The majority of the Proposed Regulations are a welcome update.  As backflow professionals from across the industry, the VA ABPA appreciates the Department for clarifying and aligning these regulations with the USBC, in cooperation with the DHCD.  Waterworks owners & building officials share the responsibility of enforcing cross-connection control, while consumers and other stakeholders must install, maintain & test backflow preventers.  Eliminating redundancy & improving efficiency are important goals, but the Department must not lose sight of the ultimate goal: to ensure that waterworks furnish potable water to consumers, which requires protecting it from backflow & contamination.  Waterworks and government agencies across the country are being scrutinized and legally challenged on the failure to protect this vital resource.  The Department should not lower the standards of protection, especially for high hazard cross-connections of any kind.  If waterworks are too complex or lack personnel or funding to implement an effective CCCP, the Department and each waterworks should develop ways to ensure regulatory compliance, rather than lowering the standards of protection.  To do otherwise risks the safety of potable water and the public health, and could irreparably breach the public’s trust.  A mistrustful public could resort to installing auxiliary systems and create cross-connections with these systems, and negatively impact the public health.  In the spirit of cooperation, and to ensure that potable water remains potable, we submit the following general and technical concerns that should be addressed and resolved before legislation:

Section Concerns & Recommendations:

1. 12VAC5-590-55 B: 
1. CONCERN:  “Backflow prevention method” is a defined term, meaning a physical separation or air gap.  However, the USBC governs backflow generally and specifically, and is not limited to backflow methods, devices and assemblies.

• 1. 1. RECOMMENDATION: Remove “method” to rephrase as “backflow prevention” in general.  Alternatively, rephrase to include “backflow prevention methods, backflow prevention assemblies, and backflow prevention devices.”

2. 12VAC5-590-600:     
2. CORRECTION in subsection 600 B, “consumer water system” should be plural, i.e. “systems.”
3. CORRECTION in subsection 600 D, “premise” should be plural, i.e. “premises.”
4. CONCERNS in Subsection 600 B & C:  Consumer water systems are subject to change after assessment.  Assessments should be performed annually or at some minimum specified interval.

2. 2. 1. RECOMMENDATION: add the word “annually” or a minimum interval to subsection 600 B; or add the word “assessments” to the required testing and evaluations required in subsection 600 C.

5. CONCERNS in Subsection 600 D:  A public education program is a welcome improvement, to give owners a flexible option for low risk consumer systems.  But any exemption increases the risk of contamination.  However, 600 D is ambiguously worded, is dangerously lacking in detail and minimum standards, and includes unnecessary loopholes.  Misinterpretation and/or misapplication could result in unintended consequences and contamination of water distribution systems across the State.  It is arguable that such an exemption should be allowed by the Department of Health, since 12VAC5-590-450 & 12VAC5-590-461 requires competent and adequate staff to operate and maintain a waterworks (including the CCCP).  Substantial modification is recommended to address the following concerns: