A North Salt Lake fire protection company is at odds with city officials over installation of a backflow protection device that is supposed to prevent undesirable fluids from getting into the city's culinary water system.
Dennis Strong, co-owner of Chaparral Fire Protection, 71 N. Highway 89, said an alarm check valve attached to the fire sprinkler system meets current state code for preventing a backflow into the culinary water system and no additional devices are needed. Besides, says Strong, some of the backflow prevention devices installed elsewhere have failed.Because Strong won't install the device on his sprinkler system, Jeff Tingey, public works superintendent over streets and water for the city, ordered the water turned off to Chaparral's sprinkling system, leaving the building without a fire sprinkler system.
Strong said the building didn't need a sprinkler system, but he installed one anyway, just to be safe. Turning the water off prompted Strong to call his insurance company and have his policy changed.
Tingey hasn't issued Chaparral a citation for violating the city's ordinance requiring the backflow prevention devices.
Tingey said the city attorney still is investigating any criminal action against Chaparral, but he didn't need to issue a citation before he turned the water off. He said city officials are adamant about protecting all of the city's residents from unsafe water.
Also joining in the fray is Lowell Gillette, president of Fire Engineering Co., a Murray company that installs fire extinguishing systems. Gillette said he was a subcontractor to install a fire sprinkler system in another North Salt Lake building, and city officials are threatening to shut off the water to that system if they don't install a backflow prevention device and not rely solely on the fire alarm check valve.
Because some of the sprinkling system pipes at Chaparral are outside and could freeze in the winter, propylene glycol, an anti-freeze, is added. Strong and Gillette contend nobody has ever become sick after ingesting the liquid, but Tingey said it can make people sick.
Although it would cost only $200 to install a backflow prevention device, Strong and Gillette said they are resisting the installation based on principle. They cite several instances where the devices have failed and present letters and opinions from others who haven't had good experiences with the devices.
Strong and Gillette said the State Plumbing Code and the state fire marshal require only fire-alarm check valves to prevent unwanted fluids from getting into a culinary water system, and several communities don't require backflow prevention devices.
Gillette said Weber County recently spent $40,000 on backflow prevention devices at the new Fremont High School, and they failed. He also pointed to an article published in a newsletter from IRM Insurance that said that as a result of tests, 40 percent of the backflow devices failed.