August 1995 the Foundation's Approval Approval Vs
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Volume 13 / Number 2 / August 1995 The Foundation's Approval Approval vs. Other Agencies' Listings vs. A Detailed Look at Different Evaluation Processes Evaluation The Foundation office re- time. This is extremely important ceives many inquiries regarding as some agencies will allow Items Evaluated by the the various listings or approvals backflow preventers to be in- Foundation are not available for backflow prevention stalled in their system if they have necessarily Approved assemblies. In particular, "how only passed the Foundation’s does the actual testing differ?" Laboratory Evaluation Phase of Aside from the Foundation’s the Approval Program. They Approval Program, the Founda- The Foundation’s Approval assume that the full Approval will tion also performs specialized Program for backflow prevention follow within the year. Since, in testing for various manufacturers assemblies is unique from other the last two years, one-third of the of hydraulic equipment. It is listing agencies. The major assemblies released to the field important to note, however, that difference is that the Foundation did not pass the field evaluation, the Foundation does not Approve has Laboratory and Field Evalua- there are many unapproved assem- equipment other than backflow tion Phases of the Approval blies which have been installed in prevention assemblies. The Program, as compared to other Foundation’s Engineering Staff is listing agencies only requiring A recent survey of the questioned frequently about compliance with laboratory tests. certain pieces of equipment. The Foundation’s experience has Foundation’s field Some people are under the im- been that the Laboratory Evalua- evaluation results showed pression that the Foundation tion determines the general operat- that one third of those Approves items other than back- ing characteristics of the backflow backflow preventers which continued on page 4 prevention assembly under test, but the twelve-month Field Evalu- passed the Laboratory ation puts the assembly into actual Evaluation Phase of the field conditions. Many variables Approval Program and were can be simulated and tested in the laboratory, but the effects of time- released to the Field in-use have not been successfully Evaluation Phase did not simulated in the lab. A recent pass the Field Evaluation survey of the Foundation’s field the first time. evaluation results showed that one third of those backflow preventers which passed the Laboratory systems which normally require Evaluation Phase of the Approval Foundation Approved assemblies. Program and were released to the If an assembly does not complete Field Evaluation Phase did not the field evaluation the first time pass the Field Evaluation the first through, it is typically modified, continued on page 3 2 he Foundation Membership grew again in this last quarter. The newest Members are listed below. The Foun- Tdation encourages Members to take advantage of the many ben- efits of Foundation Membership. Additional copies of the Manual of Cross-Connection Control are available to Members at a 25% discount. Members receive a 20% discount on training courses and 25% dis- counts on the Training Tools. Members are also encouraged to contact the Foundation office with any questions regarding cross-connection control. AAA Plumbing City of Florence Cross Talk is published by and Heating Gary Saunders the University of Southern Town of Addison Utilities Goleta Water Dist. California's Foundation for Cross-Connection Control Arizona Cross Connection Town of Griffith and Hydraulic Research for Arrow Construction Harlan Municipal Utilities its Members. Additional Copies are available to the Services Inc. Hudson Plumbing Members upon request. Barstow Unified School HydroCowl, Inc. (213) 740-2032 Copyright 1995 © University of South- District J.A. Wax Co. ern California. Burns and Roe Services Jeffrey A. Fasula All rights reserved. Corporation Stan Nikkel CalResources LLC Town of Payson Certified Backflow SEARHC/Mt. Edgecumbe Services Hospital Cross Tech City of Scottsdale The Foundation for Cross-Connection CSU, Bakersfield City of Solvang Control and Hydraulic Research Dave’s Quality Plumbing Standard Wholesale University of Southern California Dempsey Construction Supply Co. KAP-200 University Park MC-2531 Los Angeles, CA 90089-2531 Eastern Municipal Water Town of Taylor District Town of Addison Utilities Phone: (213) 740-2032 FAX: (213) 740-8399 City of Edgewater Waterfront Water Works, E-Mail: [email protected] Steven D. Fickle Inc. WWW Homepage: Yardmaster Enterprises http://www.usc.edu/dept/fccchr/ 3 A Detailed Look at Different Evaluation Processes continued from page 1 reevaluated in the Laboratory and, •Pressure Vacuum Breaker When assemblies are avail- if every thing tests satisfactorily, Backsiphonage Prevention able to start the evaluation pro- released to the field again. But, Assembly cess, the manufacturer must this assembly has been modified •Spill-Resistant Pressure submit product to initiate the from the original design. There- Laboratory Evaluation. In con- Vacuum Breaker fore, even if it does eventually junction with the Foundation’s gain Approval, the Approved Backsiphonage Prevention evaluation, most manufacturers assembly is different than the Assembly will also request that the Founda- assembly which originally com- •Atmospheric Vacuum Breaker tion conduct the evaluation re- pleted the Laboratory Phase of the Backsiphonage Prevention quired to satisfy other specific Approval Program. This is why it Assembly listing agencies, such as: is so important not to allow •Double Check Detector assemblies to be put into service Backflow Prevention American Society for Sanitary until Approval has been granted. Assembly Engineering (ASSE) •Reduced Pressure Principle International Association of The Field Evaluation is not Plumbing and Mechanical the only difference between the Detector Backflow Prevention Assembly Officials (IAPMO) The Foundation’s Labora- tory Evaluation is much continued on page 6 more involved than that of other entities. Tester Course Program Specialist Foundation’s Approval Program Los Angeles, CA Course and those of other agencies. The 16-20 October 1995 Foundation’s Laboratory Evalua- 22-26 January 1996 tion is much more involved than USC Campus that of other entities. 29 Jan-2 Feb 1996 Las Vegas, NV 18-22 September 1995 Should a manufacturer desire Incline Village, NV the Foundation’s Approval for 18-22 March 1996 their product, the manufacturer Charleston, SC will be directed to the Specifica- 6-10 November 1995 tions contained in Section 10 of the Foundation’s Manual of Cross-Connection Control, cur- rently in its 9th Edition. The Non-Members $750.00 Non-Members $800.00 Specifications contain design, Members $600.00 Members $640.00 material, and performance require- ments for backflow prevention assemblies, including the: Please contact the Foundation office for information on courses in your area or for an application for the next USC Training Course. You may also send a hard copy of a purchase order or a check to the Foundation office to reserve a space. Please be •Double Check Valve Backflow advised that some of these courses fill six to eight weeks in advance. Prevention Assembly A Purchase Order may be sent via FAX to the Foundation office •Reduced Pressure Principle at (213) 740-8399. Call (213) 740-2032 or E-mail [email protected] for more Backflow Prevention information. Assembly 4 Approval vs. Evaluation continued from page 1 flow prevention assemblies. The assembly, this does not mean that are written as a result of the Foundation does not Approve the assembly is Approved. The evaluation in the Laboratory and these various pieces of equipment, assembly may have successfully are not intended for any purpose the Foundation simply evaluates completed the Laboratory Evalua- other than documenting technical their performance based on the tion, but the assembly must evaluation results. Some manu- manufacturer’s request. successfully complete the one year facturers have shown customers field evaluation before it is con- the Foundation’s Laboratory For example, if a fire hy- sidered Approved.) Evaluation Report on their prod- drant manufacturer asked the uct. The purpose of this should Foundation to determine what the The Foundation may issue a only be to confirm certain data maximum flow rate through the Laboratory Evaluation Report on and facts regarding the test results. any piece of equipment. It is This should not be used to imply When a technical report is important to understand what the that the Foundation has found any written, the facts of the Laboratory Evaluation Report product to be “acceptable” or testing are simply detailed, states. This report will usually Approved. Should there be any there is no implication of state what tests were performed, questions, the Foundation’s Foundation Approval, en- what apparatus was used, and the Engineering Staff should be dorsement or acceptance. results of the test. These reports contacted. hydrant would be at a given pressure, the Foundation’s Engi- neering Staff would set up the piping, run the evaluation and write a Laboratory Report for the hydrant manufacturing company. Manual Available This, however, would only be a report detailing the tests per- formed and the results obtained. When a technical report is written, The Ninth Edition of the Manual of Cross-Connection the data of the testing are simply Control is available for purchase. Foundation Members detailed, there is no implication of receive