Overhead Distribution Pole

Status
Not open for further replies.
charlie b

charlie b

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Lockport, IL
Occupation
Semi-Retired Electrical Engineer
We have a project that will tap into an existing overhead distribution line for a new line that will be run underground alongside a street. The affected pole is presently being used to temporarily serve a nearby set of trailers. The installation contractor is telling us that the pole is ?too busy? (i.e., too many things on the pole) to be able to safely add our tap. They want to first relocate the line serving the trailers to the next pole, so as to make room for the new tap. I am no expert on overhead construction methods and safe practices, and neither is my co-worker.

Can anyone tell me, from looking at the attached photo, whether we (serving as the designer of record for the project) should concur with the contractor?s suggestion, or should tell them to go ahead and add the tap to the pole in its present configuration?
 

Attachments

  • Power Pole.jpg
    Power Pole.jpg
    85.2 KB · Views: 0
Every utility makes up their own construction standards, so if they say there's not enough room, then that's that. I've never heard of a place where the contractor gets to choose how they want to build something on another company's pole unless it's beyond a primary meter. That being said, I've built three phase primary risers on poles that had far less room than that pole.

I'm assuming what you're saying is those two lateral phases are coming down and becoming UG fed. Why not just get the riser pulled to the stand pipe, take an outage and remove the OH laterals to make room and build the riser. That can easily be done in less than a day.
 
Charlie,

Unless there is a requirement to maintain climbing space to the top (which I would find odd except somewhere like California), it looks like there is room to me (bracket configuration). I have designed them on poles with more stuff than that.
 
mivey said:
Charlie,

Unless there is a requirement to maintain climbing space to the top (which I would find odd except somewhere like California), it looks like there is room to me (bracket configuration). I have designed them on poles with more stuff than that.
Click to expand...
In CA you may have to maintain California Condor wingspan clearances between wires as well. Or else take steps to discourage perching. :)
 
I don't see this as the installation contractors call, more the POCO call as to the pole additions.
That being said, I have built many UG risers on poles with less room than that. Build the riser thinking about the temporary lines removed.
 
Thanks for the input everyone.

This is on a military base, well downstream of the local utility's point of connection. So the base makes the call. I should mention that the question at hand is not so much one of safety, but rather one of funding. The contractor's idea is to move the temporary trailer service wires to the next pole downstream, thus making access to this pole easier. Not a bad idea, and everyone agrees that this would be acceptable. However, the base is taking the stance that the contractor should have field-verified existing conditions before submitting their bid, and therefore any additional work to install the new service would have to be at the contractor's cost. The contractor's stance is that the base is presenting them with an unsafe installation, and therefore the base should cover the additional costs related to making the installation safe. Since my colleague is the designer of record, he asked for my advice.

Please note that this is not a legal dispute, and that information I learn from this site will not be used to support one side or the other. The dispute is in the world of contract negotiations, and I will not be involved in that process. I just needed some help understanding the technical aspects of the situation.
 
I don't know their work methods so maybe safety is a factor, but that is about as clean as you can get for an existing pole. I don't personally see how you couldn't add a riser on that pole safely. Every state, utility, and contractor has different rules, but if it were me I wouldn't have even thought about that being unsafe construction unless the base has really specific construction standards which most bases don't. If they do, I havn't seen a construction standard that wouldn't be thrown out the window in two seconds if it meant the company is going to make more money.
 
charlie b said:
The contractor's stance is that the base is presenting them with an unsafe installation, and therefore the base should cover the additional costs related to making the installation safe.
Click to expand...
I don't see that the information provided so far supports the contractor's safety case.Maybe he has some additional information but I would just ask him to clarify his case as he may have a legitimate beef that we can't see.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top