A wide variety of opinions exists on how inspectors should comment on Federal Pacific Stab-Lok electrical panels. The more definitive an inspector's comment is, the more he opens himself to liability if, in court, he were asked to prove assertions that FP Stab-Loks represent a significant safety hazard.
The Consumer Products Safety Hazard Commission decided that a definitive study was too expensive to complete. The following in-depth paper provides a wealth of information on these panels:
FPECircuitBreaker Hazards- J. Aronstein
Consumer Product Safety Commission on Stab-Loks
I recommend the use of one of the following narratives:
(From the InterNACHI Narrative Library)
"Stab-lok- QC evaluation
The electrical service panel was made by Federal Pacific and was the Stab-lok model. Federal Pacific Stab-lok service panels are widely reputed to have a high rate of circuit breaker failure that can result in a fire or shock/electrocution. You should consult with a qualified electrical contractor concerning the necessity for replacing this service panel. Information about Federal Pacific Stab-lok panels is widely available on the internet."
Or if you recommend replacement:
"Stab-lok- QC replace
The electrical service panel was made by Federal Pacific and was the Stab-lok model. Federal Pacific Stab-lok service panels are widely reputed to have a high rate of circuit breaker failure that can result in a fire or shock/electrocution. You should consult with a qualified electrical contractor to discuss options and costs for replacement of this service panel. Information about defective Federal Pacific Stab-lok panels is widely available on the internet."
These comments can also be used for Zinsco, Sylvania, Challenger, and Westinghouse panels.