Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/20/2001 - FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 47, 2001, AMENDING AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ITEM NUMBER: 17 ip FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL DATE: March 20, 2001Jim Hibbard/ STAFF: John Nelson SUBJECT: First Reading of Ordinance No.47,2001,Amending the City's Cross-Connection Control Rules and Regulations. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and Water Board recommend adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The Ordinance will reduce the need for future additional staff to administer this program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The proposed changes to the City's Cross-Connection Control Rules and Regulations would reduce the required testing interval for backflow preventers on the typical single-family residential lawn sprinkler system from annually to once every three years. The City's current regulations require that all backflow preventers be tested annually. For practical reasons, lawn sprinkler systems must be tested during the irrigation season. This has become a gigantic undertaking. This,along with feedback from customers that annual testing is too frequent, caused city staff to investigate alternatives. Staff worked with the Colorado Department of Health, Water Quality Division for clarification of the State's regulations regarding testing of the backflow preventers for residential lawn sprinkler systems. The result was that testing of these specific devices is considered a matter for local determination under a municipality's Plumbing Code. Staff believes for the typical residential lawn sprinkler system, an adequate level of protection can be obtained from testing once every three years. This level of testing is manageable with existing resources and would be more acceptable to customers. DATE: March 20, 2001 2 ITEM NUMBER: BACKGROUND: Over six years ago, the City's Water Board recommended, and City Council adopted, a Cross Connection Control Program (the "Program"). The Program requires installation and testing of backflow preventers on all connections that pose a hazard to the water distribution system of the City's Water Utility. These include fire sprinkler lines,boiler makeup lines,carbonated drink supply lines, lawn sprinkler systems, and others. The main focus of the Program is the commercial- industrial sector. Under the Program, annual testing is performed by private certified technicians hired by the customer. The Program has been very successful with over 2,500 commercial-industrial devices currently tested annually. Although the main focus of the Program is commercial-industrial connections,backflow preventers on residential lawn sprinkler systems are not ignored. All new systems must be inspected and tested. In addition, staff conducts surveys identifying homes with existing sprinkler systems. A letter is then sent requesting the customer to call for an inspection and free test of their backflow preventer. Systems without proper backflow preventers are required to install the correct assembly and have it tested. This process has identified over 5,000 residential sprinkler systems to date. Estimates indicate about 15,000 residential lawn sprinkler systems are in use in Fort Collins. The City's current regulations require that all backflow preventers be tested annually. For practical reasons,lawn sprinkler systems must be tested during the irrigation season. Sending out notices and recording test results for the residential sprinkler systems currently in the database has become a gigantic undertaking. This,along with feedback from customers that annual testing is too frequent, caused city staff to investigate alternatives. Staff worked with the Colorado Department of Health, Water Quality Division for clarification of the State's regulations regarding testing of residential lawn backflow preventers for residential lawn sprinkler systems. The result was that because a typical residential lawn backflow preventer is considered an extension of the house plumbing, it is a Plumbing Code issue. The 1997 Edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code as amended by the Colorado Plumbing Board leaves the testing frequency up to the administrative authority. Staff believes for the typical residential lawn sprinkler system, an adequate level of protection can be obtained from testing once every three years. This level of testing is manageable with existing resources and would be more acceptable to customers. Any residential system that presents an unusual hazard, such as a fertilizer injection system or back up well, will continue to be tested annually. In addition, a test would be required upon the new installation,repair, and replacement of a backflow preventer. All commercial-industrial devices, including commercial irrigation systems, would still require annual testing. i I ORDINANCE NO. 47, 2001 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE CITY'S CROSS-CONNECTION CONTROL RULES AND REGULATIONS WHEREAS, Section 26-189 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins authorizes and directs the City Manager to establish a program to control and eliminate cross-connection hazards with respect to the water distribution system of the City's water utility (the "Program"); and WHEREAS, Section 26-189 provides that the City Council may, upon recommendation of the City Manager,adopt by ordinance such supplemental rules and regulations as may be necessary to implement and administer the Program; and WHEREAS,in 1994,the City Council enacted Ordinance No. 131, 1994,adopting the City's Cross-Connection Control Rules and Regulations pursuant to City Code Section 26-189 (the "Regulations"); and WHEREAS,Section 3.5A of the Regulations currently requires that the backflow prevention devices of residential systems be tested annually; and WHEREAS,there are practical problems with requiring that the backflow prevention devices of such sprinkler systems be tested annually, and requiring that such backflow prevention devices be tested only once every three years is an adequate level of protection for the City's water distribution system; and WHEREAS,City staff has recommended that Section 3.5 of the Regulations be amended to eliminate the annual inspection requirement for the backflow prevention devices of residential lawn sprinkler systems and that the inspection requirement be changed to testing only once every three years. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That Section 3.5A of the Cross-Connection Control Rules and Regulations is hereby amended to read as follows: 3.5 TESTING, INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE A. lxeept`as providetl tparagiph B below; Itit shall be the duty of the consumer at any premises where backflow prevention assemblies are required by these Rules and Regulations to be installed,to have such assemblies tested and inspected annually by a certified technician to assure the assembly is functioning properly.Non-testable assemblies that are approved under these . Rules and Regulations for use in single-family residences are exempt from this testing and inspection requirement. 1. Backflow prevention assemblies shall not be considered as accepted under these Rules and Regulations until a certified inspection and test is made on the installed assembly and the assembly has passed such inspection and testing. 2. The inspections and tests shall be at the expense of the consumer and shall be performed by a certified technician. Section 2. That a new paragraph B.is hereby added to Section 3.5 to read as follows and all subsequent paragraphs be relettered accordingly: Introduced and considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 20th day of March, A.D. 2001, and to be presented for final passage on the 17th day of April, A.D. 2001. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading this 17th day of April, A.D. 2001. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Excerpt from Water Board Minutes February 22, 2001 Page 1 PROPOSED CHANGES TO CROSS-CONNECTION CONTROL ORDINANCE More than six years ago, Water Board recommended, and City Council adopted the City's Cross Connection Control Program. The program requires installation and testing of backflow preventers on all connections which pose a hazard to the distribution system. Jim Hibbard said the approach Utilities staff took was to essentially be the record keeper and enforcer and allow private certified inspectors to actually do the inspection. At the time the program was adopted, staff told Water Board and City Council that the primary focus of our program was going to be the highest hazard connections, which are commercial and industrial accounts. These include the fire sprinkler lines, boiler makeup lines, and carbonated drink supply lines. That portion of the program has been very successful, with over 2,500 devices currently tested annually. John Nelson and his assistant Rich Schneider have surveyed every commercial and industrial application site in the City. "To the best of our knowledge, we have good protection on those services." We have a database of all of them and send out a re-test notice annually. Jim went on to say that, although commercial and industrial was going to be the main focus of our program, we weren't going to totally ignore the residential sprinklers in our system. Since that time, we inspect and test all new residential sprinkler systems as well as go back into older neighborhoods and identify residential sprinkler systems. "We provide an inspection and the first test for those systems free of charge." He said that portion of the program has gone very well, "and we've done a lot of good." We have found a large number of residential sprinkler systems that didn't have any protection on them, had the wrong type of protection or devices that hadn't been tested for 20 years. At this point, the Cross Connection Program has identified over 5,000 of those, and estimate there may be as many as 15,000 in the entire City. Because we have to test those during irrigation season when the water is on, the sheer magnitude of getting them all tested on an annual basis, is starting to become a huge task. Although John and Rich have been able to do a significant amount of public education about the need for these devices and the annual testing, we get considerable feedback from our customers questioning the need for the annual test. Based on that, staff decided to investigate alternatives. What we found was that nobody else in the whole state is requiring annual testing of residential sprinkler systems. A few municipalities have been trying, but the magnitude of what is required if you were to test every residential sprinkler system in the entire state during a 3-4 month irrigation season, has deterred everybody from doing that. At the time that the Water Board and Council adopted these regulations, it was our understanding that the state required annual testing, and yet nobody else seems to be too worried about it. "What we found was that the state essentially backed off from the annual test requirement of the residential irrigation systems, and said that it is basically a plumbing code issue." They acknowledged that it is up to the local entity to adopt, in their plumbing code, what the testing interval would be for residential irrigation systems. In the City's plumbing code, when Building . Inspection adopted the state plumbing code, the state deleted the testing interval. Staff Excerpt from Water Board Minutes February 22, 2001 Page 2 interpreted that to mean that it was up to us to decide what is the appropriate interval for testing. Staff determined that for the residential sprinkler systems, where there is no indication of a higher hazard, such as a chemical fertilization injection system, that every three years would provide an adequate level of protection. What staff brought to the Board today was a proposal that we continue to test commercial and industrial back flow prevention devices on an annual basis, and that we change the testing interval for single family residential irrigation systems, from once every year to once every three years. "We feel we can handle sending out that level of notices, follow-up notices and testing with existing resources. We also feel it provides a reasonable level of protection, and will still put us in the lead of all the communities in the state." Jim then asked for questions. He said the - Board needs to make a recommendation to the Council to adopt the revised ordinance. Jim emphasized that commercial and industrial irrigation systems and apartment complexes will continue to be tested annually. Paul Clopper asked if there is a provision for a fine. "There is a provision for that because the Council adopts this by ordinance. A violation of this becomes a misdemeanor offense," Jim explained. "We haven't had to do that to my knowledge," he added. John Nelson said it would be a municipal code violation. The judge could set a $20 fine, for example, "but we've never done that," he added. Jim said that when customers, commercial, industrial or residential, receive a second or third notice on a system, we could go to that extreme if we chose, but we haven't in the six years of this program. "If you find a system that isn't working properly, do you tell the customer not to use it until they get it repaired?" Tom S. asked. "When we go out for the initial inspection, we carry certain parts on the truck. If it's something we can fix we fix it and make sure it's up and running," John explained. "We have about a $2000 a year budget that we use for that. Otherwise we direct them where to buy the parts, what parts they need, and a list of people that can fix it for them." Jim clarified that that takes place when the first inspection and test and are done. If Council approves this, we will send the homeowners notices once every three years saying it's time to have their backflow prevention devices tested. On the back of the notice we list the testers in town who have made their presence known to us. After testing, the tester will send us a notice, and we enter it into our database and set the next test date three years out. "How did you pick three years?" Tom Brown asked. "It was based on some data on failure rates, but, because we are still going through the system the first time, we find the failure rate high for devices we haven't seen before. When we have been back for re-testing, the failure rate is down in the 10-15% range," Jim responded. "We haven't had a long enough period of testing residential systems to be able to interpret the data. Three years was basically a compromise. Our intention is to monitor and gather that data, and see if what we are doing is supported by the data."John Nelson related that we havel5,000 systems, which is about every other household. Excerpt from Water Board Minutes February 22, 2001 Page 3 "We have sent out a little over 3,500 notices in a spring/summer time period, so we determined that we could handle about 5,000 with existing staff." Jim concluded that it is a balance of resources and level of protection. "It's not based on, for example, `is a 10% failure rate okay and 12% is not."' "Will you get data back if a homeowner gets it tested?" Tom Brown asked. "The tester, when he fills out his report, indicates whether it failed or passed and what parts he used, etc. to fix it," Jim replied. "There is a test report that they submit to us that we enter into the database." "Is one of the reasons you are making it every three years, because of there being so many residential systems in the City?" David Lauer asked. "That's part of the reason," Jim answered. "Have you thought about taking a third of them and doing it on a rotating basis, so each year you test a third of them, rather than trying to do all of them at once every three years?" David suggested. "That's how it would work," John replied. It will be a rotation, where eventually we will get it spread out more evenly," he added. "Do you have any idea about how many systems get installed without permits?" Dave Frick asked. "We get permits on about 400, so there are probably that many that get installed. It may be less now, because we try to watch that," John responded. "We work with the building department, the meter shop and other City staff." Jim said what they found is that neighbors like to tell on other neighbors. In other words, they will say, "If I have to have mine tested, my neighbor has to have his tested too." He added that once • they learn the reason for the testing, they are more accepting of the concept. John also added that staff does a lot of public education. ACTION: Motion and Vote Paul Clopper moved that the Water Board recommend to Council the adoption of the changes to the Cross Connection Control Regulations. After a second from John Morris, the motion passed unanimously.