|Question: 09-05||Code Section: 7||Date: 22 March 2009||OBC 2006 Reference: 126.96.36.199., 188.8.131.52., 184.108.40.206., 220.127.116.11.|
(In) 18.104.22.168. – every building except buildings of residential occupancy (22.214.171.124 (8)) require some degree of premise isolation and further degree of zone protection may be required. Does 126.96.36.199 (1) give this authority to require premise isolation?
I was under the impression that a code change was coming to make this requirement a clearer process. Not all inspectors are convinced we have the power to ask for premise isolation. The only area that seems somewhat clear is in the B 64. standard, but it needs to be made more clear if this is what the code is asking.
Sentences 188.8.131.52.(1) to (3) specify where backflow preventers are required.
Sentences 184.108.40.206.(1) to (4) specify the kind of backflow protection device which is required when different fire protection systems are installed.
220.127.116.11.(5) Except as permitted in sentences (1) and (8) backflow preventers shall be selected, installed and tested in conformance with;
– 18.104.22.168.(9). In addition to the backflow preventer required by this subsection, for building or facilities where a potentially severe health hazard may be caused by backflow, the potable water system shall be provided with premise isolation by the installation of a RP.
– CSA B64.10-07 Standard;
– 22.214.171.124 Premises isolation for all other water services shall be provided when required by a crossconnection control program (CCCP). The regulatory authority generally enforces a CCCP through the enactment of a bylaw.
Interpretation: Approved at AMES 2009