EPA
Water Sense
Response to Public Comments Received on
December 2014 WaterSense®Draft Specification
for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
Background
This document provides the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) responses
to public comments received on the WaterSense Draft Specification for Flushometer-
Valve Water Closets. For purposes of this document, the comments are summarized.
The verbatim comments can be viewed in their entirety at
www.epa.gov/watersense/docs/FVtoilets comments508.pdf.
2
December 17, 2015

-------
WaterSense
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
Table of Contents
I.	Comments on Section 1.0: Scope and Objective	4
II.	Comments on Section 2.0: Water Efficiency Criteria	7
III.	Comments on Section 3.0: General Water Closet Fixture Requirements	15
IV.	Comments on Section 4.0: General Flushometer Valve Requirements	16
V.	Comments on Section 5.0: Flush Performance Criteria	18
VI.	Comments on Section 6.0: Product Marking	20
VII.	Comments on Section 9.0: Definitions	21
VIII.	General Comments on the Specification	21
IX.	Comments on the Specification Supporting Documentation	27
3
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
I. Comments on Section 1.0: Scope and Objective
Inclusion of Blowout Toilets
a. One commenter suggested that no distinction should be made between blowout
fixtures and other fixtures compatible with flushometer valves and that blowout
toilets should be eligible for obtaining the WaterSense label for flushometer-valve
water closets. The commenter indicated that industry standards have not made
any distinction in performance requirements for blowout toilets, except in
specifying a different minimum operating pressure at which the performance
tests specified in the standard will be conducted. In addition, the current track of
excluding blowout toilets from any WaterSense performance specification will
have the effect of creating three categories of toilets by potentially establishing a
third specification and performance requirements for blowout toilets (separate
from tank-type and flushometer-valve water closets). The commenter believes
that doing so would cause confusion in the marketplace and put manufacturers
of blowout toilets at a disadvantage if products are not eligible for the
WaterSense label.
The commenter goes on to recommend that EPA should take one of three
approaches to address this issue, in order of preference. Firstly, the commenter
recommends that EPA place all water closets under the same specification, as is
done in the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
A112.19.2/Canadian Standards Association (CSA) B45.1 standard. The
commenter's second preferred option is to place blowout toilets within the
WaterSense Specification for Tank-Type Toilets. The third option is to treat both
siphonic and blowout toilets the same under the specification for flushometer-
valve water closets.
Response: EPA initially intended to exclude blowout water closet fixtures (i.e.,
bowls) under the specification for flushometer-valve water closets because they
are held to different maximum flush volume standards under the Energy Policy
Act (EPAct) of 1992. Under EPAct 1992, blowout water closets can have a flush
volume up to 3.5 gallons per flush (gpf), whereas other fixtures compatible with
flushometer valves (e.g., siphonic fixtures) must have a flush volume of 1.6 gpf or
less. Based on the information provided by the commenter, it became apparent
that other than this distinction made in EPAct 1992, blowout fixtures function in a
similar way to other types of water closet fixtures and are compatible with the
same flushometer valves. In addition, the commenter indicated that existing
industry standards do not make any distinction between the performance
requirements for both types of fixtures, aside from a different minimum operating
pressure at which the performance tests specified will be conducted. Finally,
there are blowout fixtures currently on the market that are rated at or below the
maximum allowable flush volume identified in the Specification for Flushometer-
Valve Water Closets.
4
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
EPA does not agree that all water closets (i.e., tank-type, flushometer-valve, and
blowout) should be included under the same specification, however. EPA
differentiates between tank-type and flushometer-valve-type water closets
because these types of toilets have different flush mechanisms that are subject
to different standards. In addition, tank-type and flushometer-valve water closets
are typically sold in different markets and are intended for different applications.
Because of this distinction, EPA determined it is important to continue to
distinguish between these two product categories for the purpose of the
WaterSense program. In addition, EPA does not agree that blowout water closets
should be included under the WaterSense Specification for Tank-Type Toilets, as
blowout water closet fixtures do not utilize tank-type technologies to operate, but
rather use a pressurized flushing device (i.e., flushometer valve).
EPA has revised Section 1.0 to state that its specification for flushometer-valve
water closets applies to both siphonic and blowout water closet fixtures (bowls)
that use water from a flushometer valve to convey waste through a trap seal into
a gravity drainage system. With this clarification, blowout fixtures and
combinations consisting of a flushometer valve and blowout fixture will be eligible
to obtain the WaterSense label, provided that they can meet all requirements,
including the water efficiency and performance criteria, identified in the
Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets. By including blowout fixtures
within the Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets, EPA is maintaining
consistency with how these fixtures are classified and handled under ASME
A112.19.2/CSA B45.1.
Opposition to the Inclusion of Dual-Flush Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
a. One commenter expressed concerns with the inclusion of dual-flush flushometer
valves in this specification. The commenter suggested that this technology is still
relatively new to the market, a fact that EPA alludes to in the WaterSense Draft
Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets Supporting Statement by
acknowledging that "To date, water savings from dual-flush flushometer-valve
toilets has not been fully researched or documented." The commenter suggests
EPA should not move forward with requirements for dual-flush flushometer
valves in the specification without having adequate data supporting their
efficiency.
The commenter continues that while the draft specification indicates EPA will
mandate that the rated flush volume of a dual-flush valve must not exceed 1.28
gpf, EPA does not put any flush volume requirements or limitations for the
reduced flush. EPA has acknowledged that user behavior and familiarity is
crucial to the water efficiency of dual-flush products. However, even with
increased user knowledge, inadvertent selection of the reduced flush for bulk
waste removal could result in a plumbing system failure. Finally, because the
water efficiency requirements proposed in the draft specification are different
from those which are found within the WaterSense Specification for Tank-Type
Toilets, the commenter believes EPA could potentially create a situation where
5
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
the varying requirements could be confusing to building designers, product
specifiers, and manufacturers. For these reasons, the commenter recommends
removing reference to dual-flush flushometer valves from the specification,
including Sections 2.1.3 and 5.4 of the draft specification.
Response: EPA believes that dual-flush flushometer-valve water closets are a
viable technology that can assist commercial facilities in reducing water use.
While EPA maintains that the usage patterns of dual-flush water closets remains
a subject in need of further study and understanding, EPA does not want to limit
product design or innovation for products that have the ability to meet the
specification requirements for both efficiency and performance. However, EPA is
continuing to maintain that the full flush of a dual-flush flushometer-valve water
closet meets the maximum water efficiency requirement of 1.28 gpf. This will
ensure savings of at least 20 percent, consistent with the WaterSense program's
goals. In addition, as discussed the in response to "Water Efficiency
Requirements for Dual-Flush Water Closets" below, EPA is establishing a
minimum flush volume of 1.0 gpf, which also applies to the reduced flush of a
dual-flush flushometer-valve water closet. This will help ensure that the reduced
flush provides the minimum amount of water maintain the effectiveness of a
plumbing system.
Retrofit Devices
a. One commenter suggested that EPA develop a WaterSense specification for
component water conservation devices, such as retrofit valves. The commenter
went on to say that an affordable water conservation device makes economic
sense and would provide environmental benefit.
Response: EPA is maintaining that the WaterSense Specification for
Flushometer-Valve Water Closets will continue to apply to fully functioning
flushometer valves and water closet fixtures. The specification does not apply to
component devices, including retrofit valves. EPA is excluding retrofit devices
from this specification because there are no applicable standards against which
such devices must be tested to ensure their performance. Without such
standards, there is no method to evaluate whether performance requirements
and water savings will be achieved.
Definition of Flushometer-Valve-Type Technologies
a. Four commenters asked for a definition of what constitutes a "flushometer-valve-
type technology." The commenters suggested that a clear definition is needed to
determine applicability of various technologies to the specification. One
commenter suggested that EPA align the definition with the existing definitions
found in the newly tri-harmonized American Society of Sanitary Engineering
(ASSE) 1037/ASME A112.1037/CSA B125.37, or remove this covered
equipment from the specification. Three commenters suggested including the
following definition:
6
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
"Any other technology that serves the function of a flushometer valve,
falls within the scope of ASSE 1037/ASME A112.1037/CSA B125.37, and
which meets these performance specifications."
Response: EPA agrees with these comments and has revised the specification
language to account for any technologies currently in the marketplace that are
not defined as a flushometer valve but that function in a similar way and are
compatible with siphonic or blowout water closet fixtures. EPA has clarified in
Section 1.0 that the specification also applies to any other non-tank-type
technology that serves the function of a flushometer valve, falls within the scope
of ASSE 1037/ASME A112.1037ZCSA B125.37, and that meets the requirements
within the specification.
Applicability of Specification to Flushometer Valves and Fixtures
a. One commenter suggested EPA revise Section 1.0 of the specification to better
clarify that the specification applies to both high-efficiency toilet fixtures and
flushometer valves. Specifically the commenter suggested the following updates
to Section 1.0:
"This specification establishes the criteria for a high-efficiency
flushometer-valve water closet fixture and a high-efficiency flushometer
valve under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's WaterSense
program."
Response: EPA agrees with this comment and has revised Section 1.0 of the
specification to clarify that it is applicable to both the flushometer valve and water
closet fixtures, as suggested.
II. Comments on Section 2.0: Water Efficiency Criteria
Minimum Flush Volume
a. Four commenters suggested that the specification should include a minimum
threshold for water consumption, below which a flushometer valve would not be
eligible for the WaterSense label. The reason for this suggestion is that there is
an unknown threshold where drainline performance and subsequently health and
safety can be negatively impacted. Results from The Drainline Transport of Solid
Waste in Buildings study prepared by the Plumbing Efficiency Research Coalition
(PERC) indicates that the flush volumes between 1.28 gpf and 0.8 gpf need to be
evaluated further to determine where this threshold might be. The commenters
fear that the specification will create an incentive to design and market water
closets or flushometer valves that could result in drainline blockage failures in
commercial buildings.
7
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
Three of the four commenters suggested establishing a minimum flush volume at
1.0 gpf for both single-flush flushometer valves and the reduced flush of a dual-
flush flushometer valve.
Two of the commenters suggested the following revision to Section 2.1.1 of the
draft specification:
"The manufacturer shall specify a rated flush volume ©f for the
flushometer valve or water closet fixture, which must shall be equal to ©f
less than 1.28 gallons per flush (gpf) (4.8 liters per flush[Lpf]), and not
less than 1.0 gpf (3.8 Lpf)."
One commenter suggested the following revisions to Section 2.1.1 of the draft
specification:
"2.1.1 The manufacturer shall specify a rated flush volume of the
flushometer valve or water closet fixture, which must be equal to or less
than 1.28 gallons per flush (gpf) (4.8 liters per flush [Lpf]). Flushometer
valves must also discharge 1.0 gallons per flush (gpf) (3.8 Lpf) minimum
when tested in accordance with the reguirements in 2.0.
2.1.2	The water consumption, determined through testing and when
evaluated in accordance with the sampling plan contained in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) at 10 CFR 429.30, shall not exceed meet the
rated flush volumes specified in Section 2.1.1 and 2.1.2.
2.1.3	For flushometer valves with dual-flush capabilities, these maximum
water efficiency requirements shall apply to the full-flush mode."
The commenter also went on to suggest related edits to Section 4.2 of the draft
specification as follows:
"The flushometer valve must not exceed the rated meet the flush volume
of water reguirements specified in Section 2.1.1 even if the primary
actuator is maintained in the flush position (i.e., device's primary actuator
must be a non-hold-open design)."
One commenter suggested that both the maximum flush volume and minimum
flush volume of the specification be established at 1.28 gpf, as this would ensure
that users will achieve a 20 percent water savings, while also maintaining a level
of performance that the industry is confident will provide an effective flush.
Specifically, the commenter suggested the following change to Section 2.1.1:
"The manufacturer shall specify a rated flush volume of the flushometer
valve or water closet fixture, which must to be equal to or less than 1.28
gallons (4.8 liters) per flush."
8
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
Response: EPA waited to finalize the WaterSense Specification for Flushometer-
Valve Water Closets in anticipation of the release of PERC Phase 2.0 research
on the impact of water-efficient water closets on drainline performance. Upon
review of the study findings, EPA has determined that, at this time, it is
necessary to establish a minimum flush volume for flushometer-valve water
closets. The specification establishes a minimum rated flush volume for
flushometer valves and water closet fixtures of 1.0 gpf, consistent with the
minimum recommended flush volume identified by some of the commenters. The
PERC Phase 2.0 study indicates that at flush volumes at 1.0 gpf and below,
drainline performance becomes chaotic and can result in drainline blockages or
performance issues. This requirement has been added to Sections 2.1.1 and 2.3
of the specification. EPA has also made clear in the specification that the
minimum flush volume requirement applies to the reduced flush of a dual-flush
flushometer-valve water closet.
While EPA does not intend to limit the development of potentially successful
water-efficient products, establishing a minimum will help protect the WaterSense
brand and address potential performance and health and safety concerns related
to drainline blockages. However, this measure is intended to be a transitional
requirement until the applicable standards committees have a chance to respond
to findings of the PERC Phase 2.0 study and make adjustments, as appropriate
and necessary, to the relevant national standards. Currently, the applicable
national standards or plumbing codes have not established a minimum flush
volume for flushometer-valve (or other) water closets. EPA maintains that it is
ultimately the responsibility of the plumbing standards committees, to determine
if a minimum flush volume is necessary, and if so, establish the appropriate level
that is required to maintain effective drainline performance and ensure public
health and safety. It is EPA's intent to refer the question of appropriate minimum
flush volumes to the ASME A112/CSA standards committees on plumbing
materials and equipment. Once the committees have fully considered the issue
and made updates to the standard, as necessary, EPA will revisit minimum flush
volume requirements in the WaterSense specification and revise it as
appropriate.
In establishing a minimum, EPA acknowledges that while the PERC Phase 2.0
Study indicated 1.0 gpf is a flush volume that can achieve effective drainline
performance, it might not be effective in all existing buildings and drainline
apparatuses. It is still the responsibility of the facility manager and/or plumbing
engineer to determine the minimum water closet flush volume that is required to
maintain a properly functioning plumbing system.
Water Efficiency Requirements for Dual-Flush Water Closets
a. Several commenters opposed the requirement to limit the maximum flush volume
of dual-flush water closets to 1.28 gpf.
9
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
Two commenters indicated that it was not a reasonable approach for the
specification to only accept a maximum flush volume for dual-flush water closets,
and to establish the maximum flush volume at the same level as for single-flush
water closets. The commenters stated that the decision to use the two small
flushes and one large flush to determine the effective flush for dual-flush water
closets was made several years ago with the concurrence of manufacturers,
regulators, and non-governmental organizations. Furthermore, the behavioral
studies that have been conducted on dual-flush water closets were limited in
scope and do not form the basis for such a significant change. The commenters
continued that the 2:1 flush ratio that is used to establish the effective flush
volume is allowed in the WaterSense Specification for Tank-Type Toilets and has
been included by reference in legislation in California, Texas, Georgia, Florida,
Colorado, New York City, and Los Angeles, as well as the green plumbing codes.
The commenters indicated that considerable resources have gone into the
design, marketing, and installation of dual-flush water closets to inform and
promote the technology in both the residential and commercial markets. EPA's
intentions to only recognize the full-flush mode of a dual-flush water closet would
significantly disrupt this technology's viability in the marketplace.
Based on information provided in the supporting statement of the draft
specification, the commenters believe elimination of the currently accepted and
published dual-flush option of 1.6 gpf full flush/1.1 gpf reduced flush can have a
deleterious effect on the potential replacements of the pre-1992 EPAct water
closets. The draft supporting statement establishes that these older fixtures will
yield 85 percent greater water savings if they are replaced with WaterSense
labeled products. Because these older existing fixtures all occur in commercial
buildings with older infrastructure, including drainlines and water supplies, the
dual flush option is necessary to encourage building owners to replace these
fixtures. The commenters argue that if the efficiency convention for dual-flush
toilets that is currently allowed in the WaterSense Specification for Tank-Type
Toilets, numerous plumbing codes, and legislation is prohibited from the
specification for flushometer-valve toilets, it will likely result in these older fixtures
not being replaced at all.
One of the commenters expressed concern that a redefinition of dual-flush
performance that only recognizes the maximum flush rate might push the small
flush design of water closets with a 1.28 gpf maximum into an area of
questionable system performance. It has been acknowledged by the PERC
Phase 1 research that there is a lower limit of water consumption in commercial
settings that could lead to catastrophic drain blockages. Without any solid
evidence to change the performance aspect of dual-flush water closets which
would significantly disrupt the overall marketplace, the 2:1 flush ratio for dual-
flush water closets should be maintained.
One of the commenters also stated that, as indicated in the draft supporting
statement, replacing the 28 percent of older water closets will yield three times as
much water savings and this should therefore be encouraged by EPA. The
10
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
commenter provides example rebate applications and criteria from various
utilities, all of which are WaterSense partners that currently provide financial
incentives for commercial customers to replace 3.5-gpf-or-greater fixtures with
high-efficiency models. These include San Francisco Public Utilities Commission,
East Bay Municipal Utility District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California, Portland Water Bureau, Denver Water, Soquel Water, and Rock River
Texas. These financial incentives are only offered for the replacement of pre-
1992 EPAct fixtures, as replacement of these will yield more water savings for
both the customer and the water agency. All of these water agencies consider a
dual-flush flushometer-valve water closet to be a high-efficiency fixture, as they
have considered and are aware that older fixtures are in older structures, with
drainlines that can be very large in diameter, have a sag or interruption in the
slope, or have considerable solid buildup that has occurred over time. The dual-
flush option at 1.6 gpf/1.1 gpf still offers efficiency and water savings, but it also
provides the additional water that can be necessary to overcome these adverse
conditions in the old drainage system. Therefore, the commenter believes that
the draft specification needs to retain the full range of efficient products available
as suitable fixture replacements within these older buildings.
Finally, both commenters presented two additional studies that were not cited in
the supporting statement for the draft specification. The studies were Flush:
Examining the Efficacy of Water Conservation in Dual-Flush Toilets, published by
Masaye Harrison in 2010, and Dual-flush Toilet Project, published by the Canada
Mortgage and Housing Corporation in 2002. The commenters state that these
studies found ratios of reduced flush to full flush that were consistent with the
industry accepted ratio of 2:1. The 2010 study indicated a 1.9 to 1 ratio, while the
2002 study found a 1.7 to 1 ratio for commercial buildings.
The commenters suggested the following language change to Section 2.1.3 of
the draft specification:
"The effective flush volume shall not exceed 1.28 gallons (4.8 liters) when
evaluated in accordance with the sampling plan contained in 10 CFR
429.30. For dual-flush toilets, the effective flush volume is the average
flush volume of two reduced flushes and one full flush. Full flush volumes
shall be tested in accordance with ASME A112.19.2/CSA B45.1 and
ASME A112.19.14. For flushometer valves with dual flush capabilities,
these water efficiency requirements shall apply to the fully flush mode."
Several commenters similarly indicated that they felt flushometer valves with
dual-flush capabilities should be required to meet the same water efficiency
requirements as WaterSense labeled dual-flush tank-type toilets. The
WaterSense Specification for Tank-Type Toilets requires that the effective flush
volume of a dual-flush toilet must not exceed 1.28 gpf (4.8 liters). The effective
flush volume of a dual-flush toilet is defined as the average flush volume of two
reduced flushes and one full flush.
11
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
One commenter suggested revising Section 2.1.3 of the draft specification as
follows:
"For flushometer valves with dual-flush capabilities, these water efficiency
requirements shall apply to the effective flush volume. The effective flush
volume is the average flush volume of two reduced flushes and one full
flush."
A fourth commenter indicated that if EPA insists on moving forward with its
specification, it should leave the current 1.6/1.1 dual-flush product in the
specification because 1) it works in today's market, 2) it will parallel the
requirements in the WaterSense Specification for Tank-Type Toilets, and 3) while
it might not provide as much water savings as the WaterSense program might
like (20 percent), it allows the use of 1.6 gpf when necessary. The minor
additional savings obtained by using a 1.28 gpf maximum device is not worth the
risk.
b. One commenter also indicated that a wide variety of tank-type water closets that
incorporate different design options for the dual-flush mechanism have been
third-party certified to both the ASME A112.19.14 standard and WaterSense
Specification for Tank-Type Toilets. While there might be some that feel that
buttons work better than levers or vice versa, or that a particular design is more
intuitive to the user, there should be no discrimination against any design that
can meet the requirements of the national consensus standard and the
specification. The commenter went on to say that while WaterSense asserted in
both the Notice of Intent (NOI) and the WaterSense Draft Specification for
Flushometer-Valve Water Closets Supporting Statement that water savings are
"largely based on ...design considerations," the fact is that the referenced
standard (ASME A112.19.14) for dual-flush water closets requires proper
identification of the flush mode options, or shall be "intuitively apparent."
Therefore, EPA has already acknowledged through the adoption of the
WaterSense Specification for Tank-Type Toilets that all types of designs are
acceptable. The commenter provided photographic examples of various dual-
flush mechanisms. The commenter indicated that EPA is correct to reference the
same national standard (ASME A112.19.14) for the specification pertaining to
flushometer-valve water closets, but they should also include the water efficiency
criteria already established in the WaterSense Specification for Tank-Type
Toilets. The commenter emphasized that it is inappropriate for EPA to single out
one particular design and to utilize a single study on that design to arrive at this
discrepancy. In exactly the same manner that EPA allows for a wide variety of
designs for dual-flush tank-type water closets that meet the specification to be
certified, EPA should include the full options in this specification.
Response: EPA is retaining the maximum water consumption of 1.28 gpf for all
WaterSense labeled flushometer-valve toilets, including the full flush of a dual-
flush flushometer-valve toilet. As stated in the WaterSense Specification for
Flushometer-Valve Water Closets Supporting Statement, water savings in
12
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
commercial restrooms are largely based on user behavior and can be influenced
by lack of user education, as well as design considerations (e.g., whether the
reduced-flush mode requires the user to pull up or push down on the handle).
EPA acknowledges the two additional studies submitted by the commenters
(Flush: Examining the Efficacy of Water Conservation in Dual-Flush Toilets,
published by Masaye Harrison in 2010, and Dual-flush Toilet Project, published
by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation in 2002). However, upon
further review of the studies, neither confirmed the 2-to-1 ratio that is currently
used to determine the effective flush volume of a dual-flush toilet. These studies
found full- to reduced-flush volume ratios of 1.6 to 1 and 1.7 to 1, respectively, for
dual-flush flushometer-valve water closets in commercial restrooms. Neither of
these ratios are sufficient to achieve 20 percent savings that is consistent with
WaterSense's goal.
In addition, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposed a test method to
account for the reduced average water use of a dual-flush water closet in a 2012
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) to amend the test procedures for
showerheads, faucets, water closets, urinals, and pre-rinse spray valves. The
test method would have allowed manufacturers to calculate the average
representative water use (i.e., the effective flush volume) using the composite
average of two reduced flushes and one full flush. Commenters argued against
the test method, stating that the weighted average approach was unproven and
the particular ratio required further evaluation to confirm its representativeness.
As a result of these and other comments, DOE ruled in 2013 that there was not
sufficient evidence to base a test procedure for the average representative water
use for dual-flush water closets.1 In declining to adopt such a test procedure,
manufacturers, distributors, retailers, and private labelers are not permitted to
make any representations of water use that reflects an average of the full- and
reduced-flush modes for dual-flush water closets. Essentially, DOE is prohibiting
the use of an effective flush volume to market dual-flush water closets. By
establishing the full-flush mode maximum at 1.28 gpf, EPA is guaranteeing at
least 20 percent savings and is eliminating the need for an effective flush volume
calculation.
With this specification, EPA does not intend to restrict certain designs of dual-
flush flushometer-valve water closets from obtaining the WaterSense label, as
long as the flushometer valve is capable of meeting the requirements of this
specification. By establishing the maximum flush volume for the full-flush mode of
a dual-flush water closet at 1.28 gpf, EPA is simply ensuring the projected water
savings regardless of the design and associated marking.
EPA acknowledges that significant marketing and research has gone into the
current convention for dual-flush water closets that have a full flush of 1.6 gpf and
1 U.S. Department of Energy. Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products and Certain Commercial and
Industrial Equipment: Test Procedures for Showerheads, Faucets, Water Closets, Urinals, and Commercial Prerinse
Spray Valves. Docket No. EERE-2011-BT-TP-0061. Federal Register, Volume 78, No. 205. October 23, 2013.
www.apo.gov/fdsvs/pka/FR-2013-10-23/pdf/2013-24347.pdf
13
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
a reduced flush of 1.1 gpf. EPA also acknowledges that this convention was
developed by consensus and has been incorporated into the national plumbing
standards. However, the WaterSense label is meant to recognize those models
that are more efficient than conventional products on the market. As such,
adopting the current convention for dual-flush flushometer-valve water closets
offers no savings over the standard approach for dual-flush flushometer-valve
water closets. Adopting more efficient requirements for dual-flush flushometer
valve toilets will drive further innovation and efficiency for those products and
guarantee savings of at least 20 percent for WaterSense labeled products.
Further, there are dual-flush flushometer-valve water closets currently available
that have a full flush of 1.28 gpf, indicating there is a market for this technology.
In addition, EPA has determined that it is appropriate to maintain differing
conventions for dual-flush tank-type and flushometer-valve water closets. These
products are intended for different markets, and therefore experience different
use patterns. In a residential setting where tank-type toilets are prominent, users
are more likely to use the full-flush and reduced-flush modes as intended. In
commercial settings, as stated previously, behavior can be more erratic and
influenced various factors, including valve design. WaterSense is less certain of
the use patterns in commercial settings and limited research suggests that toilets
are not used at a ratio of 2 reduced flushes to 1 full flush, which would be
necessary to provide 20 percent savings for conventional dual-flush flushometer-
valve water closets.
EPA also acknowledges the concern that setting the maximum flush volume for
the full flush of a dual-flush flushometer-valve water closet at 1.28 gpf might push
the reduced flush to beyond the minimum that is generally agreed upon as safe
and required to ensure performance in properly designed and functioning
plumbing systems. EPA understands as well that some municipalities and water
utilities offer rebates for the replacement of flushometer-valve water closets with
existing flush volumes of 3.5 gpf or greater and there are concerns that reducing
the full flush from 1.6 gpf to 1.28 gpf might discourage replacement of these older
inefficient fixtures, particularly in older systems which would be more likely to
have adverse conditions within the drainage system. Further EPA acknowledges
the impact this change might have on existing legislation, codes, and rebate
programs. EPA maintains that the WaterSense program, and the product
specifications associated with the program, are voluntary. As such, it is up to
each individual local government, municipality, and/or utility to decide whether to
adopt this specification and its associated requirements into local codes and
rebate programs, or to continue to allow dual-flush flushometer-valve water
closets that claim an effective flush volume of 1.28 gpf. Further, with this
specification, EPA has established a minimum flush volume of 1.0 gpf, which
also applies to the reduced flush of a dual-flush flushometer-valve water closet.
This minimum flush volume should help mitigate potential performance and
health and safety concerns related to potential drainline blockages.
14
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
Finally, EPA reiterates that it is the responsibility of the facility manager and/or
plumbing engineer to determine the appropriate minimum flush volume at which
their plumbing system function effectively. EPA is confident moving forward with
a specification for labeling high-efficiency flushometer-valve water closets and
has determined that these products, when installed, can be an effective way to
reduce facility water use and maintain high performance. However, EPA is not
recommending high-efficiency models, particularly models flushing below 1.28
gpf, for use in all existing applications where flushometer-valve water closets are
installed. Facility managers and/or plumbing engineers should use caution when
deciding whether to implement high-efficiency flushometer-valve water closets
into an existing commercial facility, first assessing the physical conditions of the
existing drainlines to ensure they are suitable for this type of retrofit. Drainlines
should be inspected for adequate slopes (ideally greater than one percent) and
for defects, root intrusions, sagging, or other conditions that could result in
blockage with lower flush volumes. In addition, high-efficiency flushometer-valve
water closets with flush volumes below 1.28 gpf should be situated downstream
of additional long-duration flows from other water-consuming appliances,
plumbing fixtures, and other devices that are available to assist with the drainline
transport of solid wastes.
Authorities (e.g., states, local municipalities, code organizations, water utilities)
intending to require or provide incentives for the installation of WaterSense
labeled flushometer-valve water closets in regulations, building codes, or other
mandates should consider offering an exemption or allowance for existing
buildings that have been deemed unsuitable for retrofit with high-efficiency
flushometer-valve water closets are excluded from the requirements The
authority may wish to require a review of the drainline system by a plumbing
engineer before issuing the exemption. Similarly, utilities offering rebate
programs or other entities promoting the installation of WaterSense labeled
flushometer-valve water closets may want to determine whether the prospective
installers are aware of and have assessed their plumbing systems to ensure
compatibility with high-efficiency water closets.
III. Comments on Section 3.0: General Water Closet
Fixture Requirements
Fixture Testing With Multiple Flushometer Valves
a. Five commenters indicated that EPA has no basis for requiring manufacturers of
water closet fixtures to test their product(s) with flushometer valves from three
different manufacturers. The commenters stated that EPA had no evidence to
demonstrate that by using three different manufacturer's flushometer valves that
are certified to ASSE 1037/ASME A112.1037/CSA B125.37 will improve the
performance and efficiency beyond the testing requirements contained in the
applicable consensus standards for water closets. Since all flushometer valves
will be required to be certified to ASSE 1037/ASME A112.1037/CSA B125.37,
15
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
the valves will perform relatively the same. The additional testing requirements
will increase the amount of time and cost for manufacturer product testing.
The commenters indicated that EPA should only reference the applicable
consensus standards for water closets (ASME A112.19.2/CSA B45.1, ASME
A112.19.3/CSA B45.4, or CSA B45.5/1international Association of Plumbing and
Mechanical Officials [IAPMO] Z124) to ensure that necessary performance and
efficiency requirements are met. The commenters suggested removing the
requirement for testing water closet fixtures with multiple flush valves throughout
Section 3.0.
Response: EPA has reassessed the requirement included in the draft
specification that would require water closet fixtures to be tested with three
representative flushometer valves from different manufacturers. Based on the
comments provided, EPA has determined that flushometer valves certified to
ASSE 1037/ASME A112.1037/CSA B125.37 will perform similarly, thus making
the requirement to test fixtures with three representative flushometer valves
redundant. To reduce burden on manufacturers and eliminate potential
redundancy, EPA has removed this requirement, and instead will reference the
applicable consensus standards for water closet fixtures (ASME A112.19.2/CSA
B45.1, ASME A112.19.3/CSA B45.4, or CSA B45.5/IAPMO Z124). These
standards require that each fixture be tested with one flushometer valve.
IV. Comments on Section 4.0: General Flushometer
Valve Requirements
Interchangeability of Replaceable or Maintainable Parts
a. Three commenters requested that EPA clarify the intent of the requirements in
Section 4.4 of the draft specification related to the interchangeability of
replaceable or maintainable parts. These commenters requested that EPA align
its requirements with the clarification statement made on January 24, 2013, in
regards to the requirements for interchangeability of replaceable and
maintainable parts in the WaterSense Specification for Flushing Urinals. The
commenters asked for clarification, as they do not believe EPA intends to require
that manufacturers must have physical differences within the valve body that
would prevent parts from being interchangeable, as such a requirement would be
cost-prohibitive for the producer in today's manufacturing environment. One
commenter suggested removing Section 4.4 of the draft specification, as the
intent of this section seems to be covered in Section 6.2.1. The other
commenters suggested the following language changes to Section 4.4 of the
draft specification:
"The manufacturer, at a minimum, must provide documentation that is
clearly marked with specific maintenance/replacement part instructions
and identification of correct replacement parts that should be used to
16
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
ensure attest that the flushometer valve is designed such that replaceable
or maintainable parts (e.g., pistons, diaphragms) are not intended to be
interchangeable with parts that would cause the device to will not exceed
the rated flush volume specified in Section 2.1.1."
Two additional commenters supported EPA's intention to limit the adjustability
and interchangeability of flushometer valve parts, as this is critical to maintain
water-saving efficiencies throughout the life of the valve.
One of the commenters recommended the following changes to Section 4.4 of
the draft specification:
"The manufacturer must attest that The flushometer valve shall be-is
designed such that interchangeable replaceable repair or maintainable
parts (e.g., pistons, diaphragms, repair kits) are not intended to be
interchangeable with parts that would that are offered for sale by the
manufacturer do not cause the devise flushometer valve to exceed
maximum the rated flush volume specified in Section 2.1.1."
The other commenter suggested the following change to Section 4.4 of the draft
specification:
"The manufacturer shall provide documentation with the product that
details a list of replacement parts that will maintain the rated flush volume
specified in Section 2.1.1."
Response: EPA maintains that requirements to ensure that replacement parts
and maintenance instructions preserve the rated flush volume is vital to ensure
the longevity of water savings associated with these products. However, it was
not EPA's intent to require that this be achieved through physical differences
within the product.
During the development of language to clarify the intent of Section 4.4 of the draft
specification, EPA determined that requirements related to the interchangeability
of replaceable or maintainable parts are more aptly covered in Section 6.0:
Product Marking, as the requirements are related to the packaging and marking
of products and the associated product documentation. EPA has clarified
language within Section 6.0 to identify specific requirements manufacturers must
meet to achieve the intent of these requirements. EPA has subsequently
removed Section 4.4 (in the draft specification) from the final specification.
17
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
V. Comments on Section 5.0: Flush Performance
Criteria
Removal of Sections 5.1 and 5.2
a. Two commenters stated that the text in Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of the draft
specification are not clear and are unnecessary for proper application and
enforcement of the specification. The commenters indicated that the specification
already requires testing to be conducted in accordance with ASSE 1037/ASME
A112.1037/CSA B125.37 for flushometer valves and these sections can be
deleted.
Response: EPA has removed Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of the draft specification as a
result of these comments. Flushometer valves tested in accordance with ASSE
1037/ASME A112.1037/CSA B125.37 and evaluated in accordance with the
sampling plan contained in 10 CFR 429.30 have been verified to have a water
consumption consistent with their rated flush volume and no adjustment should
be necessary. These sections were removed from the specification to eliminate
potential confusion.
Opposition to Inclusion of a Seat Cover in Performance Testing
a. Four commenters opposed the inclusion of an unwaxed paper water closet seat
cover within waste extraction and flush performance testing of both single-flush
and dual-flush flushometer-valve water closets.
Three of the four commenters indicated that the inclusion of a seat cover has not
been vetted through the applicable standard development process. In addition,
EPA has not provided any evidence to show that the existing performance testing
requirements within ASME A112.19.2/CSA B45.1 and ASME A112.19.14 are
flawed. The commenters requested that EPA present data supporting the
inclusion of additional test media to the appropriate ASME task group for
consideration. The commenters therefore recommended that EPA remove the
seat cover requirement from performance testing. One of the commenters
suggested that this change would allow EPA to remove Section 5.0 of the draft
specification in its entirety, as the flush performance requirements are already
covered in Sections 3.0 and 4.0.
One commenter also indicated that while the specification identifies the length
and width requirements of the unwaxed seat cover, it does not account for
different paper stocks and various designs that are on the market, thus allowing
manufacturers and test labs to procure different products. In addition, the
commenter was not aware of any testing that has been conducted to verify the
repeatability of the testing using the draft test procedure.
18
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
Response: EPA maintains that the use and disposal of a single water closet seat
cover is a likely occurrence for water closets in commercial restrooms. A test that
includes the addition of a paper seat cover is more representative of real-world
conditions and provides some additional level of assurance for flushometer-valve
toilet performance. Further, EPA has been made aware through stakeholder
comments during the NOI phase of the specification development process and
through anecdotal research that some fixtures and flushometer valve
combinations are not capable of successfully clearing a seat cover. EPA is also
concerned that toilet performance testing has been focused on bulk solid waste
removal and that this focus might be at the detriment of other areas of
performance, such as bowl washdown and the ability to remove a seat cover on
a consistent basis. EPA wants to ensure that performance testing is adequately
assessing bowl washdown and the ability to remove a seat cover, in addition to
its ability to remove bulk waste. Double flushing resulting from water closets'
inability to remove a seat cover on the first flush can result in lost water savings.
However, EPA agrees that the additional test media and testing protocol should
be vetted through the ASME and CSA committees and considered for inclusion
in future revisions of the applicable performance standards. Anecdotal research
indicates that the way in which the seat cover is added to the bowl (e.g., how
much of the seat cover comes into contact with bowl surface) impacts the water
closet's ability to flush the seat cover. This suggests that the testing
methodology, as proposed in the draft specification might not be repeatable. As a
result, EPA has removed the seat cover testing requirements from the
specification for both the full and reduced flush. EPA will, however, maintain
Section 5.0 of the specification to ensure that the flush performance
requirements for all WaterSense labeled models are met. EPA has included the
flush performance requirements by reference to the applicable sections within
ASME A112.19.2/CSA B45.1 and ASME A112.19.14.
Although EPA has removed the seat cover testing requirement from the final
specification, it will work with the ASME/CSA standards committee to address the
issue through the standards development process. This will ensure that the
testing protocol is prepared such that it is repeatable and reproducible in a
manner to ensure consistent testing done among laboratories. EPA could then
reference such a standard in future revisions to the specification.
Seat Cover Clarification
a. One commenter asked for clarification on the phrase "WaterSense labeled
models must pass additional tests, such as the ability to flush a toilet seat cover."
The commenter believed this was an unintentional error, as no toilet is capable of
flushing a seat and cover.
Response: Under the draft specification, EPA did not intend for a water closets to
be able to flush a toilet seat and cover that is used to cover the bowl when it is
not in use. Instead, EPA intended that flushometer-valve water closets be
19
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
capable of flushing disposable paper seat covers that are commonly used in
commercial restrooms for hygienic purposes.
Regardless, EPA has removed the inclusion of the disposable seat cover from
the flush performance testing. Therefore, no changes were made to the
specification resulting from this comment.
VI. Comments on Section 6.0: Product Marking
Redundant Requirements for Flushometer Valve Product Marking
a. Three commenters stated the Sections 6.2.1 and 6.2.2 of the draft specification
include the same requirements, which makes the requirements unclear. The
commenters suggested revising the language within Section 6.2.1 to include the
requirements of Section 6.2.2 and reduce redundancy.
Two commenters suggested the following change to Section 6.2.2 of the draft
specification:
"Product documentation shall be clearly marked with specific
maintenance or replacement part instructions and identification of correct
replacement parts that should be used to ensure that the device will not
exceed its rated flush volume. Under no circumstances can
manufacturers provide maintenance instructions or advertise the use of
any replacement parts that would cause the flushometer valve to exceed
its rated flush volume."
The third commenter suggested the following change to Section 6.2.2:
"The flushometer valve and its included product documentation must not
provide instruction directing the user to specific maintenance or
replacement parts that would cause the flushometer valve to exceed its
rated flush volume specified in Section 2.1.1."
Response: With sections 6.2.1 and 6.2.2, as written in the draft specification,
EPA was attempting to convey two different intents: 1) to ensure that the
manufacturer does not provide any instructions related to the product that would
advise the user on how to override the rated flush volume; and 2) to require the
manufacturer to provide clear instructions regarding maintenance regimes and
repair parts that should be used and followed to maintain the rated flush volume.
EPA has combined the two requirements into one section of the specification to
clarify these points. The language in the final specification states:
6.2.1 Product documentation shall be clearly marked with specific
maintenance instructions and shall identify replacement parts
(e.g., pistons, diaphragms, repair kits) that should be used to
20
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
ensure that the device maintains its rated flush volume. The
flushometer valve shall also not be packaged, marked, or provided
with instructions directing the user to an alternative flush volume
setting that would override the rated flush volume specified in
Section 2.1.1.
VII. Comments on Section 9.0: Definitions
Include Definition for Canadian Standards Association
a. Two commenters pointed out that EPA did not include a definition for the
Canadian Standards Association (CSA). As CSA's standards are referenced
throughout the specification, a definition should be included.
Response: EPA agrees that the definition "CSA: Canadian Standards
Association" should be include in the specification and has added it to Section
9.0. The exclusion of a definition for CSA from the draft specification was an
oversight.
General Specification Support
a. One commenter supported EPA's decision to develop a specification for
flushometer-valve water closet fixtures and flushometer valves.
Response: EPA thanks the commenter for their support of this specification.
General Specification Opposition
a. One commenter stated that the draft specification provides no user benefit above
current products and is unnecessary. Furthermore, because of some local
jurisdiction requirements, the specification might force some property owners to
retrofit a high-efficiency model onto an older system that is ill-equipped to handle
it. Some older plumbing systems might not function properly with lower flush
volumes, resulting in costly maintenance and repairs, and compromising public
health and safety. In addition, the commenter stated that there are flushometer-
valve water closets already certified to the same national performance standards
referenced in the draft specification. The only notable difference between the
current certification requirements and the draft specification is the addition of a
toilet seat cover in the waste extraction test. The commenter argues that certified
products are able to process this additional media in the field every day, and this
slight testing difference does not create "a high level of user satisfaction" any
different than current products. The specification would only burden
manufacturers with additional testing, certification and annual compliance costs
with no added benefit to the consumer. Therefore, the commenter suggests that
VIII. General Comments on the Specification
21
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
EPA should discontinue development of the specification for flushometer-valve
water closets.
b.	Two commenters expressed opposition to the release of a specification for
flushometer-valve water closets. The commenters indicated that EPA has
presented little evidence to show that the existing national standards do not
sufficiently address efficiency and performance for flushometer-vale water
closest that are comparable to what EPA has proposed. The commenters
questioned EPA's decision to use the results of the PERC Phase 1 study as
justification for this specification, even though the PERC technical committee
explicitly recommended that EPA consider the results of PERC Phase 2.0 before
making a final decision on the requirements of the specification. The commenters
believe that more data is required to justify the need for this specification, and
should wait until the results of PERC Phase 2.0 are published before moving
forward with specification development.
c.	One commenter expressed concern that release of this specification could
impact EPA's reputation on an otherwise successful WaterSense program. The
commenter indicated that the risk is not worth the reward; that is, the projected
20 percent savings by moving from 1.6 gpf to 1.28 gpf in a commercial setting is
not worth the potential negative impact that could result from such change.
Instead, EPA should work with industry to focus its efforts on converting all
existing 3.5-gpf-and-greater water-consuming commercial flushing devices to 1.6
gpf—the savings and impacts of a plan like that will product far greater water
savings than moving from 1.6 gpf to 1.28 gpf.
The commenter indicated industry has general concern with moving to a 1.28 gpf
flush volume for commercial use. The commenter supports this concern and said
that systems in the commercial market present several challenges not found in
the residential market, including but not limited to how the products are used,
frequency of use (including periods of non-use), items flushed, and length of
drainlines. The commenter further indicated that available data suggest that as
flush volumes are lowered there is a direct correlation to the distance of drainline
carry. This could result in drainline blockages in commercial markets where
longer drainlines are utilized.
The commenter indicated general support for the WaterSense program but
suggested waiting until additional research information is available to move
forward with the specification.
Response: In May 2014, the Government Accountability Office released a report
that indicated 40 of 50 states expected water shortages in some portion of their
states under average conditions in the next 10 years.2 In light of this information,
and with droughts in California and other areas throughout the country, there is
considerable interest in advancing water conservation. As indicated in the
2 United States Government Accountability Office. "Freshwater. Supply Concerns Continue, and Uncertainties Complicate
Planning. May 2014. http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/663343.pdf
22
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
WaterSense Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets Supporting
Statement, EPA conservatively estimates that if all 7 million old, inefficient 3.5 gpf
flushometer-valve water closets nationwide were replaced with WaterSense
labeled models, nearly 39 billion gallons could be saved annually. Furthermore,
replacing existing 1.6-gpf flushometer-valve water closets with WaterSense
labeled models could save nearly 15 billion additional gallons annually.
Therefore, EPA maintains that labeling high-efficiency flushometer-valve water
closets will provide measurable water savings nationwide. In addition, while
existing national standards currently ensure performance of flushometer-valve
water closets, the WaterSense label is used to recognize those products that
improve water efficiency and provide assurance to consumers about
performance. The WaterSense label will help further differentiate high-efficiency
flushometer-valve water closets in the market, and is intended to help encourage
purchasers to choose labeled models.
EPA acknowledges that there are concerns within industry related to how water
efficiency impacts plumbing system performance. However, the PERC Phase 1
study states, "Based on the findings from this study, the PERC [Technical
Committee] recommends that the U.S. EPA WaterSense Program expand their
specification on toilets to include commercial flushometer-valve operated [high-
efficiency toilets."3 To obtain greater assurance of the requirements of the
specification, EPA postponed the released of this specification until the findings
of the PERC Phase 2.0 study were released to the public. As a result of the
PERC Phase 2.0 study, and as indicated in the "Minimum Flush Volume" section,
above, EPA has included a minimum flush volume, below which products will not
be eligible to obtain the WaterSense label. Establishing a minimum flush volume
should ensure that in most plumbing systems, the products will maintain effective
drainline performance. In addition, as discussed in the "Cautionary Statement for
Installing High-Efficiency Fixtures and Fittings in Renovations" section below,
EPA will include a cautionary statement within the specification supporting
materials, as appropriate, encouraging facility managers and building owners to
consult with a plumbing engineer and assess the condition and limitations of the
existing drainline infrastructure before installing high-efficiency flushometer-valve
water closets, particularly models that flush below 1.28 gpf. It is the responsibility
of the facility manager and a plumbing engineer to understand the limitations of
the existing plumbing system and balance that with the right fixtures and flush
volumes to maximize water efficiency and ensure their plumbing system
functions effectively.
Consistency with State Commercial Code Requirements
a. One commenter asked EPA to confirm that all components of the specification
will meet commercial code requirements in states with the strictest standards.
The commenter noted that federal agencies in those states will be required to
3 PERC. November 2012. The Drainline Transport of Solid Waste in Buildings.
www.plumbinaefficiencvresearchcoalition.ora/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Drainline-Transport-St udv-PhaseOne.pdf
23
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
meet the code in their state, while also being required to purchase WaterSense
labeled products.
Response: The WaterSense Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
references all existing, applicable standards relevant to flushometer-valve water
closets, and should therefore meet plumbing code requirements.
Cautionary Statement for Installing High-Efficiency Fixtures and Fittings in
Renovations
a. Two commenters said that a statement should be added to the specification that
provides guidance to building owners, managers, or designers to have a qualified
engineer determine if their specific structure can accommodate the installation of
high-efficiency plumbing fixtures and fittings. In EPA's supporting documentation,
it is noted that 28 percent of existing flushometer-valve water closets that are
installed in commercial structures have flush volumes that exceed the current
federal standards. Even though most newer commercial structures will not have
any issue with 1.28 gpf water closets, there are those structures with aging
sanitary drainage systems where high-efficiency fixtures and fittings could result
in system failures, potentially resulting in public health and safety concerns. The
commenters suggests a statement cautioning installation of high-efficiency
fixtures and fitting in renovations without a qualified engineer's approval would
protect the WaterSense brand. Specifically, the commenters suggested adding
the following language to Section 1.0:
"For renovations and/or retrofits where the use of high-efficiency plumbing
fixtures and fittings are being considered, the structure should first be
assessed by a qualified plumbing engineer to determine if the sanitary
system can accommodate such fixtures and fittings."
One commenter also suggested adding such language to the fact sheet and
other applicable documents on the WaterSense website.
Response: In response to concerns related to the impact of reduced flush
volumes on existing building drainage systems, EPA will include a statement
within the specification supporting materials, as appropriate, that encourages
facility managers and building owners to consult with a plumbing engineer and
assess existing drainline infrastructure for potential defects or issues before
installing WaterSense labeled flushometer-valve water closets. The statement
will be consistent with the findings of the PERC Phase 1 study, which states "In
retrofit applications, it is suggested that drainlines first be inspected for defects,
root intrusions, sagging or other physical conditions that could result in clogging
with lower flush volumes."4 EPA will also recommend that authorities (e.g.,
states, local municipalities, code organizations, water utilities) intending to
require or provide incentives for the installation of WaterSense labeled
4 PERC. November 2012. The Drainline Transport of Solid Waste in Buildings.
www.plum binaefficiencvresearchcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Drainline-Transport-Studv-PhaseOne.pdf.
24
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
flushometer-valve water closets in building renovations or other retrofit
applications include an exemption or allowance for buildings where a plumbing
engineer has certified that the existing drainline is not suitable for high-efficiency
models. Similarly, utilities offering rebate programs or other entities promoting the
installation of WaterSense labeled flushometer-valve water closets should ensure
that the prospective installers are aware of and have assessed their plumbing
systems to ensure compatibility with high-efficiency water closets. EPA
acknowledges that WaterSense labeled flushometer-valve water closets are not
suitable for all existing plumbing systems. However, it is the responsibility of the
facility manager to ensure that retrofitting with high-efficiency flushometer-valve
water closets will not result in drainage system malfunctions.
PERC Phase 1 Study Not Definitive
a. Two commenters said that EPA should be cautious basing its entire rationale for
establishing a 1.28 gpf maximum on the results of the PERC Phase 1 drainline
study. While PERC Phase 1 began the conversation of "How low can we go?"
PERC Phase 1 did not conclude that all plumbing systems can operate safely at
1.28 gpf, but instead cautioned against basing any decisions on the results.
PERC has only begun to identify the impact of low-flow fixtures and fitting in the
building environment and their impact on drainline carry. The comment
suggested that EPA postpone the specification until results of the PERC Phase
2.0 study have been documented and reviewed by EPA.
One commenter also suggested EPA should delay implementation of this product
specification until some additional research on the topic of drainline carry is
available—most noteworthy, that the next phase of the PERC study is being
conducted by industry. The commenter indicated that the first phase of the PERC
study produced some interesting information that confirmed the use of 1.28 gpf
devices for residential use, but it cautioned against using the data to make
additional decisions until further research could take place.
Response: EPA has evaluated the PERC Phase 2.0 study results as part of its
final specification development. Based on the results of the PERC Phase 2.0
study, EPA has established a minimum flush volume at 1.0 gpf, as indicated in
the response to "Minimum Flush Volume," above. Flushometer valves and water
closet fixtures intended for flush volumes below this level will not be eligible for
the WaterSense label at this time.
Following review of the PERC Phase 2.0 study results, EPA remains confident in
establishing a specification for flushometer-valve water closets with a maximum
flush volume of 1.28 gpf.
Availability of Reference Standards
a. One commenter expressed concern over the availability of reference standards
in the specification. The commenter indicated that it is inappropriate for
25
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
publications written by private organizations and standard committees and
available only through purchase to be included within federal laws and codes.
The commenter goes on to say that the net effect of this is that most
stakeholders are completely ignorant of everything in the laws other than the
requirements which are freely available.
Response: Standards that are referenced within this specification are similar to
those that have been referenced in other existing WaterSense specifications. As
WaterSense is a voluntary program and not a federal law, it is not required for
EPA to make these standards or testing protocols available free of charge.
Referenced documents are copyright protected by the standards organizations
that developed them, which therefore prohibits EPA from making them available
free of charge.
Standard References
a.	Several commenters recommended updating all references to the
tAPMO/American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Z124.4 for plastic plumbing
fixtures to also include the appropriate CSA B45.5 standard to reflect the fact that
these standards have been harmonized.
Response: EPA thanks the commenters for calling attention to the update to the
standard for plastic plumbing fixtures. EPA has updated all applicable references
to this standard such that they now reference CSA B45.5/IAPMO Z124.
b.	Several commenters indicated that EPA had made an editorial error when
referencing the tri-harmonized standard for pressurized flushing devices, ASSE
1037/ASME A112.1037/CSA B125.37. In the draft specification, the "A" before
"112.1037" was omitted.
Response: EPA thanks the commenters for identifying this editorial error. EPA
has updated all references to the tri-harmonized standard for pressurized
flushing devices such that they now reference ASSE 1037/ASME
A112.1037/CSA B125.37.
Sewer Back-Up Overflow
a. One commenter said that there is no national plumbing code or Occupational
Safety and Health Administration regulation requiring that the public be alerted
when and where a sewer back-up overflow has occurred. Hundreds of gallons of
potable water are wasted in the cleanup of sewer back-up overflows. Increased
response time can effectively save water and reduce damage to the ecosystem
and community health. The commenter also commented that flushometer valves
are cost-effective and sanitary.
Response: EPA agrees that flushometer-valve water closets can be a cost-
effective and sanitary option for sewer systems. However, codes and regulations
26
December 17, 2015

-------
EPA
Response to Public Comments Received on December 2014 WaterSense®
Draft Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets
WaterSense
related to exposure to sewage and public notification of sewer overflow are
outside of the scope of this specification.
Inlet Pipe for Flushometer Valves
a. One commenter expressed concern with maintaining volume to the flushometer
valves that require inlet pipes that are three-fourths of an inch in diameter. With a
minimum line pressure of 45 pounds per square inch (psi), some buildings will
require increasing pipe size. The commenter notes that non-water urinals are not
selling well, as plumbers do not like that those fixtures are susceptible to
contamination. The commenter also states that plumbers are not trained for
exposure to biohazards from bodily fluids in drain systems.
Response: EPA appreciates the comments. All flushometer valves are required
to be tested to ASSE 1037/ASME A112.1037/CSA B 125.37 for Pressurized
Flushing Devices for Plumbing Fixtures. Pressurized flushing devices, including
flushometer valves, are required to function at supply pressures between 20 and
125 psi. Performance tests within this standard, and included by reference in the
WaterSense Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets, ensure
flushometer valves are able to maintain flush volume at these pressures.
Similarly, water closet fixtures must also conform to applicable ASME and other
national standards. These standards ensure the products meet code and are
compatible with compliant plumbing systems.
IX. Comments on Appendix A of the Specification and
Supporting Documentation
Appendix A of the Specification and Product Notification Template
a. One commenter asked how a complete system (combination of a flushometer
valve and a water closet fixture) is to be identified when they are from different
manufacturers. The commenter noted that the Product Notification Template
does not reflect this information. The commenter requested that the Product
Notification Template and Section 3.0 of Appendix A be updated to
accommodate this information.
Response: EPA's understanding of the market for these products is that
combinations of flushometer valves and water closet fixtures from different
manufacturers that are sold under a common brand are not a common or likely
occurrence, and that manufacturers typically make their flushometer valve or
water closet fixture available for mixing and matching. At this time, EPA has
decided not to update the Product Notification Template to accommodate
certification of a complete system where the flushometer valve and water closet
fixtures are from different manufacturers. If demand for this type of certification
becomes apparent, EPA will consider updated the Product Notification Template
at a later date.
27
December 17, 2015

-------