State code is 603.4.6 on page 140

http://www.iapmo.org/2010 California Plumbing Code/Chapter 06.pdf

 

California Code of Regulations
Title 23. Waters
Division 2. Department of Water Resources
Chapter 2.7. Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance

§ 492.7 Irrigation Design Plan.
.
.
.
(F) Backflow prevention devices shall be required to protect the water supply from contamination by the irrigation system. A project applicant shall refer to the applicable local agency code (i.e., public health) for additional backflow prevention requirements.​

 

most any state with a building code is going to have requirements to protect the potable water in a building

 

I don't want to read page 220 of some long PDF Form. I don't care to go read some state code. I just wanted a simple yes or no answer.

Are backflow devices required when you install an irrigation system on a residential property in most major cities in CA?

Does anyone have a simple yes or no answer for that? I'm just curious. I'm not going to be installing ANYTHING in CA, EVER. I was just curious if my employee was correct or if the company he was working for was just doing it wrong.

 

Figure your employee was blowing it out his ass - California has been requiring lawn-sprinkler backflow prevention for a very long time, even in San Diego county. They have the same anti-syphon valve setups as elsewhere in the state.

 

. They have the same anti-syphon valve setups as elsewhere in the state.

Is that all they require, or a BF in addition to ASV's? Maybe thats what the employee was talking about.

 

Figure your employee was blowing it out his ass - California has been requiring lawn-sprinkler backflow prevention for a very long time, even in San Diego county.

Ditto,tell the new guy he's full of it. The Western States, including British Columbia and Alberta, all take their regs from California. I believe it's U.C. Davis that sets the specs for all facets of cross-connection, INCLUDING resi.

 

California has their own "alphabet-soup" standards organization, but I don't know if neighboring states switched away from older standards, like those of ASSE. Either way gets you the protection.

 

California has their own "alphabet-soup" standards organization, but I don't know if neighboring states switched away from older standards, like those of ASSE. Either way gets you the protection.

And both ways should be enforced; therein lies the rub. :hammerhead:

 

Do they have to be installed backwards, or is that up to the installer?

 

Do they have to be installed backwards, or is that up to the installer?

Let me check the Suffolk Co. regs, I'll get back to you.

 

Places I've worked have mistakenly allowed an antisyphon valve serve as whole-system protection, with regular zone valves downstream. Those will be places where future restrictions on ASV use will be written into local ordinances, as if being hardasses makes up for previously slacking off.

 

Any "device" that cannot be tested, is not permitted, as far as I know in most developed western States. Not enough water people know the difference between "backflow" and "backsyphonage", both of which have to be taken into consideration when choosing a proper "assembly".

 

i don't want to read page 220 of some long pdf form. I don't care to go read some state code. I just wanted a simple yes or no answer.

are backflow devices required when you install an irrigation system on a residential property in most major cities in ca?

does anyone have a simple yes or no answer for that? I'm just curious. I'm not going to be installing anything in ca, ever. I was just curious if my employee was correct or if the company he was working for was just doing it wrong.

YES!!!!!!!

In some cities (like the one I live in) you must provide a device for meter protection as well. I have a device for irrigation and a device for the house and a device for the fire sprinklers in the house.

 

yes!!!!!!!

(and he meant every one of those seven exclamation points)

 

(and he meant every one of those seven exclamation points)

I was just trying to get to 10 characters.....

 

YES!!!!!!!

In some cities (like the one I live in) you must provide a device for meter protection as well. I have a device for irrigation and a device for the house and a device for the fire sprinklers in the house.

Get the nomenclature right, Dan. A "device" is non-testable, and only idiots permit them. What you (hopefully) meant was an "assembly", which can be tested and, depending on the little Nazi water purveyors, will be or be not permitted. I do hope your fire-line is not a "device".

 

Any "device" that cannot be tested, is not permitted, as far as I know in most developed western States. Not enough water people know the difference between "backflow" and "backsyphonage", both of which have to be taken into consideration when choosing a proper "assembly".

I hope you meant backpressure. Both are forms of backflow. Don't want yourself in with those water people that don't know the difference.

 

Get the nomenclature right, Dan. A "device" is non-testable, and only idiots permit them. What you (hopefully) meant was an "assembly", which can be tested and, depending on the little Nazi water purveyors, will be or be not permitted. I do hope your fire-line is not a "device".

Purveyors are happy with a "device" like a dual check valve at the meter, because it is only a backup, and not a primary means of protection. Building codes do not permit contamination of the potable water supply, if they say anything at all about cross-connection.

 

I hope you meant backpressure. Both are forms of backflow. Don't want yourself in with those water people that don't know the difference.

At least someone caught my screw-up. :clapping:

 

I don't want to read page 220 of some long PDF Form. I don't care to go read some state code. I just wanted a simple yes or no answer.

Are backflow devices required when you install an irrigation system on a residential property in most major cities in CA?

It is a state law Jim .... what do you think the answer is? That said, a "properly installed" ASV is what you typically see in residential around my parts and this does satisfy state code requirements.

 

Jim's a piece of work: asks a question and some well-meaning guys post answers and he gets pissed off? Boy, he sure must be busy waxing that big red truck of his.

 

Get the nomenclature right, Dan. A "device" is non-testable, and only idiots permit them. What you (hopefully) meant was an "assembly", which can be tested and, depending on the little Nazi water purveyors, will be or be not permitted. I do hope your fire-line is not a "device".

I think you have too much time on your hands to nitpick posts here. Put down the bong and go wax your motorhome or something! :hammerhead:

 

I think you have too much time on your hands to nitpick posts here. Put down the bong and go wax your motorhome or something! :hammerhead:

What's a bong?

 

What's a bong?

You're too young to know. Don't worry about it.