1

2012 Plumbing CodesInternational Plumbing Code

Uniform Plumbing Code

David McCarthy, P.E.City of Phoenix

2

Overview

• Phoenix Plumbing Code history• 2012 Plumbing Codes• Code adoption process• Code amendments• Code differences• Making the process work• Questions and answers

3

Phoenix Plumbing Code History

• Prior to September 1, 1991– The Phoenix Construction Code was a stand

alone document which was created by the City of Phoenix. The document was periodically amended with no specific cycle.

• Effective September 1, 1991– 1988 Uniform Plumbing Code with amendments

• Effective July 1, 1992– 1991 Uniform Plumbing Code with amendments

4

Plumbing Code History cont.

• Effective January 1, 1996– 1994 Uniform Plumbing Code with amendments

• Effective March 12, 1999– State of Arizona Plumbing Code – based on 1994

UPC with amendments• Effective July 1, 2005

– State of Arizona Plumbing Code – based on 1994 UPC with State amendments

5

Plumbing Code History cont.

• Effective July 1, 2007– 2006 Uniform Plumbing Code with amendments– 2006 International Fuel Gas Code with

amendments

• Effective July 1, 2013– 2012 Uniform Plumbing Code with amendments– 2012 International Plumbing Code with

amendments– 2012 International Fuel Gas Code with

amendments

6

2012 Plumbing Codes

• Overview– The International Plumbing Code (IPC) and the

Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC) cover the initial design of plumbing systems through the installation and construction phases, and into the maintenance of operating systems

– Fuel-gas appliances and systems are addressed in the 2012 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC)

7

2012 Plumbing Codes

• Applicants have the choice to use the 2012 IPC or 2012 UPC– The 2012 IPC is a performance-based code– The 2012 UPC is a prescriptive code– Both codes cover similar topics– There are also differences

• How did we get here?

8

Code Adoption Process

• City staff committee researches and prepares recommendations

• Obtain input from stakeholders• Staff and public recommendations presented

to DAB Technical Subcommittee• DAB Subcommittee presents

recommendations to full DAB committee• City Council Subcommittee review• City Council for final adoption vote

9

Code Adoption Process

• Staff committee completed a chapter comparison between the two codes and received input from City departments, industry and the public

• Staff made a presentation to DAB Technical Subcommittee with recommendation to adopt the 2012 UPC

• DAB Technical Subcommittee heard testimony and moved recommendation to full DAB for vote

• Full DAB committee deadlocked and moved recommendation to City Council subcommittee

• City Council Subcommittee voted to adopt IPC• City Council directed adoption of both codes

10

2012 Plumbing Codes

• Next staff challenge, review both codes– Determine if amendments required– Should codes remain distinct?– What is the same and different?– Mixing of codes allowed?– How will it affect review and inspections?– What about licensing?

11

Code Amendments

• Once a decision was made on the codes, amendments were made to adapt the code to local conditions and existing ordinances

• Staff and public submitted IPC and UPC amendments for consideration

• Amendments were available for public viewing on our website with written reasons behind each change

• All amendments were passed through the code adoption process

12

Typical Code Proposal

CODE CHANGE PROPOSAL Proposed Amendments to 2012 Uniform Plumbing Code

Section 1017.1 Submitted by: Phoenix Planning and Development Department Code Committee 1017.1 Interceptors Required. Repair garages and gasoline stations with grease racks or grease pits, and factories that have oily, flammable, or both types of wastes as a result of manufacturing, storage, maintenance, repair, or testing processes, and in hydraulic elevator pits shall be provided with an oil or flammable liquid interceptor that shall be connected to necessary floor drains. (Remainder of section to remain unchanged) Exception: An oil interceptor is not required in hydraulic elevator pits where an approved alarm system is installed. Reasons: Protect drainage system. Harmonize UPC with 2012 IPC section 1003.4 to be consistent in elevator installations. Cost Impact: Cost savings from installation of alarm system instead of oil interceptor. ACTION TAKEN: 2012 Code Committee Date: 12/13/2012

Approved as submitted Modified and approved Denied No action taken Development Advisory Board Technical Subcommittee Date: 1/17/13

Approved as submitted Modified and approved Denied No action taken Development Advisory Board Date: 1/17/13

Approved as submitted Modified and approved Denied No action taken Council Subcommittee Date:

Approved as submitted Modified and approved Denied No action taken City Council Action Date:

Approved as submitted Modified and approved Denied No action taken

13

2012 Common Amendments

• Minimum plumbing fixture calculation• Drinking fountains and water

dispensers• Backflow prevention devices• Installation of low slope sewers• Trap seal protection• Grease interceptors• Rainwater drainage systems

14

Minimum Plumbing Fixtures

• UPC Table 422.1, IPC Table 403.1– Tables from IBC, IPC, and UPC all match– Deleted requirements for service sinks– Use 15 occupants as threshold for separate

restrooms, 50 in Group B and M– Urinal substitution back to 50%

15

Drinking Fountains

• UPC 415.2, IPC 410.3– Tables from IBC, IPC, and UPC all match– Drinking fountains not required for occupant load

of 50 or less in all occupancies– Defined water dispensers and water coolers– In occupancies where drinking fountains are

required, water dispensers may be substituted for not more than 50% of the required number of drinking fountains

16

Backflow Prevention

• UPC 603, IPC 608– Backflow prevention device access, clearance

and aboveground requirements– Occupancies that require secondary backflow

prevention devices

17

Low Slope Sewers

• UPC 718.1, IPC 704.1– Exception: The Authority Having Jurisdiction

may approve a lessor slope for building sewers in lieu of a sewage ejector or pumping station when a registered engineer or architect certifies the building sewer design and its installation, and when the building owner agrees in writing under notary to accept the lessor slope. Certification of the building sewer shall meet the special inspection requirements of the Phoenix Building Construction Code

18

Trap Seal Protection

• UPC 1007.1, IPC 1002.4– Exception: Trap seal primer valves are not

required when an alternative device is provided to prevent evaporation of the liquid seal. Barrier type floor drain devices used to prevent evaporation shall conform to ASSE 1072, be accessible for maintenance and installed in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions. A source of water for filling of traps shall be located in the vicinity of the plumbing fixture

19

Grease Interceptors

• UPC 1014, IPC 1003– Grease traps and interceptors are regulated by

Water Services Department Environmental Services Division so codes need to match

– Definitions – Where devices are required– List of approved devices– Food waste disposal and dishwasher

requirements– Capacity and sizing of devices

20

Rainwater Drainage Systems

• UPC Ch. 11, IPC Ch. 11– Scupper location and sizing criteria– Rainfall rate of 3 inches per hour – Secondary drains– Prohibition on combined systems– Food waste disposal and dishwasher

requirements– Capacity and sizing of devices

21

Other Amendments

• UPC Chapter 12 Fuel Gas Piping – was reserved due to possible conflicts

with the 2012 International Fuel Gas Code– Sizing tables are the same

22

Code Differences

• Water heater requirements• Domestic water supply sizing• Sanitary drain pipe sizing and slopes• Dishwashing sink indirect versus direct• Venting options allowed, air admittance valves• Cleanouts for rainwater drain systems• Provisions for alternate water systems• Appendices• To be determined…..

23

Mixing of Codes

• Permit applicant is asked to identify the code used for plumbing design

• Review and inspection are then completed using the code referenced on the plan

• In certain cases it may be impractical to use different techniques such as pipe sizing or venting

• Specific items can be judged on a case-by-case basis by plan review and/or inspections

24

How Do We Make It Work?

• City and design community work together towards solutions through open dialogue and concentrating on what works

• Continuous education for staff, designers and installers

• City licensing to incorporate both codes

• Bottom line is to insure safe and sanitary systems

25

Questions?

• David McCarthy• Mechanical Plans

Engineer• (602) 534-2734

•david.mccarthy@phoenix.gov

Mike LongInspections Field

Supervisor(602) 501-1206

mike.long@phoenix.gov