opinion, if a fire or other hazard occurs with this device, neither the manufacturer nor the Commission, who have suggested in the press release that data was inconclusive or
inadequate to establish a hazard, will accept responsibility for losses that may ensue.
However a building inspector, home inspector, or contractor who makes any warranty of safety, by virtue of his/her position close to the consumer, is certain bear this very liability.
Canadian FPE Stab-Lok® panels and Federal Pacific or Federal Pioneer Circuit Breakers
Please see CANADIAN VERSIONS for the full version of this article.
In May 1999 we learned from Schneider Canada that Federal pioneer circuit breakers sold by that company are re-named from Federal Pacific circuit breakers and that
two 15-amp single-pole models NC015 and NC015CP made between August 1, 1996 and June 11, 1997 have been recalled.
The Schneider and Federal Pioneer as well as some Square-D recall notices are available here.
We asked the company engineer with whom we spoke if he could determine if Federal Pioneer and Federal Pacific components sold
in Canada were made in the U.S. or if tooling used to produce them was identical with that used in the U.S. If this is the case (as one might expect based on
economies of production) one should consider the possibility that other defects reported in the U.S. may also appear in Canadian installations.
The Federal Pioneer Warranty Alert was issued by the Ontario New Home
Warranty program in October 1997 and provides for circuit breaker replacement. Schneider Canada is an electrical supplier whose product lines combine those previously marketed under the names
Federal Pacific Electric, Federal Pioneer, Square-D, Tele Mechanique, Modicon, and Merlin Gerin.
Carl Grasso, an attorney who researched FPE failures for the New Jersey class action suit explains that since a portion of the safety defect with FPE breakers may be due
to variations during manufacture, and since Canadian breakers may be manufactured in a different plant from those made in the U.S., it is possible that the field performance of Canadian breakers
may be different than the U.S. design.
Schneider Canada, the Federal Pioneer parent company, has not provided information regarding design or manufacture changes over the U.S. design, nor provided test data regarding the product.
As of May 2008 we have had a few reports of failures in the Canadian Federal Pioneer (Stab-Lok® ) equipment and also reports of failures of "replacement" FPE circuit breakers
installed in U.S. panels. Having inspected some Canadian FPE (Federal Pioneer-brand) electric panels, we observed two ongoing concerns:
1.) the same bus design was used as in the U.S. equipment. I've seen very poor retention of breakers in the bus - in one house the breaker was held in place by duct tape, as the spring design in the contact of the breaker where it plugs into the special opening in the bus
appears not to have held the breaker in place. We have also seen breakers modified with their inserting pins bent and modified to fit a breaker into a slot where it did not belong - a step that is
impossible with other breaker designs.
2.) A similar or identical panel design may expose consumers to panel arcing and fires regardless of changes in the breakers themselves.
Back of the envelope cost-benefit analysis of replacing an FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panel
Aronstein/Lowry (2012), estimate that the potential savings from a ten-year replacement program for FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panels in the U.S. alone would result in
- Reduction of 5,212 building fires
- Reduction of 214 injuries
- Reduction of 25 deaths
- Reduction of $74.4 million in property losses [12]
[Incidentally, $74.4M / 5,212 fires = $14,275 average loss per event - a figure which may not include all losses such as cost of alternative lodging, time lost, etc. and it does not address the costs of injuries or deaths - Ed.]
These figures are difficult to translate into the cost/benefit of FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panel replacement for an individual building owner. Worse, some building owners, particularly home sellers, may figure that electrical panel replacement is an avoidable cost that is of more benefit to future owners than to themselves.
The cost to replace an electrical panel is basically the cost of materials and labor: the cost of the new panel and breakers and the labor to remove the old panel and connect existing electrical circuits into the new one. The property owner or an electrician can buy a new electrical panel complete with circuit breakers for a cost ranging from under $100. U.S. to around $200. (depending on panel ampacity and number of circuit breakers) at most building supply stores. The cost of panel installation/replacement varies widely depending on where you live but typically ranges from $1000. to $2,500. .
Also there may be financial relief for seniors or people of limited means in some communities or according to some readers, even from some insurance companies. Check with your local senior citizens state, town, or county agencies and with your insurer.
A expert reviewer pointed out that:
- [we should] keep in mind that the 1/6000 per year is the added risk of an electrical fire due to FPE breaker defects [not the total risk]
- I think it is folly to propose a cost-benefit analysis on a safety item that people think "has been working fine all these years".
The incentive to change an FPE panel is not based on saving money.
We agree that there is a lot of folly in how individuals approach safety and risk. Here we address viewers who may be open to a more accurate understanding of the risk of fire, shock, etc.
In my OPINION [DF], considering the significant contribution of FPE Stab-Lok® equipment to house fires, replacing the equipment is likely to be less costly than the cost of a fire. If we wanted to make a completely emotionless assessment of the cost-benefit of replacing an unsafe electrical panel that is associated with about 2.5% of all of the annually reported electrical panels in the U.S. and is present in about 17 million homes in the U.S. as well as in many other buildings, or if we wanted to consider that there is about one fire per year for every 6000 FPE Stab-Lok® Panels in homes, let's say that your
- Annual risk of a house fire in a home with an FPE Stab-Lok® panel = 1/6000 or one chance in 6000, per year [12]
- Guess at a house fire cost in lost property, building repairs etc = $60,000
- Guess at number of years of a home having an FPE Stab-Lok® panel = 40 years
- Calculated guess at cost of not replacing an FPE Stab-Lok® panel = (1/6000) x ($60,000) x 40 = $400
- A serviceable replacement electrical pa nell cost at Home Depot for a 125A replacement electrical panel = $85.00 * To the panel cost we must add installation labor and licensing fees, making typical electrical panel replacement total ost $1000 - $2500. or more. (For details see FPE REPLACEMENT PANEL COSTS)
To the costs you are avoiding, add
- An assessment of how risk averse you are and what you will pay to reduce or eliminate a particular risk of fire, loss, and risk of injury or death.
- An assessment of the impact on home resale; few home buyers will accept a home with an FPE Stab-Lok panel without asking for an allowance of panel replacement cost - a stumbling block to negotiate if you are a home seller. Why not replace the panel while you are living in the home, enjoying the reduced risk and addressing what you otherwise are likely to have to pay at time of home resale?
In my OPINION, one might infer that even if we were not willing to pay one cent to reduce the risk of the time, trouble, or even injury or death that might ensue from a house fire caused by an FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panel or breaker failure, that is, if we just consider the cost of a replacement electrical panel, replacing the panel is a good deal.
* GE PowerMark Gold 125 Amp 12-Space 24-Circuit Main Breaker Load Center Contractor Kit, Model # TM1212RCU1K, Internet # 100182490, Store SKU # 393844, retrieved 10/2/2012
For people who are unable to promptly replace an FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panel we recommend that you should be sure you have working smoke detectors properly installed and at least you will be able to sleep at night. Also see CAN'T AFFORD A NEW ELECTRIC PANEL?
How to report your FPE Stab-Lok® panel or circuit breaker Failure - Reporting Federal Pacific and Federal Pioneer Equipment Problems
Please see FPE INCIDENTS, HOW TO REPORT for full details of reporting FPE Stab-Lok® ™ and other electrical product failures
We invite voluntary field failure reports from readers
who are aware of or who experience failures of Federal Pacific and Federal Pioneer equipment order to add to the existing data base.
In addition to informing us of an FPE Stab-Lok® or Federal Pioneer electrical panel or breaker event so that we can add this incident report to the data base we maintain, we encourage readers to report such events also to the US Consumer Product Safety Commission - it's easy: you can use a simple form at the CPSC's website: https://www.cpsc.gov/incident.html or you can send the CPSC email on incidents to: info@cpsc.gov
There is no requirement that failures be reported to us for tabulation here.
This website is not a government or other official document, nor does it receive nor request funding. Contact the author.
Citation by brief quote or links-to this website are invited,
provided you credit this source website InspectAPedia.com/fpe/fpepanel.htm
Printed copies of our website pages are permitted (hard copies on paper) for free (not for sale) distribution provided that you do not edit the content, you include a citation of the source web page, and you do not imply that our website is endorsing any product or service for sale.
Do NOT copy electronically nor reproduce our website content electronically (for example to a web page) without writing to us (Contact Us) first to obtain
express permission. See our Policy on use of website contents - OK in printed form only, do not make electronic copies
Federal Pacific Electric FPE Stab-Lok® Information for your website: for information on FPE Stab-Lok® equipment that can be copied to your website, see FPE Stab-Lok® Hazard Summary Page for Public Use
Federal Pacific Electric FPE Stab-Lok® Panel Replacement Financial Aid?
There is no financial recourse, no product recall, no financial help, no warranty claim, no replacement fund currently available for FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panels except for a very limited class action result in the state of New Jersey. New Jersey residents can see New Jersey FPE Class Action 2005 for more information.
For more information about the cost of panel replacement, FPE replacement options, electricians, and an approach that can save part of replacement cost in some cases: see the articles listed just below
FPE REPAIR ELECTRICIANS
FPE REPLACEMENT PANELS
FPE REPLACEMENT PANEL COSTS
CAN'T AFFORD A NEW ELECTRIC PANEL?
Cost-benefit analysis of replacing an FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panel
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about the FPE Stab-Lok® ® Circuit Breaker Hazard: identification, repair/replacement advice, product history
Question: I can't afford to pay for a new electrical panel - where can the money come from?
Thanks alot! 71 yrs old, on social security, everything went up, especially Taxes, food etc. Now I can't sleep worried my house is going to burn down. Where does the money come for this!! I'm sure it's not cheap to replace circuit boards electricians are expensive. Thanks my money was right there for you when we put in Federal Pacific.... - Joann Novotny - 6/23/11
Reply: cost-benefit analysis of replacing an FPE Stab-Lok electrical panel
Joann, please don't blame InspectAPedia for the installation of an unsafe electrical panel in your home. If you are unable to promptly replace the panel, take a look at the advice in the articles listed just above this FAQs section and also linked-to at Related Topics titled:
CAN'T AFFORD A NEW ELECTRIC PANEL?
Be sure you have working smoke detectors properly installed and at least you will be able to sleep at night.
Replacing an electrical panel is basically cost of labor plus the new panel. You or an electrician can buy a new electrical panel complete with circuit breakers for a few hundred dollars at most building supply stores. The cost of panel installation/replacement varies widely depending on where you live.
Also there may be financial relief for seniors in your area; check with your local senior citizens state, town, or county agencies.
Finally, in my opinion, considering the significant contribution of FPE Stab-Lok® equipment to house fires, replacing the equipment is likely to be less costly than the cost of a fire. Details are at Cost-benefit analysis of replacing an FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panel.
Reader Comment:
A lot of Home Insurance company's are helping with paying for the replacement of these panels, especially now that most companies will not insure a home with these panels in them. I would suggest to anyone to contact your insurance company to see what they are or are not helping with. - Gator 7/14/11
Question: are the FPE hazards the same in both main panel and sub panels?
I have my service panel and a main panel. Are the issues the same with both? Do they both need to be replaced? - Don E. 8/11/11
Reply:
Yes Don E. - the FPE breakers don't know if they are in a main panel or a sub panel. Their performance doesn't vary by that criterion.
Question: Is there a retrofit kit available for FPE Panels?
Is there a retrofit kit available for FPE panels? - David W. Nies 9/19/11
It is my understanding there is a retro fit kit for FPE panels??? If so how do I get one? - Budd 9/4/12
Reply:
David and Budd
Eaton - Cutler Hammer make replacement bus and breaker assemblies that can fit in some FPE panel steel enclosures. See FPE REPLACEMENT PANELS for details.
Question: is there a similar risk with FPE panels that use fuses
What are the risk associated with domestic cut out fuse - Ajiroghene sunny 1/1/12
Reply:
No A.S. Fuses are completely different devices. However if your electrical panel uses fuses it may be under-sized and obsolete for modern home usage levels. You should review that question with your electrician.
Question: Electrician Report on FPE Failure - breaker didn't shut off
I’m a licensed 309A electrician in Stoney Creek Ontario with 30 yrs exp.
Last year did a service call on an a/c unit ,shut off breaker went outside began to service unit, was electrically thrown back ,did a volt test and there was power, went inside and tested breaker and it was hot, this was my first experience with a defective breaker.
-I purchased a double pole 30 amp Stab-lok to install a heater in my garage, wired it up turned on breaker , heater is working good. Decided to install longer cable so I could place heater in another location, shut off breaker and began to unwire unit, I was almost electrocuted because I was grounded, my heart felt like base drum…..
Tested the breaker ,,hot on one pole,, removed breaker did an ohm test, one side does not shut off…. - Pete Vann 1/5/12
Reply:
Pete, thanks so much for the comment. Thank goodness you were not killed by that failing FPE Stab-Lok unit. Indeed it has been shown by independent testing that a scary feature of FPE's is that the breaker toggle may be switched to the OFF position but one or more breaker poles may remain "on" or energized internally. Very dangerous.
Please see the HOW TO REPORT FPE INCIDENTS link (page left) - you would be doing a service to also report this incident to the US CPSC.
Also see SAFETY for ELECTRICAL INSPECTORS
Daniel
Reader comment from Anonymous:
Pete, sounds like you should start using a voltage tester every time!
Reader comment from George Campbell 1/17/2012
Pete Vann - An experienced 309A electrician should be smart enough to us a volt meter to make sure the line does not have a voltage potential EVERY TIME. Not just for Stab Lok breakers. I've been an electronics tech and engineer for 28 years and I know enough to test an AC or DC line at work or at home before I trust there is on voltage. I also have a breaker panel full of STAB LOK. I have done extensive work in my house (AC, Water Heater, additional outlets, etc.). So far I have found that they do turn off. And in a few cases I know they do trip. Guess I am lucky so far but I'll be changing the panel out soon.
Reply from DF:
George,
The failure of FPE breakers to switch off internally when the toggle is moved to the "off" position has been well documented and occurs at a stunningly high rate - let's not risk killing someone or burning a building by asserting otherwise in one person's experience.
I agree that using a VOM or other voltage tester is good safe practice; but after following electricians and electrical work for nearly 50 years I have the opinion that very often fellows perform extensive work without taking that precaution. In any event, blaming the victim for a very dangerous electrical device is not a sufficient solution to the problem any more than blaming a passenger injured when the seat belt breaks during an accident.
Question: Electrician Report on FPE failures to trip
Being an electrician a few years now have ran into a few of these panels. They were common in trailers from the smaller 100amp mini trailer version to the industrial 40 space commercial which uses challenger style breakers. I've seen many times the breakers do not shut off entirely causing electrocution risk. As a man of safety you always check for voltage even if the panel is well known QO ,homeline, ge, etc. I've seen I-line breakers on 480 not kill a pole causing an electrocution risk. Although very rare it does happen.
I can't stress enough to get the dangerous fpe's replaced. Once the breakers trip, they do not shut off or trip again due to arching welding the trip mechanism. I've seen outlets burned clean out of the wall causing fires many times. They had a huge run of these failed products here in the late 60's and 70's.
Also, do not think buying an aftermarket fpe replacement is going to magically fix the problem as the whole design was flawed. These panels buss system uses the stab-lok interface which doesn't make good enough contact(although used copper buss) and causes deterioration of the insulator board behind the buss making a serious arch condition to the panels enclosure.
I've been called out after the utility co pulled the meter out of an FPE firework show and the main never tripped. - Eric 1/26/2012
Reply:
Thank you Eric for this field report on FPE - I invite you to also report your experience to the US CPSC. See FPE INCIDENTS, HOW TO REPORT
Question: Electrician in Hospital questions FPE Hazard in non-residential installations
I am an electrician in a hospital. The hospital was originally built in 1974 and alot of the branch circuit panels are FPE. These panels use type NA,NC,or NAGF breakers. Should I have the same concerns as a home owner? Are the panels I have the same as the residential panels? - Brett 3/8/12
Reply:
Brett,
Please take a look at HOW TO IDENTIFY FPE & FP (article link at Related Topics ) - if your breakers and panel bus are the same FPE Stab-Lok design, as I imagine they are, then the same FPE hazard concerns apply to your building.
Certainly FPE Stab-Lok equipment was installed in both residential and many non-residential buildings. Aronstein/Lowry (2002) report that the product defects extended across the product line and across its manufacturing history, including the product's use in both residential and non-residential installations.
Keep in mind that this is a "latent" fire hazard - the equipment itself does not initiate the problem - but it fails to protect against overheating or fire should an overcurrent or short circuit occur.
And there is a particular hazard to you as an electrician: switching the breaker to "OFF" does not necessarily turn it off internally - the circuit you thought you'd turned off may still be life.
Question: A local electrician advertises for FPE Replacement but I've never had a problem with my panel
I received an advertisement from a local electrician offering to replace this panel in my Williamsburg home. Sounds like a scam. This house is 31 years old and no problem with my Federal Pacific panel. If I want to have my panel checked I would choose an electric contractor with good ratings on Angie's List and not respond to some ad dropped at my door. - Jimmy Jo 4/12/12
Reply:
Jimmy Jo,
On the one hand, it makes perfect sense to hire an electrician who is familiar with FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panel hazards. After all, the risk of hiring an electrician to replace an FPE Stab-Lok® but who is unaware of the hazards involved means you might be hiring someone who is generally not well informed - which means there may be a risk of other mistakes or poor work.
On the other hand, if an electrician is getting business by scaring people inappropriately, s/he may not be someone you want in your home.
BUT
On the third hand, an electrician who warns you that FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panels are unsafe is not saying anything incorrect nor inappropriate. The hazards are well documented, and we agree that the panel should be replaced.
Recommendation Against In-Home Testing of FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panels, breakers, circuits
Watch out: in any case, "testing" or "inspecting" an FPE Stab-Lok® panel on-site by an electrician is a fundamentally bad idea. Not only will tests not be conclusive unless performed by one of very few experts, using special equipment and under very carefully monitored conditions so as to avoid setting the house on fire) but worse, "tests" of FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers by switching them on and off, or by applying an overcurrent, is at risk of significantly increasing the risk of a future failure - after testing OK the breaker may be at much greater risk of not tripping in response to an overcurrent should one occur, or simply not turning "OFF" internally even when you switch the toggle to the "OFF" position. Those are very serious hazards.
In sum, there is no need for FPE testing in your home, we already know that the equipment is hazardous, and such tests are unreliable and dangerous.
Reader comments:
All I have to say to Jimmy Jo is "Good luck!" You may need it. How do you know the panel is "fine"? Do you know if any of the breakers have ever been called upon to trip? I am a home inspector, and have seen numerous Stab Lok panels, some looking just as clean and pretty as when they were first installed. What does that mean? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!! Those panels have been there all that time, and have likely never been overloaded. Maybe yours have functioned properly, as I'm sure others have, but with the failure rate reported by well-respected electricians and other professionals, I would not want to risk my life or property for $1500. Why do we purchase insurance? For financial protection, even though you may never need it. Think of replacing an FPE panel in the same way. An insurance policy against loss of your house or life. Speaking of that, many insurance companies WILL NOT ISSUE A POLICY if they know an FPE panel is present. - Joe 8/4/12
Joe,
thanks for the comment, we agree completely. Just because you never noticed a problem with a no-trip circuit breaker that's no promise that everything's fine. My jeep's seat belt is cut to a single thread. Each time I drive to the rifle range in my Jeep I fasten my seat belt. So far, I've never been in a car crash, so it's obvious that the seat belt is working "just fine" - right? - Editor.
Question: I want to add two circuits to my StabLOK panel - can I do it myself?
I have a Stab Lok panel and want to add two 240 V 20A and 2 110V 20A circuits. Should i consider replacing the panel? Can i do it myself? - @John, 4/26/12
Reply:
From Tom 4/30/12
@ John (four days ago) - YES - change the panel out. The Federal Pacific panels are defective and dangerous.
As for whether you can do it yourself - My thought is this - if you have to ask this question, you probably cannot do it. It is not hard to install or change out a panel, but if you do it wrong, you risk your life and the lives of anyone who comes into the house. Hire an electrician who can do it right if you have ANY question as to your abilities. He will have insurance to cover you in case he does it wrong - do you have that kind of coverage? I doubt it. Likewise, he has the skills needed to do the job quickly and safely.
Comment:
Tom, very well said. Thank you for your comments. 4/30/12 Daniel Friedman
Question: FPE Stab-Lok failure leads to apartment fire
We had a Federal Pacific panel in an apartment we were renting. On Friday, a bathroom fan jammed and failed to run. The fan got very hot and melted the motor. As the motor melted, the plastic fan cover melted into the melting metal motor, and the wall caught fire. After the wall caught fire the entire apartment caught fire, burning us out of our home.
Had the Federal Pacific circuit breaker reacted correctly, as the metal fan motor melted the resistance would have gone down, causing more and more amperage to flow. Once the flow got to 15 amps - which is the limit of the circuit breaker for that appliance - the circuit breaker should have tripped, cutting off electricity to the circuit. Instead, it did not trip, causing a serious fire. Everything in our apartment is destroyed, all due to deferred maintenance by our landlord, and by the Federal Pacific circuit breaker that failed to trip.
Jimmy Jo said he thought it was a a scam that an electrician would offer to replace his Federal Pacific panel. All I can say is replacing those breakers may save your life and the lives of those you love. Whether you hire the ambitious electrician who is trying to build business by replacing these super dangerous panels or another electrician, HIRE SOMEONE AND FIX IT. My family is living (Thank GOD!) proof that these breakers are dangerous, plain and simple. - Tom 4/30/12
Reply:
Tom, thank you for this important FPE fire report. We are of course so sorry to read that the fire occurred and that you had a serious house fire. I encourage you to report the fire to the U.S. CPSC - FPE INCIDENTS, HOW TO REPORT. And help me out as topic editor -
- Were you aware of the FPE Stab-Lok panel fire hazard before your fire occurred?
- Were you aware of the US CPSC position on this hazard?
- Had you read information about FPE Stab-Lok at this website? If so, is there something we could have said here, or some information we could have provided that would have prompted you to have the panel replaced before the fire occurred?
Question: Electronics Engineer opted to replace FPE equipment, expresses hazard opinion
I'm a well experienced electronics engineer for over 40 yrs. After seeing a report in February 2012 by WFTV 9 (a local central Florida TV station) about these panels, I knew (by sheer luck of the draw) my 1985 built home just had to have one of these "defunct" FPE Stab-Lock panels---of course IT DID! I just replaced the entire panel with a Square-D. I checked my next door neighbor's panel and they also have the FPE Stab-Lock. I advised them of replacing it---they haven't! After follow-up investigating on many web sites about these FPE panels---ANYBODY who has one in their home is at HIGH risk of fire hazard! Take my well intended advice: DEFINITELY replace the panel whether it currently works and /or has never had a problem! This is a VERY insidious problem and VERY high risk! - Kurt 5/16/12
Reply:
Kurt,
thank you for your helpful comments. Part of the difficulty of the FPE hazard is that although the hazard has been demonstrated as real by compelling independent evidence, both research and actual field reports, the company successfully stopped the CPSC investigation, money held out for a product recall was never used for that purpose, the company is now gone except for a remains left for protection against litigation, and in the absence of an "official U.S. Government recall" some folks who have conflicting interests (including a real estate agent who contacted us today) simply deny the hazard. You are right in your respect for the hazards involved.
Question: Did FPE Pay for Panel Replacements?
Did FPE pay for the change out? - Alton 6/18/12
Reply:
Alton, what a great question to bring out a little bit of not-easy-to-find FPE history. When FPE was sold, the buyer, on discovering they'd bought a liability, negotiated a multimillion dollar allowance that was to be used to pay for a panel recall. But no recall was ever issued, they pocketed the money instead. All of that information is in public documents; see FPE Exxon Scandal Article for an example.
In sum, I'm repeating the explanation I gave below for Kurt.
Question: Hospital Electrician Asks if he should be concerned about FPE panels in the hospital
I am an electrician in a hospital. The hospital was originally built in 1974 and alot of the branch circuit panels are FPE. These panels use type NA,NC,or NAGF breakers. Should I have the same concerns as a home owner? Are the panels I have the same as the residential panels?
Is there a answer to this question. I have read alot about this topic and it clear that they are referring to residential home. What about the stab lok in commercial buildings, motels or apartments - Harvey 7/28/12
Reply:
Harvey, thanks for the important question. Indeed FPE made an extensive range of equipment, both residential and commercial. In some instances breakers and parts were reported to have been swapped between the two, as well as swapping breakers among amperage ratings.
I have two suggestions:
1. take a look at our FPE Stab-Lok design identification photos and text beginning at
FPE & FP IDENTIFICATION, HOW TO (links at Related Topics )
and if you see the same breaker and bus design in the equipment in the hospital it would be prudent to presume it's the same equipment and that it has the same hazards.
2. I'd welcome any sharp photos you can send along of the panels, panel labels, bus and breaker details that you have installed.
Also, in the event that your hospital does have FPE Stab-Lok design equipment installed, its important to understand how to approach the risk and to understand what all the risks are. In addition to the "no-trip" problem (most severe on 2-pole breakers), there are frequent reports of breakers that remain "on" internally even though the physical breaker toggle or handle has been moved to the "OFF" position - this could pose a very serious risk to you personally when working on such equipment.
Do not assume that power has been turned off - use safety procedures, test equipment &c accordingly.
Question: Where can I find an electrician qualified to work on FPE Panels ?
Looking for electricians qualified to work on Federal Pacific Panels in the Anderson, SC area. - Terrie Mann 9/10/2012
Reply:
Terrie:
I may not have understood clearly your use of the words "work on Federal Pacific Panels" but to be clear, "working on" the panel is not a safe approach. The panel should be replaced.
Any licensed electrician should be fully capable of properly replacing any electrical panel of any brand. No special knowledge about FPE Stab-Lok® equipment is necessary simply to replace one of those electrical panels. But ...
Watch out: if you have the bad luck of running into an electrician who is not familiar with the FPE Hazard, s/he could put you and your family and home at extra risk by expressing the opinion that "there is nothing wrong with the FPE panel you have installed so no action is needed". It is in part to avoid that risk that we recommend electricians who are familiar with FPE hazards, just as similarly we do so for aluminum electrical wiring repairs.
At DIRECTORY OF ELECTRICIANS we list licensed electricians who assert that they are familiar with the equipment and the hazards. If you find a local electrician whose work satisfies you and who is familiar with the issue, encourage him/her to contact us to be listed in the directory if s/he does not already appear there. There are no costs or fees involved. InspectApedia has no financial relationship with companies offering products or services that may be discussed at this website.
Question: FPE panel Y95003A-514 in a 20 year old house "does not look like an FPE panel"
We saw a FPE panel Y95003A-514 in a newer home. Are those bad too. It did not look like FPE panel. The house is 20 years old. - Sam Sain 9/14/12
Reply:
Sam,
We have no data and no field reports indicating that late model FPE Stab-Lok equipment is safer than earlier made devices. If you're not sure what is installed see the article titled
FPE & FP IDENTIFICATION, HOW TO
(links at Related Topics )
Question: Where is there recently-published data updating findings on the FPE Stab-Lok® ® Hazard?
I am writing to see if you have published data from the NJ condo study
showing increased failure rate with FPE Stab Lok panels and breakers.
- D.H., Washington State
Reply:
D.H.
Thank you for asking about updated status on FPE (Federal Pacific Electric) Stab-Lok® ® hazards. Because of publication restrictions and rules imposed by IEEE, we have cited but not published the contents of the most important recent study that contains updated and authoritative research on the FPE hazard. However we do cite and refer readers to the document in our FPE home page where for reader benefit I include this email, keeping your identity private (let me know if you want to be identified). (at http://www.inspectapedia.com/fpe/fpepanel.htm )
From the IEEE you should be able to obtain this updated report that is current as of 2011:
Jesse Aronstein, Ph.D., P.E., and Richard Lowry, Ph.D., "Estimating Fire Losses Associated with FPE Stab-Lok® ® Circuit Breaker Malfunction", IEEE ESW-2011-29, Industry Applications, IEEE Transactions on, Jan.-Feb. 2012,
An updated version of the original paper, possibly available from Dr. Aronstein, identifies the name of the defective circuit breakers - information that was not identified in the published version due to conference rules. Abstract:
Abstract - A method is presented for connecting small branch
circuit breaker functional test data to statistical fire loss data.
Test results are presented for field samples of a particular line
of circuit breakers that have an abnormally high defect level.
The test results are then utilized in combination with available
electrical fire statistics to estimate the annual number of fires
and consequent injuries, deaths, and monetary loss associated
with the defective breakers. An estimate is then made of the
reduction of injury and loss that can be achieved by
encouraging replacement of the defective breakers. The role of
the electrical safety community in promoting
replacement of the
defective breakers is discussed.
In my OPINION the Aronstein/Lowry IEEE-published study is an important update on the FPE hazard. It establishes the FPE Stab-Lok® hazard to a new higher level of certainty across the entire product line, and concludes that "... there are substantial fire losses due to the defective operation of FPE Stab-Lok® (R) circuit breakers.
The Aronstein/Lowry report found failure rates confirming those documented in earlier FPE Stab-Lok® studies and it cites the considerable body of failure data that has been produced since the CPSC closed its investigation in 1983. Importantly, Aronstein/Lowry also conclude that defects exist across the entire FPE Stab-Lok® ® circuit breaker product line (rather than just the specific breaker types originally investigated by the US CPSC).
The study also recaps more recent legal history of the FPE Stab-Lok® breaker product, citing the 2002 New Jersey class action lawsuit in which the judge ruled that the manufacturer of FPE Stab-Lok® ® breakers committed fraud over a period of many years by applying UL-labels to circuit breakers that did not meet UL product testing standards. The decision drew principally on the company's own documents, but public documents also indicate that FPE lost their UL listing when deceptive testing and labeling of breakers was discovered (see our citation of press reports - FPE Exxon Scandal Article, published at InspectAPedia.com).
In sum, the recent Aronstein/Lowry study is a call-to-action to the U.S. CPSC to finally make a clear warning to both the electrical trades and the public concerning the FPE Stab-Lok® ® hazard.
Question/Comment: what does "hire a professional mean?"
The common used phrase is "hire an experienced professional". I work for a company that requires two years experience, drug testing, four weeks on the job training, etc., etc. and these guys screw up all the time. Anon, 4/5/13
Reply:
Anon you make a good point, that it can be tough for people to figure out if their "professional" is one. On the job conduct, workmanship, licensing, are all clues. If you have specific additional tips we'd be happy to publish them here. _ Daniel
Ask a Question or Search InspectApedia
Questions & answers or comments about FPE Federal Pacific Electric panels and circuit breakers, Federal Pioneer, and related brands.
Ask a Question or Enter Search Terms in the InspectApedia search box just below.
Technical Reviewers & References
Related Topics, found near the top of this page suggest articles closely related to this one.
- Note: as we didn't add this reviewers list until 2007, this list of technical reviewers is incomplete; we have received comments and suggestions
regarding this topic, edits and remarks included, from engineers and management from the US CPSC, electricians (many listed at our
page on field reports of FPE failures), home inspectors, licensed electricians, and electrical engineers, and even a few attorneys and
real estate agents, since 1986. Technical review, critique, content suggestions, questions, or clarifications are invited and
where a contributor wishes, credit and links will be provided to that source. Contact us to provide feedback.
- [1] Dr. Jess Aronstein, electrical engineer, Poughkeepsie, NY, forensic engineering services, independent laboratory testing for various agencies protune@aol.com (independent electrical panel testing, including FPE Stab-Lok® panels, to April 2010)
- [2] David Carrier, electrical engineer, 53 Henmond Blvd., Poughkeepsie, NY 12603 845-430-7527 davidwcarrier@earthlink.net (independent electrical panel testing, including FPE Stab-Lok® panels, beginning 2010)
- [3] Alan Carson, Carson Dunlop Associates, Toronto, Ontario. Mr. Carson is a home inspection professional, educator, researcher, writer, and a principal of Carson Dunlop Associates, a Toronto home inspection and education firm. Mr. Carson is a past president of ASHI, the American Society of Home Inspectors
- [4] Mark Cramer Inspection Services Mark Cramer, Tampa Florida, Mr. Cramer is a past president of ASHI, the American Society of Home Inspectors and is a Florida home inspector and home inspection educator.
- [5] Carl Grasso, Esq., Herzfeld & Rubin, New York, NY. Mr. Grasso is an attorney who managed a plaintiff's class action litigation against Federal Pacific Electric in New Jersey.
- [6] William King, US CPSC Director of Electrical Engineering (Retired).
- [7] Licensed Electricians: FPE Fire and Failure Reports includes electricians who have provided cases and photographs of field failures of FPE equipment at this website.
- [8] Homeowners, Home Inspectors, Electricians: Federal Pacific Electric (FPE) Panel Fires and other Failures includes anecdotal field reports provided by a range of contributors including electricians (and some home owners or home inspectors) who have provided cases and photographs of field failures of FPE equipment at this website.
- [9] "Experts say electrical panels in Dallas-area homes may be a fire waiting to happen", Christina Rosales, The Dallas Morning News, August 21, 2010,
crosales@dallasnews.com continues to attend to the unresolved issues around FPE Stab-Lok® equipment and the lack of a clear US CPSC Warning.
- [10] FPE Stab-Lok® Panel Failure Research, Public documents on FPE obtained under FOIA: The following reports on defects (non trip and burning) of FPE Stab-Lock Circuit Breakers 8 were obtained from Consumer Product Safety Commission by request, under the Freedom of Information Act:
- "Status Report - Evaluation of Residential Molded Case Circuit Breakers", Wright-Malta Corp., (For U.S. Consumer product Safety Commission, Project# CPSC-C-81-1455), August 10, 1982 (Contains analysis of mechanism of failure of FPE two-pole Stab-Lock breakers.)
- "Failure Analysis of Residential Circuit Breaker Panel", Wright-Malta Corp., (For U.S. Consumer product Safety Commission, Project #CPSC-C-81-1455), May 20, 1982 (Contains failure analysis of FPE Stab-Lock panel that ignited due to failure of buss-bar interconnections in the backside of the panel.)
- "Phase II Report, Evaluation of Residential Molded Case Circuit Breakers", Wright-Malta Corp., (For U.S. Consumer product Safety Commission, Project# CPSC-C-81-1455), March 10, 1984 (Contains experimental analysis of materials, construction, and performance of molded case circuit breakers, including FPE. Lack of corrosion resistance of certain internal parts is considered to be a factor in the failure of the circuit breakers.) More about the galvanic scale and corrosion between dissimilar metals is at GALVANIC SCALE & METAL CORROSION.
- "Final Report: Calibration and Condition Tests of Molded Case Circuit Breakers," Wright-Malta Corp., (For U.S. Consumer product Safety Commission, Project #CPSC-C-81-1429), December 30, 1982 (Extensive calibration and functional testing of FPE breakers. Substantial percent failures to trip on overload.
- [11] Federal Pacific Electric FPE Stab-Lok® Information for your website: for information on FPE Stab-Lok® equipment that can be copied to your website, see FPE Stab-Lok® Hazard Summary Page for Public Use
- [12] 2011 FPE Stab-Lok® ® Hazard Study published in 2012
Jesse Aronstein, Ph.D., P.E., and Richard Lowry, Ph.D., "Estimating Fire Losses Associated with FPE Stab-Lok® ® Circuit Breaker Malfunction", IEEE ESW-2011-29, Industry Applications, IEEE Transactions on, Jan.-Feb. 2012, reviewed and accepted for publication and presentation at the IEEE Electrical Safety Workshop, Toronto, January 28, 2011. Retrieved 10/2/2012, original source - IEEE link: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6074935 &url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2 Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D6074935
Abstract - A method is presented for connecting small branch
circuit breaker functional test data to statistical fire loss data.
Test results are presented for field samples of a particular line
of circuit breakers that have an abnormally high defect level.
The test results are then utilized in combination with available
electrical fire statistics to estimate the annual number of fires
and consequent injuries, deaths, and monetary loss associated
with the defective breakers. An estimate is then made of the
reduction of injury and loss that can be achieved by
encouraging replacement of the defective breakers. The role of
the electrical safety community in promoting
replacement of the
defective breakers is discussed.
- [13] 2011 Commission Closes Investigation Of FPE Circuit Breakers And Provides Safety Information For Consumers, Revised 18 Feb 2011.
- 2008 - 2007 FPE Stab-Lok® TECHNICAL REPORT (revised) - an updated test report of independent testing (a large 1.2MB PDF file) using a larger pool of FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers than the older CPSC and Wright Malta tests found significantly higher failure rates of FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers, including a look at critical safety failures (breaker failed to trip at 200% of rated current or jammed) which found up to 80% failure rate for FPE Stab-Lok® GFCI circuit breakers (n=4), 12% failure rate for double pole FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers (n=120), and a 1% failure rate for FPE Stab-Lok® single pole circuit breakers (n=345).
- 2008 FPE Class Action Lawsuit Results: In May 2008 the FPE Class Action Lawsuit in New Jersey was finally settled. New Jersey homeowners who were the original owners of an FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panel received $500. in settlement as part of the action. Institutional class members also got varying amounts, depending on their installations.
No one received the full cost of panel replacement. New Jersey Judge's Summary Judgment for the Plaintiffs against FPE 8-15-2002 & 29 October 2002 - "FPE violated the Consumer Fraud Act because FPE knowingly and purposefully distributed
circuit breakers which were not tested to meet UL Standards as indicated on their label and there is an ascertainable loss for which treble damages
are recoverable;" as reported by the Superior Court of New Jersey.
- 2007 FPE Stab-Lok® TECHNICAL REPORT - an updated test report of independent testing (a large 1.2MB PDF file) using a larger pool of FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers than the older CPSC and Wright Malta tests found significantly higher failure rates of FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers, including a look at critical safety failures (breaker failed to trip at 200% of rated current or jammed) which found up to 80% failure rate for FPE Stab-Lok® GFCI circuit breakers (n=4), 12% failure rate for double pole FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers (n=120), and a 1% failure rate for FPE Stab-Lok® single pole circuit breakers (n=345).
- Fifty FPE Field Failures Reported to US CPSC - 2006 letter from Dr. Jess Aronstein, consulting engineer
- FPE FIRES: Failures continue: FPE breaker fails, results in fires: field reports
- Schneider Canada Federal Pioneer circuit breaker recall
- 2005 FPE Class Action Litigation Notice - for homeowners in New Jersey
- 2004 FPE Stab-Lok® TECHNICAL REPORT - St. Louis ASHI Seminar including: Hazard Summary & Independent Tests confirms Stab-Lok® failures
- 2004 FPE Update: Exxon Buys a Scandal Along With A Company Business Week Article 7/21/80 now available on line
2004 Federal Pioneer & Square-D Arc Fault Circuit Interrupter Safety Notice: newer products than the earlier FPE Stab-Lok® design
- 2003 Federal Pacific Electric Breakers - an encyclopedic, non-prioritized inventory of FPE StabLok deficiencies by Douglas Hansen. [www.codecheck.com - Code Check] offers building code inspection guides for field use, and links on codes and failures.
- 1999 The International Association of Electrical Inspectors (IAEI) published (6/99) an inaccurate article asserting that there is no hazard with FPE Stab-Lok® equipment - OUR REPLY disagreed and cited authoritative data found here along with follow up notes.
- FPE Class Action Lawsuit Results - 2002: New Jersey Judge's Summary Judgment for the Plaintiffs against FPE 8-15-2002 & 29 October 2002 - "FPE violated the Consumer Fraud Act because FPE knowingly and purposefully distributed
circuit breakers which were not tested to meet UL Standards as indicated on their label and there is an ascertainable loss for which treble damages
are recoverable;" as reported by the Superior Court of New Jersey. [Note: only very limited recovery rights were granted to homeowners and only in New Jersey. The case may still be under appeal as of January 2007].
- New Jersey Federal Pacific Electric Class Action Lawsuit Summary [provides little meaningful relief but supports claims about & against FPE.]
- A Canadian Federal Pacific recall in 1997 is documented here. There has been
no "recall" in the U.S. though there is no doubt that the product is hazardous and should be replaced.
Schneider Electric is the Canadian company which still makes a version of this equipment in Canada under the name Federal Pioneer (but see the Federal Pioneer Recall Notice for Canada.
2000 FPE breakers fail in lab test of field-supplied panel 10/00
1996-1997 Federal Pioneer NCO15 and NC015CP circuit breaker recalls from Schneider Electric in Canada are newer products than the earlier FPE Stab-Lok® design.- 1997 Schneider Canada Federal Pioneer circuit breaker recall
- Schneider Canada Federal Pioneer circuit breaker recall British Columbia Fire Commissioner's Notice and Warning
- Federal Pioneer breaker recall notice from the Canadian Electrical Safety Authority
- 1986 Challenger acquired FPE from Reliance Electric ca 1986.
- 1983 CPSC Investigation of FPE Circuit Breakers Safety Information for Consumers
- 1982 CPSC Calibration and Condition Tests of Molded Case Circuit Breakers, Final Report December 30, 1982, summary pages, indicating failure rates found for FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers
- 1982 Reliance Electric Co. SEC Quarterly Report: Note C. reports litigation between Reliance and UV Liquidating Trust and contends that "... improper and deceptive practices were employed for many years to secure UL listings for Federal Pacific's circuit protective products..."
- 1980 Reliance Electric Co. Press Release: improper practices improper practices used to obtain UL Listing for most of FPE's circuit breakers and notes testing which indicates "possible defects." 1980, Reliance Electric Co.
- 1980 FPE - Exxon Buys A Scandal Along With A Company improper practices used to obtain UL Listing for most of FPE's circuit breakers and notes testing which indicates "possible defects." 1980, Reliance Electric Co.
- New Jersey Class Action lawsuit settled, homeowner plaintiffs received $500. per panel and institutional plaintiffs received varying amounts. The lawsuit pertained to original homeowners in New Jersey who had an FPE Stab-Lok® electrical panel in their homes. Details are below.
- Electro-Mechanical Corporation, purchased the assets of a dry-type transformer facility from Challenger and in conjunction with that purchase, acquired the right to use the name Federal Pacific in connection with their products, excluding Stab-Lok® circuit breaker products.
- HC Zang Agency in Buffalo, NY says that "Federal Pacific Company and Federal Pacific Transformer Company of Bristol, Virginia are in no way related to the old Federal Pacific Electric (FPE)" and offers to answer questions about the old equipment.
- FAQ: Website Credibility
- ...
Letter to IAEI International Association of Electrical Inspectors News Magazine re: FPE Public Relations Article asserts Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Lok® panels are OK
Please see FPE HAZARD IAEI LETTER INACCURATE for the full version of this article.
8/11/99
International Association of Electrical Inspectors
ATTN: Philip H. Cox, Editor-in-Chief, IAEI Magazine
PO Box 830848
Richardson TX 75083-0848
Dear Mr. Cox:
The May/June '99 IAEI News article by an unidentified FPE consultant asserts
that Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Loks are UL-Listed and thus without any
concern. The article fails to address a record of failures to trip, actual test
results, field reports of failures, and improper UL listing practices. The FPE
author and IAEI News failed to report on the actual website content, failed to
contact the author, and failed to give the correct website address so that
readers could judge for themselves. We am an IAEI member and the author of the
informational website for home inspectors which was referred-to in the FPE
article. The correct Internet website address is
http://InspectAPedia.com/fpe/fpepanel.htm
Publicly available information is compelling and sufficient to warrant warning
contractors, inspectors, and consumers. The best data available substantiates
that the 2-pole breakers cannot be relied upon to trip. CPSC found that was the
case. FPE agreed that was the case. Field reports confirm that is
still the case. Inspectors should work towards replacing breakers that won't
trip, not towards whitewashing the problem.
The problem with FPE breakers is that a significant portion of them will not
trip on overload or short circuit conditions in order to protect a building from
fire ignition. Testing done by the CPSC showed that at a modest overload on both
poles these failed 25% of the time, followed by a lockup. The breaker would
never trip in the future at any overload. (See Table 1, Summary of Failures,
CPSC-C-81-1429 December 30, 1982, attached.) There are other types of failures
known to occur in FPE panels at lower probability and not as well documented as
the 2-pole no-trip problem.
FPE did not refute the CPSC's test data. The no-trip problems with 2-pole
Stab-Lok® breakers were acknowledged by FPE. FPE claims that when their circuit
breakers do not trip it does not constitute a hazard. The article in IAEI News
by FPE is asking us to agree with FPE's position that breakers that won't trip
are OK because they are "listed and labeled." Let's keep in mind that a breaker
that will not trip on certain overcurrent conditions is electrically the same as
an Edison-base fuse with a penny behind it. No inspector should be encouraged to
condone or whitewash the continued use of breakers that cannot be depended on to
trip properly.
These problems were known. Reliance Electric Co. had bought FPE in 1979 when
they discovered problems with FPE breakers. They sued the company they had
bought FPE from, claiming undisclosed potential liability made FPE not what they
had bargained for and citing evidence that "improper and deceptive practices
were employed for many years to secure UL listings for Federal Pacific's circuit
protective products? They wanted their money back. Reliance eventually settled
the suit, kept FPE, and got back $41.85 million in return for which they agreed
to indemnify the company they'd bought FPE from for product liability claims
arising from products made by FPE before the purchase.
Continuing problems can't be ruled out. For example, see the Federal
Pacific/Federal Pioneer circuit breaker warranty alert issued by the Ontario New
Home Warranty Program in 1997 (copy attached). These products are still present
in the field! Reports from consumers and electricians indicate failures to trip,
overheating, and fires.
Note also that the author of the FPE article did not want to have his or her
name associated with it and that the FPE contact listed is an attorney retained
(presumably) by FPE. The information address given in the article would have
been more accurate if given as: Howard B. Abramoff Law Offices, 25700 Science
Park Dr. Suite 260, Cleveland OH 44122. This is a law firm, not a
circuit-breaker manufacturer. This confirms that the article is biased towards
the defense of FPE rather than providing information on "?the safe installation
and use of electricity" (IAEI's mission statement in the magazine's masthead).
As a neutral professional, I'd be pleased to receive reliable information
shedding new light on the situation. But a public relations article written by
someone whose aim is to protect FPE's interests and which fails to address
legitimate concerns and the known failures and problems occurring around the
country is not something I'd rely upon. Based on our experience and numerous
reports from people with no axes to grind, it appears that FPE circuit breakers
frequently fail to perform their function. A circuit breaker may sit in a
building for twenty years, and as long as it never sees an overload or short
circuit it may seem to work fine. But if it cannot perform its function to
interrupt current when overloaded or short circuited, that circuit breaker is a
latent fire hazard. Such equipment should be replaced.
Respectfully,
Dan Friedman, IAEI #195930
Attachments:
1. "Calibration and Condition Tests of Molded Case Circuit Breakers, Final
Report: Contract CPSC-C-81-1429," December 30, 1982, Wright Malta Corporation,
Summary Pages 1-3.
2. Reliance Electric Co. Press Release, July 7, 1980, stating that "Underwriters
Laboratories labels for most of FPE's circuit breakers were obtained through
improper practices,?
3. Schneider Electric Canada Warranty Alert, recalling Federal Pioneer (Federal
Pacific Canadian) circuit breakers NC015/NC015P, October 14, 1997
4. our resume/background (Since the article indicates the author did not know who we are )
5. WEB FaqS: Website author, credibility
6. "Federal Pacific Electric (FPE) Panels, a Summary," website page from
http://InspectAPedia.com/fpe/fpepanel.htm (This is the root page of a
collection of public documents and articles regarding this topic.)
10-1-00 follow up note: IAEI and Mr. Cox have declined to reply to this correspondence.
03/01/03 follow up note: IAEI has not retracted the un-signed article described above. Industry experts have confirmed that the IAEI article is
inaccurate and dangerous in its advice as it exposes consumers to equipment which cannot be relied upon in event of an overcurrent. The result
could be shock or fire. We have encountered one or two instances of electricians who, unfamiliar with FPE failures, cited this article in defense of
a "no action" position, in all cases in defense of a home seller. our advice to consumers who are faced with denials that this equipment is
a latent safety hazard to ask for that opinion in writing. To date (12/1/2005) we have not had any reports of a professional who was willing to sign such a document.
01/26/2006 follow up note: IAEI declined to ever address the dangerous inaccuracies in the original IAEI magazine article. The article appears to have been penned by
an attorney charged with protecting the remaining interests of that organization.
04/22/2008 follow up note: IAEI has not responded to this correspondence.
08/03/2010 follow up note: IAEI did not respond to this correspondence.
Citation by brief quote or links-to this website are invited,
provided you credit this source website FPE Stab-Lok® HAZARDS & REPAIRS WEBSITE found at http://InspectAPedia.com/fpe/fpepanel.htm, Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Lok® Circuit Breaker & Panel Information Website
Printed copies of our website pages are permitted (hard copies on paper) for free (not for sale) distribution provided that you do not edit the content, you include a citation of the source web page, and you do not imply that our website is endorsing any product or service for sale.
Do NOT copy electronically nor reproduce our website content electronically (for example to a web page) without writing to us (Contact Us) first to obtain
express permission. See our Policy on use of website contents - OK in printed form only, do not make electronic copies
Federal Pacific Electric FPE Stab-Lok® Information for your website: for information on FPE Stab-Lok® equipment that can be copied to your website, see FPE Stab-Lok® Hazard Summary Page for Public Use
Note: the following articles included as addenda are maintained as separate web pages listed above and at Related Topics .
CALIBRATION AND CONDITION TESTS OF MOLDED CASE CIRCUIT BREAKERS - Federal Pacific Stab Lok Breakers - CPSC Data
CPSC-C-81-1429 December 30, 1982
Final Report: Contract CPSC-C-81-1429
Date: December 30, 1982
Submitted by: Jesse Aronstein
(original contains signature)
WRIGHTVM MALTA
CORPORATION. Malta test station, Ballston Spa, New York 12020 518-899-2227
1.0 FPE Stab-Lok® Electric Panel Hazard Summary
Calibration tests have been performed on 122 two-pole Federal Pacific Electric circuit breakers. The calibration tests were performed -in accordance with UL Standard 489 except for or a difference in the sequence of calibrations. UL 489 is the applicable standard that the breakers are presumed to meet. In most cases, the calibration tests were repeated after 500 off-on mechanical operations of the toggle handle..
The circuit breakers tested were supplied by CPSC and came from several sources. Most were provided to CPSC by Federal Pacific Electric, some were purchased new by CPSC staff members at retail outlets, and a few were removed from existing installations. The breaker ratings tested were 30A (30 two-pole breakers tested), 40A (35), 50A(20), 60A(7) and 80A (30). The tests include performance at 100%, 135%, and 200% of ratings, and dielectric tests. More about the galvanic scale and corrosion between dissimilar metals is at GALVANIC SCALE & METAL CORROSION.
A substantial number of breakers failed the calibrations testing, both before and after the mechanical toggle operations. Failures were evident with both poles carrying current as well as with one-pole operation. Specifically, the failures are summarized as follows:
|
FAILURE CONDITION |
FAILURES |
|
% (#failed/#tested) |
|
Before Mechanical Operations |
After Mechanical Operations |
|
No-trip: 200% of rating, both poles |
0% (0/122) |
1% (1/107) |
|
No-trip: 200% of rating, individual poles |
1% (3/244) |
10% (21/214) |
|
No-trip: 135% of rating, both poles* |
25% (31/122) |
36% (39/107) |
|
No-trip: 135% of rating, individual poles |
51% (125/244) |
65% (144/220) |
|
Trip: 100% of rating, both poles* |
3% (4/122) |
6% (7/111) |
|
Dielectric Breakdown (short)* |
0 |
1% (1/111) |
|
TABLE 1 - SUMMARY OF FAILURES
*UL 489 Test Conditions |
The failures appeared. among breakers of all ratings, none were failure-free. Most of the "no-trip' conditions were sustained for four hours well beyond the UL specification. These were not marginal failures with respect to the failure criteria. The data suggests that, on the average, the mechanical operations result in increased failures. This was .'not strictly the case on a sample-to-sample basis.
The failures relate to hazardous conditions in at least two ways. First, a fault in the wiring or utilization equipment which causes excessive- current-can result in fire if the circuit is not opened by the breaker -- this is its principal functional requirement. Secondly, it was determined in these tests that some of the breakers overheat to hazardous levels when subjected to overcurrent conditions (due to their own failure to trip) for sustained periods of time. The overheating can result in incapacitation of the breaker (i.e.: it will no longer open under any condition), and the temperature can be high enough to ignite fire in the vicinity of the breaker, as evidenced by charring of the case on some samples.
NOTE: this text is quoted verbatim from pages 3-5 of "Calibration and Condition Tests of Molded Case Circuit Breakers, Final Report: Contract CPSC-C-81-1429 December 30, 1982," obtained from the US Consumer Product Safety Commission as a FOIA request.
Federal Pacific Electric (FPE) Service Panel & Breaker Identification
This paper describes how to identify Federal Pacific Stab-Lok® Electric
Panels in buildings. It is information for building inspectors, home buyers, home owners, electricians
exploring the background of possible hazards associated with Federal Pacific
Electric Stab-Lok® circuit breakers and service panels.
Summary: How to identify Federal Pacific Stab-Lok® (FPE)
Electric Panels
To identify the circuit breaker panels and breakers
discussed at the FPE
information website you should look for the product name "Federal
Pacific Stab Lok" or "Federal Pioneer Stab Lok" on the
equipment. If all product identification labels have been removed, look at the
various photos of FPE panels which you can find at the Federal Pacific Electric
Stab Lok Panel website, and at several of the articles at that website,
e.g. See Hazardous
FPE Circuit Breakers and Panels.
What if there are no labels on our FPE Electric panel? How can we tell if it
is a "Stab-Lok® " model?
- Look again carefully for
labels, on the panel exterior, or on the inside of the hinged,
consumer-operable panel door. Look for the words "Stab-Lok® "
- Photo of a small
Stab-Lok® Panel with the labeling visible, notice the words
"Stab-Lok® visible in the center between the two rows of breakers when
the hinged cover door is open.
- Photo of a 125A Stab-Lok® Electric panel (partial view)
- Photo of a
typical Stab-Lok® circuit breaker - and typically, one of these is
visibly overheated - and failed to trip in response to an overcurrent
(Photo Credit: M.C., FL.)
- Photo of a typical FPE
Stab-Lok® 30A double pole breaker oblique view � typically these jam on
overcurrent
- Interesting
Camouflaged FPE Stab-Lok® breaker (of unknown vintage) used alone in a
1950's house in FL, note the clearly-legible name on the paper label.
- thanks to JB, the Inspectigagtor, FL
- Photo of a typical Stab-Lok® hinged panel door label
- Photo of an old type ID
label in a Stab-Lok® circuit breaker panel
- If no labels are visible,
a visual inspection of other panel details can confirm that it is one of
several FPE Stab-Lok® designs, the "F" shaped bus or the
"E" shaped buss - but this step requires use of a licensed
electrician, as it is necessary to remove the panel cover, and possibly to
remove one or two circuit breakers to look at the buss connectors on the
bottom of the breaker or at the bus itself in the panel.
Watch out: SAFETY WARNING - FATAL SHOCK HAZARD - If it
is necessary to remove an electric panel cover to inspect the panel interior,
buses, or other components, you should hire a licensed electrician for that
purpose. Unless you are a licensed electrician, DO NOT REMOVE ELECTRIC PANEL
COVERS, DO NOT INSERT TOOLS INTO ELECTRIC PANELS, DO NOT TOUCH LIVE ELECTRICAL
PARTS such as screws, buses, bare wires, or anything that is inside of the
electric panel.
This warning does not prohibit unlatching and
swinging open the normal hinged panel covers provided for use by the homeowner
to permit access to circuit breaker switches themselves. The warning refers to
disassembling, unscrewing, or otherwise modifying or operating on an electric
panel. Live wires and contacts inside of an electric panel can, if touched,
cause fatal shock - death. If you are uncertain of what is safe to touch, do
not touch any part of the equipment.
Three Stab-Lok® bus designs were used in these
panels and can be identified by an electrician on disassembly of some panel
components.
Does the age of Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Lok® Electric Panels make a
difference in the safety concerns?
The following is a personal opinion by the website author:
From our knowledge of the history, pattern, and nature of FPE manufacturing and
management difficulties, we suspect the entire product line may have had
defects, labeling errors, safety, or other performance issues for both
commercial and residential equipment, where circuit breakers and panels are
concerned. (I don't have similar criticism of the older FUSE equipment).
However we have test data only for the FPE Stab-Lok® series of residential electrical
panels and circuit breakers. The "Stab-Lok® " product involves a
specific electrical panel, bus, and circuit breaker design. Therefore the FPE Stab-Lok® Panel Website
only includes research and warnings for this specific product line.
People write to ask if their Federal Pacific Electric equipment is "OK"
based on a particular age of their house and presumably of the panel.
"Year" criteria is not useful in evaluating risk as there is no data
that demonstrates that FPE Stab-Lok® equipment is better or worse after specific
dates. Furthermore, the age of a piece of equipment installed in a house can be
older or newer than the age of the house itself.
Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Lok® Historic Dates
The following dates are excerpted from various public documents, all of which can be
found at this website:
1979 Reliance Electric acquired the [bankrupt]
Federal Pacific Electric Company from UV Industries.
June 1980, Reliance Electric and FPE brought suit
against UV Industries [a liquidating trust which previously handled the assets
of the bankrupt FPE company.] for damages of $345 million or for rescission of
the previous sale by UV of the FPE line to Reliance, referring to deceptive
practices which went on for years on obtaining UL listing for FPE products.
5 July 1980: Reliance Electric stopped shipping FPE
Stab-Lok® equipment on or about July 5, 1980. Keep in mind that equipment in the
pipeline in supply houses was never recalled, so homes built considerably after
that date may still have an FPE Stab-Lok® panel installed.
21 July 1980: Business Week magazine reports on
FPE/Reliance Electric scandal.
September 1980: Reliance Electric brought legal
action against Sharon Steel Company which had assumed the liabilities of UV
Liquidation.
17 February 1981: Federal Pacific announced that it
would voluntarily replace or field modify certain models of its [predominantly
commercial and industrial] molded case circuit breaker line. [No recall, no
field repair was offered for residential equipment.] Funds were set aside for
this replacement [but may not have been expended.]
31 March 1982: Reliance Electric Financial
Statements acknowledge that FPE previously obtained UL Listings by fraudulent
means and that at "some point thereafter, lost their UL listing."
(Aronstein) provide report
of independent testing and failures of FPE Stab-Lok® breakers.
CPSC management halts testing of
FPE Breakers, citing high costs of continuing the project. The announcement
does not exonerate the product and includes generic warnings to consumers.
11 October 1995: The FPE Stab-Lok® Website
created by DJ Friedman as a consumer information and failure research project.
14 October 1997: Ontario Canada Home Warranty
Program issues a warning regarding Canadian Federal Pioneer [Canadian version
of FPE Stab-Lok® ] equipment provided by Schneider Electric if made in 1996 and
1997, and announces a recall program for Canadians.
May 1999 :FPE Stab Lok Website author converses with
Schneider Electric re: Federal Pioneer Equipment - further data not
forthcoming.
December 1999: Ohio FPE Stab-Lok® failure-caused panel-fire
documented at the website.
June 1999: IAEI International Association of
Electrical Inspectors publishes anonymously and disclaimed, an article [penned
by a previous FPE employee] - stating that there have never been failure,
safety, or other issues with FPE Stab-Lok® equipment.
21 February 2004: Update of ongoing FPE Failure
testing reported to ASHI - American Society of Home Inspectors [this topic has
been reported to ASHI previously and has been addressed at ASHI conferences and
seminars.
Federal Pacific Electric Equipment issues extend beyond basic design of the Stab Lok Circuit Breaker
But it's
more complicated than that. The company actually changed the design from time
to time (without necessarily telling anyone). On the other hand, No one has
provided any technical or even anecdotal data suggesting that any of these
changes corrected basic design flaws. In addition, there was the problem of
equipment UL-listing label swapping and therefore mislabeling individual
pieces of equipment, therefore incorrectly stating the use to which individual
pieces of equipment could be applied.
FPE USA stopped making equipment quite a while ago,
but Stab-Lok® (TM) panels and circuit breakers continued to be produced in
Canada, under the name Federal Pioneer, a
Canadian "FPE" company which was later bought by Schneider Electric,
also in Canada.
"Federal Pioneer Stab-Lok® circuit breakers and panels continue to be
available even still as "new" today. Some of our Canadian contacts
claim that the Canadian product was better than the U.S.-made version but my
own first-hand view of some of it in the home of a Canadian Home inspector was
that it was just as bad. (The circuit breakers had to be held into the panel
using adhesive tape!)
Several
years ago we called Schneider Electric and was able to speak with a Schneider
engineer about this product. We asked if they had changed the design to fix any
of the inherent problems with the product series over the U.S. version. We were promised an answer to this question - the engineer was quite polite. But in
follow-up calls no one at the company wanted to provide any information about
this product.
If a manufacturer cannot, or will not provide their supporting test or other data
for a product home inspectors and electricians are forced to err on the safe side by refusing to endorse it.
"Trust me" just doesn't cut it where electrical safety is concerned.
Exxon Buys A Scandal Along With A Company - Business
Week, July 21, 1980, p.66
For faster loading, this article, obtained from a public library, has been broken into segments. Use the links below to read the article in order; use the "back" button on your browser to return to this page.
Federal Pacific Electric (FPE) Panels - CPSC Information
This page contains a closing statement regarding a CPSC Investigation of FPE Circuit Breakers and additional safety information for consumers.
Click your browser's "back" button to return to the previous page
NOTE: This document has been entered verbatim from the original document. Very important
safety remarks and independent study reports of FPE hazards and advice about what to do can be found
at More Information about FPE.
FOR RELEASE: MARCH 3, 1983
COMMISSION CLOSES INVESTIGATION OF
FPE CIRCUIT BREAKERS AND PROVIDES
SAFETY INFORMATION FOR CONSUMERS
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Consumer Product Safety Commission
announced today that it is closing its two year investigation into
Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Lok® type residential circuit breakers.
This action was taken because the data currently available to the
Commission does not establish that the circuit breakers present a
serious risk of injury to consumers.
The Commission investigation into Federal Pacific Electric (FPE)
circuit breakers began in June, 1980, when Reliance Electric Co., a
subsidiary of Exxon Corporation and the parent to FPE, reported to
the Commission that many FPE circuit breakers did not fully comply
with Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (UL) requirements. Commission
testing confirmed that these breakers fail under certain UL calibration
test requirements. The Commission investigation focused primarily
on 2-pole residential circuit breakers manufactured before Reliance
acquired FPE in 1979.
To meet UL standards, residential circuit breakers must pass
a number of so-called "calibration tests." The purpose of these
tests is to determine whether the circuit breakers will hold the
current for which they are rated and also automatically open or
"trip" (shut off the current) within the specified time limits if
over-loading of the circuit breakers causes current levels in excess of the
breaker's amperage rating. (Overloading can occur because a
consumer plugs too many products into a circuit or due to the failure
of a product or component connected to that circuit.) While the
Commission is concerned about the failure of these FPE breakers to
meet UL calibration requirements, the Commission is unable at this
time to link these failures to the development of a hazardous situation.
According to Reliance, failure of these FPE breakers to
comply with certain UL calibration requirements do not create a
hazard in the household environment. It is Reliance's position
that FPE breakers will trip reliably at most overload levels unless
the breakers have been operated in a repetitive, abusive manner
that should not occur during residential use. Reliance maintains
that, at those few overload levels where FPE breakers may fail to
trip under realistic use conditions, currents will be too low to
generate hazardous temperatures in household wiring. Reliance
believes that its position in this regard is supported by test data that
is provided to the Commission.
The Commission staff believes that it currently has insufficient
data to accept or refute Reliance's position.
The Commission staff estimates that it would cost several
million dollars to gather the data necessary to assess fully whether
those circuit breakers which are installed in homes but which may
fail UL calibration tests present a risk to the public. Based on
the Commission's limited budget ($34 million for fiscal year 1983),
the known hazards the Commission has identified and must address
(involving products of other manufacturers) and the uncertainty of
the results of such a costly investigation, the Commission has
decided not to commit further resources to its investigation of
FPE's circuit breakers. However, despite its decision to close
this particular investigation, the Commission will continue its
investigation of circuit breakers generally. The Commission can
reopen its investigation of FPE breakers if further information
warrants.
The Commission advises consumers to take certain safety
precautions with all circuit breakers and fuses. Consumers should:
-Know your electrical circuit. Know which outlets and products
are connected to each circuit.
-Never overload any electrical circuit by connecting too
many products to the circuit. Be particularly careful not
to connect several products that demand high current (such
as heating appliances) to a low amperage circuit.
-Comply with local building codes in wiring or adding electrical
circuits. Make sure the wiring and devices used in the
circuit are connected to a circuit breaker or fuse of the
-Immediately disconnect any electrical product if problems develop.
Have the product examined by a competent repair person.
-Investigate to determine why a fuse blows or circuit breaker
trips. Do not simply replace the fuse or reset the breaker.
If a fuse blows or breaker trips, it is often a warning that
the circuit is overloaded. Check the circuit for causes of
overloading (for example, too many appliances plugged in, a
malfunctioning product, a short circuit). When in doubt,
consult a licensed electrician.
Consumers who have questions concerning circuit breakers, or
who wish to report information relating to their safety, may call
the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission's toll-free safety
hotline at 800-638-CPSC, teletypewriter for the hearing impaired
at 800-638-8270 (Maryland only 800-492-8104).
Books & Articles on Building & Environmental Inspection, Testing, Diagnosis, & Repair
 The Home Reference Book - the Encyclopedia of Homes, Carson Dunlop & Associates, Toronto, Ontario, 25th Ed., 2012, is a bound volume of more than 450 illustrated pages that assist home inspectors and home owners in the inspection and detection of problems on buildings. The text is intended as a reference guide to help building owners operate and maintain their home effectively. Field inspection worksheets are included at the back of the volume. Special Offer: For a 10% discount on any number of copies of the Home Reference Book purchased as a single order. Enter INSPECTAHRB in the order payment page "Promo/Redemption" space. InspectAPedia.com editor Daniel Friedman is a contributing author.
Or choose the The Home Reference eBook for PCs, Macs, Kindle, iPad, iPhone, or Android Smart Phones. Special Offer: For a 5% discount on any number of copies of the Home Reference eBook purchased as a single order. Enter INSPECTAEHRB in the order payment page "Promo/Redemption" space.
|
- * Safety Hazards and Safe Inspection Procedures for Electrical and Home Inspectors at Residential Electric Panels
- Aluminum Wiring Information Website Aluminum Electrical Wiring Hazards and Repairs: in-depth authoritative info, photos, documents including selection of proper vs. ineffective repair methods. E.g.: Ideal 65 "Twister" purple connector fails in field and lab testing with aluminum wire.
- Ampacity of an Electrical Service: How to determine the electrical service size or ampacity entering a building
- Circuit Breaker, a bad one fails to trip failure at aluminum bus-to-circuit breaker connection - field report and photographs
- Electrical System & Wiring Hazard Inspection, Detection, Cause, Remedy, Prevention - Main Electrical Page
- Electrical Panels, How to Inspect in buildings, safety for electrical inspectors, electrical panel, fusing, wiring defects, defective products. Inspection Class Presentation
- Lightning Strike Risk Assessment, Protection Systems & Services
- Multi-wire branch circuit inspection and defects
- Directory of Home Inspectors accessible via internet
Carson Dunlop's Home Inspector's Home Study Course (DJF is a contributor and participant in this education project).
© 2012- 1988 Copyright InspectAPedia.com All Rights Reserved, The information on this page may not be reproduced or republished on another web page or website - InspectAPedia® is a Registered U.S. Trademark
Citation by brief quote or links-to this website are invited,
provided you credit this source website InspectAPedia.com/fpe/fpepanel.htm
Printed copies of our website pages are permitted (hard copies on paper) for free (not for sale) distribution provided that you do not edit the content, you include a citation of the source web page, and you do not imply that our website is endorsing any product or service for sale.
Do NOT copy electronically nor reproduce our website content electronically (for example to a web page) without writing to us (Contact Us) first to obtain
express permission. See our Policy on use of website contents - OK in printed form only, do not make electronic copies
Federal Pacific Electric FPE Stab-Lok® Information for your website: for information on FPE Stab-Lok® equipment that can be copied to your website, see FPE Stab-Lok® Hazard Summary Page for Public Use
