Arlington, Texas Updates Waterworks Standard Details

Arlington Adds New Standard Details

Congratulations to Joe Gildersleeve, Water Resource Services Manager for the City of Arlington, Texas, for being the first in the north central Texas area to publish containment or "premise isolation" backflow preventer guidelines in the form of new standard details and drawings, for non-residential projects. This applies to new construction and renovations. Find these details, items 15A through 15J, here.

Local Engineers Speak Out

The need for updated design standards for this particular building system became evident following a survey of local civil and plumbing engineers. The results of this survey were presented to the city of 
Arlington in February of 2015 revealing that more than 78% of local design engineers stated a need for standard details. The format of the survey was to make astatement and then full_design_engineer_survey_results.pngask the local designer to reply in one of five ways: strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, or strongly disagree. Over the period, 1311 civil and plumbing engineers were contacted for response. One statement in particular was extraordinary: "Local water guidelines for commercial and industrial construction lack needed standard details for above-ground backflow preventer installations." Of those surveyed, over seventy-eight percent of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed, and less than two percent disagreed. See the full results of the survey to the right.

Head over to the local codes section of our website to look for your city's standard details.


Overcoming the Inertia of the Status-Quo

Central to the need for new design standards is the lack of clarity and understanding that design engineers face when attempting to specify the installation method sought by any given water utility. Moreover, the methods sought by many local plumbing authorities do not align with recognized best practices endorsed by leading trade groups such as the American Waterworks Association (AWWA) and the American Society of Plumbing Engineers (ASPE). This is not surprising. Within many water districts and city governments there is a very strong force at work. I call it the "inertia of the status quo".  Utility and government personnel are not preoccupied with the same management benchmarks and iterative improvement objectives found in most businesses. This is not a criticism. Their roles are centered on asset management, resource-delivery efficiency, and to some extent, customer service. It is also fair to say that across the north-central Texas region, the observed effort ranges from poor to exemplary. Going through the difficult task of publishing an agreed-upon set of preferences for one installation method over another - especially when there is no difference in resource-delivery efficiency - tends to get moved down the priority list year after year.  But a slow drip of incremental wisdom has accumulated over the past several years and a tipping point appears to have been reached.

Premise-Isolation is Essential

The Clean Water Act of 1972 started a slow but steady march to a more robust system of cross connection abatement when it's author, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published its initial Cross-connection control manual (CCCM) in 1976. With revisions through 2006, it now exists as the preeminent guidance on the protection of the public water system from private water customers. The imperatives embedded in this guidance place extraordinary responsibilities on the local water district to control individual water gateways to customers. The language clearly conveys on the water purveyor the duty of ensuring that no delivered water will ever return to - and therefore be commingled with - the public water supply. As part of the introduction to the current published edition of the CCCM, the AWWA, the trade group representing the nation's water utilities, states,

“…. The return of any water to the public water system after the water has been used for any purpose on the customer’s premises or within the customer’s piping system is unacceptable and opposed by AWWA. …”

Given this mandate, water utilities all over the U.S. are adopting requirements for premise isolation using a backflow preventer assembly that meets the stringent performance specifications of the American Society of Sanitary Engineers (ASSE) and the University of Southern California Foundation of Cross Connection Control and Hydraulic Research (USC). More and more, it is becoming apparent that without a containment, or premise isolation system at the service connection, water utilities are unable to uphold their duty under the CWA statute.

New Call-to-action

Related Posts

One Step Ahead: A Look at High-Hazard Cross-Connections and Compliance

IoT Takes Backflow Prevention To Another Level


Game changer: The Ames Deringer backflow


How a Project in Georgia Could Change the Face of the Backflow Protection and Enclosure Requirements

What Happens When a RPZ Fails?

Introducing Our New Best Practices Guide

Do Backflow Events Really Endanger Our Drinking Water?

The State Flower of Florida (Backflow Preventer)

Comparing the Costs: Meter Vault vs. Enclosure

Meter Vault Innovation — Check Out This Trend

Chicago Backflow Incident of 1933

What You Need To Know About Backflow Prevention Devices

Part 3: Why You Should Keep Backflow Preventers Out of Basements

Expert Says Containment Protection is Necessary For Backflow Prevention

What You Need to Know About Backflow Prevention and Flood Risks

How To Build a Successful Cross Connection Control Program

What is a Cross Connection Control and Backflow Preventer?

Expert Says Backflow Prevention Can't Be Ignored Anymore

Water Quality Drops When Backflow Preventers Fail

Backflow Prevention Plays Small but Mighty Role in Water Quality

Cross Connection Control Spotlight: How LVVWD Avoids Backflow

Backflow Protection and Fire Protection Pit Safety Against Safety

Ottawa protects water system with new backflow prevention program (15,000 Properties to be Affected)

Webinar: The End-All Discussion on Underground Utility Vaults

Never Put Your Backflow Preventer Installation In The Basement

High Hazard Classification - Who Makes the Determination?

Which Do You Need - A Cage or Enclosure For A Backflow Preventer?

Are Water Utilities Inheriting Risk Regarding Backflow Installation?

Keep Backflow Prevention Outside To Reduce Risk for M/P Engineers

AMI & Negative Meter Readings Reveal Backflow & Water Quality Issues

Cross Connection Alert - Poll Reveals Concerning Info on Vault Design

Backflow FAQ - Flooded Vaults, Standard Details, and RPZ Flooding

Think Backflow Doesn't Happen? Just Look at Corpus Christi.

A Video on Why Vaults Are A Bad Idea For Backflow Installation

How and Why The Cross Connection Control Industry is Changing

Arlington Rolls Out New Engineering Backflow Preventer Details

New Slideshare Series on Cross Connection Control and Waterworks


7 Voices; 1 Solution - Backflow Preventer Installation Trends

Why You Should Get Specific About Backflow Installation

Waterworks Best Practices for Backflow Installation

7 Reasons Utility Vaults are a Bad Choice for Backflow Installation

How to design & Buy a Pump Enclosure

Get the free, editable checklist.



Have a question about a backflow preventer enclosure?
Click the contact us button below and one of our experts will be able to help with your specific enclosure needs.