Why are FPE - Federal Pacific Electric circuit breakers and electrical panels unsafe?

This document explains the latent electric shock and fire hazards associated with Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Lok® electric panels and circuit breakers and in Challenger® electrical panels and circuit breakers. Federal Pacific Electric "Stab-Lok® " service panels and breakers are dangerous and can fail, leading to electrical fires. The problem is that some 240-Volt FPE circuit breakers and possibly also some 120-Volt units simply may not work.

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.

How Many FPE Stab-Loks Are There? Why Are They Still In Place?

It has been suggested that there are as many as 28 million of these FPE Stab-Lok® breakers in use in the U.S. which means that in some conditions as many as one million of them may fail to provide proper fire protection. This includes "new old stock" and appears to include "substitute" FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers, none of which have shown an improvement in reliability in independent testing.

Three thousand FPE type breakers tested to date (2018): the statistical certainty of conclusions drawn from the data is very high. These breakers have a significantly-high rate of failure to perform safely. Details are at CIRCUIT BREAKER FAILURE RATES and also at FPE INVESTIGATION CPSC

So the right "repair" is to replace the FPE Stab-Lok® electric panel.

But where are they? Most homeowners whose houses are served by these panels are unaware of the hazards. So too are some inspectors and contractors.

Because most homeowners do not order periodic electrical safety inspections, the presence of these panels is often undiscovered until an inspection made in the course of renovating or selling a property. Our field experience indicates that even when problems occur with this equipment, often it is simply removed or replaced with little publicity. Neither manufacturers nor some electricians are inclined to frighten consumers.

See HOW to IDENTIFY FPE Federal Pacific Stab-Lok® Electric Panels - is yours one of these?

What is the FPE Stab-Lok® Failure Rate and How Much Worse Is It Than Other Equipment?

FPE Stab-Lok® or Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Lok® circuit breakers can fail to trip at an alarming rate.

In the original testing, at a modest overload (135% of rating) switches that had never been touched (never mechanically switched) were energized on both poles. These failed 25% of the time, followed by a lockup that meant the switch would never trip in the future at any overload. Once these switches had been flipped on and off (mechanically energized), failures increased to 36%!

Worse, when individual poles on these switches were energized under the same conditions, 51% of the "virgin" switches failed, and for switches that had been mechanically energized, a whopping 65% of them failed!1

In the most recent independent tests of FPE Stab-Lok® equipment, 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).

(To download this article see "Technical Reports" below.)

When a circuit breaker will not trip in response to an overload there is a serious risk of fire.

What is the Proper Repair for FPE Stab-Lok® Panels and Circuit Breakers?

Homeowners and renovators who encounter these panels should replace the entire panel and circuit breaker set with new equipment. Panel replacement, can involve significant expense, typically $800 to $1200 depending on service size and other factors.

Do not simply replace individual FPE Stab-Lok® circuit breakers: first of all, there is no data suggesting that new stock, replacement FPE breakers, or "new old stock" FPE breakers found in storage somewhere perform any better than the ones already in the FPE Stab-Lok® panel. Second, there are other functional and safety concerns in the panel besides the breakers themselves.

We've seen panel bus damage, panel bus meltdowns, and failure of breakers to remain secured in or onto the connecting bus itself.

Replacement Federal Pacific Electric FPE Stab-Lok® Circuit Breakers

For several reasons I do not recommend attempting to "repair" an individual failed Stab-Lok® breaker by buying a replacement either from used stock, new stock, or "compatible" stock:

• The replacement equipment and parts for FPE Stab-Lok® panels has not been independently tested and demonstrated to perform any better than the original materials
• Engineers involved in FPE Stab lok research have explained that a good part of the source of product failure for FPE Stab-Loks was in the original design and its specifications. It appears that while there were some "on the fly" (and unapproved) changes from time to time on the manufacturing line for this product, there was never a redesign suitable to attempt to "design out" the product failure.
  
  One expert opined to me privately that he believed that the original product's price point in the electrical equipment market was at the low end, and that had Federal Pacific attempted a redesign they'd not have had a product they could sell at their price point.
• There are other hazards in FPE electrical panels besides the breakers, including bus and bus insulation meltdowns and shorts.

A few other warnings:

• "Exercising" the FPE stablok circuit breakers by turning them on and off has not been shown to "un-stick" or in any other manner improve the probability of working properly. Worse, excessive toggling of an FPE 2-pole circuit breaker on and off may in fact increase the chances of a future failure by causing the breaker to jam internally.
• "Testing" FPE circuit breakers by applying a load may give an instantaneous picture of the performance of individual breakers but it does not predict their performance when a real safety problem occurs (overcurrent) later. More important, except if performed by a very expert person, in-place testing is very dangerous, risking fires in the building being tested.

In sum, if you could replace all the FPE Stab-Lok® equipment with (somehow magically obtained) all "new" FPE Stab-Lok® equipment (found in a used-or new-old-stock warehouse for example) the risk level for the building would not be sufficiently different from before the replacement and would remain high: there remains a latent risk of fire from failure of these breakers to trip in response to overcurrent.

Replacement Federal Pacific Electric FPE Stab-Lok® Panels is Recommended

For some cost and method alternatives when replacing an Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Lok® Panel or "load center"

see REPLACEMENT PANELS which describes conventional Option#1 - "remove and replace" the electrical panel and Option#2 - FPE Load Center Replacement using Cutler Hammer (CH) Adjustable Retrofit Kit

See FPE REPLACEMENT BREAKERS for details about and advice against replacement circuit breakers sold for retrofit or installation into Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Lok® electrical panels.

 

Comments from Company Selling Replacement FPE Replacement Circuit Breakers

(Apr 8, 2014) Mike said:

You do not have to replace your entire panel if you have Federal pacific Stab-lok style breakers. There is a company, Connecticut-Electric, Inc that makes brand new, ETL listed, same test as UL, circuit breakers that are safe to use and completely safety agency listed.

There seams to be a "red scare' out there about these breakers, yes, there were some issues. Even the federal government couldn't make a decision based upon the facts present to say that Federal Pacific breakers are actually unsafe. Why spend all that money replacing your entire panel, which most electrician love to hear. They just see dollar signs.

Reply:

Watch out:  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.

(Apr 8, 2014) (mod) said:

Mike,

I cannot imagine worse advice than your opinion stated below. There are several very serious concerns:

1. the "replacement breakers" that you cite have no evidence of performing any differently than the unreliable ones they replace
2. the underlying design problems that lead to breaker no-trips and bus connector burn-ups and on occasion more serious losses, remain when the panel remains
3. In addition to having been found guilty of fraud, label switching, cheating on breaker qualification tests, and other improper practices, independent research has consistently shown that the product fails to respond to overcurrent at a stunning rate, in the 60% range for 2 pole breakers, in an industry where overall circuit breakers fail to trip in response to overcurrent at a fraction much less than 1%.
4. FPE Stab-Lok electrical panels and circuit breakers are a latent safety hazard. That means that the product does not itself initiate a failure or fire. The breakers may also remain "on" internally when apparently switched off - a good way to electrocute someone. It's a latent safety hazard just sitting there, failing to protect when it's called upon in an emergency. That may explain why this "sleeping dog" while it remains asleep - not called on to perform - seems just fine. There's no need for panic, but there is a need to replace the equipment.
5. On one point we might agree, that is that some electrical repair companies and product vendors indeed prey on consumer fear to make a buck. For this reason we point out that

• Avoiding panic can avoid being gouged by a contractor when you order electrical panel replacement
• InspectAPedia is an independent publisher of building, environmental, and forensic inspection, diagnosis, and repair information provided free to the public - we have no business nor financial connection with any manufacturer or service provider discussed at our website.

WATCH OUT: One wonders who Mike is and what might be his connection with the company he touts.

Reader follow-up comments "Would you prefer that this escalated further? "

(Apr 9, 2014) Mike said:

DanJoeFriedman,

You are correct, My position with Connecticut Electric is inside sales.

We make the UBIF line of circuit breakers, Which is a Federal Pacific REPLACEMENT circuit breaker that is ETL listed to the UL molded case 489 standard. We have been manufacturing for nearly 20 years the UBIF breakers, and have not seen an issue with the design or function.

You claims of unsafe, recalls, and fire hazards, etc are all based upon fiction. You are making false claims. Would you prefer that this escalated further?

Reply: Stating the FPE Hazard Accurately

(Apr 9, 2014) (mod) said:

Mike, with all due respect, and appreciation that you want to discuss this matter, you completely mis-state the CPSC position. The issue was not closed with a statement of absence of evidence. The history of the matter is that CPSC management, in negotiation with FPE attorneys decades ago, overrode their own engineers and the results of that work to decide to stop the investigation.

There is not a shred of doubt that the hazards are real. That information is supported by the CPSC's research, by very extensive independent research, and by decades of reports of serious failures, fires, and even a few fatalities.

Before you try threats or other silly action that could embarrass you, you should read the independent research in this matter.

Take a look at

• FPE HAZARDS - 2012 [PDF] provides independent test reports on FPE Stab-Lok electrical equipment, including replacement circuit breakers, including some from your own company
• UBIF Replacement Circuit Breaker Failure rate in limited testing: In this report in Table 3, the "two failures out of 12 for the 2-pole breakers, one of which jammed" were UBI - your circuit breakers failed at a rate of 16% for this sample. My understanding that a typical industry no-trip breaker failure rate is less than 0.01%.
  
  Notice: though we were disappointed to read about a UBI 16% failure rate where industry failures are usually uncommon, this sample size is too small to form an accurate judgement about the failure rate of this product. Nonetheless it would be inaccurate to claim that the FPE replacement breaker product has shown no failures. Aronstein comments in the study cited above:
  
  Since the end of manufacturing of circuit breakers under the Federal Pacific Electric (FPE) brand, compatible Stab-Lok® type breakers hae appeared under names such as "American", "Federal Pioneer", "Challenger", "Federal Pacific Reliance Electric", "UBI", and "Federal Pioneer Limited" (Canada). There is insufficient data (too few samples tested) at this time (2012) on which to base an accurate judgment as to their reliability relatie to the FPE breakers. In many instances, these are essentially the same product as FPE. Whether or not any substantive changes in design or manufacturing were made to solve the known problems associated with the original FPE Stab-Lok® breakers has not been determined. A summary of the test results on the non-FPE breakers that were included in the panels from 38 homes (Section 2E, above) is shown in Table 3. [of the FPE HAZARDS 2012 Report cited above - Ed.]

The 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).

Also see

• UBI FPE CIRCUIT BREAKER TEST RESULTS (January 2017) reports on independent test results of a modest sample of replacements for FPE Stab-Lok circuit breakers. Overall the failure rate for this sample was over 50%.
  This article also reports on UBI FPE Stab-Lok replacement breaker tests completed up to 3 December 2014 - a small sample size with a high failure rate.
• FPE FAILURE FIELD REPORTS - a significant numbe of field reports, separate article tracks reports of FPE failures, incidents, fires & events in the U.S. & Canada - That article reports field failures to "no trouble found" in a ratio of about 170:1.
  
  That article also includes a 2014 report of Connecticut Electric's UBI breakers in which a retired electrical engineer and homeowner tested (with unknown test details) a sample of these breakers finding significant failure rates.
• FPE HAZARD ARTICLES, STUDIES where the FPE research is listed
• FPE REPLACEMENT BREAKERS - where test results & field performance of these products are discussed
• FPE FAILURE FIRE PHOTOS - fire reports involving FPE equipment
• FPE INVESTIGATION CPSC Revised 2011 for Mike who sells replacement UBI - FPE circuit breakers and also for other readers who want to get clear on the US CPSC statement on FPE circuit breakers, you can see the actual U.S. CPSC statement itself

Mike,

If you have independent research on the failure rates of FPE replacement breakers from various sources, we would be glad to see it and would be glad to add that to information for our readers to consider.

It would be great for consumers if there were a field repair for FPE equipment that addressed the breaker hazards, bus hazards, and that were supported by independent research.

Unfortunately, just plugging in a breaker from an unknown (or possibly even a known source some of which included both used and new old stock FPE breakers) into an existing FPE panel does not address the known hazards. To date, the effective repair that may be less costly than a whole new panel has been the installation of CH's replacement bus and breaker assemblies.

InspectAPedia.com® is an independent publisher of building, environmental, and forensic inspection, diagnosis, and repair information for the public - we have no business nor financial connection with any manufacturer or service provider discussed at our website.

We are dedicated to making our information as accurate, complete, useful, and unbiased as possible: we very much welcome critique, questions, or content suggestions for our web articles provided discourse is polite and informed. Threats from Mike (no last name provided) or his company are in my OPINION a poor substitute for unbiased data, research, and data.

Finally, Aronstein's research has been continued by another independent electrical engineering researcher, David Carrier who has added additional brands and breaker sources to the mix; to my knowledge that work is ongoing and additional results have not been released.

As Mr. Carrier has continued independent testing of circuit breakers for no-trip failures, if you are interested in providing [funding for an in-the-market-place purchase of ] some of your product for independent testing let me know and I'll check with David - I'd expect that he'd welcome a chance to have a source of new or old product for failure testing.

[Aronstein has pointed out the importance of testing circuit breakers that are obtained in the same market place in which consumers will purchase them, thus avoiding any suggestion that any manufaturer might have pre-tested, pre-qualified, or otherwise skewed independent test results with product supplied directly from its producer. ]

Daniel

FPE - UBI Replacement Circuit Breaker Discussion Continued [with a vendor of replacement breakers]

(Mar 13, 2012) Anonymous said:

Dan, the one point that I find very confusing is why Schneider-Federal Pioneer Stablok panels and breakers have not been shown to have an elevated risk of danger--except for the relatively few breakers subject to the recall. If the stablok design is inherently dangerous, Federal Pioneer breakers should seize frequently enough to result in a "body count."

It does seem that the one FPE panel shown has buss corresponding to Jesse Aronstein's "Type C," direct insertion; is this the main difference? If so, does it reduce heating to a sufficient extent to a sufficient extent that the better environment overcomes any inherent inadequacy in the breaker design?

Also, when you describe Asian replacement stab-loks as similarly inadequate, are the breakers you tested NRTL-listed?
Thanks

(Oct 2, 2012) Mike said:

Still have seen nothing regarding FPE Replacements, such as being made by American Circuit Breaker, except, "not recommended", "no evidence the replacement is any better", ect., and other opinions.

The testing and research into FPE is extensive and proven. Why, as you have many resources available to minutely test the originals, do you rely on mere opinion and conjecture regarding the replacements. In my experience, I have seen none of the supposed problems with the so called "split buses" buses or other parts of the FPE panel, excepting wire bending radius inadequacies, so it seems a repacement of the FPE breakers with AMC breakers would work satisfactorily. AMC has been UL tested, and approved. They have not been proved to be unsafe.

Reply:

Anon and Mike:

There are certainly field reports of FP failures from the Canadian product, but in point of fact we have very little data from the Canadian installations and too few tested breaker samples to support an unequivocal conclusion about their performance.

However, in speaking with a Schneider engineer several years ago, it was made clear that there was no product redesign from the original defective FPE design. I asked Schneider where their manufacturing line equipment came from, figuring that perhaps the manufacture, testing, or QA were different from the offending plant(s) in the U.S. but the company appeared to get nervous and declined to offer further information.

Keep in mind that the FPE defects are a latent hazard - the breakers fail to respond properly to an overcurrent. If an overcurrent does not happen, no evidence of failure shows up. We do not have a study of differences in electrical wiring and installations between the U.S. & Canadian homes, nor a study of differences in frequency of overcurrent events - in particular, interruptible electrical ignition events in which a fire will be caused ONLY if the protection device is defective, improperly sized, mis-wired, tapered with.

Mike,

I much appreciate the discussion, but with respect, your comments and conclusions about the safety of FPE equipment are simply incorrect. The articles found in this section draw from, quote, cite testing that has been performed through 2012.

And I think you'll find that we have documented that the FPE replacements are the identical design, in fact are generally, new old stock that was purchased from FPE. I have asked experts to keep us informed about any additional testing of FPE, FP (Canadian equipment now sold by Schneider) and of the replacement market products.

In fact as the article above cites and Aronstein confirms, testing included a limited number of replacement FPE circuit breakers. No-trip failures were encountered in that group as well.

Aronstein also points out that self-selection of product submitted for "independent" testing is itself problematic. At least in past experiences manufacturers first screened product to weed out failing devices before submitting the remainder for testing. And as you know from reading FPE history, there was still more serious test fraud occurring in the in-house tests.

Excerpting from FPE Stab-Lok® : FIRES WAITING TO HAPPEN [this page] where you also posted comments and where we provide more details, we cite:

• HAZARDOUS FPE CIRCUIT BREAKERS AND PANELS - 2024 [PDF] independent research article by Jess Aronstein, supercedes older FPE hazard reports by this author. This provides the latest version of independent test reports on FPE Stab-Lok electrical equipment, including replacement circuit breakers, including some from your own company
• UBI Replacement Circuit Breaker Failure rate in limited testing: In this report in Table 3, the "two failures out of 12 for the 2-pole breakers, one of which jammed" were UBI - your circuit breakers failed at a rate of 16% for this sample. My understanding that a typical industry no-trip breaker failure rate is less than 0.01%.
• Current UBI Replacement Circuit Breaker Failure Rate Test Results: by January 2017 we were seeing a failure rate in replacement FPE breakers of over 50% - see UBI FPE CIRCUIT BREAKER TEST RESULTS

What's needed is an amended circuit breaker test procedure that obtains breakers for testing from the open marketplace, from the very same sources that will be used by consumers and electricians when buying replacement circuit breakers.

Watch out: Finally, the fact that you have not personally seen "supposed problems", while it is an understandable reaction, is not sound. One individual's experience is hardly a technically sound approach to product evaluation. Or putting it in fancier language, absence of evidence in one person's personal experience is hardly evidence of absence of a problem. In fact we have both independent test results indicating no-trip failures and field reports indicating no-trip failures of these devices.

See our Recommended Articles below.

Notice: In subsequent discussion reader Mike acknowledged that he works in sales for Connecticut Electric, a vendor of replacement FPE circuit breakers - Ed.

 

Reader Discussion & Comments about the FPE Stab-Lok Hazard & Challenger Electric Panels, Breakers, & Field Failures

Ensues in the reader QA below.

...

---

---

ADVERTISEMENT

---

---

Reader Q&A - also see RECOMMENDED ARTICLES & FAQs

On 2021-03-22 by (mod) - an FPE panel in a 1976 mobile home is a fire hazard that could be costly though replacing the panel could cost more than the home is worth!

@Lloyd, thank you for your opinion, it's helpful for everyone involved in risk management and electrical safety to be reminded of the costs involved; we welcome your comments.

With respect, some of your statements are incorrect, particularly about where the risks lie with an FPE electrical panel.

Just read the research and test data.

These breaker fail to trip at a stunningly high rate, principally because of their design, materials, and manufacture. Where typical "safe" electrical circuit breakers fail to trip less than a fraction of 1%, in some circumstances an FPE breaker will fail 60% of the time! The panel should be replaced.

Watch out: some of Lloyds statements need a closer look.

[I don't need to replace my FPE panel because ...] it is properly maintained, in good condition and fully functioning.

Really? No: An FPE panel that seems to be fully functioning is a latent hazard: the high risk of a breaker failing to trip when it should risks fire and possible injury from FPE breaker failures.

By "latent hazard" we mean that these circuit breakers don't initiate a bad event like a fire; rather, when an unsafe condition such as having plugged-in too many devices on a circuit causes an over-current, the breakers fail to protect you by turning off the circuit before a fire occurs.

Plus the cost would be more than the home itself is worth.

Really? Well yes, Lloyd is correct. If we exclude the value of contents, furnishings, etc. that could be lost in a fire, and if we place no dollar value on the risk of an injury or wose from a fire caused by an FPE breaker failure, then the cost of replacing the FPE panel could exceed the typical sale price of a small 1976 mobile home.

The typical cost of a 1976 Mobile Villa, M-30 Prices, from nadaguides.com (April 2021) listd the home at suggested List Price of $5,019 with a low retail price of $1,330 and an average retail of $1,600.

The typical cost of a 1976 M-40-2 Two Bedroom home, using M-40 prices and again from NADA, shows a suggested lilst price of $8,369 with a low retail price of $1,330 and an average retail of $1,600.

Advice for people who can't afford to replace an unsafe electrical panel is

at CAN'T AFFORD A NEW ELECTRIC PANEL? where we discuss taking steps to reduce the risk of a fire or electrical failure and we cite the possibility of financial aid in some communities.

On 2021-03-22 by Lloyd

Hello all,

First off, I would like to say I very much appreciate the unbiased information this site intends to present. It is a fantastic resource to find all the related issues with Federal Pacific panels and the Stab-lock breakers. Great job providing as much useful information as available and continuing to update based on new testing and issues.

However, in my opinion the whole issue around FPE and Stab-lock breakers is inherently biased to say that they are all unsafe. By this I mean the use of the words "latent risk" automatically cause biased on the whole subject. Many thing in life cause a "latent risk" of danger. But to say that all of the FPE panels are dangerous and need to be replaced is just not factual. If that was the case, why are replacement breakers made for them? If they are unsafe regardless of patents and manufacturers everything concerning them should be pulled from the market, period.

Now mind you I am not an industry expert, but I am very handy when it comes to electrical products. I have read much of the pertinent info on the FPE panels and breakers as I have one in my home. I live in a manufactured home that was built in 1976. Install date on the FPE box is 11/14/1975 and it has the blue UL listed sticker number BC-863149. According to all information available this box is a latent risk of immanent danger as it one of the many that falls under fraudulent UL listing. However, for the last 45 years this FPE panel has been doing exactly what it is intended to do. 25 of those years I have lived in the home. Being an older manufactured home many of the rooms run on the same 15 or 20 amp breakers.

They are original FPE Stab-lock breakers with the orange-red stripe. Because of the wiring in the home I consistently overload the circuits and the breakers work ever time. With the fickle oil burning furnace I run at least 5 electric heaters in multiple rooms for days at a time with no issues. I find that the original plugs that are left in the home burn out constantly but the circuits are not overloaded when this happens. The physical receptacles fail due to heat before the home could catch fire. I replace them with new ones and the heat issue that caused the problem is mitigated. But even with the old malfunctioning receptacles when the circuit is overloaded the FPE panel responds appropriately everytime.

Now I don't want to discuss the fact that FPE had problems as a company. Yes, their panels could be a risk. Yes, they defrauded UL testing. But did they intend to burn down homes or harm the people working within, I doubt it. I assume the reasoning was to provide panels that were more affordable, not to endanger people. Truth is the panel was most likely only used in this home because of cost. And being a mobile home it should be more at risk then most other homes because of the lack of quality of materials. And in the last 25 years the only part of the home that has not failed is the FPE panel.

Could it be the real issue here is the way the panel was installed? I mean honestly my mom lives in a home that was built in 1942 and has the original wiring with no grounds in 75% of the house. It was built by her father and grandfather with minimal knowledge of wiring. But a certified electrician put a new main panel and sub panel in her home without even checking the wiring. With the life of copper wiring only being 50 to 70 years the entire house should have been rewired, especially with the lack of grounds. Many homes were built by the homeowners or by subpar building companies. So the fault in my opinion could fall on the homeowners or the contractors and not souly on Federal Pacific for not installing things properly.

Now my reason for commenting pointing out the biased has to do with the fact for me to have an electrician come to my home and do any sort of I would be advised to replace the panel and they most likely wouldn't touch it. Now my panel wouldn't be up to code do to its location anyway. Neither would 20 of my receptacles because of age. So I would have to replace and relocate damn near the entire electrical system for no reason other than the fact that my FPE panel may be a risk. But it is properly maintained, in good condition and fully functioning.

Plus the cost would be more than the home itself is worth. So basically if I have an issue my best bet would be to just grab my cats and let it burn. From the information that is available that is the only conclusion I can infer. How is that better then just repairing a minor problem?

Sorry for being so long winded. I had to rant a bit. But my whole point is no matter how high the "latent risk" is doesn't necessarily mean danger is imminent. We take on a "latent risk" of danger every time we leave our home, but were not all agoraphobic. I tried to be as clear and concise as possible. Hopefully my point was made without sparking an argument over the safety of FPE panels. Thanks for reading my ramblings.

Best,
Lloyd

On 2020-11-19 - by (mod) -

Harold

Thank you for the question this is a good point to clarify.

Since the role of a circuit breaker is to prevent a wire from overheating and starting a fire and also to reduce shock hazards should the circuit become short-circuited, any place that a circuit breaker is used it's on duty protecting something in there for if it's not going to behave reliably it is unsafe

On 2020-11-18 by Harold

A stab lok panel that is on a pole outside that is supplying power to outside lights. I understand the concern for FPE stab lok panel but in this situation is it reasonable to conclude that they are a fire or life safety hazard if outside in a parking lot and being used to provide lighting.

On 2019-09-09 - by (mod) -

Thank you so much for the kind note, Ed. We work hard to provide researched, authoritative, unbiased information that, in some cases like this one, must wade through a sea of opinion and controversy. I'm particularly grateful when a reader finds our data useful and clear.

Frankly my model for this work is Dr. Jess Aronstein - physically a small man but a giant in the field, and one who has remained calm, fact-focused, expert, and un-biased for a lifetime in the face of sometimes rather self-serving and disingenuous criticism. Kudos to Aronstein.

We also welcome questions, content suggestions, and critique. Working together makes us smarter - or at least feel smarter.

Daniel

On 2019-09-09 by Ed

Mr. Friedman, I just wanted to thank you for making the wealth of information & data to be available to folks and to let the materials speak on their own and you not succumbing to being bullied or scared into removing various reports and studies just because some irritated "inside sales" ignoramus keeps making innuendos. I'm sure electrical topics are not limited to this stupidity, and it happens with other themes of your most excellent encyclopedia website as well. Carry On Sir.

On 2019-07-28 - by (mod) -

Yes John, all FPE circuit breakers, panels, and "replacement" breakers have the same family of safety hazards.

On 2019-07-28 by John

I have an inside FPE panel box that I am replacing. My outside panel is also an FPE. Should I replace that as well?Thanks.

On 2019-03-26 by (mod) - lost sale of my camper because of an FPE box

Anon=Gary

Your home inspector could certainly have been correct. One of the defects common in FPE and FP electrical panels is that the breakers do not remain connected securely to the bus and can fall out when the cover is removed. That can be very dangerous, even fatal.

An electrician was killed by an electrical arc explosion that occured when breakers popped out of position when he removed the panel cover.

Besides it's not necessary to remove an FPE panel cover to know that the breakers are unsafe - failing to trip in response to over-current as much as 60% of the time - and to recommend replacement. All that's needed is to properly identify the electrical panel.

It is of course silly to lose the sale of a camper because its electrical panel needs replacement. The cost of installing a new breaker box must surely have been a trivial percentage of the cost of the camper.

On 2019-03-26 by Anonymous

@gary l withers,
paul lewis ,i lost a sell of a camper because of this brand FPE, home inspector wouldn't look inside metal box-he said the way it was made that everything would fall out if the cover was taken of ( BS ) took cover off -looked like any other panel box. the problem is the breaker not the box ,is that correct

On 2019-03-26 by gary l withers

@Paul Lewis,

never seen this type breakers or box used where i live, have there ever been a reported problem with GE breakers

On 2019-03-12 by Anonymous

@John J Hazel, - The quote I received to replace my FPE panel with like and kind was $3200. I don't know what you are getting for $400-$500, but that is likely for the panel only, no breakers.

On 2019-03-12 by (mod) - Connecticut Electric FPE breaker Failures

Paul you raise an important point: it is essential to distinguish between OPINION and FACT about circuit breaker failures.

The Connecticut Electric FPE breaker failures (UBI circuit breaker failures) have been thoroughly documented both by tests by independent forensic engineer (Aronstein) and by field reports of actual failures as well.

Here are the facts - these are UBI / Connecticut Electric Breakers not OEM FPE breakers

UBI FPE CIRCUIT BREAKER TEST RESULTS - see the citations there as well

An older report can be downloaded at: FPE HAZARDS - 2012 [PDF] .

Also see FPE REPLACEMENT BREAKERS where more reports are cited

InspectAPedia.com provides building and environmental diagnostic and repair information.

In order to absolutely assure our readers that we write and report without bias we do not sell any products nor do we have any business or financial relationships that could create such conflicts of interest.

InspectAPedia is an independent publisher of building, environmental, and forensic inspection, diagnosis, and repair information for the public - we have no business nor financial connection with any manufacturer or service provider discussed at our website.

We very much welcome critique, questions, or content suggestions for our web articles. Website content contributors, even if it's just a small correction, are cited, quoted, and linked-to from the appropriate additional web pages and articles - which benefits us both. Working together and exchanging information makes us better informed than any individual can be working alone.

On 2019-03-12 by Paul Lewis - shooting from the hip to bash Connecticutt Electric breakers with no evidence

Some on this site are shooting from the hip to bash Connecticutt Electric breakers with no evidence, but then attempt to justify their attacks using the FPE breakers as your source of proof? He's suggesting to replace the failing FPE breakers with Connecticutt Electric ones

Let's please use factual information and not try to refer back to known failures of FPE breaker as evidence that the Connecticutt breakers will fail also because the FPE breakers do.

He is suggesting to replaced these faulty breakers with one proven to be sound and receiving certification. The panel itself is not the cause of the fire, it's the breakers. FPE was putting them out so fast that they weren't being tested. Ignorance and scare tactics based on false information doesn't help anyone.

On 2018-03-24 by (mod) - get estimates before assuming the panel replacement would be cost prohibitive

Thanks for the remark, John.

On 2018-03-22 by John J Hazel

I obtained an estimate of only $450-500 from a licensed electrician here in Phoenix, AZ to replace a small Federal Pacific Stab-Lok panel with a small Eaton main lug load center. The low price surprised me. I always thought that a panel replacement would cost at least $1K.

I encourage people to get estimates before assuming the replacement would be cost prohibitive. Let's get some competition going and spread the word that panel replacements do not have to cost an arm and leg and get those Federal Pacific panels replaced !

On 2017-03-10 by (mod) - the primary no-trip problem lies inside the breaker, but there are indeed serious connection to bus problems

Nicholas,

I agree with you that while the primary no-trip problem lies inside the breaker, there are indeed serious connection to bus problems. I've seen breakers held into both US and Canadian panels with adhesive tape!

On 2017-03-09 by Nicholas Greggerson

As an electrician with 46 years of experience the problem is not only with the FPE breakers it also lies with the stab-loc connection especially the small twin size breakers. They do not seat tight and cause arcing at the connection point which in turn can cause a fire .

On 2016-07-30 by (mod) - my breakers pop at random with no load dryer range etc ?

Ken

If this is an FPE panel you should replace it.

On 2016-07-27 by ken

my breakers pop at random with no load dryer range etc ?

Question: Thanks for the FPE warning

(Aug 21, 2011) TX Homeowner said:

I've just learned about the FPE Stab-Lok panels and although, after having the panel for 50 years and having no problems until today, I am replacing the panel and all breakers tomorrow. It will cost $2,000 but if it saves the life of me and my family, it's worth it. Thanks for the warning.

Reply:

Thanks for the feedback TX homeowner.
Indeed, if your electrical system never experienced an overcurrent, nothing ever called on a circuit breaker to trip. Having breakers that fail to trip when they should at a rate of up to 60 % of the time is like riding around in a car with the seatbelt cut nearly thorough. Everything's just fine as long as you're not in an accident.

Kudos for being safe.

Best wishes

Question: I want to replace the whole unit - is there financial help?

(Nov 5, 2011) ME Homeowner said:

Appreciate the info! Our FPE box with stab-lok breakers has been in place since the house was built in 1980. We are lucky in that we have never had any issues, and all the breakers have worked perfectly, even up to today

. I would be interested however, in replacing the whole unit, but the expense would be way too much for me right now (primarily the labor costs). Is there any chance that these units have such a bad reputation that my homeowners insurance might recognize this and step up to help me with the costs?

Reply:

ME please see these two articles

• FPE REPLACEMENT PANEL
• FPE REPLACEMENT PANEL COSTS

Question: difficult to remove FPE panel

(Jan 26, 2012) Eric Doute said:

Id like to comment that this is also one of the hardest panels to get out of the wall. They have a 1/2" lip that sits recessed in the wall causing you to botch and cut it out with extreme predudice. I had a big 200amp tall boy I had to rip out. It also had laminated plywood wall surface.

This may add an hour or two to the job if its recessed into the wall. Also you have to be careful of not hitting any wires with the sawzaw.

If you do the work yourself, make sure you pull out the meter before you start any cutting to risk hitting live wires.

Reply:

Eric, I appreciate the warning about difficulty removing an FPE Stab-Lok electrical panel but I suspect that the removal problem ou describe has nothing to do with the panel design in this case. Rather the issue is how your particular electrical panel was installed p with a lack of working space.

Still, understanding the trouble one may run into when replacing any electrical panel helps understand the cost of hiring a professional to do the job.

Question: Why do I find replacement FPE breakers only on E-Bay?

(Feb 11, 2012) Bryan Skruck said:

I just bought a rental property that is 40 years old with one of these panels. I noticed that because of the design that the breakers aren't secure in the panel and that is what I believe has caused the panel bus damage. I seem to have the opposite problem with the breakers tripping prematurely a 12.5 A load trips a 20 A breaker (again, I think it has to do with the design and the poor contact between the breaker and the panel bus)

I was wondering why I couldn't find these breakers anywhere except on e-bay. I was going to add a diishwasher but it looks like there's another more important project first. I'll have to make sure none of the circuits are overloaded myself since there seems to be a substantially high rate of breakers failing to trip.

In an effort to not completely discredit the load center itself and Federal Pacific, part of my problems have stemmed from improper breaker installation. There is a wiring diagram on the panel that shows breaker sizes at pole locations. Each panel has spaces that accommodate either full size (NA style) or 1/2 size (NC style) thin breakers.

It appears that the installing contractor decided to use thin style breakers throughout, either because he was in a hurry and didn't have any full size breakers on hand at the time of installation, or didn't follow directions.

I'm pretty sure this wasn't the doing of a homeowner after the fact because the way the panel is laid out. My problems are occurring where the thin style breakers were used in a full size breaker space. Those are the ones that are loose and arching. The panel bus is now damaged, so the entire box must be replaced.

I realize there are other problems with the breakers not tripping when overloaded as well, but my problem with arching and premature breaker tripping was due to improper installation.

Was wondering about the picture posted at the top of the article. Clearly that breaker suffered water damage as indicated by the rusted rivets at the top. If water is leaking into your electrical panel, you’re going to have a problem!

Reply:

Bryan, there are vendors of replacement circuit breakers for FPE Stab-Lok electrical panels, discussed and warned-about
at FPE REPLACEMENT BREAKERS.

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.

Question: defective FPE breaker without popping?

(Apr 21, 2012) Dennis said:

Can beaker be defective with out popping. reason just replaced one
The circuit would cut out hour or more then come back on.
Replaced breaker problen went away.

Reply:

Yes Dennis, there are other hazards including

• The FPE circuit breaker may be manually switched "off" while remaining "on" internally
• The FPE circuit breaker may jam internally leaving the visible toggle switch in an "on" position or an "off" position

Question: buying a house with and FPE Stab-Lok panel

May 2, 2012) Paul Scott said:

Good Evening, thinking of buying a house, it has the FPE Stab-Lok panel. My inspector pointed it out, and we advised the seller. Her response was that she has lived in the house for 25 year and hasnt had a problem! so, seeing how these panels are not "ilegal" , explaining to her that it could be an issue is hard.

She was living alone for these years or with her husband so possible there wasnt a load on the system. However i will have 3 kids and two adults! if she doesnt agree to fixing this, if i put GFI outlets in the bath rooms will this at least help in the shock department?? if you have anything i can use to persuade the seller please let me know

Reply:

Paul, in my opinion the cost of replacing an electrical panel is such a tiny part of the value of a home that it certainly ought not to deter a home buyer. And it should be replaced.

As we comment in various FPE articles, absence of evidence of a "problem" may simply mean that the breakers were never exposed to an overcurrent, so were never called-on to trip. It's also the case that there may be already-jammed circuit breakers in the FPE panel that simply haven't been noticed by anyone if no one has tried to work on a supposedly switched-off circuit.

Adding GFCI's in an older home reduces shock hazards but will not address the no-trip problem back in the electrical panel.

Question: if I replace the FPE panel do you think the building is safe?

(June 27, 2012) Cathy - Westchester NY said:

There is a Federal Pacific Electric Stab-Lok Panel in the co-operative apartment that I'm intested in purchasing. Even if I replace the box do you think the building itself is safe?

Reply:

Cathy, I am GUESSING that you mean that you're worried that other FPE Stab-Lok panels remain in place in your building. My opinion is, I agree with the implication of your question: replacing your panel reduces the electrical fire risk significantly within your co-op apartment, and thus somewhat reduces risk for your co-owners; but until everyone replaces their panel, risks remain. Beyond that, no one in their right mind could possibly state, by email or by a web page comment, that a building then know nothing about is "safe" or "unsafe".

Question: Comment: multiple FPE panel flaws mean the panels should be replaced.

(Sept 3, 2012) Greg said:

Many of the FPE panels have other design flaws that create unnecessary hazards for those of us who have to service them. Many of the breaker handles require you to push them toward the "on" position in order to remove them.

They also used a bolt and nut to secure the dead-front panel, which becomes a problem especially since most of them are rusted by this point. The result is that the cover is rarely secured properly and presents a major shock hazard to the home owner.

This, along with the known fire hazards, should be plenty enough evidence to replace these panels as soon as possible. The design is poor and the breakers have several known problems. As and electrician, I assure you my first concern is safety. I remember being schooled as a young apprentice about the dangers of working on these panels, rightfully named "the widow maker". Replace it.

Question: is my FPE panel involved in the recall?

(Apr 3, 2013) Barbara Walters said:

Our house was built in 1986 and a Federal Pacific box was used (Y82647A-Rev.A),I don't see StabLok on the box but can you tell me if this unit would be in the recall?

Reply:

Barbara,

Yes Federal Pacific was an earlier brand of the identical StabLok Design. Click to expand the Related LInks near page top to see a series of product identification articles.

There was no recall. The buyer of FPE took an allowance for a recall and decided to pocket the money.

...

Continue reading at FPE FIRES: FAILURE REPORTS or select a topic from the closely-related articles below, or see the complete ARTICLE INDEX.

Or see these

Recommended Articles

• CAN'T AFFORD A NEW ELECTRIC PANEL?
• CIRCUIT BREAKER FAILURE RATES
• FPE FAILURE FIRE PHOTOS
• FPE FAILURE FIRE PHOTOS - CONTENTS: Field reports & photos of FPE Stab-Lok® panel or breaker incidents & Field photographs of FPE Stab-Lok® equipment failures
• FPE FAILURE FIELD REPORTS - separate article tracks reports of FPE failures, incidents, fires & events in the U.S. & Canada
• UBI FPE CIRCUIT BREAKER TEST RESULTS - current test results showed a greater than 50% failure-to-trip rate as of January 2017
• HAZARDOUS FPE CIRCUIT BREAKERS AND PANELS - 2024 [PDF] Final Report - independent research article by Jess Aronstein, supercedes older FPE hazard reports by this author.
• FPE HAZARD REPORT - 2017 [PDF]

Suggested citation for this web page

FPE Stab-Lok® : FIRES WAITING TO HAPPEN at InspectApedia.com - online encyclopedia of building & environmental inspection, testing, diagnosis, repair, & problem prevention advice.

Or see this

INDEX to RELATED ARTICLES: ARTICLE INDEX to FPE STAB-LOK BREAKERS & PANELS

Or use the SEARCH BOX found below to Ask a Question or Search InspectApedia

Ask a Question or Search InspectApedia

Questions & answers or comments about the latent nature of fire and shock hazards associated with Federal Pacific Electric FPE StabLok panels and breakers.

Try the search box just below, or if you prefer, post a question or comment in the Comments box below and we will respond promptly.

Note: appearance of your Comment below may be delayed: if your comment contains an image, photograph, web link, or text that looks to the software as if it might be a web link, your posting will appear after it has been approved by a moderator. Apologies for the delay.

Only one image can be added per comment but you can post as many comments, and therefore images, as you like.
You will not receive a notification when a response to your question has been posted.
Please bookmark this page to make it easy for you to check back for our response.

---

 

IF above you see "Comment Form is loading comments..." then COMMENT BOX - countable.ca / bawkbox.com IS NOT WORKING.

In any case you are welcome to send an email directly to us at InspectApedia.com at editor@inspectApedia.com

We'll reply to you directly. Please help us help you by noting, in your email, the URL of the InspectApedia page where you wanted to comment.

Citations & References

In addition to any citations in the article above, a full list is available on request.

---

ADVERTISEMENT

---