3’ high mast

A

AC\DC

Senior Member
Location
Oregon
Occupation
EC
I got a mask a little under 3 feet above roof 2 inch ridges one triplex aluminum 50 feet span and the wires going up 20 feet higher in the air. To power pole It’s a nice slope.
They’re saying that a guy wire it the mast can’t support it.
Poco was fine just inspector is saying I need

Is the 2” mast capable and how does one prove that
 
How far does the mast go below the roof surface? If it's going 4-5 feet down and is solid at the roof surface itself (the fulcrum point) and at the bottom, it sounds good to me. OTOH, if a guy is easy to install, it might be faster to put one in than argue the point.
 
Did the inspector cite 344.30? RMC shall be securely fastened within 3 ft of each conduit termination, if your last support is below the roof and your conduit termination (weather head) is 3' above the roof you might be more than 3' from your last support? There is also 230.28 which says a service mast shall be of adequate strength or be supported by braces or guys you cant have a coupling above a roof.
 
Yeah, he quoted the one where it’s gotta be adequate to support it. The last point of attachment will be the roof that secured that penetration is secured and strapped as far as I’m concern, but he didn’t quote that
 
AC\DC said:
I got a mask a little under 3 feet above roof 2 inch ridges one triplex aluminum 50 feet span and the wires going up 20 feet higher in the air. To power pole It’s a nice slope.
They’re saying that a guy wire it the mast can’t support it.
Poco was fine just inspector is saying I need

Is the 2” mast capable and how does one prove that
Click to expand...
Our utility would require 2 1/2" rigid for that mast. If the portion above the roof was 2' 2" or less they would permit 2" rigid.

Without engineering design this is a subjective issue. One way to correct the inspectors objection would be a tie back of some sort. Have seen both solid and cable type between the mast and a roof anchor.
 
Yeah, I could but there’s one right down the street that he approved of. He’s just picking on me cause I took him the state for a dispute, I believe
 
I’d say power company hooked up they’re adequate and it’s their connection point anyway so if they’re fine with it, he should be fine with it
 
AC\DC said:
I’d say power company hooked up they’re adequate and it’s their connection point anyway so if they’re fine with it, he should be fine with it
Click to expand...
He should be. But he's not. So now you have to do something about it.

NEC requirement is 230.28. Check it out. I'd say according to the requirements of 230.28, this service is very compliant.

Is the 2" mast capable? Absolutely. How do you prove it? Depends on if the jurisdiction has any avenue for you to contest and what that avenue is. Around these parts, there is no avenue. You don't contest. So the answer is probably: you don't, you do what the inspector tells you to do.

In the real world what the NEC says does not matter, the only thing that matters is what the inspector thinks the NEC says. And what the inspector feels like he should and should not make you do and based on how he feels. And how much the office behind him is going to bludgeon you if you don't comply. And he thinks it says that mast needs a guy wire. So that mast needs a guy wire.
 
AC\DC said:
The last point of attachment will be the roof that secured that penetration is secured and strapped
Click to expand...
Post a photo,
If its secured and strapped within 3' of a piece of kindorf with a strut strap or you 2-hole strap wiht lag screws and end of the raceway is 3 feet from that take him to the state again.
But if its 3' from WH to a roof boot and a hole in plywood I could see him not considering the hole in roof secure enough, I make those holes larger than the pipe then cover it with the boot, not secure at all if did it.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Our utility would require 2 1/2" rigid for that mast. If the portion above the roof was 2' 2" or less they would permit 2" rigid.
Click to expand...
Obviously the height is important but equally important is the length of the drop. I'm kind of surprised that's not part of their equation.
 
230.28 says "adequate strength" and it is not defined. That pretty much does leave it up to how the inspector feels and 110.2.

AC\DC said:
Is the 2” mast capable and how does one prove that
Click to expand...
A structural engineer could calculate it and write you a report for $500 ;)...

If the guy is reasonable, he would probably accept whatever the utility has written in their guidelines as "adequate strength" unless it is a really unusual install, which this one clearly is not.

The AHJ might have an office policy or "code interpretation" they enforce by. If that policy is written down, you have no leverage at all... but you could keep the policy handy to stay out of trouble.

If it's not written down and the guy is not reasonable about utility specs... he's wrong, but you will not win this battle.
 
In most areas the utility will not hook up a service until after is passes City/County/State inspection. In this case they hooked it up before inspection? Seems odd.

In my area the utility's have specifications on mast size and support. The inspectors generally stay out of it and say to follow the utility rules.

The exception is if they don't feel the mast is tall enough to meet NEC clearances over roofs, pools, etc they call it. The unique thing about that is CA GO95 which is the rules the utility's follow in CA states that local jurisdictions have no say in overhead clearances. Their rules are more lenient on some items such as swimming pools. The inspectors always respond that the can enforce NEC rules on utility owned lines.
 
The only thing he’s saying is that the mass is not strong enough I don’t believe that at all with the dimensions I specified earlier it should be fine
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top