Laserfiche WebLink
November 8, 2025 <br />T-Arm Mount Analysis Fairview Business Park (12844670) <br />TEP Project Number 353924.1184084 Page 3 <br /> <br />Table 4 - Documents Provided <br />Document Remarks Source <br />Previous Mount Analysis GPD Group Inc., dated September 28, 2021 <br />GPD# 2021723.21.195375.01 M Squared <br />Previous Structural <br />Analysis <br />GPD Group Inc., dated September 28, 2021 <br />GPD# 2021723.21.195375.01 M Squared <br />Scoping form AT&T Mobility, dated September 26, 2025 <br />RFDS ID: RFDS-34994 M Squared <br />Preliminary Construction <br />Drawings <br />M Squared <br />Project No. 12844670 M Squared <br />Correspondence Correspondence from M Squared Wireless Solutions in reference to <br />the existing, proposed, and reserved loading. M Squared <br /> <br /> <br />RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> <br />1) If the load differs from that described in Table 2 of this report or the provisions of this analysis <br />are found to be invalid, another structural analysis should be performed. <br />2) The mount and its connection have sufficient capacity to carry the proposed loading <br />configuration. <br />In order for the results of this analysis to be valid, the mount modifications listed below must be <br />completed: <br />a) (3) SitePro P30120, 2.5 Sch.40 x 10’-0” Mount Pipes (CONMAT Item No. ANT.16008) <br />b) (6) SitePro FCX45-U Universal Crossover Plate Kits (CONMAT Item No. ANT.56006) <br /> <br /> <br />ANALYSIS ASSUMPTIONS <br /> <br />1) The mount was built in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications. <br />2) The mount has been maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s specification. <br />3) The configuration of antennas, transmission cables, mounts and other appurtenances are as <br />specified in Table 2. All mount components have been assumed to be in sufficient condition to <br />carry their full design capacity for this analysis. <br />4) Serviceability with respect to antenna twist, tilt, roll, or lateral translation, is not checked and is <br />left to the carrier or tower owner to ensure conformance. <br />5) TEP did not analyze the collar mount connection to the pole and assumes it to have sufficient <br />structural capacity to transfer the applied forces from the mount to the tower. <br />6) All material grades used for this analysis, unless verified by mount manufacturer design, were <br />assumed per AISC Table 2-4, 15th Edition. See RISA 3-D output for confirmation on grades used <br />in this analysis. <br /> <br />This analysis may be affected if any assumptions are not valid or have been made in error. TEP should <br />be notified to determine the effect on the structural integrity of the mount. <br />