 |
InspectAPedia® |
InspectAPedia
|
Free Encyclopedia of Building & Environmental Inspection, Testing, Diagnosis, Repair | Ask a Question or Search InspectAPedia |
 Mobile ViewELECTRICAL INSPECTION, DIAGNOSIS, REPAIR AFCIs ARC FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTERS ALUMINUM SECs & WIRING ALUMINUM WIRING HAZARDS AMPS & VOLTS DETERMINATION AMPACITY - the LIMITING FACTOR APPLIANCE EFFICIENCY RATINGS BACKUP ELECTRICAL GENERATORS Cadet & Encore Heater Recall CIRCUIT BREAKER FAILURE CIRCUIT BREAKER SIZE for A/C or HEAT PUMP CIRCUIT BREAKER SIZE for A/C or HEAT PUMP Classified CIRCUIT BREAKER WARNING CUTLER HAMMER PANEL FIRE CONDUIT, ELECTRICAL CORROSION in ELECTRICAL PANELS CORROSION & MOISTURE SOURCES in PANELS DEFINITIONS of ELECTRICAL TERMS DIRECTORY OF ELECTRICIANS DIRECTORY OF ELECTRICIANS - Aluminum Wiring DIRECTORY OF ELECTRICIANS - FPE Zinsco ELECTRIC HEAT ELECTRIC METERS & METER BASES ELECTRIC MOTOR DIAGNOSTIC GUIDE ELECTRIC MOTOR OVERLOAD RESET SWITCH ELECTRIC PANEL AMPACITY ELECTRIC PANEL INSPECTION ELECTRIC PANEL MOISTURE Electric Power Frequency Table ELECTRICAL BASICS EMF RF FIELD & FREQUENCY DEFINITIONS ENERGY SAVINGS in buildings ELECTRICAL GENERATORS ELECTRICAL GROUND SYSTEM INSPECTION FEDERAL PACIFIC FPE HAZARDS FEDERAL PACIFIC FPE HAZARD SUMMARY FPE FAILURE REPORTS FPE FIRE & FAILURE PHOTOS FPE FAILURE FIELD REPORTS FPE HAZARD ARTICLES, STUDIES Summary of the FPE Stab-Lok Hazard FPE Fraud - Press Release FPE Fraud Stab-Lok SEC report FPE Exxon Scandal Article How to Repair FPE Stab-Lok FPE- Fires Waiting to Happen, Debate Waiting to End FPE Technical Report - Independent Research 2007 FPE Technical Report - Independent Research 2011 New Jersey FPE Class Action 2005 FPE St Louis Seminar 2004 Federal Pioneer Recall 1997 EXXON Buys a Scandal 1980 FPE HISTORIC DATES 1950-Present FPE Pre-1970 STAB-LOKS OK? FPE HISTORY FPE & FP IDENTIFICATION, HOW TO FPE STAB-LOK PANEL COVERS FEDERAL NOARK PANELS FEDERAL ELECTRIC PANELS FEDERAL PIONEER PANELS FPE PANEL DOOR LABELS FPE TOGGLE SWITCH FPE BREAKER ID PHOTOS FPE BREAKER LABELS HOW TO ID FPE IF NO LABELS FPE PANEL BUS DESIGNS FPE PANEL AGE MATTERS? OTHER FPE DEFECTS FPE INCIDENTS, HOW TO REPORT FPE INVESTIGATION CPSC Revised FPE INVESTIGATION CPSC 1982 FPE INVESTIGATION CPSC 1983 FPE IAEI LETTER INACCURATE FPE INVESTIGATION CPSC Revised FPE INVESTIGATION CPSC 1982 FPE INVESTIGATION CPSC 1983 FPE HAZARD IAEI LETTER INACCURATE FPE PANEL ADVICE for HOME BUYERS FPE PANEL INSPECTION REPORTS FP FEDERAL PIONEER in CANADA What Are Federal Pioneer Panel Concerns? Federal Pioneer Warranty Alert Federal Pioneer Electrical Circuit Breaker Recall Field Reports of Federal Pioneer Problems Other Federal Pioneer Concerns Are Recent Federal Pioneer Stab-Loks Safe? FEDERAL PIONEER PANELS FPE REPAIR ELECTRICIANS FPE REPLACEMENT BREAKERS FPE REPLACEMENT PANELS FPE REPLACEMENT PANEL COSTS CAN'T AFFORD A NEW ELECTRIC PANEL? FPE Stab-Lok Panel Test Report FPE PANEL Test Performed FPE PANEL Test Results Photos of FPE Stab-Lok Panel FPE SUB PANELS, RISK ASSESSMENT FPE STAB-LOK: FIRES WAITING TO HAPPEN How Many Stab-Loks Stab-Lok Failure Rate Proper Repair Proving the Hazard Multiwire Circuits Single Pole Breakers Latent Safety Hazard Failure Reports Technical Reports FPE Stab-Lok TECHNICAL REPORT FPE Stab-Lok Circuit Breaker Test Results CPSC Tests FPE Test Results Southwest Research Incorporated Underwriters Laboratories Inc. Recent Testing of Field Samples FPE Stab-Lok Combination Breaker/GFI Non-FPE Stab-Lok Breakers FPE Main Breakers FPE Stab-Lok Panels FPE Stab-Lok Panels with "Rule of Six" Configuration Hazardous Failure - an Example History of the FPE Problem Should FPE Panels be Replaced? FPE Stab-Lok TECHNICAL REPORT-2004 FPE Stab-Lok Panel Test Report FPE PANEL Test Performed FPE PANEL Test Results Photos of FPE Stab-Lok Panel FPE Stab-Lok Hazard Summary Page for Public Use GENERATORS, ELECTRICAL GFCI PROTECTION,Testing GFCIs AFCIs HEATING COST FUEL & BTU Cost Table HEAT, ELECTRIC HEAT TAPE USAGE GUIDE Hertz - Definitions of KHz MHz GHz THz KNOB & TUBE WIRING LIGHTING, EXTERIOR GUIDE LIGHTING, INTERIOR GUIDE LIGHTNING PROTECTION SYSTEMS LOW VOLTAGE BUILDING WIRING MAIN DISCONNECT MAIN DISCONNECT AMPACITY MOISTURE SOURCES in PANELS MULTI-WIRE CIRCUITS MURRAY SIEMENS Recall PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER SYSTEMS PUSHMATIC - BULLDOG PANELS REMOTE ELECTRIC POWER, PHOTOVOLTAIC RUST in ELECTRICAL PANELS SAFETY for ELECTRICAL INSPECTORS SE CABLE SIZES vs AMPS SIEMENS MURRAY Recall SQUARE-D RECALLS UNDERGROUND SERVICE LATERALS VOLTAGE MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS WIND TURBINES & LIGHTNING ZINSCO / SYLVANIA HAZARDS More Information |
This article summarizes the safety issues concerning Federal Pacific Electric FPE Stab-Lok electrical panels and circuit breakers. This website explains the fire and shock hazards associated with Federal Pacific Electric Stab-lok circuit breakers and service panels, provides a history of the issue, recounts research on FPE failures, and recommends replacement of the panels. 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. InspectAPedia tolerates no conflicts of interest. We have no relationship with advertisers nor with topics or services discussed at this website.© Copyright 2012 InspectAPedia.com, All Rights Reserved. Information Accuracy & Bias Pledge is at below-left. Use page top links to major topics or use links at the left of each page to navigate within topics and documents at this website. Green links show where you are in a document series or at this website. A Summary of the Problem: Federal Pacific Stab-Lok® Electric Panel and Circuit Breaker HazardsElectronic copies and reproduction of this information at other websites are prohibited. Readers are welcome to make and distribute printed copies of our articles about FPE Stab-Lok equipment provided the web page address is cited and provided that the content is not edited or changed.
Details are summarized below, and are provided at length at the FPE Stab-Lok HAZARDS & REPAIRS WEBSITE. Text above based on correspondence from J. Aronstein. [5] FPE Stab-Lok® Circuit Breakers Fail to TripHigh failure rate: The central safety defect in FPE Stab-Lok(R) electrical equipment is that FPE Stab-Lok(R) circuit breakers fail to trip under overload or short-circuit conditions, at a failure rate much higher than comparable equipment made by other producers. This failure to trip occurs up to 80% of the time when the breakers are called-on to trip, depending on the individual breaker type and ampacity. We have found no data indicating that circuit breakers from other manufacturers fail at anywhere near this high rate. Risk of fire or injury: When an overload or short circuit occurs in an electrical device, say an electric clothes dryer, the circuit supplying electricity to the device is supposed to be interrupted, electrical power cut off, by either a fuse or a circuit breaker. This interruption of electrical power is intended to minimize the resulting fire hazard of electrical overloads or short circuits. A circuit breaker that fails to trip is unsafe fails to protect the electrical circuit and the building and building occupants where that circuit breaker is installed. This can lead to fire, property loss, and injury or worse. FPE Stab-Lok TECHNICAL REPORT describes independent research explaining the hazards involved with FPE Stab-Lok electrical panels and includes a link to the most-current and easily-printable .pdf version of that document. FPE Stab-Lok® Circuit Breakers Are a Latent Safety HazardA "latent safety hazard" means that the product itself does not initiate the unsafe condition. Rather, when the unsafe condition occurs (as just described above), the product, in this case an FPE Stab-Lok(R) circuit breaker, which is intended to interrupt electrical power, fails to do its job. An impartial review of documentation regarding this issue, and discussions of the issue with forensic experts in the field, make clear 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. An FPE Stab-Lok Electrical Panel Should Be Replaced, not "Inspected by an Electrician" and not "Tested"Having the FPE Stab-Lok panel evaluated by an electrician is unfortunately of absolutely no value. A visual inspection can not predict whether a circuit breaker is going to jam on the next occurrence of an overcurrent or short circuit. While a visual might pick up evidence of a previously burned circuit breaker or panel bus connection, the absence of such evidence is not any assurance whatsoever that the panel is safe.
Having the FPE Stab-Lok panel "tested" by an electrician is dangerous. For example, placing an overcurrent on an electrical circuit in the building could cause a fire to occur. Further, placing an overcurrent on a circuit "protected" by an FPE Stab-Lok circuit breaker may actually increase the chances that the circuit breaker will fail to trip in the future, even if it appears to work when tested. Aronstein's research showed a dramatic increase in the jam-up and failure rate in these circuit breakers after they had been exposed to a first "event" such as an over-current. But Up to Now the Electrical Panel has Never Shown a Problem!A statement by a building owner or occupant that no problem has been observed in a particular FPE Stab-Lok panel is absolutely no assurance that the panel is safe. It may simply be the case that the building has not experienced an over-current or short circuit on an electrical circuit. Or an overcurrent may have occurred, tripped a breaker, but in doing so, increased the chance that next time the same breaker will fail to trip. It would be dangerous for a building seller, for example, to warrant the future safety of an electrical panel in the building s/he is selling. It would be dangerous for a building buyer to rely on the claim by a seller, real estate agent, or electrician that an FPE Stab-Lok electrical panel is "safe" since all independent research indicates that they are mistaken. Bottom line on FPE: If it's an FPE Stab-lok electrical panel, it should be replaced, period.Financial Assistance for Replacement of Electrical PanelsIn general, financial aid is not available: Except for an almost-worthless class action settlement that affected some New Jersey homeowners, there is no financial relief offered by FPE nor by its successors to homeowners or home buyers for the replacement of these panels. In some communities there may be generic financial aid for home repairs to elderly homeowners or to homeowners of limited financial means, such as the Christmas in April program or financial aid to seniors programs - check with your local city, town, county, or state financial aid offices. Some electricians may offer discounted services to seniors or to others of modest means. Ask your electrician. Panel replacement choices can save some money: FPE REPLACEMENT PANELS contains some panel-replacement suggestions that can in some cases save a portion of the replacement cost. How Did These Unsafe FPE Stab-Lok(R) Circuit Breakers Get Into Homes?"In a class-action lawsuit against FPE/Reliance in New Jersey, the Court found that Federal Pacific Electric Co. (FPE) committed fraud by representing that their FPE Stab-Lok(R) circuit breakers met the applicable (UL) standard test requirements when in fact they did not. The Court's finding of fraud, published in 2005, indicates that FPE cheated on the tests that were required to obtain UL listings. The company improperly applied UL labels to circuit breakers that could not and did not meet the UL requirements. FPE covered up the defective performance of the circuit breakers by a long-standing practice of fraudulent testing. The Court's finding helps resolve the question as to how the defective breakers got into the marketplace and into homes." -- 2007 FPE Stab-Lok TECHNICAL REPORT, p.1, Dr. Jess Aronstein [available at this website]. Why Do Some People Say There is no FPE Stab-Lok(R) Hazard?Most Circuit Breakers Are Never Called-on to TripIn a home or on a circuit that has never been used, or has never experienced an overcurrent or short circuit, an unsafe breaker that would not trip when it should, will look just fine. That's because the circuit breaker has never been required to trip off. As Aronstein points out [2007 FPE Stab-Lok TECHNICAL REPORT, Dr. Jess Aronstein], the performance of such an electrical circuit would look equally fine if there were no circuit breaker installed at all, since it has never needed to be interrupted. Does that mean such an electrical circuit is safe and that it is protected as intended? No. Companies, Attorneys, Realtors, Home Sellers, Home Buyers with Conflicting InterestsA home owner who intends to continue living in a home, or someone buying a new home, has a great interest in assuring that the home's electrical system is properly protected and safe, as does their insurance company. However in some circumstances such as wanting to push through the sale of a home without incident, or wishing to avoid admitting potential liability, or perhaps out of lack of accurate information, some people may still assert that this well-documented safety concern does not exist. Some insurance companies now require that their policy holders replace FPE Stab-Lok(R) equipment in the home before they will issue homeowners insurance for the property. Has There Been a U.S. Government, CPSC, or Manufacture's Product Recall for FPE Stab-Lok(R) Electrical Equipment?No, not in the U.S. for FPE Stab-Lok® equipment. However some versions of the sister product sold Canada under the label Federal Pioneer, were recalled. Did the CPSC Say There Was No Problem with FPE Stab-Lok(R) Equipment?No. A 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 [at that time], and that the Commission did not have funds to pursue testing. In that 1983 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 Aronstein's updated 2007 Report and in the IAEI letter available at this website. According to reports we've received from the field, a hasty reader or someone with conflicting interests, sometimes infers from the CPSC 1983 press release concerning FPE Stab-Lok(R) equipment that the manufacturer and some Commission members were of the opinion that conditions producing FPE Stab-lok(R) incidents and failures 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 my opinion, a serious fire hazard. So Is There an FPE Stab-Lok(R) Safety Problem or Not?Yes. Current research now confirms the safety hazards of FPE Stab-Lok(R) equipment and documents its failure rates. 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:
[The significance of these numbers can be understood more clearly if you consider that the typical failure-to-trip rate for circuit breakers in residential electrical panels is a small fraction of one percent. For the full report see 2007 FPE Stab-Lok TECHNICAL REPORT - an updated test report of independent testing (a large 1.2MB PDF file) FPE Stab-Lok® Equipment Means Latent Fire HazardsIt'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 breakers may perform with adequate reliability, possibly those manufactured after the companies discovered safety defects and improper practices in listing the product, and possibly some of those manufactured in Canada (certainly not all Canadian Federal Pioneer breakers, since there was a Canadian recall). In absence of an explicit statement from a 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, my 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. A home inspector, electrical inspector, building inspector, electrician, or contractor who makes any warranty of safety, by virtue of his/her position close to the consumer, is certain bear this very liability. Questions & Answers regarding this articleQuestions & answers about the FPE Stab-Lok hazard and what to do about a Federal Pacific Electric Stab Lok electrical panel or circuit breaker in your home, condominium, apartment, or business. Ask a Question or Search InspectAPediaHTML Comment Box is loading comments...
Recommend / Share this Article
... Technical Reviewers & References
Use links just below or at the left of each page to navigate this document or to view other topics at this website. Green links show where you are in our document or website. FPE Stab-Lok HAZARDS & REPAIRS WEBSITE - See detailed links at page left
Books & Articles on Building & Environmental Inspection, Testing, Diagnosis, & Repair
|
