Is a swimming pool considered a non-potable water source? Should I be
doing tours of the neighborhood to determine if there are NP sources?
(Cha-ching, my price just went up.) Oceans, rivers and lakes are
obvious, but where does it stop? What about if the location is 1500
ft from the water source and 250 ft of it is vertical drop (actual case)?
At 06:43 PM 10/9/2007, Garth W. Warren wrote:
Gayle - if the systems are within 1700 feet of a non potable water source
they are supposed to be RPZs anyway. or if you have A-F. Also be wary of
the installation location, a RPZ can not be placed below grade regardless
where the DCV is unless a gravity drain capable of handling the discharge of
the device when it fouls is present. Just because a DCV is installed in a
pit and has to be changed out does not allow you to place the RPZ in the
pit. DCV and RPZ are NOT the same protection.
Sounds like you need to ask politely for the Code section that is being
referenced so that you might have it handy for the next project. If it can
be produced, comply.
Garth
----- Original Message -----
From: "GAYLE KNOWLES" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 1:26 PM
Subject: RE: Double-check vs RPs
Thanks for the info. I guess what I'm looking for is something that states
that all these existing double-check backflows are not a threat and
replacing them all with RPZ is a lot of unnecessary extra cost for the
owner. As Matt stated, it may very well be a losing argument as long as it
has been "adopted". The info will be used to fight to keep the existing
double-checks.> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 14:10:20 -0400> From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected]> Subject: RE:
Double-check vs RPs> > Gayle, Perhaps our regulations in New Jersey would be
of assistance.> > John Drucker, Fire Protection Subcode Official,
NJ> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------> > STATE OF NEW JERSEY> > DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION> >
BUREAU OF SAFE DRINKING WATER> > SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT REGULATIONS> >
(N.J.A.C. 7:10)> > ADOPTED: November 4, 2004> > 7:10-10.4 Installation> >
(a) The approved physical connection installation shall be> installed on the
customer's side of the water meter on the> pipe(s) conveying the water from
the public community water> system into a facility, shall be installed as
close to the meter as> is reasonably practicable, and shall be prior to any
other> connection, unless such other connection is also protected by> means
of an approved physical connection installation. For a> fire service line,
the approved physical connection installation> shall be installed prior to
the alarm check and siamese> connection.> (b) The approved physical
connection installation shall be> installed so as to allow easy access, with
adequate space for> maintenance, inspection, and testing. No part of the
device> shall be submerged or subjected to freezing temperatures unless>
such part is thermally protected.> > (c) The approved physical connection
installation shall not> be installed in a pit or vault.> > 1. This
subsection shall not apply to any physical> connection installation operated
under a current physical> connection permit issued before the operative date
of this> chapter until such time as the existing physical connection>
installation is replaced or modified> >
_______________________________________________> Sprinklerforum mailing
list> [email protected]>
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum> > To
Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Put
the word unsubscribe in the subject
field)_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
At 06:48 PM 10/9/2007, GAYLE KNOWLES wrote:
Not a code violation, just a new code is wanting to come into
playGayle Knowles, SET
> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 14:43:13 -0400> From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected]>
Subject: RE: Double-check vs RPs> > Gayle,> > Off the top of my
head (which means it not nor will be enforceable glc!)> perhaps the
installed BFP is an existing code violation ?. Yea it> happens
stuff gets approved that shouldn't be. The water purveyor may> have
simply caught it. However RPZ's in submersable locations has to
the> best of my knowledge been prohibited.> > While we are on that
subject, remember a code violation is a violation> forever despite
what "approval" you may have in hand. > > John Drucker> Fire
Protection Subcode Official> New Jersey > > -----Original
Message-----> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
GAYLE> KNOWLES> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 2:26 PM> To:
[email protected]> Subject: RE: Double-check vs
RPs> > > Thanks for the info. I guess what I'm looking for is
something that> states that all these existing double-check
backflows are not a threat> and replacing them all with RPZ is a
lot of unnecessary extra cost for> the owner. As Matt stated, it
may very well be a losing argument as> long as it has been
"adopted". The info will be used to fight to keep> the existing
double-checks.> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 14:10:20 -0400> From:>
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected]>
Subject:> RE: Double-check vs RPs> > Gayle, Perhaps our regulations
in New Jersey> would be of assistance.> > John Drucker, Fire
Protection Subcode> Official, NJ>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------>
> ------> > STATE OF NEW JERSEY> > DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL>
PROTECTION> > BUREAU OF SAFE DRINKING WATER> > SAFE DRINKING WATER
ACT> REGULATIONS> > (N.J.A.C. 7:10)> > ADOPTED: November 4, 2004> >
7:10-10.4> Installation> > (a) The approved physical connection
installation shall> be> installed on the customer's side of the
water meter on the> pipe(s)> conveying the water from the public
community water> system into a> facility, shall be installed as
close to the meter as> is reasonably> practicable, and shall be
prior to any other> connection, unless such> other connection is
also protected by> means of an approved physical> connection
installation. For a> fire service line, the approved physical>
connection installation> shall be installed prior to the alarm
check and> siamese> connection.> (b) The approved physical
connection installation> shall be> installed so as to allow easy
access, with adequate space for>> maintenance, inspection, and
testing. No part of the device> shall be> submerged or subjected to
freezing temperatures unless> such part is> thermally protected.> >
(c) The approved physical connection> installation shall not> be
installed in a pit or vault.> > 1. This> subsection shall not apply
to any physical> connection installation> operated under a current
physical> connection permit issued before the> operative date of
this> chapter until such time as the existing physical> connection>
installation is replaced or modified> >>
_______________________________________________> Sprinklerforum
mailing> list> [email protected]>>
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum> >
To> Unsubscribe, send an email
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> (Put the word
unsubscribe in the subject>
field)_______________________________________________>
Sprinklerforum mailing list> [email protected]>
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum> >
To Unsubscribe, send an email>
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Put the word
unsubscribe in the subject field)> > >
_______________________________________________> Sprinklerforum
mailing list> [email protected]>
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum> >
To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Put the word
unsubscribe in the subject
field)_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
Todd G. Williams, PE
Fire Protection Design/Consulting
Stonington, Connecticut
www.fpdc.com
860.535.2080
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
