# Proposed Illinois Plumbing Code Changes & Legionnaires



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

In Illinois proposed plumbing code changes must be submitted and reviewed by an advisory council consisting of plumbers, laborers, architects, general public.

They submit proposed changes and vote on them. Then they are published and go through a public comment period. After that they will go to JACAR (joint rules committee) They can either accept the proposed changes, modify them or knock them down.


One more comment period I believe then they can go to the governor to sign into law.


We are currently going through this process. A bunch of changes.


Lead will be completely removed as will caulked joints. If approved and a plumber that runs into a lead line that needs repair either sanitary or potable. To keep code compliant and not create a violation. All lead must be removed and replaced. Older towns like Chicago will be hit hard. Failure to do so after this gets passed can cause a fine , suspension or revocation of a plumber license.


Galvanized pipe will be completely removed also, So repairs to this type of piping would be a violations also. It would be required to be removed completely instead of repaired.


Another big change is ways to combat Legionnaires disease. Their have been multiple deaths in Illinois Veterans homes and a few other places from this. Recently across the river from me In Missouri a Hilton hotel was completely evacuated for a day so the lines could be flushed.


A primary cause is from mildly heated water (tempered) which stagnates and becomes aerosolized. Spray from decorative fountains, fish ponds, out of faucets, etc. carry the virus, it gets breathed in and spreads in the lungs. Causing symptoms similar to phenomena. Very easily becoming fatal.


Really bad in buildings with older galvanized piping systems which harbor the virus more readily. A few location this has happened at are establishing a documented plan of flushing the lines. A couple are installing ultra expensive filtration systems to help deal with it. 


New decorative fountains, etc. will be mandated to come up with a documented program to flush and sanitize lines. The documentation may be required to be kept for 3 to 5 years or more. A building owner would be held responsible for this.



Master tempering valves will no longer be approved. Hot water must be supplied at 160 or 165 degrees throughout the whole building. Remote tempering will be mandated no farther than 12" away from each faucet that requires it.


This is a very relevant and critical issue. All caused by lower water temperatures and stagnated or low flow systems.


Air chambers will no longer be allowed. Arrestors will be mandated. Dead ends of 24" or less have been removed. Dead ends will not be allowed. 


With current planning designated fire lines are not allowed, since they create dead ends which can of course allow for stagnated water to get into the potable system and now finding it also can contribute to the spread of Legionella. Existing locations may have to develop & maintain a flushing program. That has not been discussed yet.


I am a member of the I.C.C.A. (Illinois Council of Code Administrators) Plumbing Code Advisory Council and put together a condensed list of the proposed change. I tried to upload a legionaries disease response & remediation report from the Quincy Illinois Veteran Home. Both the files were to large to upload.


If anyone is interested drop me a PM with your Email and I will forward it to you. This is turning into a nationwide issue we should all be looking at.


----------



## Toli (Nov 7, 2015)

Interesting stuff.

Although I tried to get approval to take out a master mixing valve and install point of use mixers on the lavs in a nursing home about five years ago and was told no.


----------



## 89plumbum (May 14, 2011)

Would ongoing projects fall under some kind of grandfathering until the end of there warranty period, or would they have to comply immediately? Thinking of the cast and galvanized.


----------



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

Toli said:


> Interesting stuff.
> 
> Although I tried to get approval to take out a master mixing valve and install point of use mixers on the lavs in a nursing home about five years ago and was told no.


Interesting. Who denied it? Facility, State Inspector, Long term Health Care (In Illinois IDPH could mandate doubt they will. The rest could deny. Currently would be considered a viable solutions to potential health risks). The thinking is changing rapidly since Legionella outbreaks are happening.

Our new Governor has just mandated a new task force to get involved with this.
https://www2.illinois.gov/veterans/features/QuincyMatters/Pages/Water-Management-Task-Force.aspx

https://www.pritzkerlaw.com/personal-injury/category/legionnaires/

Just some extra FYI


----------



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

89plumbum said:


> Would ongoing projects fall under some kind of grandfathering until the end of there warranty period, or would they have to comply immediately? Thinking of the cast and galvanized.


That's a real good question. From what I gather they don't want to touch existing, until it either needs repairing or the owner chooses to modify. Then it would mandate removal & replacement.


I can see even an existing location being required by IDPH to develop & follow a plan to flush and maintain decorative features (fountains, decorative pools, even submersed irrigation systems where water may set for longer than 48 hours).


They may even look into mandating flushing programs for dedicated fire lines from a potable main to the back flow prevention device inside.


Long term they will be looking at anything that creates a dead end or that allows water to set for 48 hours or more.


----------



## skoronesa (Oct 27, 2015)

GAN said:


> Lead will be completely removed *as will caulked joints.*





Does this mean no more lead joints on drains meaning no more cast iron unless it's no-hub? Or do you mean wiped joints on lead potable water lines? I know that there can be poured lead joints on hubbed potable cast iron but I thought that was extremely rare.


If you are saying chicago will no longer pour lead on cast iron drain pipe than I am going to buy stock in the companies that make no-hub connectors 






.


----------



## Toli (Nov 7, 2015)

GAN said:


> Interesting. Who denied it? Facility, State Inspector, Long term Health Care (In Illinois IDPH could mandate doubt they will. The rest could deny. Currently would be considered a viable solutions to potential health risks). The thinking is changing rapidly since Legionella outbreaks are happening.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The part of the IDPH that inspects nursing homes. And in fairness it was probably 10-15 years ago, not 5. I really lose track of time. 

Their argument was temp would have to be taken in each room to check compliance and the risk was to great. They said they wanted someone to look at one thermometer to check temps. 

My argument was it’s almost impossible in this building to be in compliance with one part fed under the floor and one part over head. Wouldn’t it be better to have one room out of compliance instead of all the rooms? 

Plus you can’t rely on one thermometer. You still have to at least spot check rooms. 

That was about the extent of my arguing because it went nowhere. 

After the deal in Quincy (and I just saw there’s another one now) they might change their tune.


----------



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

skoronesa said:


> Does this mean no more lead joints on drains meaning no more cast iron unless it's no-hub? Or do you mean wiped joints on lead potable water lines? I know that there can be poured lead joints on hubbed potable cast iron but I thought that was extremely rare.
> 
> 
> If you are saying chicago will no longer pour lead on cast iron drain pipe than I am going to buy stock in the companies that make no-hub connectors
> ...



Lead & Galvanized will "no longer" be listed as an approved material in the Illinois Plumbing Code. So no wiped joints, no poured joints, no lead safe pans, no galvanized piping. Neither approved for potable or DWV.

All cast iron will be no-hub.

If faced with a repair, can't do it (legally) since the material is no longer listed as an "approved" material in the code. Removal & replacement will be the only acceptable means.


What has not been clarified enough is if a section of galvanized water piping gets a leak will it be approved to connect with a brass male to the rest of the system. Or will all the galvanized piping need to be removed. That Is going to be a fun one. I have absolutely no idea how that will play out.


Considering what they are trying to accomplish especially dealing with the Legionella deaths it would not surprise me.


Classically in the past a plumber is only responsible for what they installed, they didn't have to deal with materials and work performed by others.

What would you do if you were working on a system and noticed a piece of black iron in the potable system. Would you leave it or replace it?


----------



## skoronesa (Oct 27, 2015)

GAN said:


> Lead & Galvanized will "no longer" be listed as an approved material in the Illinois Plumbing Code. So no wiped joints, no poured joints, no lead safe pans, no galvanized piping. Neither approved for potable or DWV.
> 
> All cast iron will be no-hub.
> 
> ...





If I saw a piece of black iron I would let the customer know about how it shouldn't be there but isn't any worse than galvanized. If they want me to change it that is up to them. If I am working right next to it than yeah I would try to remove it but I am not going to touch it with out their permission if it is across the basement from where I am working.


It is not my place to force work on a customer. It is my job to write down and notify the customer of any issues I see that should be fixed.


In the case of fixing a galv water line we just cut it back to where it is good and use a compression fitting to connect it to our new pipe. There would be a revolt if plumbers started telling people that they have to replace the entire length of their buried main instead of just patching it because of some new ordinance.


Have they stopped chlorinating the city water?






.


----------



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

Yes, making them aware is the point. If this section of black is no across the basement but is at the point your working, you replace it because it "is not" code compliant.

Now take that thought forward to the potential new code adoption. Galvanized not an approved material (just like black iron currently is) your working on a system now that is not just across the basement. Every piece you touch although old "is still" non-compliant. Your repairing or replacing and connecting to piping that constitutes a code violation which you would not do if that little piece of black iron happened to be the whole system.


To little is known on how IDPH will consider this. That is the current problem. Under the license law a plumber who knowingly violates either the license law of the code is subject to fines, suspension or revocation of their license.


There is no doubt Chicago has already been warned for their current practice (their public works department at the least) of repairing lead water service. This move will put a complete cap on it, and these guys aren't for the most part licensed plumbers.


Realistically I can see lead is out no one will touch it. Galvanized most likely they will not push removal. However with the changes the fact is it will not be an approved material. I want to see the first charges against a plumber for connecting to a material that s not approved. Il'' sit by and drink a cup pf coffee.

For me when it eventually gets passed, I will contact IDPH and request a written reply as to their stance.


----------



## ShtRnsdownhill (Jan 13, 2016)

Gan, a few questions..
1- what has changed in the last few decades that has brought about so much of this Legionnaires disease, it wasnt heard of till that outbreak in that philadelphia holtel that killed all those veterans, as thats how it got the name????( being some what of a conspiracy person I have my dark ideas on it, but thats another thread).
2- who is going to pay for all the changes or replacement of plumbing systems when the new laws are put into place??? example..plumber gets called for repair and finds c lots of lead or galvanized pipe , but repair is isolated to 1 small section, as understood any plumber connecting a repair onto lead or gal is going to get hung out to dry if all the piping isnt replaced..so who gets to pay for all the work to remove pipe thats been there 70 years? and what if home or building owner cant afford to change it out? who gets the fines?
3- are plumbers now going to be made into snitches if they see lead in a building even if they arent working on that pipe? will they get fined or be mandatory to turn in the building?
new laws many times are overkill to the threat and are put into place more to generate revenue from fines and permits than for public saftey..just ask OSHA about that...


----------



## leakfree (Apr 3, 2011)

I just don't see the IDPH having a good time telling the State of Chicago that poured joints are no longer accepted?If galv. is out what's the contractor going to be running for those 4" and up risers and suspended mains,copper?


----------



## skoronesa (Oct 27, 2015)

GAN said:


> Yes, making them aware is the point. If this section of black is no across the basement but is at the point your working, you replace it because it "is not" code compliant.
> 
> Now take that thought forward to the potential new code adoption. Galvanized not an approved material (just like black iron currently is) your working on a system now that is not just across the basement. Every piece you touch although old "is still" non-compliant. Your repairing or replacing and connecting to piping that constitutes a code violation which you would not do if that little piece of black iron happened to be the whole system.
> 
> ...


I agree on the lead thing, no plumber in their right mind would touch it partly because it is difficult but mostly for liability. But with galvanized I think you should be allowed to connect to existing.

.


----------



## skoronesa (Oct 27, 2015)

leakfree said:


> I just don't see the IDPH having a good time telling the State of Chicago that poured joints are no longer accepted?If galv. is out what's the contractor going to be running for those 4" and up risers and suspended mains,copper?


Copper, stainless, or hdpe I would think would replace the galv.

As for no more pouring joints, yeah some guys will resist but it can't be a pleasant thing to do all the time and I imagine that many guys on the job would be glad not to breath in lead fumes or get burnt. And if chicago resists I am sure some guys hurt on the job or who have lung issues(probably from cigarettes) will be sueing over the lead fumes and burns.



.


----------



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

ShtRnsdownhill said:


> Gan, a few questions..
> 1- what has changed in the last few decades that has brought about so much of this Legionnaires disease, it wasnt heard of till that outbreak in that philadelphia holtel that killed all those veterans, as thats how it got the name????( being some what of a conspiracy person I have my dark ideas on it, but thats another thread).
> 2- who is going to pay for all the changes or replacement of plumbing systems when the new laws are put into place??? example..plumber gets called for repair and finds c lots of lead or galvanized pipe , but repair is isolated to 1 small section, as understood any plumber connecting a repair onto lead or gal is going to get hung out to dry if all the piping isnt replaced..so who gets to pay for all the work to remove pipe thats been there 70 years? and what if home or building owner cant afford to change it out? who gets the fines?
> 3- are plumbers now going to be made into snitches if they see lead in a building even if they arent working on that pipe? will they get fined or be mandatory to turn in the building?
> new laws many times are overkill to the threat and are put into place more to generate revenue from fines and permits than for public saftey..just ask OSHA about that...



1) My thoughts on the conspiracy theory. When these systems where initially installed, especially galvanized they were nice & clean. After 50, 60, 80 years of deterioration, slime, etc. they are more prone to be able to harbor microbes and such that breed at these particular temperature ranges. I have no idea of how far back in history this (also know as Pontiac Fever). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legionella. Just think of how hot water has to be in a commercial kitchen to sanitize.

2) I follow you. That is in the next universe yet. I have heard nothing from Springfield, on the depth, what will be accepted (just the affected are or the whole system). This is my mind going devils advocate. I really don't see forcing a plumber to be responsible for something they did not install. Now lead is another matter. From what I understand complete replacement of failing or lead water service lines that are in need of repair will be forced (even in the country of Chicago) We will see, I do know IDPH has been on them as far back as 2 years ago about still repairing these instead of replacing. Replacement costs (another good question) No real consensus, although I have heard about municipalities helping with financing for those people who can't afford it. We will see if Broke Illinois can come up with some possible funding to help in these cases. Or it may be considered an unfunded mandate if they wish to force it. I have no idea. 
My concern for plumbers in the field (it may take a case with IDPH to find out). The reason I brought this up is if passed these materials will no longer be recognized or approved. That got my feeble mind wondering, hmmmm If I ran across a material I needed to connect to that was not code approved what would I do. For me, I would not connect to it. I would knowingly be making a connection to a non-approved material which in theory violates my license. This may take another case with the "Department" to decide. Remember you aren't going to court if these violations are brought up, your going to the IDPH review board. If they suspend your license or revoke it you would have to pay a lawyer and go to court to settle it.
I full hope when they get ready to pass this, they will publish some comment. They have never done this in the past. For me when & if this goes through I will be contacting my regional State Inspector. I have known him for year and his dad before that who was also a State Inspector to get feedback from their meetings at the State level. If this all runs true for me (being an inspector) if I run into this in the field I would not approve it, require compliance with the plumber of record and let the higher ups sort it out.
As I hear more I will for sure post it. 

3) I doubt and have never heard that if a plumber sees something in a building, is not working there will be and has never been held responsible for anything like this. How could one prove it, I said she said, I saw he saw. Would never hold up. I think what they are trying to do is when any repairs are needed, the changes come. No to retro back to every and any location. Fines for sure. IDPH is not on the general fund in Illinois and has to generate it's own operating costs. This has rang true for several years. Many years ago our license costs doubled when that happened and fines were raised.


----------



## ShtRnsdownhill (Jan 13, 2016)

3) I doubt and have never heard that if a plumber sees something in a building, is not working there will be and has never been held responsible for anything like this. How could one prove it, I said she said, I saw he saw. Would never hold up. I think what they are trying to do is when any repairs are needed, the changes come. No to retro back to every and any location. Fines for sure. IDPH is not on the general fund in Illinois and has to generate it's own operating costs. This has rang true for several years. Many years ago our license costs doubled when that happened and fines were raised.


my question was that, the plumber IS working in a building, say installing a boiler, but sees lead pipes in violation, is it the plumbers NEW responsibility to contact the inspecting jurisdiction to take an action? as it would be almost impossible not to see the pipes..and will the plumber be held liable for not reporting?, just as if you as an inspector went to inspect the boiler and saw the lead pipes in violation, would you be held accountable if you didnt write up the violation?..
it sounds from the law so far they will be counting all the fines they could hand out as revenue, whether this was or is one of the reasons behind it..
A friend of mine is a contractor and he just had to renew his lead license( for paint) so when he renovates an older house he needs to test for lead paint, if it is found he needs to hire an abatement company, just like the asbestos, if he doesnt test he can be fined huge amounts by the EPA, and if he doesnt have the lead license they wont renew his contractors license...in the end everyone has to pay for the license, for the testing and the fines if not followed..just more money pouring out of people pockets...


----------



## PLUMBER_BILL (Oct 23, 2009)

*Lead in plumbing*



ShtRnsdownhill said:


> 3)
> 
> A friend of mine is a contractor and he just had to renew his lead license( for paint) so when he renovates an older house he needs to test for lead paint, if it is found he needs to hire an abatement company, just like the asbestos, if he doesnt test he can be fined huge amounts by the EPA, and if he doesnt have the lead license they wont renew his contractors license...in the end everyone has to pay for the license, for the testing and the fines if not followed..just more money pouring out of people pockets...
> 
> ...


----------



## Toli (Nov 7, 2015)

Boy, they sure got the 1017 valve makers in an uproar. 😂😂

I’ve been getting their stuff forwarded to me and they’re gonna be coming hard at that February public comment meeting.


----------



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

Oh yes airborne is the primary issue. Secondarily is ingestion with small kids & Lead. Currently just painting over old lead is recognized for an owner to do. An owner can abate themselves with no issues. Like you said let a non-licensed contractor do it and get caught. I know a contractor who removed tile in a church and was almost crucified for not having it tested before remove. There is a threshold of disturbed area that kicks in before it is mandated.


Asbestos the same, A homeowner can remove the siding or insulation, double bag it and send it on it's merry way. Contractor will be crucified.


----------



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

ShtRnsdownhill said:


> 3) I doubt and have never heard that if a plumber sees something in a building, is not working there will be and has never been held responsible for anything like this. How could one prove it, I said she said, I saw he saw. Would never hold up. I think what they are trying to do is when any repairs are needed, the changes come. No to retro back to every and any location. Fines for sure. IDPH is not on the general fund in Illinois and has to generate it's own operating costs. This has rang true for several years. Many years ago our license costs doubled when that happened and fines were raised.
> 
> 
> my question was that, the plumber IS working in a building, say installing a boiler, but sees lead pipes in violation, is it the plumbers NEW responsibility to contact the inspecting jurisdiction to take an action? as it would be almost impossible not to see the pipes..and will the plumber be held liable for not reporting?, just as if you as an inspector went to inspect the boiler and saw the lead pipes in violation, would you be held accountable if you didnt write up the violation?..
> ...


As I stated all good and relevant questions. I have no idea currently. Until the public comment section has ended and it goes before JACAR or the back to the review board, it is all up in the air.


Even currently Lead DWV is still approved as well as galvanized and a valid system. It would not be mentioned. When inspecting I only look at "health & safety" violations. None of the potential new changes are considered this as of yet. I sue as heck don't know how IDPH will expect me to respond if these changes get approved. Classically from my regional State Inspector, existing non-complaint doesn't get addressed with him. This is going to be interesting.

Only the shadow knows...…..


----------



## ShtRnsdownhill (Jan 13, 2016)

LOL..sometimes they work themselves out and sometimes they dont and you have to go back to the chalk board...only time will tell and the people that made the laws probably dont know how its going to turn out for themselves and they wrote them...


----------



## Tommy plumber (Feb 19, 2010)

Interesting information Gan, thank you for the updates.


I wonder if more states will follow suit in attempting to phase out galvanized piping and lead joints.


The last significant code change that I recall is back around the year 2000 or so, when our code {FL} prohibited galvanized underground for gas piping. Galvanized corrodes and rusts rather quickly in FL soil and with our climate.


It's great to have the insight that an Illinois plumbing inspector and member of IL code council brings to this site. I appreciate your taking the time to enlighten us.


----------



## Tango (Jan 13, 2018)

In my area old pipes are left in place, when renovating you only replace what needs to be done in that area. It's NOT the contractor's obligation to remove everything or be held responsible for the existing installation.

But then since we have no inspector it's a free for all, the last job as an employee working in several schools the GCs and the plumbing company were aware and removed a lot of asbestos pipe insulation, no procedure in place, no suits or masks, no quarantine. The asbestos landed on children's games, teddy bears and dolls, school education games, on spare desks in the basement. Even the Janitor turned a blind eye!

Back to school in September kids.


----------



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

Tango said:


> In my area old pipes are left in place, when renovating you only replace what needs to be done in that area. It's NOT the contractor's obligation to remove everything or be held responsible for the existing installation.
> 
> But then since we have no inspector it's a free for all, the last job as an employee working in several schools the GCs and the plumbing company were aware and removed a lot of asbestos pipe insulation, no procedure in place, no suits or masks, no quarantine. The asbestos landed on children's games, teddy bears and dolls, school education games, on spare desks in the basement. Even the Janitor turned a blind eye!
> 
> Back to school in September kids.



That is horrific. Here you would be hung out to dry by the State (since all plumbers are notified not to touch Asbestos). Then after that the wrongful damage suits by parents for exposing the kids and everyone else to it.


----------



## Tommy plumber (Feb 19, 2010)

Tango said:


> In my area old pipes are left in place, when renovating you only replace what needs to be done in that area. It's NOT the contractor's obligation to remove everything or be held responsible for the existing installation.
> 
> But then since we have no inspector it's a free for all, the last job as an employee working in several schools the GCs and the plumbing company were aware and removed a lot of asbestos pipe insulation, no procedure in place, no suits or masks, no quarantine. *The asbestos landed on children's games, teddy bears and dolls, school education games, on spare desks in the basement. Even the Janitor turned a blind eye!*
> 
> Back to school in September kids.




















That is a disgrace. Canada should be thoroughly ashamed of itself!


----------



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

Here is the specific proposed "change" in the Illinois Code which is still under public comment until Feb 22nd. I believe.

_In buildings other than residential, hot water shall be generated, distributed and maintained at 160 degrees Fahrenheit or higher. Any mixing or tempering of hot water for use in plumbing fixtures, appliances or appurtenances shall occur within 12 inches before any fixture, appliance or appurtenance. Mixing and tempering devices shall comply with the requirements of this Part. Distribution of tempered or mixed water is prohibited._

A sigh of relief for those freaking out in regards to repairs. "Proposed changes below"

_Replacement or Repair of Existing Service Lines. If any portion of a service line is constructed of materials not approved under Appendix A, and the service line is to be modified, repaired or replaced, then the portion constructed of unapproved materials and all downstream portions of the service line must be replaced with approved materials listed in Appendix A. Repair of existing service lines shall be made in accordance with Section 890.350(b) and only using materials approved in Appendix A. 
_


----------



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

Here is the section regarding lines which create a dead end.

_f) Any service line intended to supply seasonal or infrequent uses, such as lawn irrigation systems, fire protection systems, which may include fire hydrant leads, fire hydrant loops, fire sprinkler systems or hose reels, shall be installed in a manner to prevent stagnation of water. This shall be achieved by installing service lines in accordance with one of the following methods: 

1) Install a combined building water service capable of meeting the larger of the domestic or fire suppression system flow requirements; 

2) Install a service line designed to ensure the water age within the service line does not exceed 48 hours under normal building operations with the design certified by an Illinois licensed professional engineer, an Illinois licensed architect or an individual Certified in Plumbing Design (CPD) by the American Society of Plumbing Engineers and approved in writing by the Department; or 

3) Cross-Connection Control by Containment: Install an approved backflow device, within a distance no greater than two times the nominal inside pipe diameter of the service line, from the water main or pipe supplying the water service._


----------



## Tommy plumber (Feb 19, 2010)

GAN said:


> Here is the section regarding lines which create a dead end.
> 
> _f) Any service line intended to supply seasonal or infrequent uses, such as lawn irrigation systems, fire protection systems, which may include fire hydrant leads, fire hydrant loops, fire sprinkler systems or hose reels, shall be installed in a manner to prevent stagnation of water. This shall be achieved by installing service lines in accordance with one of the following methods: _
> 
> ...


















This is a step in the right direction. 


We as plumbing professionals have a duty to protect the health and safety of the population. "Keeping the good water from the bad water" as it has been stated.


----------



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

Here is a big one for decorative fountains, which have never been addressed previously, outside of the connection (if any) to the potable water system.


_Section 890.2020 Decorative Fountains and Aesthetic Water Fixtures 

a) Decorative fountains or aesthetic water fixtures, including, but not limited to, water walls or spray fountains shall be designed, installed and maintained in accordance with this Part. 

b) Decorative fountains and aesthetic water fixtures shall not be supplied from a harvested water system. 

c) Decorative fountains and aesthetic water fixtures that utilize recirculation and provide for direct contact by the public shall comply with the Swimming Facility Code. 

d) Owners and operators of decorative fountains and aesthetic water fixtures shall develop and maintain a disinfection and maintenance program. This does not apply to single family dwellings. 

e) Owners and operators shall maintain records for the disinfection and maintenance program for at least 3 years. These records shall include, but are not limited to, the disinfection and maintenance schedule, maintenance and disinfection records, and any associated sampling and analyses if a sampling plan is in place. The records shall be made available to the Department upon request. This does not apply to single family dwellings. 

f) Decorative fountains and aesthetic water fixtures shall not be installed in food establishments. 

g) Decorative fountains and aesthetic water fixtures shall not be installed in health care facilities subject to the Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Center Act, Hospital Licensing Act, Nursing Home Care Act, Assisted Living and Shared Housing Act or Community Mental Health Act. 

h) Decorative fountains and aesthetic water fixtures shall not be installed as part of a building's humidification system._


----------



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

There is another full new section regarding the responsibility of "Health Care Facilities, Restaurants, Schools, Shared Housing, Nursing Homes" during water outages.

I won't post that since that will be out of the realm of Plumbers responsibility.


----------



## Tango (Jan 13, 2018)

Tommy plumber said:


> That is a disgrace. Canada should be thoroughly ashamed of itself!


It's the contractors that are bad. My last plumbing employer at the time was one of the worst. He even came to my house after he laid me off to cheat on his mandatory construction reports. He wanted me to sign falsified time sheets. He then threatened me in my parking lot and I told him to get the frack out and I was calling the police. 

I then filed a complaint on him about that and the money he owed me and the other employees. I did mention the asbestos to the person who was in charge of my case but it's unknown what happened after that. After one year I got a cheque and I was lucky that it turned out anonymous as I was the only one who filed a complaint. All the guys were laid off at the same time as me and no one else stood up for themselves.


I also want to mention in my time as an employee I filed a few complaints on safety issues and the government authorities who were supposed to show up on job site to investigate never did. I've also seen guys been fined because they didn't have their hard hard but they turned a blind eye to the company who supplied broken down step ladders, no safeties on tools, no toilets on site, no water to drink, eating in the basement of the building under construction with a 1/2" layer of dust on the table etc.

It's very complicated and a real hazard to those who stand up for themselves. You have to take into consideration of what the employer will do to you in the future.


----------

