We danced around that a few years ago by using copper in the basement and cpvc upstairs to keep the potable materials and put in a swing check. Then that came back and wanted a testable device to certify against stagnant contamination. I wouldn't want to be the PE that said it's OK even after the fact.
Tom Don't look now, but City of San Diego requires a certified RPZ assembly on all new sprinklered domestic services. We still end up with a check at the riser because the BFP is at the property line ... Steve Leyton I can see where black steel pipe in the basement might be less than desirable if connected to the rest of the plumbing, but a pair of rubber-seated checks could address that at lower cost, and without the friction loss of spring-loaded clappers inherent in a BFP. As with so many of these requests, the knee-jerk reaction should be: "Could you show me the regulation so we can be certain we are complying with it in its entirety?" glc I did a design a couple of years ago for a group home based on NFPA 13D (2002). We have a single copper feed from the public supply for both domestic and fire. The basement has steel pipe and the upper floors have CPVC. Now, the water company is coming back and saying that a backflow preventer is required on the system because of the different materials used on the system. Supposedly the State of CT is requiring it, although I've never heard of it before. Anybody run into this in other jurisdictions? Todd G. Williams, PE _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
