news » Check valves for Backflow Prevention

	12/17/2002
	Check valves for Backflow Prevention
	David Viola, PMI Technical Director
	PMI was successful in its bid to eliminate restrictions on the use of fixture fitting backflow prevention devices complying with the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) A112.18.3 from the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC). Operating under new development procedures for the UPC, PMI and several of its members were able to convince the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO) Standards Council that objections raised by the IAPMO membership were unsubstantiated. The ruling paves the way for manufacturers to incorporate durable check valves by themselves in faucets and fixture fittings with hose-attached outlets as the primary means of providing backflow protection. PMI’s accomplishment did not come easily. Reversing an action taken in 2001, the UPC Technical Committee voted overwhelmingly in favor of PMI’s proposal in April at the hearing in Reno, Nev. In fact, the Technical Committee ballot results were 24 in favor with only one objection. The Technical Committee agreed that ASME A112.18.3 contains unprecedented performance requirements and devices in compliance with the standard provide equivalent protection to those currently permitted by the UPC. Then, in a surprising vote at their annual conference in September in Denver, Colo., the IAPMO membership rejected the Technical Committee’s action after a single individual offered inaccurate and unsubstantiated testimony that the proposed change creates a cross connection and that check valves are inadequate. In years past, the IAPMO membership action would have been the final step in the process. Under new consensus development procedures accredited by American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the content of the UPC is determined by the Technical Committee, which is the primary consensus body in the process. The IAPMO membership actions on code content are advisory and intended to provide stakeholders an additional opportunity to provide input. Where disagreements arise between the Technical Committee and the IAPMO membership, they are resolved by the Standards Council. The IAPMO Standards Council acts as the administrator of the UPC development process, the arbiter of appeals and the body that ultimately approves its publication. PMI and Delta Faucet filed appeals to the Standards Council because the unsubstantiated action of the IAPMO membership is contrary to the action of the primary consensus body. Substantiation is a basic and critical prerequisite for any action taken on a technical document in the development of American National Standards. At the appeal hearing in Ontario, Calif., on November 7, 2002, Sally Remedios of Delta Faucet, Norm Kummerlen of Moen and I teamed up to persuade the Standards Council to reject the IAPMO membership’s action and uphold the Technical Committee’s decision. Admittedly, I was skeptical that a move to an ANSI consensus development process for a plumbing code was going to be an improvement. My primary concern was the decrease in the number of code development cycles between editions would result in the reduction of our ability to incorporate new product standards, and address emerging issues and new technology. However, having been a member of the Technical Committee and an active participant throughout the first cycle of the new process, I have come to understand that this is not a problem. In fact, under the new system, PMI has never been more successful in influencing the content of the Uniform Plumbing Code. As such, with the benefits of due process and the safeguards against undue influence by any one interest group, the ANSI consensus process is an improvement. My hat goes off to IAPMO and its members for making such a change. A copy of the IAPMO Standards Council ruling can be found at http://www.iapmo.org/iapmo/stds-council-agenda.html PMI News – November/December 2002 www.pmihome.org Reproduced with permission