Our country is in a fractured state. We are more divided now than we have been at any other point in my lifetime. Things that were normal in the past are no longer normal. Public trust in our government and institutions are at an all-time low. Facts no longer seem to matter to many people and common sense has left the building. I am not picking sides here — there is crazy to be found everywhere. The trend of the day seems to be if one side supports something, the other side must come out strongly against it, even if it makes sense and is possibly something that was universally supported in the past. It’s a recipe for disaster to start with the mindset that all regulations are unnecessary and should be repealed. If you think that every regulation is necessary and needs to be made even stronger, you are also part of the problem.
There is a word that used to reflect how things worked in the past. That word is compromise. The definition of this word is “an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.” We can also look at it as the ability to look at both sides of an issue or problem and create a solution that is based on facts and is acceptable to both sides. Let us look at examples related to cross-connection control.
As cross-connection control technicians, we must be proactive and pessimistic. We need to make sure that the proper protection is in place and that it is tested and maintained. We need to look at the type of hazard present and the type of backflow that may occur to make the correct call on the protection needed. We do not simply install a reduced pressure principle assembly at every commercial service connection. We also do not make the decision that all residential systems do not require backflow protection. To do so would defy logic and the laws of physics. That is what a number of jurisdictions are doing. Worse than that, some jurisdictions are simply making the call that backflow protection is not needed, stating it puts too high of a burden on developers and building owners.
Cutting regulations to decrease the costs of development and construction may seem like a reasonable idea. So does streamlining the permitting process to allow for less red tape and for projects to be approved and allowed to begin construction more rapidly. Taking a chain saw to codes, standards, and regulations in a quest to provide a more business friendly environment is an unforced error and a mistake that will be paid for by everyone in the end. I once sat in a meeting in Ohio where a state regulator proudly talked about a maximum thirty-day period the state was requiring its staff to meet to approve new fracking wells. His reasoning was that this would convince fossil fuel companies to drill more wells in Ohio than any of the surrounding states. I think the residents of Ohio would be more interested in a careful, thought-out review process than an arbitrary timeline for approval.
The state of North Carolina decided to take the path of cutting regulations before, and surprisingly even after, Tropical Storm Helene devastated large areas of the state. Most people would look at updating and making building codes stronger after a tragedy like this storm. But the majority of lawmakers in the state assembly decided to move in a different direction. According to the North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management, the storm caused a total of 44.4 billion dollars in direct damage, 9.4 billion dollars in indirect damage, and an additional 5.8 billion dollars in related costs, bringing the total to 59.6 billion dollars. Over one hundred people also died as a result of the storm. The National Hurricane Center estimated the damage in North Carolina at 79 billion dollars.
During the 2023-2024 legislative session in North Carolina, several bills that seemed to be aimed at watering down or eliminating codes, permitting requirements and inspections in the state were passed. House Bill 488 contained some interesting changes. Some of the language in the bill blocks the state from updating most of their building codes until 2031, which will put them at least six codes cycles behind many jurisdictions.
Another section raised the cost threshold for which a permit would be required from $20,000 to $40,000 for both commercial and residential projects. If there are no permits, there will be no inspections. Governor Roy Cooper, understanding the importance of up-to-date codes and standards, vetoed this legislation. The state assembly overrode his veto with a vote of 78 to 40 in the house and a vote of 27 to 17 in the state senate. This took place one year and eleven days before Tropical Storm Helene arrived on the scene. Thankfully, the storm had weakened from the category four hurricane it was when it struck Florida. Otherwise, the devastation to Asheville and other areas of North Carolina would have been much worse. The storm would have arrived with or without the code updates, but having them in place and ensuring proper inspections and permits would’ve led to better construction and may have mitigated some of the damage. The drive to fast-track development and permitting while reducing inspection and review always leads to issues down the road.
The North Carolina state assembly also began an effort to weaken and eliminate backflow and cross-connection standards and regulations, including testing requirements. Senate Bill 166 focused on lowering costs and requirements for the installation and testing of backflow assemblies. This law passed the general assembly and was also vetoed by Governor Cooper. The assembly overrode his veto on Sept.11, 2024, sixteen days before Helene hit North Carolina. Reading the bill’s language and conditions makes it clear that the authors of this legislation do not understand the hazards and the dangers related to cross-connection control. Or they are simply looking to eliminate any regulations that could possibly add costs to any business or property owner, regardless of the danger to the water supply.
One of the highlights of this legislation is that it prohibits a public water system from requiring the installation of backflow preventers on any commercial or residential system or service that is not deemed a high hazard by the state. If a water supplier attempts to require backflow prevention, the supplier must cover all costs related to the installation and inspection of the backflow prevention. The law also makes water suppliers immune from any lawsuits resulting in a backflow incident in their systems.
The law goes on to roll back and prohibit any annual testing requirements that a water supplier in the state now has, only mandating testing every three years. The law stops water suppliers from mandating new backflow protection on existing residential or commercial customers. It also does away with the requirements for certified testers, allowing licensed plumbers to test without any tester certification.
In many ways, what the law does is prohibit local governments and water suppliers from having or enforcing stronger regulations or requirements than the state’s requirements. It removes local control. The law does this for many regulations concerning land development, permitting, and a host of other services. All this to make the state more business and development friendly.
The state was never near the top of the list in cross-connection control. It is, and was, full of kings and kingdoms with enforcement of testing requirements. These regulations will only make a bad situation worse.
While I have highlighted North Carolina as having some significant issues, they are far from being the only jurisdiction with regulation and enforcement problems in the United States. The fact that I teach certification classes in a number of states allows me to hear both the success stories and the nightmare situations that testers encounter. I was on a call several weeks ago with a group of state officials in an eastern state talking about the need for statewide tester approval. One of the participants mentioned that their regulations prohibited any cross-connections on water systems in the state. The call then went back to the basics of what a cross-connection is and why they do exist in all systems. It was a productive call with people who really were looking for the correct information.
There is a state whose regulations allow for any pressure vacuum breaker assembly or double check valve assembly installed before Jan.1, 2014 to not be tested annually. If these assembles were installed after Dec. 31, 2013, they must be tested annually. If you can explain the logic in that decision, you must be smarter than I am. Grandfathering public safety is a bad idea in every case. There is an effort in many areas to relax the annual testing requirements to a three-year cycle for testing assemblies. Some legislators are suggesting a five or even a 10-year cycle for testing. What do we say about a state that requires a reduced pressure principle assembly on a chemical dispenser that contains integral backflow protection, but allows double check valves or dual check on irrigation systems?
The cross-connection industry and its professional organizations need to work together to convince state and federal regulators and legislators that backflow testing is a critical part of protecting the public water supply. We need to form a coalition of like-minded people and industry groups who can respond to misinformation and incorrect, destructive regulations, and educate the people who make the regulations and the rules. We need to get the correct information to the people who need it.
In the current political climate, it will be more of a challenge than ever before. Clean water is necessary for all life on this planet, but that does not mean it won’t become a partisan issue. We must always understand the need to be accurate with our information. We need to start working together to ensure we keep our water systems safe.
