Thread: Tub Filler Requirements

I am remodeling my master bath, with a permit from the city, and am planning to use a freestanding tub filler, like this one: Contemporary Freestanding Bath Filler with Hand Sprayer | Signature Hardware.

My question is, does the filler have to comply with any standards, and if so, which ones? I noticed that some brands (Kohler, Grohe) list compliance with CSA and ASME standards - the one I listed above has not been certified to these standards. I spoke with the vendor of the filler, and he said that he never had one returned due to code non-compliance. But I would hate my inspector to tell me to take it out after I install it.

I plan to ask my inspector about this, but wanted to get some preliminary information from others who may have thoughts on this. Do tub fillers have to comply with ASME or CSA standards?

Thanks in advance.

Similar Threads:

• Attic Access Requirements
• Any updates on new TX insurance requirements?
• GFCI Requirements
• Proposed AFCI requirements-- discussion
• Inspectors must meet Md. license requirements - Daily Record (subscription)

Based on the IRC, which may be the same as, or slightly different from, CA:
- ASME A112.18.1M, CSA B125 (meaning either one or the other of those standards)

Thanks Jerry, that's what my inspector said too. So it looks like the one I had in mind won't work. It just makes me wonder, why do these places sell items that do not meet code requirements (somewhat rhetorical question, but still curious).

Like the vendor said, people buy them anyway. Lots of remodeling gets done without permits. Non-certified fixtures are a perfect fit.

I guess it makes sense that they sell it to folks who don't pull permits, I just don't happen to fall into that category .

So I will go with this item, it has the needed certs: JADO - Contemporary Floor Mount Tub Filler - Product Details

California has had lead content & other metals (brass/de-zinc, etc.) standards in place longer than the rest of the country. Connected to potable (drinking water, hot & cold) distribution system.

All Cert. to NSF-61 ??
Additional requirements also, ALL applicable from Table 14-1.

See Ch.s 4 & 14 of the 2010 California Plumbing Code, cross reference Ch. 6 also).

The 2010 California Plumbing Code may be viewed on-line for free (by chapter) here:

Pages - 2010CaliforniaPlumbingCode


See especially:
401 (Materials, General Requirements)
401.3 (NSF 61),
402.1 (flow rates (shower head/wand limited to 2.5 gpm @ 80 psi not 60 psi), & ref. to all applicable standards within the chapter & those listed in Table 14-1)
407.7 (supply fittings - incl. hand-held shower head/wand - to prevent backflow reference to Ch. 6)
411.11 (riser - even exposed - to be secured to structure)
414 (Bathtubs)
415 (Fixture Fittings)
418 (Shower and Tub-Shower Combination Control Valves; ASSE 1016 or ASME 112.18.1/CSA B125.1, or ASSE 1069, amongst options).

And Table 14-1 (Chapter 14).

HTH.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Based on the IRC, which may be the same as, or slightly different from, CA:
- ASME A112.18.1M, CSA B125 (meaning either one or the other of those standards)

??? Harmonized, referenced with a Slash between them (what's up with the "M"?), not exclusive...as in:

" ASME A112.18.1/CSA B125.1 "

...what was meant by your comment???

My inspector stated that "fixture itself must be labeled that it is IAPMO certified to meet UPC standards.". So I don't think that it needs ot meet a CA specific code, just the UPC?

So if a fixture is labeled as being compliant to ASME A112.18.1, CSA B125 standards, does that satisfy his requirement? (I am asking him as well, just haven't heard back from him yet).

For what it's worth, I have never seen an inspector look at any faucet or fixture to see if it carried a certification.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

??? Harmonized, referenced with a Slash between them (what's up with the "M"?), not exclusive...as in:

" ASME A112.18.1/CSA B125.1 "

...what was meant by your comment???

Watson,

Are you off your meds again?

You "Harmonized, referenced with a Slash between them"?

I posted them the way the code had them, so ...
... what was meant by your comment???

Originally Posted by Gunnar Alquist

For what it's worth, I have never seen an inspector look at any faucet or fixture to see if it carried a certification.

I know, but it would be just my luck that my inspector would, after I had it all plumbed in...

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Watson,

Are you off your meds again?

You "Harmonized, referenced with a Slash between them"?

I posted them the way the code had them, so ...
... what was meant by your comment???

Peck,

You, as usual, have made incorrect, false, WRONG statements, and caught making same, (foot-in-mouth syndrome) resort to juvenile tactics, and personal attacks.

You made-$hit up, when you obviously don't know, and when 'called on it' get nasty.

1. You made a typo (you added an "M" where it doesn't belong).

2. You editorialized - and gave false (Jerry "invented")information represented as fact. You said:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

meaning either one or the other of those standards

There is only ONE standard reference in your "cut & paste" with typo post.

3. You defined the reference as two independent standards, they are not. They are equivallent references to the SAME THING, a SINGULAR STANDARD, it is THE SAME DOCUMENT/STANDARD, with more than means to identify it.

Since you claim to be "the" "Code Man", I'll relate it to Model CODE references:

Such as referring to the National Electrical Code (NEC) as NFPA 70; or

Referring to the National Fuel Gas Code (NFGC) as NFPA 54 or as ANSI Z223.1 or as NFPA 54/ANSI Z223.1 or as ANSI Z223.1/NFPA 54; SAME THING - NFPA 54 = ANSI Z223.1!

or

Would not a rose known by any other name still smell as sweet? - A Nose knows a rose is a rose..(paraphrasing Shakespear & a populist I can't recall at the moment, to attribute).

ASME A112.18.1/CSA B125.1 is one document, one standard. ASME A112.18.1 = CSA B125.1!
Both "references" are to the same harmonized (coordinated, equivallent) standard which has more than one identifier/nomenclature method of reference.

It is unfortunate that you do not know what the word "harmonized" means, since you've used the word yourself, quite often.

This publication is “harmonized”—developed in response to an industry request for a uniform standard that would be acceptable in both the United States and Canada. It offers comprehensive solutions applying to the design, construction, installation, operation, inspection, testing and marking of these components used for plumbing purposes.

It is unfortunate that you do not know what "the slant" (back-slash) denotes.

It is unfortunate that you as usual resort to ad hominem, and lately so frequently approach breaking your 24-hour record of same on this forum, set back before A.D. was banned.

It is most unfortunate that you resort to making references to code references that DO NOT PERTAIN to the OP (not only does California not adopt the plumbing chapters of the IRC - just like many states do not - they have adopted the IAMPO - UPC (which is accredited STANDARD) with California ammendments (CPC 2010) - they have never used IPC-bsed plumbing codes or chapters of any kind - EVER, and you know this, and have been told this many, many times.

You accuse so many so often of not reading what is written BY JERRY PECK, and so often accuse others of "not taking their medication", "being off medication" etc. I believe you suffer from the failures you accuse others of regularly. You "project" your own "issues" upon others.

So slow yourself down, take your prescribed medication as prescribed, if necessary to accomplish this, take a moment (or a nap) to clear your mind, and read what YOU wrote. Then educate yourself as to what you pontificated upon. When you realize your embarassingly obvious invention you'll either apologize (never happens), STFU (never happens, always has to have 'the last word') or carry on with more of your mountains of B.S. with a multitude of 1,000-word plus cut-and-paste posts sprinkled with dozens of derrogatory remarks.

Originally Posted by leon g

My inspector stated that "fixture itself must be labeled that it is IAPMO certified to meet UPC standards.". So I don't think that it needs ot meet a CA specific code, just the UPC?

So if a fixture is labeled as being compliant to ASME A112.18.1, CSA B125 standards, does that satisfy his requirement? (I am asking him as well, just haven't heard back from him yet).

I cannot speak to "his" requirement, only the 2010 CPC (based on 2009 UPC with California ammendments) code-mandated requirements. Whether or not your local "inspector" will check or hold you to proving all those requirements are met in your "bathroom remodel" project no one but that inspector can say.

With the mssive influx of cheap foreign-made products, assemblies, componants in the country, and the high rate of failure, deterioration, and contamination they cause - and considering the expense (and labor) you're extending on your project, it would be in your best interests to endeavor to make your investments in materials and labor to be worthwhile, and not endanger the health and safety, and future enjoyment of your project results, of yourself, and other present or future occupants, guests, users, of your remodeled bathroom, the potable water supply at your residence, and the public at large.

Cheap materials, de-zinctifying, pot metals, leaching lead, staining of your tub, leaks, disimilar metals, backflow contamination of water supply from your shower wand, scald protection, avoidance of thermal shock, etc. The CPC and its standards references and requirements are one of the safest and strictest plumbing codes in the nation, for good reason. Not that many think of the tub with shower as a drinking water source - but it must be protected as one & protect the supply to same.

Sadly, it may not be against any law or ordinance to sell or buy "crud" materials, for crazy prices, but it is against the law of the land to use/install them, or to install approved materials incorrectly. Are the water safety, water saving or plumbing inspector going to "get you"? Likely not. That's not the point. The point of the laws is to protect the health and safety of the public and to protect you and yours from yourself, and the boogey men taking short-cuts and producing cheap, unworthy, and unsafe materials and putting them out in the market place. If you have a loss, such as leaks, floods, dmages from plumbing, you're insurer won't pay out if they catch a problem due to an identified non-code-compliant part. Those insurance folks are the ones that can and will nit-pick you to heck after-the-fact, why? because if they can catch such, esp. on DIY work as contributing or causing the loss - they don't have to pay out, and thats the motivating factor, if your own health & welfare, and/or preserving your property investment long-term, doesn't motivate you sufficiently.

I earlier posted a clickable link which takes you to the free on-line version of the current CPC. Your local authority may have further restricted requirements. Good luck to you.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

You, as usual, have made incorrect, false, WRONG statements, and caught making same, (foot-in-mouth syndrome) resort to juvenile tactics, and personal attacks.

You made-$hit up, when you obviously don't know, and when 'called on it' get nasty.

1. You made a typo (you added an "M" where it doesn't belong).

Watson,

As usual ... you have no friggin' idea of what you speak, and the easiest proof is that you never even bothered to look at the code nor search for that standard with the "M" on the end of it.

What a friggin' piece of work you are, Watson.

What a dolt you are, Watson.

The attached screen capture is from the ICC 2006 IRC Table P2701.1 Plumbing Fixtures, Faucets and Fixture Fittings.

The 2009 edition dropped that M at the end of the standard.

Guys, I heard back from the inspector, he said the second fixture I mentioned will satisfy the local codes, so I will go that route.

Watson, I appreciate your statements about crappy and perhaps dangerous "cheap" fixtures working their way into the construction trade, and that is why I posted here and why I am doing this work with a permit - my goal is to make everything as good as possible, not as cheaply as possible. Sadly, my experience with some contractors sometimes led to the latter, while when I do things myself (as I do 99% of the time), I know that I can choose quality items.

The problem is that cost is often not the discriminator - the first fixture I listed, which is not code compliant, is actually 30% more expensive than the second one, which is code compliant. So go figure .

Leon

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Watson,

As usual ... you have no friggin' idea of what you speak, and the easiest proof is that you never even bothered to look at the code nor search for that standard with the "M" on the end of it.

What a friggin' piece of work you are, Watson.

What a dolt you are, Watson.

The attached screen capture is from the ICC 2006 IRC Table P2701.1 Plumbing Fixtures, Faucets and Fixture Fittings.

The 2009 edition dropped that M at the end of the standard.

Wow, as expected, man-without-a-clue -- burrying his faux-pas with bulldozers of b.s.!

Unfortunate you resort to an inapplicable code (no part of the 2006 IRC was EVER applicable to california) and a code section (table) from a version with a typo corrected by errata bltn, and which still does not support your invention of two different free-standing standards when there was just the ONE harmonized one.

Further unfortunate that you had to reach back to 2006, ROTFLMBO! How many code-cycles do you have to reach back to justify your continued WRONGNESS?

2006 IPC (still not applicable, but what your erroneous reference IS BUILT UPON and unjustifiable conclusionary declaration, you so desperately cling to to support your CONTINUED WRONGNESS), didn't have a typo and was of course more COMPLETE.

SECTION 424 FAUCETS AND OTHER FIXTURE FITTINGS

424.1 Approval.

Faucets and fixture fittings shall conform to ASME A112.18.1 or CSA B125. Faucets and fixture fittings that supply drinking water for human ingestion shall conform to the requirements of NSF 61, Section 9. Flexible water connectors exposed to continuous pressure shall conform to the requirements of Section 605.6.

424.2 Hand showers.

Hand-held showers shall conform to ASME A112.18.1 or CSA B125.1. Hand-held showers shall provide backflow protection in accordance with ASME A112.18.1 or CSA B125.1 or shall be protected against backflow by a device complying with ASME A112.18.3.


However, since neither the 2006 IRC, nor ANY edition of the IRC's plumbing chapters, nor any portion of any edition of the IPC has EVER applied to CALIFORNIA (which has relied on UPC based plumbing code for decades, and for longer than the "international code" series was created...

Moreover, its "freaking" "friggin' " 2012, not 2007. The OP needed CPC/UPC references he's in "freaking' 'friggin' California, he's doing the work NOW, and the 2010 CPC based on the 2009 UPC is: "THE CODE".


YOUR arguments, references, inaccurate conclusions, and personal insults, are still WRONG, WORTHLESS, INCORRECT, INAPPLICABLE, and continue to evidence who and what you are and are not. You "ain't no code-man" & "ain't no expert", esp. when you endeavor to step out of your "own back yard". California "ain't Kansas", it 'ain't no disco in Chicago' and it 'ain't' backwater Florida.

Doesn't change the fact that Standard you referred to is a HARMONIZED Single standard. Nor that the "M" was erroneous errata. Nor the fact that you're "off your rocker" using any I-code of any edition to address the OP's question from CALIFORNIA.

Yet one more post proving that Watson is a dolt and does not even bother to read what is written:

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

Unfortunate you resort to an inapplicable code (no part of the 2006 IRC was EVER applicable to california)

(bold and underlining are mine to help with Watson's reading impaired problem)

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Based on the IRC, which may be the same as, or slightly different from, CA:
- ASME A112.18.1M, CSA B125 (meaning either one or the other of those standards)

Watson, you are, without a doubt, a full fledged Dolt ... with a capital D ...

By the way, that screen shot from the table in the 2006 IRC was from the Sixth Printing version which IS CURRENTLY on the ICC web site.

Click on it and read it for your reading pleasure (referring to all who may desire to read it, except for Watson, who apparently has a reading impairment and I would thus not expect him to be able to read it).

If the last link does not work, go to the next higher link, the links may not allow you to go directly to the last link.

- Free Resources (click on the "+" at +Category : International Codes, then click on the '2006 International Codes' link)

- International (if this link works, it will take you directly to the 2006 ICC codes, then click on the 'International Residential Code for One- and Two-Family Dwellings' link)

- International Residential Code for One- and Two-Family Dwellings (if this link works, it will take you to the 2006 IRC, then click on the 'Sixth Printing' link)

However you get to the 'Sixth Printing' link that works, it will bring up the 2006 IRC, Sixth Printing, the current version on the ICC web site.

Now scroll down to the 'Chapter 27 - Plumbing Fixtures' link and click on it.

Now click on the 'SECTION P2701 FIXTURES, FAUCETS AND FIXTURE FITTINGS' link.

Scroll down through the table to 'Plumbing fixture fittings' and read the standards to the right.

HG and Jerry,
Both of you bad children need to go sit with your noses in a corner for a long while. You are both making a habit of acting like spoiled little boys instead of constructive members of the board. That's a shame since you both have outstanding knowledge to share.

Originally Posted by Darrel Hood

HG and Jerry,
Both of you bad children need to go sit with your noses in a corner for a long while. You are both making a habit of acting like spoiled little boys instead of constructive members of the board. That's a shame since you both have outstanding knowledge to share.

Can we get out now Daddy? We've been in the corner since forever.

Darrel, in case you had not yet noticed, Watson has calmed down recently, so the arguments have dropped back quite a bit between us (Watson has been throwing sand in others faces though ).

Jerry, is post no. 17 an example of the new calm, adult behavior?

Originally Posted by Darrel Hood

Jerry, is post no. 17 an example of the new calm, adult behavior?

Yep, it is.

Originally Posted by Gunnar Alquist

For what it's worth, I have never seen an inspector look at any faucet or fixture to see if it carried a certification.

The AHJ Inspector would before signing off.
* just passing through do carry on.
.

What a shame. Bye bye, JP.