Document text
Talent to check risk of water backflow By TONY BOOM TALENT � Residents with a secondary source of water on their property will have to wait before learning whether they will need to install devices that would prevent the water from flowing back into the city�s water system. At a hearing Wednesday, the City Council directed staff to evaluate the levels of risk to public health posed by varying degrees of installation requirements. Some residents spoke out against the devices on economic grounds, but others maintained they are essential to preserve public health. Backflow prevention devices, usually installed between a house and the city water meter, keep water from a secondary source from flowing back into city lines in the event of a pressure differential. Installation could cost as much as $1,000 for a complete system, or homeowners could do it themselves for about $200 in materials. Backflow can be a problem from wells, sprinkler systems, swimming pools or irrigation district water. Letters were sent last September to 283 city residents who receive water from both the city and the Talent Irrigation District. The letter said devices were to be installed and inspected within 90 days. Permits for 10 devices have been issued so far. City official Mike Broomfield delayed permits in January because he disagreed on the necessity of the devices in all cases. He subsequently resumed issuing permits, but the controversy caused the council to reconsider its 1998 ordinance requiring devices where "an auxiliary water source exists on the property or is piped to the property." "There will probably be some compromise," said councilwoman Jodi Riker Yap, when contacted Thursday. "We will do what is in the public interest, but try not to affect the private side adversely. There are a lot of people on fixed incomes. If they don�t need it, why have it?" "We directed staff to bring us back an ordinance that addresses the latitude we are allowed," said Telerski. City Public Works Director Tim Dedrick said he believes backflow devices are essential. "There is no acceptable risk with auxiliary water," he said. "That�s my viewpoint as a water supplier. TID is a proven contaminate source that must have protection." Talent resident Art McLean plans to install a device. "I think it�s a good idea for most people. If someone used water from a well and you had a pressure change, you could get e-coli or other contamination." A 1999 state administrative rule calls for each water district to develop a program for prevention devices if an auxiliary water source is, or can be, connected to water systems. Annual device inspections are required. "We don�t get involved in (city) ordinances," said Dave Leland, manager of the Drinking Water Program for Oregon�s Division of Health. "The city is required to have a program that meets our requirements for cross-connections. City water systems go through all this testing, treatment and inspection. The last thing you want is water of unknown quality back in the system." Other local water agencies require the devices in most cases. The Medford Water Commission requires residents and businesses to put in backflow devices where a well or sprinkler system exists. Irrigation district water sources either in closed pipes or in open canals are reviewed on a case-by-case basis, said Jeff Fowler, commission cross-connection inspector. Property owners bear the cost of installation. "If it�s a commercial facility or there�s a different source of water on the property, such as a well, we require a backflow between our water source and the house," said Central Point Public Works Director Bob Pierce. Central Point doesn�t require devices where irrigation district water is available, but would require installation if they saw a potential backflow problem. Property owners pay for the costs. Reach Ashland bureau reporter Tony Boom at 482-4651, or e-mail [email protected] Mail Tribune Home | Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. | Dow Jones & Co., Inc. | Privacy | Contact Us Copyright � 2001 Mail Tribune, Inc.