Ponder this:




I have omitted some parts of the above mentioned codes but here is my question..
Does the code reference mentioned exempt FDOT (Florida dept of transportation) from electrical inspections or any requirements of the National Electric Code? The case in question involves the installation of street lighting along US 19 in Pasco County. The contractor has installed a 480 volt service with main disconnect feeding a control panel controlling the lights. The control panel is not listed at all from any NRTL and consists of a shop made control box including panel guts from a square D I line panel and breakers, contactors and remote on/off switches and photo cells. It also has a parallel neutral conductor from the disconnect to the control panel. EGC paralleled with neutral.We have been told we do not have jurisdiction over this and to just inspect the service and that's it.
In another installation of 7 lights with metal poles being installed on a street going to a new school, we found the light poles were only being grounded by a driven ground rod to the pole without any EGC attached to the metal pole. All of this seems to be of concern for safety, what say you all??
We did get the grounding taken care of properly. When I asked the installers who met me on the job who was the licensed electrician they said they didn't have any.

I agree for the us 19 deal - inspection of "supply" conductors only, the whole "qualified personnel" thing.?

The school road? Is the street part of the site? What are you guys doing on a school job? All that said - I cringe at the lack of an EGC, seen it too many times, what would be worse is having a green wire used as a neut. or hot!

I agree with the EGC. The road to the school is a public road not on school property. It was redone to accomodate the school buses.

I think the (B) would apply - not covered. How did you guys even get wrapped up in this stuff?

The service needs to be permitted and this was brought up back in 1995 in regards to traffic signal light controls when an inspector wanted the bonding jumper in the control panel (load side bonding of the neutral)removed between the ground bar and the neutral bar. I wasn't here then but my predecessor lost that battle with our traffic department and the FDOT. I have read their specs and codes and see where that jumper is required by them and they do not see the shock hazard. I understand it can cause interference with the signal monitor tripping during electrical storms creating a hazard in traffic situations. So we do not inspect those control panels only the service but when this street lighting situation came up I thought It was my right to inspect the control panel.

The battle, as you say, was primarily with the building official's boss, who legally had no right to tell me what to do or how to inspect electrical work. If I remember correctly the company that was the subcontractor who actually installed the equipment agreed with my position, and removed the bonding jumpers. Heck, it's basic electricity 101. So to those who say I lost a battle, go on thinking that, what they don't know will not hurt them. Before I was there, permits were not even being issued for traffic lights so I think it has come a long way.

Now it is up to you to build upon what was there when I left, which I believe you are doing.

According to Florida Statute 489.503, this work is exempt from licensing/inspection only if it is being performed by an authorized employee of the State of Florida.

If the control panel is not listed, then the question becomes who or whom is liable in case of an accident wherein bodily harm or death is involved. Is the FDOT exempt from law suits in this case ? I think not ! Lawyers in this state would have a field day with this type of scenario. The real question becomes, if it is in the general interest of the public to allow unlisted or uninspected equipment to be used on public/state right of way. Perhaps a query to the FDOT about how they have protected their liabilty in this matter may be appropriate.

And yes, the State of Florida can be sued if something happens in this scenario. Florida court history has many examples of the State having to defend a practice that is not in the general interest of the public.

When I was working the only thing I was inspecting was jobs within the Florida state government and DOT had their work inspected if it was a building or other structure. I never saw a permit for anything that was hanging on a light pole or serving the pole. I did sewer lift stations, toll booths and the maintenance buildings.

My only guideline from Florida DMS (the agency that handled all permitting/inspection) was to enforce the NEC and when something was in a gray area, "make it safe".

Do you see anything inside that cabinet that looks particularly dangerous or outside standard trade practice?
I assume it does get locked up to keep the public out.

Nick, I wasn't referring to you, I was going back even further to your predesessor in 1995 of which I have all the paperwork involved in that situation. I remember when I first started with the county and was inspecting my first traffic control panel and was in a battle with the traffic department, you calmed me down and brought up the previous ruling by our higher ups and you did agree with me. I should have said predessor's, predessor LOL

Greg, I have posted pics in the picture gallery.