Appeal 20236

301.2

301.2 Minimum Standards. Pipe, pipe fittings, traps, fixtures, material, and devices used in a
plumbing system shall be listed or labeled (third-party certified) by a listing agency (accredited
conformity assessment body) and shall comply with the approved applicable recognized standards
referenced in this code, and shall be free from defects. Unless otherwise provided for in this code,
materials, fixtures, or devices used or entering into the construction of plumbing systems, or parts
thereof, shall be submitted to the Building Official for approval.

A teak wood washbasin was selected for a lavatory remodel. The washbasin is a slab of reclaimed teak wood with a sink and drain hole carved into the wood, as seen in the attached picture titled ‘Lavatory Washbasin Picture’. The manufacture website can be viewed in the attachment titled ‘Washbasin Manufacture Website’. The certification provided with this washbasin, supplied by the manufacture, is outlined in the attached document titled ‘Karpenter FSC’. The sealant material used on the washbasin during manufacturing is described in the attachment titled ‘Polyurethane Sealant Compound for Washbasin’. The species of teak wood selected for the washbasin is referenced in the attachment document titled ‘Tectona Grandis Info’.

The teak wood sink was selected as the show-stopping centerpiece of the bathroom remodel project. The teak sink was commissioned for construction through a company that connects architects and designers to pieces designed and fabricated by carpenters from around the world. The pieces are exhibited on archiproducts.com where you are able to connect with the vendors to commission one of their custom- made items. The sink was a custom order for the bathroom project which yielded a two-month fabrication and shipping turnaround time. The fabricator is known world-wide for quality of materials used and superior construction of their pieces. The bathroom was designed completely around the teak sink to highlight it as the centerpiece. If an alternate sink was to be selected, part of the bathroom would have to be redesigned and reconstructed to adapt a different sink-type. A drawing compiled for the bathroom project, including the teak sink, is attached to the appeal.

Reconsideration text:

I. Use of the Proposed Sink Meets the Equivalency Standard of Oregon Specialty Plumbing Code Section 301.2.

Oregon Specialty Plumbing Code (OPSC) Section 301.2 permits use of alternative materials in construction that are of “equivalent or superior quality, strength, fire resistance, effectiveness, durability, and safety over those prescribed by this code.” In the present appeal, the alternative material for the proposed sink is teak. Teak is a highly durable material that is resistant to rot, fungi, and water damage. See Exhibit A. Several large-scale retailers such as The Home Depot and Signature Hardware sell teak sinks that are available for purchase online. See Exhibit B. The availability of teak sinks by large-scale retailers demonstrates teak is widely-accepted as an alternative material for use in home construction. The average consumer relies upon stores like The Home Depot to provide them with products that are safe, durable, and of standard sanitary equivalency. Such stores have high quality standards and would not sell items that could harm consumers or would subject them to liability.

Additionally, the proposed sink is not contrary to sanitary principles or injurious to health. Insanitary conditions are defined by OSPC 211.0 as:

a. Any trap that does not maintain a proper trap seal.
b. Any opening in draining system, except where lawful, that is not provided with an approved liquid-sealed trap.
c. A plumbing fixture or waste discharging receptor or device that is not supplied with water sufficient to flush and maintain the fixture or receptor in a clean condition.
d. Any defective fixture, trap, pipe, or fitting.
e. Any trap, except where in this code exempted, directly connected to a drainage system, the seal of which is not protected against siphonage and back-pressure by a vent pipe.
f. Any connection, cross-connection, construction, or condition temporary or permanent, that would permit or make possible by any means whatsoever or any unapproved foreign matter to enter a water distribution system used for domestic purposes.

The proposed design includes an approved liquid-sealed trap and will connect to a pre-existing plumbing system that was previously approved and permitted. There is no data to support the conclusion that the sink will negatively impact the plumbing system or render it insanitary. On the contrary, the proposed design, like the teak sinks sold and distributed by major retailers, is made of a high-quality material and sealed in conformity with the requirements of this section. Further, the sealant used on the sink will ensure the integrity of the sink remains intact and does not warp or retain contaminants. See Exhibit C. Accordingly, the proposed sink meets the minimum equivalency requirements of Code Section 301.2.

II. City of Portland’s Building Official has Discretion to Approve the Proposed Sink

OSPC Section 301.2 grants the building official discretion to approve the use of alternative materials. Appellant respectfully requests BDS exercise discretion and approve the proposed sink for two reasons. First, approval of the proposed sink will not negatively impact the City or frustrate the purpose of the code. The purpose of the code is to ensure the City’s water distribution systems and the plumbing systems that feed into it are sanitary and safe for the public. There is no evidence to support that the proposed sink is insanitary or would result in insanitary conditions. The use of sustainable materials such as teak which is demonstrated to be durable and naturally resilient is in alignment with the City values regarding environmental sustainability.

Second, the proposed sink is a custom item that is the only one of its kind imported into the United States. Because the item is unique and distributed in limited quantity, testing is impractical as it would result in damage to the sink. Additionally, due to the low quantity produced, it would be unreasonable to require the vendor to get UPC certification. The State of Oregon recognizes there are instances where it would be unreasonable to require UPC certification for items such as the proposed sink. Oregon law provides for a special product certification process for specialty items such as the proposed sink.
Although not applicable in this case, it is useful in evaluating the reasonableness of approving sinks that are not UPC-approved. Oregon Administrative Rule 918-770-0200 states that plumbing products may be approved by a Special Deputy if:

1. no more than (3) three exist or are intended to be produced;
2. there are no more than (2) two manufacturers and they are not seeking to sell their products in Oregon;
3. the product is not offered for sale in Oregon more than (2) two times over any 2-year period following inspection by the Special Deputy.

Appellant attests that the sink is the only one of this kind in the United States as confirmed by the vendor. See Exhibit D. There is only one manufacturer of this sink and they are not seeking to sell the item in Oregon. Based upon this information, the proposed sink would be eligible for product certification by the State through the special process. Since no equivalent process exists in this jurisdiction, we respectfully request BDS exercise its discretion and approve the use of the proposed sink.