# Got this when I was inspecting...



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

http://i36.tinypic.com/2pq19bc.jpg


----------



## pauliplumber (Feb 9, 2009)

:blink: I'm confused.....


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

pauliplumber said:


> :blink: I'm confused.....


Indirect waste receptor? Other than being homemade try to find a code violation! It was existing and we just laughed and went on...


----------



## uaplumber (Jun 16, 2008)

Hmm, no code violations we can see here in the shop.

It works, even if it is a little hillbilly.


----------



## pauliplumber (Feb 9, 2009)

I've never seen one quite like that. Is that something you've seen before, or did someone get real creative?


----------



## Protech (Sep 22, 2008)

How is the seal maintained? A toilet s trap is designed to self siphon and then be refilled by the fill valve overflow. I don't see a fill valve. There for the seal cannot be maintained unless I'm missing something......


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

Ever find a toilet that has the refill hose blowing into the tank instead of the overflow? Now was that trap primed or not? Sure it was.


----------



## Protech (Sep 22, 2008)

Uh no, it isn't


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

Protech said:


> Uh no, it isn't


 Go turn your toilet off and then flush it. get back with me:laughing:


----------



## 1703 (Jul 21, 2009)

Is the sink draining into the bowl?

What is the flushometer for?


----------



## Protech (Sep 22, 2008)

I've seen it many times bro. The water level stays about 1/2" above the top of the trap inlet and goes no higher. Some 1.6gpf toilets can refill some what if they've been tampered with to over flush. In those cases the siphon breaks but the tank still has a bit of water left before the flapper closes and that water makes it into the bowl and refills it some what. Even in that case the bowl is not refilled to the original level. Class dismissed.



TheMaster said:


> Go turn your toilet off and then flush it. get back with me:laughing:


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

pauliplumber said:


> I've never seen one quite like that. Is that something you've seen before, or did someone get real creative?


It is one of a kind as far as I know....Even around here!


----------



## Bollinger plumber (Apr 3, 2009)

slickrick said:


> Indirect waste receptor? Other than being homemade try to find a code violation! It was existing and we just laughed and went on...


 the waste is too long it is below the flood rim of the bowl.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Protech said:


> How is the seal maintained? A toilet s trap is designed to self siphon and then be refilled by the fill valve overflow. I don't see a fill valve. There for the seal cannot be maintained unless I'm missing something......


The toilet had a flush valve that wound take care of the trap. The sink did not cause the toilet to siphon. Everything worked properly.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Bollinger plumber said:


> the waste is too long it is below the flood rim of the bowl.


Air break was all that was required at the time... you cannot see the air gap from the angle but it did have about a 1 1/2" air gap....


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

Protech said:


> I've seen it many times bro. The water level stays about 1/2" above the top of the trap inlet and goes no higher. Some 1.6gpf toilets can refill some what if they've been tampered with to over flush. In those cases the siphon breaks but the tank still has a bit of water left before the flapper closes and that water makes it into the bowl and refills it some what. Even in that case the bowl is not refilled to the original level. Class dismissed.


 Better tell the instructor (google) that they dont have the experience I have. I just made a toto 1.6 gal flush....without a refill tube and the trap reprimed just like I said it would. I seen the refill tube mis-placed by homeowners 1,000+ times and not one of them had issues with sewer gas or trap not priming. I suggest you stick to amature's when arguing about toilets and not Themaster:laughing:. The refill tube is made to INSURE the trap seal...just because the refill is not there doesn't mean it will not reprime the trap. It will cause a poor flush however.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

TheMaster said:


> Better tell the instructor (google) that they dont have the experience I have. I just made a toto 1.6 gal flush....without a refill tube and the trap reprimed just like I said it would. I seen the refill tube mis-placed by homeowners 1,000+ times and not one of them had issues with sewer gas or trap not priming. I suggest you stick to amature's when arguing about toilets and not Themaster:laughing:. The refill tube is made to INSURE the trap seal...just because the refill is not there doesn't mean it will not reprime the trap. It will cause a poor flush however.[/quote
> 
> Installed 2 toilets yesterday without refill tubes...


----------



## uaplumber (Jun 16, 2008)

I have seen plenty of toilets with flushometers, never seen a refill tube on a flushometer though. I would think that the remaining water in the line fo=rom the flushometer would be sufficient to close the trap?


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Colgar said:


> Is the sink draining into the bowl?
> 
> What is the flushometer for?[/quote
> 
> Yes the sink drained into the bowl. Hit the flush valve and BAM!


----------



## Protech (Sep 22, 2008)

I'll shut my mouth then 



slickrick said:


> The toilet had a flush valve that wound take care of the trap. The sink did not cause the toilet to siphon. Everything worked properly.


----------



## Protech (Sep 22, 2008)

I think that flushometer toilets have a smaller bowl volume……..I think…..



uaplumber said:


> I have seen plenty of toilets with flushometers, never seen a refill tube on a flushometer though. I would think that the remaining water in the line fo=rom the flushometer would be sufficient to close the trap?


----------



## Protech (Sep 22, 2008)

Hmmmm, I guess it's youtube time. BRB.........



TheMaster said:


> Better tell the instructor (google) that they dont have the experience I have. I just made a toto 1.6 gal flush....without a refill tube and the trap reprimed just like I said it would. I seen the refill tube mis-placed by homeowners 1,000+ times and not one of them had issues with sewer gas or trap not priming. I suggest you stick to amature's when arguing about toilets and not Themaster:laughing:. The refill tube is made to INSURE the trap seal...just because the refill is not there doesn't mean it will not reprime the trap. It will cause a poor flush however.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Protech said:


> I'll shut my mouth then


 
It is very challenging. I looked at it hard with code book in hand at the time. I was going to PROVE it was illegal but had no ammo to fire... Red tag Rick....


----------



## Plasticman (Oct 14, 2008)

just wondering just how much water is actually measurable in the so called " trail" that exits a sink or tub drain at the final emptying? Surely not enough to replenish a toilet trap. :detective:


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Plasticman said:


> just wondering just how much water is actually measurable in the so called " trail" that exits a sink or tub drain at the final emptying? Surely not enough to replenish a toilet trap. :detective:


 
We need to get stillaround on that one..He won't sleep tonight..


----------



## Protech (Sep 22, 2008)

Yeah, bit he already said that there wasn't enough flow to get the toilet to siphon in the first place.



Plasticman said:


> just wondering just how much water is actually measurable in the so called " trail" that exits a sink or tub drain at the final emptying? Surely not enough to replenish a toilet trap. :detective:


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Protech said:


> Yeah, bit he already said that there wasn't enough flow to get the toilet to siphon in the first place.


Seek its own level yes, siphon no....


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

I would have failed it because theres noway to make a water tight seal between the toilet and the bottom of the cabinet. That would allow spillage to seep under the cabinet. From the picture thats what it looks like would happen. Also did they have a vaccum breaker on the direct flushvalve? Looks like theres noway to clean it is my issue. Just unsanitary in general. Toilets are not allowed to be installed in food prep areas or have doors opening into food prep areas. The code doesn't specify that the toilet must be used as a toilet....just says one cannot be installed. I'd fail it on that alone.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

uaplumber said:


> Hmm, no code violations we can see here in the shop.
> 
> It works, even if it is a little hillbilly.


I resemble that remark...At least it is indoors...I'm just say'in...


----------



## Pipedoc (Jun 14, 2009)

Surely there must be a code violation there somewhere. In Illinois this would fail several areas of the code.


----------



## Airgap (Dec 18, 2008)

Pipedoc said:


> Surely there must be a code violation there somewhere. In Illinois this would fail several areas of the code.


 Don't worry, they'll be here soon......


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Airgap said:


> Don't worry, they'll be here soon......


 @#%


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Pipedoc said:


> Surely there must be a code violation there somewhere. In Illinois this would fail several areas of the code.


 
Somebody quote some scripture....


----------



## Pipedoc (Jun 14, 2009)

> *Section 890.200 Operation of Plumbing Equipment*
> 
> a) All plumbing equipment required by this Part shall be operated in the manner intended by the manufacturer. No alteration or modifications to plumbing fixtures, equipment and appurtenances which would negate designed safety features shall be allowed. All plumbing systems shall be maintained in a functional, safe and sanitary condition. The owner of the facility shall be responsible for maintenance of the plumbing system.


...


----------



## Turd Burglar (Sep 26, 2009)

I don't think a water closet bowl qualifies as an indirect drain.:laughing:


----------



## Pipedoc (Jun 14, 2009)

*Section 890.1010 Indirect Waste Piping* 

a) Food and Beverage Handling. Commercial dishwashing machines, dishwashing sinks, pot washing sinks, pre-rinse sinks, silverware sinks, bar sinks, soda fountain sinks, vegetable sinks, potato peelers, ice machines, steam tables, steam cookers and other similar fixtures shall have their drain lines indirectly discharged to a proper receptor. The only exception shall be when such fixtures are located adjacent to a floor drain. The waste may be directly connected on the sewer side of the floor drain trap provided the fixture waste is trapped and vented as required by this Part (see Appendix H: Illustrations A and B), and the floor drain is located within 4 feet horizontally of the fixtures and in the same room. In the case of direct connection, no other fixture waste shall be connected between the floor drain trap and the fixture protected. All indirect waste shall discharge to a vented trap located as close as possible to the fixture and in the same room. (See Appendix H: Illustrations C and D.)


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Pipedoc said:


> ...


What was modified or hazardous.?


----------



## Pipedoc (Jun 14, 2009)

*Section 890.630 Installation* 



f) Improper Location. Piping, fixtures, or equipment shall not be located or installed in such a manner as to interfere with the normal operation of windows, doors, or other exit openings. Plumbing fixtures shall be installed in an area where there is sufficient room for the fixture to be used for its intended purpose.


----------



## Pipedoc (Jun 14, 2009)

I could probably find more if I kept looking.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Pipedoc said:


> *Section 890.1010 Indirect Waste Piping*
> 
> a) Food and Beverage Handling. Commercial dishwashing machines, dishwashing sinks, pot washing sinks, pre-rinse sinks, silverware sinks, bar sinks, soda fountain sinks, vegetable sinks, potato peelers, ice machines, steam tables, steam cookers and other similar fixtures shall have their drain lines indirectly discharged to a proper receptor. The only exception shall be when such fixtures are located adjacent to a floor drain. The waste may be directly connected on the sewer side of the floor drain trap provided the fixture waste is trapped and vented as required by this Part (see Appendix H: Illustrations A and B), and the floor drain is located within 4 feet horizontally of the fixtures and in the same room. In the case of direct connection, no other fixture waste shall be connected between the floor drain trap and the fixture protected. All indirect waste shall discharge to a vented trap located as close as possible to the fixture and in the same room. (See Appendix H: Illustrations C and D.)


 Define indirect waste receptor..


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Pipedoc said:


> *Section 890.630 Installation*
> 
> 
> 
> f) Improper Location. Piping, fixtures, or equipment shall not be located or installed in such a manner as to interfere with the normal operation of windows, doors, or other exit openings. Plumbing fixtures shall be installed in an area where there is sufficient room for the fixture to be used for its intended purpose.


No doors or windows.... It was....


----------



## Pipedoc (Jun 14, 2009)

slickrick said:


> What was modified or hazardous.?


 Wrong sentance. This is the one your looking for.


> All plumbing equipment required by this Part shall be operated in the manner intended by the manufacturer


----------



## Turd Burglar (Sep 26, 2009)

A toilet bowl is not an approved indirect waste receptor afaik.


----------



## Pipedoc (Jun 14, 2009)

Quote:
Originally Posted by *Pipedoc*  
_*Section 890.630 Installation* 



f) Improper Location. Piping, fixtures, or equipment shall not be located or installed in such a manner as to interfere with the normal operation of windows, doors, or other exit openings. Plumbing fixtures shall be installed in an area where there is sufficient room for the fixture to be used for its intended purpose. _



> No doors or windows.... It was....


I don't think anyone could fit under that cabinet and take a dump. :laughing:


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Pipedoc said:


> Wrong sentance. This is the one your looking for.
> [/color]


Too vague. what is the definition of "operating in a manner intended"

The reason I say these things is that plumbing inspectors are not plumbing Gods. There is an intended purpose in the codes. Nothing so far would have been enough ammo. I might as well have said " because I said so" These are the question the building official would have ask me.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Pipedoc said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Pipedoc*
> _*Section 890.630 Installation* _
> 
> ...


Your right about that :yes: But that was was not it's intended purpose...


----------



## Turd Burglar (Sep 26, 2009)

NC icc code
Chapter 8 Indirect/special waste
802.3
Every waste receptor shall be of an approved type....

How is the toilet bowl an approved indirect waste receptor? Unless it is flushed after every use, it will not drain correctly.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Turd Burglar said:


> A toilet bowl is not an approved indirect waste receptor afaik.


 
Prove it...


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Turd Burglar said:


> NC icc code
> Chapter 8 Indirect/special waste
> 802.3
> Every waste receptor shall be of an approved type....


Approved by who? Iam just trying to prevoke everyones thinking on the "Intent" of the law. It is not always cut and dried. Something to do on a slow day...


----------



## Pipedoc (Jun 14, 2009)

slickrick said:


> Too vague. what is the definition of "operating in a manner intended"
> 
> The reason I say these things is that plumbing inspectors are not plumbing Gods. There is an intended purpose in the codes. Nothing so far would have been enough ammo. I might as well have said " because I said so" These are the question the building official would have ask me.


 What is your definition of "is?" :laughing: Just kidding. Thanks Bill Clinton.

I don't think that one is too vague. I do know what you are saying though. I find a lot of code vague and ambiguous.

To me, "operating in a manner intended", simply means that the toilet is not being used as such. The toilet was not designed and built as an indirect waste. (I don't mean for that to sound condesending, I know you are obviously aware of that)


----------



## Pipedoc (Jun 14, 2009)

slickrick said:


> Your right about that :yes: But that was was not it's intended purpose...


 I am confused. Are you saying the toilet would be okay 'cause in this case it's intended purpose is that of an indirect waste? 

Or are you agreeing with me that it is not okay (In Illinois ) because it is not being used for its intended purpose of functioning as a toilet?


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Pipedoc said:


> What is your definition of "is?" :laughing: Just kidding. Thanks Bill Clinton.
> 
> I don't think that one is too vague. I do know what you are saying though. I find a lot of code vague and ambiguous.
> 
> To me, "operating in a manner intended", simply means that the toilet is not being used as such. The toilet was not designed and built as an indirect waste. (I don't mean for that to sound condesending, I know you are obviously aware of that)


Yes, I know what you are saying too. But It would be next to impossible to condem this fixture the way the codes are written..


----------



## Pipedoc (Jun 14, 2009)

I respectfully disagree as far as Illinois is concerned anyway.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Pipedoc said:


> I am confused. Are you saying the toilet would be okay 'cause in this case it's intended purpose is that of an indirect waste?
> 
> Or are you agreeing with me that it is not okay (In Illinois ) because it is not being used for its intended purpose of functioning as a toilet?


I am not agreeing or disagreeing this is a debatable definition..I know what you are saying..:whistling2:


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Pipedoc said:


> I respectfully disagree as far as Illinois is concerned anyway.


Picture yourself facing a lawyer on the issue of condeming this picture.


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

If that is a kitchen then you cant have a toilet in a kitchen. The code doesn't say the toilet has to be used as a toilet....just says no toilets. Failed! I said this earlier in the thread too.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

TheMaster said:


> If that is a kitchen then you cant have a toilet in a kitchen. The code doesn't say the toilet has to be used as a toilet....just says no toilets. Failed! I said this earlier in the thread too.


Who said It was a kitchen? It was in a shop. Green tagged again.!


----------



## Pipedoc (Jun 14, 2009)

slickrick said:


> I am not agreeing or disagreeing this is a debatable definition..I know what you are saying..:whistling2:


That's a fair statement Rick. Everything is debatable. Just ask any attorney. I think it would be quite a stretch though.



slickrick said:


> Picture yourself facing a lawyer on the issue of condeming this picture.


I don't think it would be tough to win that one. The fixture is clearly not being used as it was intended by the manufacturer. If the attorney could show me an advertisement by Americn Standard peddling their new line of toilet/inderect waste fixtures, I would conceed the point to him.


----------



## Airgap (Dec 18, 2008)

"Alright! Who left the cabinet doors open when the inspector was coming by!?!? "


----------



## Pipedoc (Jun 14, 2009)

I love your humor Airgap! You always make me laugh. I think your avatar is very befitting of you.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Pipedoc said:


> That's a fair statement Rick. Everything is debatable. Just ask any attorney. I think it would be quite a stretch though.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think it would be tough to win that one. The fixture is clearly not being used as it was intended by the manufacturer. If the attorney could show me an advertisement by Americn Standard peddling their new line of toilet/inderect waste fixtures, I would conceed the point to him.


You may be right. My partner was a major player with the SBCCI code body at the time. And he did not think so... I'm just say'in.......


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

This picture was from 1990. I am glad I kept it. It made for an interesting day on PZ...:thumbup:


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

TheMaster said:


> I would have failed it because theres noway to make a water tight seal between the toilet and the bottom of the cabinet. That would allow spillage to seep under the cabinet. From the picture thats what it looks like would happen. Also did they have a vaccum breaker on the direct flushvalve? Looks like theres noway to clean it is my issue. Just unsanitary in general. Toilets are not allowed to be installed in food prep areas or have doors opening into food prep areas. The code doesn't specify that the toilet must be used as a toilet....just says one cannot be installed. I'd fail it on that alone.


Floor sinks are under cabinets a lot of the time, Yes the flush valve had VB. Nothing to do with food prep. Break room...


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

slickrick said:


> Floor sinks are under cabinets a lot of the time, Yes the flush valve had VB. Nothing to do with food prep. Break room...


If its a breakroom then people are eating in there and preparing their lunch. I would consider it a lunch breakroom. Red tagged. measuring horizontally from the center line of the toilet to the wall would be too close in a standard 24" cabinet. It would be too close to the wall or the cabinet doors or maybe both. Whats the minimum distance to a side wall for a toilet?


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

TheMaster said:


> If its a breakroom then people are eating in there and preparing their lunch. I would consider it a lunch breakroom. Red tagged. measuring horizontally from the center line of the toilet to the wall would be too close in a standard 24" cabinet. It would be too close to the wall or the cabinet doors or maybe both. Whats the minimum distance to a side wall for a toilet?


That does not qualify as food prep area..... 15" ... but is not used as a toilet... green again :whistling2:


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

slickrick said:


> That does not qualify as food prep area..... 15" ... but is not used as a toilet... green again :whistling2:


 If you put a toilet in a breakroom then its not a breakroom anymore its a bathroom. Ok if its a bathroom the toilet must be 15" from the wall.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

TheMaster said:


> If you put a toilet in a breakroom then its not a breakroom anymore its a bathroom. Ok if its a bathroom the toilet must be 15" from the wall.


 ...
Where in the code did that come from...:laughing:

Remember you are a inspector looking at this and it has to be cut and dried, black and white with no personal opinion...


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

slickrick said:


> ...
> Where in the code did that come from...:laughing:
> 
> Remember you are a inspector looking at this and it has to be cut and dried, black and white with no personal opinion...


 What does the code call a room with a toilet installed in it? Now does the code specify that the toilet must be used as a toilet to qualify as a toilet?


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

TheMaster said:


> What does the code call a room with a toilet installed in it? Now does the code specify that the toilet must be used as a toilet to qualify as a toilet?


 
Man we are getting desperate now..:laughing::laughing:


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

slickrick said:


> Man we are getting desperate now..:laughing::laughing:


No those guys who rigged all that up were the desperate ones. If the toilet bowl (which is in the cabinet out of sight) is not flushed by the flushometer...a thick layer of goo could develop in the toilet bowl and that would leave you with a nasty situation to clean out. Keep in mind that a typical indirect receptor does NOT have a water spot like that 3.5 gal flush toilet. You would have a mini cespool unless the valve was operated......Plus you would have a mildew problem with all that water in the cabinet. Failed baby:thumbup:. Its simply unsanitary.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

TheMaster said:


> No those guys who rigged all that up were the desperate ones. If the toilet bowl (which is in the cabinet out of sight) is not flushed by the flushometer...a thick layer of goo could develop in the toilet bowl and that would leave you with a nasty situation to clean out. Keep in mind that a typical indirect receptor does NOT have a water spot like that 3.5 gal flush toilet. You would have a mini cespool unless the valve was operated......Plus you would have a mildew problem with all that water in the cabinet. Failed baby:thumbup:. Its simply unsanitary.


Yea, but the flush valve did work and you could tell that the fixture was staying clean. Everything worked all the way. There was no sanitation problem at all... Floor sinks receiving discharge from a triple compartment sink are not washed any better, Are they unsanitary?


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

slickrick said:


> Yea, but the flush valve did work and you could tell that the fixture was staying clean. Everything worked all the way. There was no sanitation problem at all...


 I understand the flushvalve worked but it required a person to flush it. The bowl was hidden in the cabinet. The current owners maybe took care of it but whos to say the next people will. Thats why the code states fixtures shall be used as intended by the manufacturer. So you dont end up with a 12" diameter cesspool under the cabinet evaporating into the air until sombody smells it and decides to flush it. It then overflows and runs down in between the cabinet were its cut around the toilet. You would never be to properly clean it up without ripping the cabinet out. It would Look oike this when you did rip the cabinet out.....


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

TheMaster said:


> I understand the flushvalve worked but it required a person to flush it. The bowl was hidden in the cabinet. The current owners maybe took care of it but whos to say the next people will. Thats why the code states fixtures shall be used as intended by the manufacturer. So you dont end up with a 12" diameter cesspool under the cabinet evaporating into the air until sombody smells it and decides to flush it. It then overflows and runs down in between the cabinet were its cut around the toilet. You would never be to properly clean it up without ripping the cabinet out. It would Look oike this when you did rip the cabinet out.....
> 
> 
> But it is still not a code violation...


But is not a plumbing code violation....


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

Here it would be a violation and would be failed. The cabinet would mildew. Our climate is very humid and closing a toilet up into a cabinet is asking for mold problems.


----------



## Ron (Jun 12, 2008)

316.4 Prohibited Joints and Connections. 316.4.1 Drainage System. Any fitting or
connection that has an enlargement, chamber, or recess with a ledge, shoulder, or reduction of pipe area that offers an obstruction to flow through the drain shall be prohibited.


True or false, I can't answer the question from here, the pipe which the toilet dumps into what size is it, it it is smaller then the opening on the bottom side of the toilet, is that not considered a reduction in the drain, if it is, it is a violation of the code which I follow.


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

I say its illegal because the the toilet is an s trap and its being used for the sole purpose of an indirect drain. The flushvalve is not needed to operate the sink so its not the approriate fixture and is not being used as intended by the manufacturer. Failed. But thats not my major beef with it. Its the cesspool that could develope in that water spot if the flushvalve wasn't operated on a regular basis,then sombody flush's it one day and it overflows all into the cabinet and into the space between the cabinet where they cut around the toilet. The intersticial space between the floor and the cabinet bottom now has all kinds of "stuff" rotting there. Unsanitary.


----------



## Ron (Jun 12, 2008)

I'm sorry but I see many violations under The UPC Code. Too many to list, I can't believe you let this pass an inspection.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Ron The Plumber said:


> I'm sorry but I see many violations under The UPC Code. Too many to list, I can't believe you let this pass an inspection.


Like I said this was existing. Show me something that would be grounds to condem this configuration or it is just opinion....


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Ron The Plumber said:


> 316.4 Prohibited Joints and Connections. 316.4.1 Drainage System. Any fitting or
> connection that has an enlargement, chamber, or recess with a ledge, shoulder, or reduction of pipe area that offers an obstruction to flow through the drain shall be prohibited.
> 
> 
> True or false, I can't answer the question from here, the pipe which the toilet dumps into what size is it, it it is smaller then the opening on the bottom side of the toilet, is that not considered a reduction in the drain, if it is, it is a violation of the code which I follow.


There is no reduction or restrictions here... Water closet is connected to 4" all standard size everthing installed properly . The question should be the definition of "approved indirect waste receptor" Otherwise it is no different than discharging to a floor sink... The picture was taken by our chief plumbing inspector. He had 30 yrs of plumbing inspection experience. He was also helped write codes for SBCCI. Longview, Texas was one of the toughest areas to work in the country. Probably one of the last to except PVC. 1990 when I took over as chief plumbing inspector. Whoever and whenever put this in had to do some research on the codes. if the were trying to be cute, I don't know.There are plumbers out there that like to challenge the system. This plumber did a fair job...


----------



## Ron (Jun 12, 2008)

1004.0 Traps — Prohibited.
No form oftrap thatdepends forits seal uponthe action of movable parts shall be used. No trap that has concealed interior partitions, except those of plastic, glass, or similar corrosion-resisting material, shall be used. "S" traps, bell traps, and crown-vented traps shall be prohibited.

That my friend is an s-trap.

You Fail


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

slickrick said:


> There is no reduction or restrictions here... Water closet is connected to 4" all standard size everthing installed properly . The question should be the definition of "approved indirect waste receptor" Otherwise it is no different than discharging to a floor sink... The picture was taken by our chief plumbing inspector. He had 30 yrs of plumbing inspection experience. He was also helped write codes for SBCCI. Longview, Texas was one of the toughest areas to work in the country. Probably one of the last to except PVC. 1990 when I took over as chief plumbing inspector. Whoever and whenever put this in had to do some research on the codes. if the were trying to be cute, I don't know.There are plumbers out there that like to challenge the system. This plumber did a fair job...


 You see all the qualifications the inspectors had but yet they still passed that crap. Thanks for making a good point. They didn't want to accept PVC but "Sure you can install a toilet in a cabinet and use it to dump your bar sink into....Oh dont forget to install a flushvalve so you an clean the receptor" Thats the kinda crap they will pass:laughing:. 
Passing that was a judgement call....and this inspector made the wrong call. The installation was improper for the intended use. Its unsanitary as i have been screaming. The toilet will overflow at some point and flood underneath that cabinet between the floor and the plywood bottom in that cabinet. That would not be allowed here nor should it have ever been passed. Sounds like sombody knew sombody.......THAT SETUP WOULD NEVER BE PASSED FOR THE THE NEW PLUMBER IN TOWN BY THAT INSPECTOR.


----------



## Ron (Jun 12, 2008)

804.0 Indirect Waste Receptors.
804.1 All plumbing fixtures or other receptors
receiving the discharge of indirect waste pipes shall be approved for the use proposed and shall be of such shape and capacity as to prevent splashing or flooding and shall be located where they are readily accessible for inspection and cleaning. No standpipe receptor for any clothes washer shall extend more than thirty (30) inches (762 mm), nor less than eighteen (18) inches (457 mm) above its trap. No trap for any clothes washer standpipe receptor shall be installed below the floor, but shall be roughed in not less than six (6) inches (152 mm) and not more than eighteen (18) inches (457 mm) above the floor. *No indirect waste receptor shall be installed in any toilet room, closet, cupboard, or storeroom*


----------



## TheMaster (Jun 12, 2009)

I'd love to make the guy who passed that RESET THAT TOILET and see if he would still pass it. Fixtures should be accessible for repair and maintenace. This is my last post on this topic. resetting that toilet would be a freakin nightmare.....I'd love to see him trying to cut that far closet bolt off down under that cabinet bottom. Improper use period.


----------



## Protech (Sep 22, 2008)

Then why does a normal toilet installation pass?


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Ron The Plumber said:


> 1004.0 Traps — Prohibited.
> No form oftrap thatdepends forits seal uponthe action of movable parts shall be used. No trap that has concealed interior partitions, except those of plastic, glass, or similar corrosion-resisting material, shall be used. "S" traps, bell traps, and crown-vented traps shall be prohibited.
> 
> That my friend is an s-trap.
> ...


Yea, but.. The toilet bowl is designed to replenish the trap seal. even though it is not a toilet anymore. Look at waste receptors. There is not much there except requiring a strainer. And I don't remember that in there at the time.It may have been added since. I don't think I have that edition any longer. The definition of approved is," approved by the code offical or other authority having jurisdiction" So at the time who ever inspected it approved it as "a indirect waste receptor" It might have been the first chief they had, I was the 3rd. He had been known to do plumbing on the side.. If he approved it at the time of installation it would have been grandfathered.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Ron The Plumber said:


> 804.0 Indirect Waste Receptors.
> 804.1 All plumbing fixtures or other receptors
> receiving the discharge of indirect waste pipes shall be approved for the use proposed and shall be of such shape and capacity as to prevent splashing or flooding and shall be located where they are readily accessible for inspection and cleaning. No standpipe receptor for any clothes washer shall extend more than thirty (30) inches (762 mm), nor less than eighteen (18) inches (457 mm) above its trap. No trap for any clothes washer standpipe receptor shall be installed below the floor, but shall be roughed in not less than six (6) inches (152 mm) and not more than eighteen (18) inches (457 mm) above the floor. *No indirect waste receptor shall be installed in any toilet room, closet, cupboard, or storeroom*


.BINGO..The cupboard has been added since and that would have stopped it. I am looking at a older addition and it is not in it. Maybe they saw the picture...:laughing: Like I said , It would have been grandfathered if the previous inspector approved it and I would not be able to condem it until it did not function properly..


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

TheMaster said:


> You see all the qualifications the inspectors had but yet they still passed that crap. Thanks for making a good point. They didn't want to accept PVC but "Sure you can install a toilet in a cabinet and use it to dump your bar sink into....Oh dont forget to install a flushvalve so you an clean the receptor" Thats the kinda crap they will pass:laughing:.
> Passing that was a judgement call....and this inspector made the wrong call. The installation was improper for the intended use. Its unsanitary as i have been screaming. The toilet will overflow at some point and flood underneath that cabinet between the floor and the plywood bottom in that cabinet. That would not be allowed here nor should it have ever been passed. Sounds like sombody knew sombody.......THAT SETUP WOULD NEVER BE PASSED FOR THE THE NEW PLUMBER IN TOWN BY THAT INSPECTOR.


They used to haul plumbers into court daily. Violation, Let's go see the judge... I had records that floored me! It may have been somebody "special" But I don't operate like that.. This has been interesting!!!!


----------



## Plasticman (Oct 14, 2008)

Whats to keep a small boy from peeing in that thing thinking it was fun and different. Nice to have pee all over your pots and pans. Besides, if you are gonna go to the expense to install a sink you have to do the drain, stack, and water. He could have saved money by using 2" pipe instead of 4", not had to buy a toilet bowl or flush valve, or went to all the hassle. What does a freekin pvc tubular p-trap cost for goodness sakes? Some people have more money than common sence.


----------



## SlickRick (Sep 3, 2009)

Plasticman said:


> Whats to keep a small boy from peeing in that thing thinking it was fun and different. Nice to have pee all over your pots and pans. Besides, if you are gonna go to the expense to install a sink you have to do the drain, stack, and water. He could have saved money by using 2" pipe instead of 4", not had to buy a toilet bowl or flush valve, or went to all the hassle. What does a freekin pvc tubular p-trap cost for goodness sakes? Some people have more money than common sence.


If I remember right the toilet was the point from which everything else was built around...


----------



## Herk (Jun 12, 2008)

I'm guessing the owner might prefer peeing in sinks to toilets? 

Just my luck, somebody would want me to replace the bol-wax on that thing. Then, when I tried to tell them it wasn't up to code, they'd say that they don't care and after all, it's been working like that for years.


----------

