I was watching some State workers repairing traffic signals in my neighborhood this morning. They used red wire for ?red stop light?, yellow wire for ?yellow light go faster so you don?t have to stop? and a GREEN wire for the ?green light GO?. All were wired with a white grounded conductor 120-V. Is this permissible because they are ?qualified? electricians working in a controlled environment? What do you think? Can we use the green wire as an ungrounded wire in this case.
Green wire on traffic signals
- Thread starter gary b
- Start date
- Status
ryan_618
Senior Member
- Location
- Salt Lake City, Utah
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
Hi Gary. One of the forum moderators here does a lot of traffic signal work in the Seattle area. He was showing me some of the practices used industry wide for this type of work, and the coloring schemes are intended to correspond with the colors of the traffic signals (Ie, green wire for green light, red wire for red light, etc.). He will probably reply to this thread (Tom Baker is his name). He intended to make some proposals to the NEC to 200.6 and 250.119 this cycle to address this.
By the way, I have been trying to call you the last few days about IAEI. Give me a call on my cell, would you?
[ February 04, 2006, 03:15 PM: Message edited by: ryan_618 ]
Hi Gary. One of the forum moderators here does a lot of traffic signal work in the Seattle area. He was showing me some of the practices used industry wide for this type of work, and the coloring schemes are intended to correspond with the colors of the traffic signals (Ie, green wire for green light, red wire for red light, etc.). He will probably reply to this thread (Tom Baker is his name). He intended to make some proposals to the NEC to 200.6 and 250.119 this cycle to address this.
By the way, I have been trying to call you the last few days about IAEI. Give me a call on my cell, would you?
[ February 04, 2006, 03:15 PM: Message edited by: ryan_618 ]
Ken9876
Senior Member
- Location
- Jersey Shore
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
I work full time for the NJDOT and using the green wire for the green indications is common practice there. The pole and base are bonded with a # 6 conductor to the raceway, and in newer installations the bonding conductor is continuos from the cabinet. The state acts as it's own AHJ so they pretty much do as they like.
Some of the other?things I've seen.
1. 30 & 40 amp breakers feeding the controller cabinet, even though the field wire is all #14
2. Bonding connections rotted off
3. Misuse of the ground rod
4. Traffic signal cable is not listed
5. In many cases the workers are not qualified
6. Disregard for the quality of the bonding connections
7. The state inspectors are not licensed electrical inspectors, but yet they inspect electrical work.
8. At lighting cabinets, where the service is 480v, you will find a transformer installed for the control, the equipment ground and the neutral are never tied together anywhere.
9. Fuse kits installed improperly on lighting.
I work full time for the NJDOT and using the green wire for the green indications is common practice there. The pole and base are bonded with a # 6 conductor to the raceway, and in newer installations the bonding conductor is continuos from the cabinet. The state acts as it's own AHJ so they pretty much do as they like.
Some of the other?things I've seen.
1. 30 & 40 amp breakers feeding the controller cabinet, even though the field wire is all #14
2. Bonding connections rotted off
3. Misuse of the ground rod
4. Traffic signal cable is not listed
5. In many cases the workers are not qualified
6. Disregard for the quality of the bonding connections
7. The state inspectors are not licensed electrical inspectors, but yet they inspect electrical work.
8. At lighting cabinets, where the service is 480v, you will find a transformer installed for the control, the equipment ground and the neutral are never tied together anywhere.
9. Fuse kits installed improperly on lighting.
petersonra
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern illinois
- Occupation
- Semi-retired engineer
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
Some of the other?things I've seen.
...
4. Traffic signal cable is not listed
That does not make it unsafe, just not listed. Is there any legal requirement to use listed cable for this purpose? As long as it is safe, what difference does it make if it is listed or not?
5. In many cases the workers are not qualified
why do you say this? if the state is the ahj, and they decide the workers they select are qualified, than by law they are qualified. It is no different than the state determining what constitutes "qualified" in any profession.
7. The state inspectors are not licensed electrical inspectors, but yet they inspect electrical work.
The state gets to make the determination of who inspects this work, if it is inspected at all, not you. What they determine is what matters.
8. At lighting cabinets, where the service is 480v, you will find a transformer installed for the control, the equipment ground and the neutral are never tied together anywhere.
I was told once that in some cases they deliberately do not tie the ground and neutral together so that if a ground fault occurs, the lights will still work.
[ February 04, 2006, 04:16 PM: Message edited by: petersonra ]
Some of the other?things I've seen.
...
4. Traffic signal cable is not listed
That does not make it unsafe, just not listed. Is there any legal requirement to use listed cable for this purpose? As long as it is safe, what difference does it make if it is listed or not?
5. In many cases the workers are not qualified
why do you say this? if the state is the ahj, and they decide the workers they select are qualified, than by law they are qualified. It is no different than the state determining what constitutes "qualified" in any profession.
7. The state inspectors are not licensed electrical inspectors, but yet they inspect electrical work.
The state gets to make the determination of who inspects this work, if it is inspected at all, not you. What they determine is what matters.
8. At lighting cabinets, where the service is 480v, you will find a transformer installed for the control, the equipment ground and the neutral are never tied together anywhere.
I was told once that in some cases they deliberately do not tie the ground and neutral together so that if a ground fault occurs, the lights will still work.
[ February 04, 2006, 04:16 PM: Message edited by: petersonra ]
- Location
- Bremerton, Washington
- Occupation
- Master Electrician
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
All:
I write the Code Corner article for the IMSA (Traffic Signal) Journal. My next article is on "traffic signal and roadway lighting - ten common NEC violations" where I discuss the use of IMSA 19-1 cable.
Also I wrote an article on specifically the use of the green conductor in such cable, find it here:
http://www.imsasafety.org/journal/janfeb/janfeb1.htm
If you would like a copy of my ten common violations send me a PM.
I agree 100% with what Ken states
I submitted a code proposal to allow the use of IMSA 19-1 cable. I'm pretty sure it will be rejected.
I have instructed many classes for the IMSA, and there are many persons doing traffic signal work who are technicians and are not qualified.
In fact I gave a class at the Denver IMSA National conference (grounding and bonding) a signal tech from the City of New York (12,000 signals) attended, based on what he learned they changed there standard.
Comments:
While traffic signal cable does have a UL listing, its not used as there is no demand.
Most of the traffic signal work is not inspected past the service. No equipment at all in the signal cabinet is listed.
Nearly every signal installation is a violation of the NEC, as power and "low votage" are run in the metal poles or junction boxes.
In washington state, the DOT has jurisdiction on its right of way, I know their installations are inspected and per the NEC, our state law allows them to inspect, as they use a standard that is "equal, better or higher"
But in small towns almost any one can and does the work. I have seen house lamps in a signal display.
Tom
IMSA Level II TS certified.
IMSA Representative to the Illumination Engineering Society
Member Illumination Engineering Society Roadway Lighting Committee
All:
I write the Code Corner article for the IMSA (Traffic Signal) Journal. My next article is on "traffic signal and roadway lighting - ten common NEC violations" where I discuss the use of IMSA 19-1 cable.
Also I wrote an article on specifically the use of the green conductor in such cable, find it here:
http://www.imsasafety.org/journal/janfeb/janfeb1.htm
If you would like a copy of my ten common violations send me a PM.
I agree 100% with what Ken states
I submitted a code proposal to allow the use of IMSA 19-1 cable. I'm pretty sure it will be rejected.
I have instructed many classes for the IMSA, and there are many persons doing traffic signal work who are technicians and are not qualified.
In fact I gave a class at the Denver IMSA National conference (grounding and bonding) a signal tech from the City of New York (12,000 signals) attended, based on what he learned they changed there standard.
Comments:
While traffic signal cable does have a UL listing, its not used as there is no demand.
Most of the traffic signal work is not inspected past the service. No equipment at all in the signal cabinet is listed.
Nearly every signal installation is a violation of the NEC, as power and "low votage" are run in the metal poles or junction boxes.
In washington state, the DOT has jurisdiction on its right of way, I know their installations are inspected and per the NEC, our state law allows them to inspect, as they use a standard that is "equal, better or higher"
But in small towns almost any one can and does the work. I have seen house lamps in a signal display.
Tom
IMSA Level II TS certified.
IMSA Representative to the Illumination Engineering Society
Member Illumination Engineering Society Roadway Lighting Committee
Ken9876
Senior Member
- Location
- Jersey Shore
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
Not the traffic signals, I'm referring to the street lighting.
The people determining what matters have no idea of what matters. They are civil engineers not electrical
Let me take you back in NJ history...5-10 years ago the state decided that anyone hired needed a class B CDL, not many electricians have one and not many who do would work for the money they offered. So maintenance workers came over to the electrical shop, never schooled, trained, tested, nothing. I can't tell you of the unsafe situations that have occurred.
Funny how the state makes this decision, I wonder what would happen if someone got hurt as a result of inspector missing something. Funny how polices change after an accident.
websparky
Senior Member
- Location
- Cleveland, Ohio
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
Tom,
The NEC is for premises wiring systems.
Why would the traffic lights be expected to comply?
Tom,
The NEC is for premises wiring systems.
Why would the traffic lights be expected to comply?
- Location
- Bremerton, Washington
- Occupation
- Master Electrician
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
Why would traffic signals not be considered a premisis wiring system? They meet the definition of a structure. What code should traffic signals follow?
Keep in mind that for traffic signals, often the civil engineer drives the bus, leading to incorrect and odd interperation of the NEC.
Some of the violations I commonly see are:
No disconnecting means for the signal cabinet
Service and non service conductors in the same raceway
Mixing of low voltage and ower in a raceway. (Ever see a camera on a traffic signal mast arm? How does that coax get back to the signal cabinet? We don't do that in buildings)
Most inspectors don't know what they are looking at inside a traffic signal cabinet. I do. Some agencies are very good, others don't seem to know the difference.
Why would traffic signals not be considered a premisis wiring system? They meet the definition of a structure. What code should traffic signals follow?
Keep in mind that for traffic signals, often the civil engineer drives the bus, leading to incorrect and odd interperation of the NEC.
Some of the violations I commonly see are:
No disconnecting means for the signal cabinet
Service and non service conductors in the same raceway
Mixing of low voltage and ower in a raceway. (Ever see a camera on a traffic signal mast arm? How does that coax get back to the signal cabinet? We don't do that in buildings)
Most inspectors don't know what they are looking at inside a traffic signal cabinet. I do. Some agencies are very good, others don't seem to know the difference.
- Location
- Massachusetts
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
We used to install security cameras on site light poles until everyone realized that doing so was usually a violation.
We would run separate raceways as far as the pole base than the power (often 480) would be in the same pole as the camera coax.
An easy way around this is to switch from coax to fiber.
That is a good point.
We used to install security cameras on site light poles until everyone realized that doing so was usually a violation.
We would run separate raceways as far as the pole base than the power (often 480) would be in the same pole as the camera coax.
An easy way around this is to switch from coax to fiber.
- Location
- Bremerton, Washington
- Occupation
- Master Electrician
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
There is a company who makes a traffic signal head with a small covert camera in it.
The signal output is via a Cat 5 cable.
I mentioned to the mfg that this was a code violation but they don't care.
There is a company who makes a traffic signal head with a small covert camera in it.
The signal output is via a Cat 5 cable.
I mentioned to the mfg that this was a code violation but they don't care.
LawnGuyLandSparky
Senior Member
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
In what premisis is a traffic signal located? If that's a premisis, then what the heck isn't a premisis? :roll: As long as a system is maintained and serviced by properly and specifically trained personnel, who understand the uniqueness of the arrangement, everything is jake. IMHO following the letter of the NEC won't necessarily make it "better."
Ken9876
Senior Member
- Location
- Jersey Shore
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
Just because the state adopts laws doesn't mean they shouldn't follow them.
In my area we have these things walking around, they have two legs under their butt, arms, and a head,,what are they called...people, traffic signal installations should be to the NEC because the primary function of the NEC is the practical safe guarding of PEOPLE and equipment from the hazards arising from the use of electricity. There is nothing so "SPECIAL" about a damn traffic signal that should make it exempt from anything. Why have a code if it's not going to be followed. Are you suggesting if something is different with an installation the code shouldn't be followed, just because it's a little different.
So if I install a hundred pole lights and not run a grounding conductor, instead tie the pole to a ground rod and no one gets shocked the installation is ok with you, Lawn GUY.
[ February 06, 2006, 09:28 PM: Message edited by: Ken9876 ]
The NEC applies to electrical installations not under the exclusive control of a utility.
Just because the state adopts laws doesn't mean they shouldn't follow them.
In my area we have these things walking around, they have two legs under their butt, arms, and a head,,what are they called...people, traffic signal installations should be to the NEC because the primary function of the NEC is the practical safe guarding of PEOPLE and equipment from the hazards arising from the use of electricity. There is nothing so "SPECIAL" about a damn traffic signal that should make it exempt from anything. Why have a code if it's not going to be followed. Are you suggesting if something is different with an installation the code shouldn't be followed, just because it's a little different.
So if I install a hundred pole lights and not run a grounding conductor, instead tie the pole to a ground rod and no one gets shocked the installation is ok with you, Lawn GUY.
[ February 06, 2006, 09:28 PM: Message edited by: Ken9876 ]
- Location
- Bremerton, Washington
- Occupation
- Master Electrician
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
"Traffic signal systems work. Nobody is dropping dead, no one is getting electrocuted or shocked. (usually) [Roll Eyes] As long as a system is maintained and serviced by properly and specifically trained personnel, who understand the uniqueness of the arrangement, everything is jake. IMHO following the letter of the NEC won't necessarily make it "better."
People are being electrocuted,see this article about a fatality in Las Vegas:
http://www.imsasafety.org/journal/mayjun04/1.pdf
Following the letter of the NEC will make it better. Its sad, but many in the traffic signal industry feel a ground rod at an metal lighting pole without an equipment ground makes the installation safe.
Many traffic signal installations are done by technicans who are not qualified electricians.
I have instructed many many classes for IMSA, and been to numerous national conferences, so I have a good feel for how installations are done, good and bad.
IMO the only TS certification program, IMSA's is inadequate in its coverage of the NEC. I reviewed the last rewrite of level II and got them to change that the primary document of interest is the NEC not the NESC.
Also I have been awarded three journalistic awards from the IMSA for my articles.
"Traffic signal systems work. Nobody is dropping dead, no one is getting electrocuted or shocked. (usually) [Roll Eyes] As long as a system is maintained and serviced by properly and specifically trained personnel, who understand the uniqueness of the arrangement, everything is jake. IMHO following the letter of the NEC won't necessarily make it "better."
People are being electrocuted,see this article about a fatality in Las Vegas:
http://www.imsasafety.org/journal/mayjun04/1.pdf
Following the letter of the NEC will make it better. Its sad, but many in the traffic signal industry feel a ground rod at an metal lighting pole without an equipment ground makes the installation safe.
Many traffic signal installations are done by technicans who are not qualified electricians.
I have instructed many many classes for IMSA, and been to numerous national conferences, so I have a good feel for how installations are done, good and bad.
IMO the only TS certification program, IMSA's is inadequate in its coverage of the NEC. I reviewed the last rewrite of level II and got them to change that the primary document of interest is the NEC not the NESC.
Also I have been awarded three journalistic awards from the IMSA for my articles.
LawnGuyLandSparky
Senior Member
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
And these houses have more potential than a single cobra head.
I know I'm talking to a group of serious and dedicated electricians and contractors who probably care very much about doing the safest thing. But let's face it, this is reality and in life there are certain risks that come with anything we do. I think sometimes we need to step back and look at the big picture and make a judgement call, or an assessment as to exactly how far we, as a society, are obligated to go make things even safer than they already are.
Exactly HOW MANY people have died or been injured due to arc-faults in bedrooms? Was that code really necessary to "save lives? " Or was that code necessary to boost sales for the corporations that will manufacture the arc-fault breakers? I'll bet it's less than 100 deaths per year. In a country with 3 hundred MILLION people, that's pretty darn safe. No need for arc-fault protection in MY book. Yes, cold and harsh though it may sound, no other country changes the rules to protect you from something that has a 1 in 30 million chance of occuring.
I am an Inside Wiremanm But I have had the good fortune to experience traffic signal and street lighting maintainence as well. Since I've experienced intimate work relations with both technicians who are not electricians but trained only in T.S. or St. Lt. maintainence, as well as electricians who are of the same calibur as I, I can tell you a good T.S. tech is as good at what s/he does electrically as any electrician who might happen be qualified to do so much more.
And I'm not looking to make any enemies here, but I do have to wonder if your insistance that a T.S. or St. Ltg. "tech" or company should be populated by electricians and electrical contractors who have intimate knowldege of NEC, and that all T.S. and St. Ltg comply with the NEC is not just a "make work / more money for me" desire on your part.
As for the stated purpose of the NEC "primary function of the NEC is the practical safe guarding of PEOPLE and equipment from the hazards arising from the use of electricity." that's already covered in any T.S. or St. L. MOP...
-Everything reachable (above ground) is bonded or plastic.
-All access to live parts or conductors is either out-of-reach, or locked in a cabinet, or behind a limited access door.
Basically, every part of the system accessable to the public is at 0 potential.
As for the accident in Las Vegas - even here in NYC a couple of dogs and a person were electrocuted by stepping on cast iron utility box covers imbedded all over in NYC's sidewalks. Always the same issue with bonding wires corroded and live conductors touching metal parts within the hand holes.
I don't think this is an NEC issue. The box covers were bonded. They should have been safe. This is a maintainence issue. And the NEC can't enforce maintainence. Even if the utility had to follow the NEC, these accidents would still have happened.
And let me take this opportunity to state, emphatically, that I'm getting a little sick and tired of hearing about all of these "sally's law" or "Megan's law" and whatever new law or legislation that grieving family members demand get legislated or changed on behalf of their personal tragedy.
Accidents happen. Sure it's gotta suck if it happens to you or to someone close to you. But more laws aren't going to stop people from dying or more accidents from happening. As soon as something is considered idiot-proof, along comes a better idiot.
Here's the jist of my position: It's not just a little different, it's a LOT different. And the companies that service street lighting and/or traffic signals ARE classified as "Utilities" and their employees "Utility workers." Just because (in our case) the company is private doesn't mean it's not a utility. We can't get parking summonses and drivers are exempt from most Vehicle & Traffic laws while engaged in the servicing of the city's utility systems.
It's OK with me if it works and it's safe. Why not, they "install" a development with 100 houses and don't install a "grounding conductor" and instead they drive ground rods at every house and run an undersized grounding "jumper" of questionable "metalurgistic" qualities and non-industry standard guages, and still no one is getting killed or shocked.
And these houses have more potential than a single cobra head.
I know I'm talking to a group of serious and dedicated electricians and contractors who probably care very much about doing the safest thing. But let's face it, this is reality and in life there are certain risks that come with anything we do. I think sometimes we need to step back and look at the big picture and make a judgement call, or an assessment as to exactly how far we, as a society, are obligated to go make things even safer than they already are.
Exactly HOW MANY people have died or been injured due to arc-faults in bedrooms? Was that code really necessary to "save lives? " Or was that code necessary to boost sales for the corporations that will manufacture the arc-fault breakers? I'll bet it's less than 100 deaths per year. In a country with 3 hundred MILLION people, that's pretty darn safe. No need for arc-fault protection in MY book. Yes, cold and harsh though it may sound, no other country changes the rules to protect you from something that has a 1 in 30 million chance of occuring.
I am an Inside Wiremanm But I have had the good fortune to experience traffic signal and street lighting maintainence as well. Since I've experienced intimate work relations with both technicians who are not electricians but trained only in T.S. or St. Lt. maintainence, as well as electricians who are of the same calibur as I, I can tell you a good T.S. tech is as good at what s/he does electrically as any electrician who might happen be qualified to do so much more.
And I'm not looking to make any enemies here, but I do have to wonder if your insistance that a T.S. or St. Ltg. "tech" or company should be populated by electricians and electrical contractors who have intimate knowldege of NEC, and that all T.S. and St. Ltg comply with the NEC is not just a "make work / more money for me" desire on your part.
As for the stated purpose of the NEC "primary function of the NEC is the practical safe guarding of PEOPLE and equipment from the hazards arising from the use of electricity." that's already covered in any T.S. or St. L. MOP...
-Everything reachable (above ground) is bonded or plastic.
-All access to live parts or conductors is either out-of-reach, or locked in a cabinet, or behind a limited access door.
Basically, every part of the system accessable to the public is at 0 potential.
As for the accident in Las Vegas - even here in NYC a couple of dogs and a person were electrocuted by stepping on cast iron utility box covers imbedded all over in NYC's sidewalks. Always the same issue with bonding wires corroded and live conductors touching metal parts within the hand holes.
I don't think this is an NEC issue. The box covers were bonded. They should have been safe. This is a maintainence issue. And the NEC can't enforce maintainence. Even if the utility had to follow the NEC, these accidents would still have happened.
And let me take this opportunity to state, emphatically, that I'm getting a little sick and tired of hearing about all of these "sally's law" or "Megan's law" and whatever new law or legislation that grieving family members demand get legislated or changed on behalf of their personal tragedy.
Accidents happen. Sure it's gotta suck if it happens to you or to someone close to you. But more laws aren't going to stop people from dying or more accidents from happening. As soon as something is considered idiot-proof, along comes a better idiot.
Ken9876
Senior Member
- Location
- Jersey Shore
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
Well just south of were you are, the state or county takes care of the signals, and they are not utilities. And are workers are subject to even more laws, such as the CDL driving regs,the national traffic highway safety rules, state safety regulations, we simply cannot do whatever we want.
So as well as your stance on traffic signals and street lighting, you also feel convicted sex offended can live anywhere unannounced, which Megan's law would be about.
How True.
LawnGuyLandSparky
Senior Member
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
A "utility" doesn't necessarly mean a Poco or a Telco. It can also mean utility-type work. SO if a State or County or a Town or Township or Parish does it's own utility work in-house, then it's acting as a utility.
We aren't exempt from ALL V&T laws, we do need CDL licenses. We can't speed, we can't be on roadways that prohibit commercial traffic, unless we have business on that roadway. The laws we're exempt from are similar to the laws police or EMTs of fire departmments are exempt from. Such as facing the wrong way, or blocking traffic, and of course all of the parking, including fire hydrant regulations.
This thread started because someone was aghast at the thought of using a green wire as a conductor. I can understand how that can seem "shocking" to an inside wireman. Spends one day doing traffic signal work and you'll understand how it all makes perfect sense, and is perfectly safe. After all, electricity has no idea what color wire it's in.
As for Megan's law - I don't want a predator anywhere near me, however that law doesn't prevent it. It doesn't make the world any safer as there are just as many predators today as there were before the law was passed. It was "feel good you did something" legislation. It's pretty well established that when adults have unnatural urges towards inappropriate behavior with minors, that it's a sort of disease and cannot be cured. So the solution, or an effective "Megan's law" would have been to commit them to institutions for their natural lives until a cure is found. Not simply publish there whereabouts.
A "utility" doesn't necessarly mean a Poco or a Telco. It can also mean utility-type work. SO if a State or County or a Town or Township or Parish does it's own utility work in-house, then it's acting as a utility.
We aren't exempt from ALL V&T laws, we do need CDL licenses. We can't speed, we can't be on roadways that prohibit commercial traffic, unless we have business on that roadway. The laws we're exempt from are similar to the laws police or EMTs of fire departmments are exempt from. Such as facing the wrong way, or blocking traffic, and of course all of the parking, including fire hydrant regulations.
This thread started because someone was aghast at the thought of using a green wire as a conductor. I can understand how that can seem "shocking" to an inside wireman. Spends one day doing traffic signal work and you'll understand how it all makes perfect sense, and is perfectly safe. After all, electricity has no idea what color wire it's in.
As for Megan's law - I don't want a predator anywhere near me, however that law doesn't prevent it. It doesn't make the world any safer as there are just as many predators today as there were before the law was passed. It was "feel good you did something" legislation. It's pretty well established that when adults have unnatural urges towards inappropriate behavior with minors, that it's a sort of disease and cannot be cured. So the solution, or an effective "Megan's law" would have been to commit them to institutions for their natural lives until a cure is found. Not simply publish there whereabouts.
- Location
- Bremerton, Washington
- Occupation
- Master Electrician
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
An important point is for doing utility "type" work which rules apply, NEC or NESC.Just because you do utility type work does not make you a utility.
That determination is up to the state regulatory agency. See 90.2 in the NEC
Heres a link a great article by a well known author on "NEC or the NESC, which rules apply for traffic signal and roadway lighting?"
http://www.imsasafety.org/journal/mayjun/mayjun8.htm
Note that the IMSA in its traffic signal certificaitno study guide used to state (I had them change it) that the NESC is the primary document of interest.
LawnGuyLandSparky
By the way are you a certified traffic signal tech or electrician?
An important point is for doing utility "type" work which rules apply, NEC or NESC.Just because you do utility type work does not make you a utility.
That determination is up to the state regulatory agency. See 90.2 in the NEC
Heres a link a great article by a well known author on "NEC or the NESC, which rules apply for traffic signal and roadway lighting?"
http://www.imsasafety.org/journal/mayjun/mayjun8.htm
Note that the IMSA in its traffic signal certificaitno study guide used to state (I had them change it) that the NESC is the primary document of interest.
LawnGuyLandSparky
By the way are you a certified traffic signal tech or electrician?
- Location
- Bremerton, Washington
- Occupation
- Master Electrician
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
One other commnet. What started this was the discussion about use of the green wire for other than grounding.
I submitted a code proposal for the 2008 NEC to allow continued use of this application.
I suggest that if you strongly belive in this practice, and thats it's safe, then you submit a comment to accept my proposal.
I am fairly sure the CMP will vote to reject my proposal. Of course if enough comments were made they could change there vote at the comment stage.
Its always been a violation. So are a lot of the common traffic signal installations I see.
One other commnet. What started this was the discussion about use of the green wire for other than grounding.
I submitted a code proposal for the 2008 NEC to allow continued use of this application.
I suggest that if you strongly belive in this practice, and thats it's safe, then you submit a comment to accept my proposal.
I am fairly sure the CMP will vote to reject my proposal. Of course if enough comments were made they could change there vote at the comment stage.
Its always been a violation. So are a lot of the common traffic signal installations I see.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
Don
I don't agree. Look at 90.2(B). There is nothing to support the "utility type work" idea.
Don
LawnGuyLandSparky
Senior Member
Re: Green wire on traffic signals
I figure at this rate, as soon as I have done everything, they'll retire me because I'll know where all the bodies are buried.
I try to work out of as many divisions as possible. I love all things electrical and construction related. I'm a A-Journeyman wireman in NYC but I've also done data (ugh) inside and outside plant fiber, & traffic signal construction / maintainence.
I figure at this rate, as soon as I have done everything, they'll retire me because I'll know where all the bodies are buried.
- Status