Some 200 people turned out for a county meeting on backflow valves in Sun City Center on March 27. The meeting was effectively a continuation of a meeting that began on March 17 but ended early when a County engineer suffered an emergency health situation. According to Hillsborough County Commissioner Stacy White, the engineer is recovering and expected to return to work soon.
For this meeting, primarily a question-and-answer session, the site was changed from the Florida Room at the Community Association complex to the larger Community Hall in order to accommodate a larger crowd. The County reiterated its stance on the need for and use of backflow valves, and approximately 10 to 12 residents stood to ask questions about the program.
Backflow valves are used so that potentially contaminated water cannot enter the County drinking water supply. According to the County, this is of particular concern in places where a potential cross connection could exist between a yard irrigation system using pond or well water and the public water system.
Cross connections, in general, are not allowed by Hillsborough County codes. However, to eliminate all risk, the proposed County program mandates the use of a double-check valve when pond or well water is used for an irrigation system. If a home has no auxiliary water system or is using reclaimed water, then a less expensive and simpler dual-check valve will be allowed.
The cost of a double-check valve is significantly higher than that of a dual-check valve. County officials say the use of the more expensive double-check valve where needed is justified due to an estimated longer useful life of 20 or more years, versus five to 10 years for the less expensive dual-check valve. The double-check valve is also easier to test to ensure proper functioning, the County said.
Overall, the County estimates, provided by Hillsborough County Civil Engineer Randi Kim, were that dual-check valves for all residences will cost $75 each, while double-check valves will cost $150 each. According to charts provided during the meeting, the County expects only a small percentage of residences will require the double-check valves. The entire program is expected to cost $11.4 million.
There was some confusion about who would bear the expense, with the burden dependent upon various scenarios: largely, equipment connected to or inside a home versus equipment that is removed from the home structure. The County expects to own the bulk of the backflow valves.
Community resident David Brown, who has followed and researched this issue over the years, is an opponent of the double-check valves in general due to higher costs and the potential threat of tampering. He has taken issue with the estimated costs, stating that they do not include installation nor any potentially needed additional parts, and that the valves could require changes to hot-water systems, namely a lower pressure relief valve and a thermal expansion tank if a water heater is replaced, which, presumably, would take place at the homeowner’s expense.
Brown also takes issue with the County’s assumption that if an auxiliary system exists at all, a potential cross connection is simply inferred, whether or not one actually exists.
Brown has also taken issue with the potential inspection and maintenance costs of the double-check valves.
The cheaper dual-check valves cannot be maintained, per se, and testing is more difficult, thus part of the reason for the shorter estimated life. That is a point both the County and Brown make, as well as a point of contention: the inability to test the shorter-life, cheaper dual-check valves versus the higher initial cost, along with testing and maintenance costs of the longer-life, more expensive double-check valves.
According to Brown, his research of the valve life spans vary greatly from the County estimates, as well as the total lifetime cost estimates.
Backflow valves are a countywide issue, but they are of greater concern in Sun City Center where a relatively higher percentage of homeowners could be impacted by differing standards on what valves may be required and where. In the end, however, all sides have the same objective: ensuring the safety of the public water system.