Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage DocumentsHazel Dell Bldg Expansion - WQ Flow Rate Model Water Quality Printed 8/20/2021Prepared by Fritz Engineering Page 1HydroCAD® 10.10-6a s/n 10557 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Rainfall Events Listing Event# Event Name Storm Type Curve Mode Duration (hours) B/B Depth (inches) AMC 1 Carmel WQ Rainfall Type II 24-hr Default 24.00 1 1.00 2 Hazel Dell Bldg Expansion - WQ Flow Rate Model Type II 24-hr Carmel WQ Rainfall Rainfall=1.00"Water Quality Printed 8/20/2021Prepared by Fritz Engineering Page 2HydroCAD® 10.10-6a s/n 10557 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Ex & Prop Bldg [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.61 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 0.030 af, Depth> 0.83" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr Carmel WQ Rainfall Rainfall=1.00" Area (sf) CN Description * 8,850 99 Roofs, HSG C * 10,100 99 Roofs, HSG C 18,950 99 Weighted Average 18,950 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Min Tc Subcatchment 2S: Ex & Prop Bldg Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Type II 24-hr Carmel WQ Rainfall Rainfall=1.00" Runoff Area=18,950 sf Runoff Volume=0.030 af Runoff Depth>0.83" Tc=5.0 min CN=99 0.61 cfs City of Indianapolis Stormwater Quality Unit (SQU) Selection Guide Pg. 3 04/27/2021 Version 19 Manufactured SQU SQU System Model Max Treatment Flow (cfs) Max 10-yr On-Line Flow Rate (cfs) Cleanout Depth (Inches) 2-4 0.62 2.57 6 3-6 1.4 5.80 6 3-8 1.87 7.75 6 4-8 2.49 10.31 6 5-10 3.89 16.11 6 6-12 5.6 23.19 6 6-13.75 6.42 26.59 6 7-14 7.62 31.56 6 7-15 8.17 33.84 6 8-14 8.71 36.08 6 8-16 9.96 41.25 6 9-18 12.6 52.19 6 10-17 13.22 54.76 6 10-20 15.56 64.45 6 12-21 19.6 81.18 6 Oldcastle NSBB-HVT 12-24 22.4 92.78 6 AS-2 0.36 0.73 7 AS-3 0.71 1.44 7 AS-4 1.18 2.39 7 AS-5 1.46 2.96 7 AS-6 2.11 4.28 7 AS-7 2.87 5.82 7 AS-8 3.74 7.59 7 AS-9 4.73 9.59 7 AS-10 5.84 11.84 7 AS-11 7.07 14.34 7 AS-12 8.42 17.08 7 AquaShield Aqua Swirl Concentrator AS-13 9.87 20.02 7 S3 0.70 1.40 10 S4 1.25 2.50 10 S5 1.95 3.90 10 S6 2.80 5.60 10 S8 5.00 10.00 10 ADS Barracuda S10 7.80 15.60 10 2-4 0.70 1.53 6 2.5-5 1.10 2.40 6 3-6 1.59 3.47 6 4-6 2.11 4.60 6 4-8 2.82 6.15 6 5-10 4.40 9.60 6 BioClean Debris Separating Baffle Box (DSBB) 6-12 6.34 13.83 6 NJCAT TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System AquaShieldTM, Inc. November, 2016 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Figures ii List of Tables iii 1. Description of Technology 1 2. Laboratory Testing 1 2.1 Test Unit 1 2.2 Test Setup 3 2.3 Test Sediment 5 2.4 Removal Efficiency Testing Procedure 6 2.5 Scour Testing Procedure 7 3. Performance Claims 8 4. Supporting Documentation 9 4.1 Test Sediment PSD Analysis – Removal Efficiency Testing 9 4.2 Removal Efficiency Testing 12 4.3 Test Sediment PSD Analysis – Scour Testing 28 4.4 Scour Testing for Online Installation 29 5. Design Limitations 31 6. Maintenance Plan 32 7. Statements 33 8. References 40 Verification Appendix 41 iii List of Figures Page Figure 1 Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 2 Figure 2 Schematic Illustration of Test Loop Setup, May 2016 4 Figure 3 Schematic Illustration of Test Loop Setup, September 2016 4 Figure 4 Average Removal Efficiency Test Sediment PSD vs. Protocol Specification 12 Figure 5 Scour Test Sediment PSD vs. Protocol Specification 29 iv List of Tables Page Table 1-A PSD of Removal Efficiency Test Sediment, May 2016 Test Runs 10 Table 1-B PSD of Removal Efficiency Test Sediment, September 2016 Test Runs 11 Table 2 Summary of AS-3 25% MTFR Test 13 Table 3 AS-3 25% MTFR Sediment Feed Results 13 Table 4 AS-3 25% MTFR Background and Effluent Measurements 14 Table 5 AS-3 25% MTFR QA/QC Results 15 Table 6 Summary of AS-3 50% MTFR Test 16 Table 7 AS-3 50% MTFR Sediment Feed Results 16 Table 8 AS-3 50% MTFR Background and Effluent Measurements 17 Table 9 AS-3 50% MTFR QA/QC Results 18 Table 10 Summary of AS-3 75% MTFR Test 19 Table 11 AS-3 75% MTFR Sediment Feed Results 19 Table 12 AS-3 75% MTFR Background and Effluent Measurements 20 Table 13 AS-3 75% MTFR QA/QC Results 21 Table 14 Summary of AS-3 100% MTFR Test 22 Table 15 AS-3 100% MTFR Sediment Feed Results 22 Table 16 AS-3 100% MTFR Background and Effluent Measurements 23 Table 17 AS-3 100% MTFR QA/QC Results 24 Table 18 Summary of AS-3 125% MTFR Test 25 Table 19 AS-3 125% MTFR Sediment Feed Results 25 Table 20 AS-3 125% MTFR Background and Effluent Measurements 26 Table 21 AS-3 125% MTFR QA/QC Results 27 Table 22 Annualized Weighted TSS Removal of the AS-3 28 v Table 23 Scour Test Sediment PSD 28 Table 24 Flow and Background Concentrations for AS-3 Scour Testing 29 Table 25 Effluent Concentration Results for AS-3 Scour Test at 203% MTFR 30 Table A-1 MTFRs and Required Sediment Removal Intervals for Aqua-Swirl® Models 43 Table A-2 Standard Dimensions for Aqua-Swirl® Models 44 1 1. Description of Technology The Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System is a vortex hydrodynamic separator designed and supplied by AquaShieldTM, Inc. Aqua-Swirl® technology removes pollutants including suspended solids, debris, floatables and free-floating oil from stormwater runoff. The Aqua-Swirl® is a rapid or high flow rate device that has no moving parts and operates on gravity flow or movement of the stormwater runoff entering the structure. Operation begins when stormwater enters the swirl chamber by means of its tangential inlet pipe thereby inducing a circular (swirl or vortex) flow pattern. The swirl chamber diameter represents the effective treatment area of the device. Both sediment capture and sediment storage is accomplished within the swirl chamber. A combination of gravitational and hydrodynamic drag forces results in solids dropping out of the flow and migrating to the center of the swirl chamber where velocities are the lowest. The treated flow exits the Aqua-Swirl® behind the arched inner baffle. The top of the baffle is sealed across the treatment channel to eliminate floatable pollutants from escaping the swirl chamber. A vent pipe is extended up the riser to expose the backside of the baffle to atmospheric conditions, thus preventing a siphon from forming at the bottom of the baffle. 2. Laboratory Testing Laboratory testing was performed to independently verify that the Aqua-Swirl® is eligible for certification by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) as a 50% Total Suspended Solids (TSS) removal device. The Aqua-Swirl® was tested in accordance with the “New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Laboratory Protocol to Assess Total Suspended Solids Removal by a Hydrodynamic Sedimentation Manufactured Treatment Device” (NJDEP 2013). Testing was conducted in Chattanooga, Tennessee at the hydraulics laboratory of AquaShieldTM, Inc. under the supervision of Dr. Gregory Williams, P.E. of Good Harbour Laboratories, Ltd., Mississauga, Ontario. Dr. Williams served as the independent observer. The particle size distribution (PSD) of both the removal efficiency test sediment samples and the scour test sediment samples were independently prepared under the direction of Dr. Williams at the Good Harbour Laboratories facility. All PSD testing was performed in accordance with ASTM D 422-63 (2007) by Maxxam Analytics in Mississauga, Ontario. All test sediment was collected, labeled and security sealed under the direction of the independent observer prior to shipment to the AquaShieldTM test facility. The independent observer confirmed that the security seals were intact prior to opening the test sediment shipment containers at the AquaShieldTM test facility. 2.1 Test Unit The test unit was a full scale, commercially available Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 constructed of polymer coated steel measuring 3.5 feet in diameter and approximately 8.5 feet in height (Figure 1). 2 Figure 1 Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 3 Key dimensions of the test unit were measured by the independent observer prior to the beginning of the testing program to ensure that the assembly was consistent with a commercial AS-3. The false floor depth was also confirmed by the observer. The test unit used 12-inch diameter influent and effluent pipe with an internal bypass weir. 2.2 Test Setup Two closed loop recirculation test loops are illustrated in Figure 2 and Figure 3. Figure 2 represents the test loop used for the May 2016 test runs. The test loop was modified for the September 2016 test runs to improve background sediment control using a 1-micron filter assembly manufactured by Filtra Systems (Model 080808CSVR2, Option B). The modification to the original test loop did not yield any material change to the testing program other than providing more reliable background samples that did not exceed 20 mg/L per the protocol requirement. Metered flow for both test loops was directly supplied to the AS-3 with a Berkeley Model B5ZPBH centrifugal pump drawing water from the water supply tanks. All inflow to the test unit was measured using an inline Badger M-2000 flow meter within a vertical section of pipe leading to a raised platform used to accommodate the influent piping, background sample port location and the test sediment feeder. The test flow rate was recorded every 60 seconds throughout the duration of each test run using a Lascar EL-USB-4 Data Logger. A 6-inch pipe diameter exits the supply tank and expands to a 12-inch pipe diameter at a 1.0% slope that leads to the AS-3. The pipe expansion is downstream of the flow meter and 9.6 feet upstream of the sediment injection point. The test loop piping is constructed of Schedule 40 PVC. Background samples were manually collected from the 6-inch piping section via a sample port for the TSS removal efficiency testing. As discussed in Section 2.5 the background measuring procedure was modified for the scour testing. The 12-inch diameter influent pipe includes an open sediment feed port (tee) for injecting sediment through the crown of the 12-inch diameter influent pipe at a distance of 5 feet upstream of the test unit. Test sediment injection used an IPM Systems Auger® volumetric screw feeder, model VF-2, with an attached vibrator mounted on the hopper. The sediment feeder assembly was positioned adjacent to and above the influent pipe to accommodate sediment feed sampling and injection. Both the background sample location and the auger feeder are situated on the raised platform to allow for the influent piping to enter the AS-3 at the design elevation. Effluent piping from the AS-3 is also 12-inch diameter schedule 40 PVC at a 1.0% slope that leads to the effluent sample location. Effluent water is sampled as it free falls from the effluent pipe into the water supply tank. Water is then re-circulated through the test loop as shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3. 4 Figure 2 Schematic Illustration of Test Loop Setup, May 2016 Figure 3 Schematic Illustration of Test Loop Setup, September 2016 5 Total Suspended Solids Removal Efficiency Test Setup For the total suspended solids (TSS) removal efficiency test runs, sediment was introduced in the flow at a consistent, calibrated rate using the above-cited auger feeder. The designated 100% sediment storage zone of the Aqua-Swirl® is 14 inches as measured upward from the base of the unit. In accordance with the protocol, a false floor was positioned 7 inches from the base of the test unit to simulate a 50% full condition. The false floor was secured and sealed around the edges to prevent material from collecting below it. Scour Test Setup To simulate the 50% full condition for the scour test, a false floor was positioned 3 inches from the base of the test unit. The false floor was secured and sealed around the edges to prevent material from collecting below it. Four (4) inches of scour test sediment was then added to a level of 7 inches above the base of the test unit. 2.3 Test Sediment Test Sediment Feed for Suspended Solids Removal Efficiency Testing All test sediment used for the Suspended Solids Removal Efficiency Testing was blended by Good Harbour Laboratories using high purity silica supplied by AGSCO and U.S. Silica. All blending activities took place at the Good Harbour Laboratories facility under the direction of the independent observer. Three random sediment samples were collected from sediment blends and delivered to Maxxam Analytics in Mississauga, Ontario for particle size distribution (PSD) analysis using ASTM D 422-63. The PSD of each of the 3 samples were averaged and reported as the overall PSD (see Figure 4 in Section 4.1). It was determined that the test sediment blends meet the protocol specification. Test sediment was placed in shipping containers, security sealed, and transported to the AquaShieldTM laboratory test facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee. All container seals were intact upon receipt and were removed by the independent observer at the initiation of testing. Scour Test Sediment Test sediment used for Scour Testing was also blended by Good Harbour Laboratories of high purity silica supplied by AGSCO Corporation. Three random sediment samples were collected from the sediment blend and delivered to Maxxam Analytics in Mississauga, Ontario for PSD analysis using ASTM D 422-63. The particle size distribution of each of the 3 samples were averaged and reported as the overall PSD (see Figure 5 in Section 4.3). It was determined that this scour test sediment blend meets the protocol specification. Test sediment was placed in shipping containers, security sealed, and transported to the AquaShieldTM laboratory test facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee. The security seals were intact upon receipt and were removed by the observer at the initiation of scour testing. 6 2.4 Removal Efficiency Testing Procedure Removal efficiency testing was performed in accordance with Section 5 of the NJDEP Laboratory Protocol for HDS MTDs. A total of 5 flow rates were tested: 25%, 50%, 75%, 100% and 125% of the Maximum Treatment Flow Rate (MTFR). The test sediment mass was fed into the flow stream at a known rate using a screw auger. Sediment was introduced at a rate within 10% of the targeted concentration of 200 mg/L influent concentrations throughout the duration of the removal efficiency testing program. Six calibration samples were collected at the injection point. The calibration samples were timed at evenly spaced intervals over the total duration of the test for each tested flow rate and timed such that no collection interval exceeded 1 minute in duration. Each calibration sample was collected in a clean 1-liter container over an interval timed to the nearest second. A factory- calibrated stop watch was used for timing all sediment calibration sampling intervals. These samples were weighed to the nearest milligram using a calibrated Tree® Model HRB-413 electronic balance. This data was used to confirm that the COV of sediment feed rate stayed below the limit of 0.10 as required by the protocol. The average influent TSS concentration used for calculating removal efficiency was calculated using the total mass of the test sediment added during injection divided by the volume of water that flowed through the test unit during injection (Equation 1), as required by the protocol. The mass extracted for calibration samples was subtracted from the total mass injected to the system when removal efficiency was subsequently calculated. The volume of water for each test was calculated by multiplying the average flow rate by the time of sediment injection only. Equation 1 Calculation for Average Influent Sediment Concentration During each flow rate test, the flow meter data logger recorded flow rate once per minute. The Effluent Grab Sampling Method was used per Section 5D of the protocol. Once constant flow rate and test sediment feed were established, three MTD detention times passed before the first effluent sample was collected. All effluent samples were collected in clean, laboratory-provided 1-liter plastic bottles using a sweeping grab sampling motion through the effluent stream as described in Section 5D of the protocol. Samples were then time stamped and placed into a cooler. The observer confirmed that each effluent sample was properly recorded. The time interval between sequential samples was evenly spaced during the test sediment feed period to obtain 15 samples for each flow rate. The water temperature was recorded at 60 second intervals. Background samples were collected at the background sample port using a clean, laboratory- provided 1-liter plastic bottle. Influent background samples were collected at the same time as 7 odd numbered effluent grab samples (first, third, fifth, etc.). The collection time for each background sample was recorded. Background samples were time stamped and placed in a cooler. The observer confirmed that each background sample was properly recorded. A chain of custody form was completed for each test run and samples were transported on ice in a cooler(s) to the independent laboratory for TSS analysis. All samples were analyzed by AIRL, Inc. of Cleveland, Tennessee in accordance with ASTM D 3977-97 (re-approval 2007) “Standard Test Methods for Determining Sediment Concentrations in Water Samples.” The background data were plotted on a curve for use in adjusting the effluent samples for background concentration. The AS-3 removal efficiency for each tested flow rate was calculated following Equation 2: Equation 2. Equation for Calculating Removal Efficiency 2.5 Scour Testing Procedure In order to simulate the 50% full sediment storage depth, the AS-3 false floor was set to a height of 3 inches above the base of the unit and filled with 4 inches of scour test sediment. The sediment layer was leveled and afterwards the test unit was filled with tap water that same day at a slow rate in an effort to minimize disturbance to the scour test sediment. Scour testing commenced within 96 hours after the unit was pre-loaded with scour test sediment. All scour test setup activities, measurements, testing and sampling were performed in the presence of the independent observer. Scour testing commenced by ramping up the flow rate to 647 gpm (1.44 CFS) which meets/exceeds 200% MTFR. The flow rate was recorded once per minute. Effluent samples were collected and time stamped every 2 minutes after the target flow rate was reached. A total of 15 effluent samples were collected over the duration of the scour test. Effluent samples were collected in clean, laboratory provided plastic 1 liter bottles using the grab sampling method as described in Section 5D of the protocol. Water temperature was recorded every 60 seconds to ensure it did not exceed 80 °F during the test run. Fifteen (15) background samples were collected at evenly spaced intervals to coincide with the times at which effluent samples were collected (every 2 minutes). The 15 background samples exceed the minimum number of 8 background samples as cited in Section 4A of the protocol. The background sample port is a 6-inch x 6-inch x 2-inch tee with the 2-inch branch facing down from the bottom (invert) of the 6-inch pipe run. Due to the high velocity of the water through the 6-inch pipe occurring at the scour test flow rate, a sufficient volume of water could not be conveyed through the background sample port to allow for background sediment sampling to be ) 8 consistent with the TSS removal efficiency testing approach. Using an alternative background sampling approach, water samples were drawn directly from the influent flow pipe through the 12-inch sediment feeder tee to coincide with the effluent samples. A clean, laboratory provided plastic 1-liter bottle was lowered into the flow stream to the base of the 12-inch diameter influent pipe. The bottle cap was then removed to allow the bottle to fill. The cap was replaced when the bottle became full. The background sample bottle was removed from the influent pipe after the cap was intact. Background samples were time stamped accordingly. A chain of custody form was completed for the scour test samples. Once it was established by the observer that the samples were properly recorded, ice was added to the cooler for transportation to the independent analytical laboratory. All samples were analyzed by AIRL, Inc. of Cleveland, Tennessee in accordance with ASTM D3977-97 (re-approval 2007) “Standard Test Methods for Determining Sediment Concentrations in Water Samples.” 3. Performance Claims In keeping with the NJCAT verification process, Aqua-Swirl® performance claims are cited below. Total Suspended Solids Removal Rate For the particle size distribution and weighted calculation method specified by the NJDEP HDS MTD protocol, the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 at an MTFR of 0.71 cfs will demonstrate at least 50% TSS removal efficiency. Maximum Treatment Flow Rate The MTFR for the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 was demonstrated to be 320 gpm (0.71 cfs) which corresponds to a surface area loading rate of 33.4 gpm/ft2. Sediment Storage Depth and Volume The maximum sediment storage depth of the Aqua-Swirl® is 14 inches. Available sediment storage volume varies with each Aqua-Swirl® model, as Aqua-Swirl® model dimensions increase in diameter. A sediment storage depth of 7 inches corresponds to 50% full sediment storage capacity. Effective Treatment Area The effective treatment area of the Aqua-Swirl® models vary with model size, as it corresponds to the surface area of the Aqua-Swirl® model diameter. The tested Aqua-Swirl® AS-3 model has an effective treatment surface area of 9.6 square feet. Detention Time and Volume The detention time of the Aqua-Swirl® depends on flow rate and model size. The detention time is calculated by dividing the treatment volume by the flow rate. The treatment volume is defined as the surface area multiplied by the depth between the pipe inverts (which are at the same elevation) and the top of the sediment storage zone. The tested Aqua-Swirl® AS-3 model at the MTFR of 0.71 cfs has a detention time of 60 seconds. 9 Online or Offline Based on the results of the Scour Testing as described in Section 4.4, the Aqua-Swirl® qualifies for online installation. 4. Supporting Documentation The NJDEP Procedure (NJDEP, 2013a) for obtaining verification of an MTD from NJCAT requires that copies of the laboratory test reports, including all collected and measured data, all data from performance test runs, all pertinent calculations, etc. be included in this section. It is the understanding of AquaShieldTM that this was discussed with NJDEP and it was agreed that as long as such documentation could be made available by NJCAT upon request that it would not be necessary to include all such supporting documentation in verification reports. 4.1 Test Sediment PSD Analysis – Removal Efficiency Testing AquaShieldTM retained the services of Good Harbour Laboratories to prepare all test sediment using high quality silica from two commercial suppliers. These silica blends were mixed together at the proportions needed to produce a test sediment that complied with the particle size distributions (PSDs) that are specified in the NJDEP HDS MTD protocol. The independent observer directed the blending activities at the laboratory’s facility. Three representative sediment samples were collected from the sediment blends and directly transported to Maxxam Analytics in Mississauga, Ontario for PSD analysis using ASTM D 422-63. The PSD of each of the three (3) samples were averaged and reported as the overall PSD. It was determined that all test sediment meets the protocol specification. Test sediment was placed in shipping containers, security sealed, and transported to the AquaShieldTM laboratory test facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee. The container security seals were intact upon receipt and were removed by the independent observer at the initiation of sediment removal testing. The PSD results and the comparison to the protocol specification are shown in Tables 1-A and 1-B. Figure 4 illustrates the comparison of the NJDEP PSD specification to the average PSDs for both the May and September test runs (labeled TRJC20160428-01 and TRJC20160909-01, respectively). 10 Table 1-A Particle Size Distribution of Removal Efficiency Test Sediment May 2016 Test Runs Particle Size (µm) Test Sediment Particle Size (% passing) NJDEP Minimum Specification QA/QC Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Average 1,000 98 98 97 98 98 PASS 500 95 96 95 95 93 PASS 250 91 90 90 90 88 PASS 150 85 80 79 81 73 PASS 100 62 63 63 63 58 PASS 75 56 58 56 57 48 PASS 50 49 49 50 49 43 PASS 20 36 37 36 36 33 PASS 8 19 20 20 20 18 PASS 5 13 13 13 13 8 PASS 2 7 6 6 6 3 PASS d50 53 µm 52 µm 51 µm 52 µm < 75 µm PASS 11 Table 1-B Particle Size Distribution of Removal Efficiency Test Sediment September 2016 Test Runs Particle Size (µm) Test Sediment Particle Size (% passing)  NJDEP Minimum Specification QA/QC Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Average 1000 99 99 99 99 98 PASS 500 96 96 96 96 93 PASS 250 91 91 91 91 88 PASS 150 76 77 78 77 73 PASS 100 63 67 64 65 58 PASS 75 57 74 63 64 48 PASS 50 49 52 50 51 43 PASS 20 35 37 36 36 33 PASS 8 18 19 20 19 18 PASS 5 12 13 13 13 8 PASS 2 5 5 6 5 3 PASS d50 53 µm 47 µm 50 µm 50 µm < 75 µm PASS 12 Figure 4 Average Removal Efficiency Test Sediment PSD vs. Protocol Specification 4.2 Removal Efficiency Testing In accordance with the NJDEP HDS MTD Protocol, sediment removal efficiency testing was conducted on the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 unit in order to establish the ability of the Aqua- Swirl® to remove the specified test sediment at 25%, 50%, 75%, 100% and 125% of the target MTFR with the goal to demonstrate at least 50% annualized weighted sediment removal as defined in the protocol. The target MTFR was 320 gpm (0.71 cfs). All results reported in this section were obtained from test runs that comply with the protocol. None of the sediment calibration samples exceeded 1 minute for any of the tests. The inlet feed concentration coefficient of variance (COV) did not exceed 0.10 for any tes t flow rate. The average influent sediment concentration was calculated using Equation 1 from Section 2.4 herein. The average effluent sediment concentration was adjusted by subtracting the measured background concentrations. No background TSS concentrations exceeded the 20 mg/L maximum allowed by the protocol. Water temperature did not exceed 80° F during any of the test runs. Also note that background sample concentrations listed as 2 mg/L represent one half of the method detection limit of 4 mg/L (reported by the laboratory as <4 mg/L). 13 25% MTFR Results The 25% MTFR test was conducted in accordance with the NJDEP HDS MTD protocol at a target flow rate of 0.18 cfs. A summary of test readings, measurements and calculations are shown in Table 2. Feed calibration results are shown in Table 3. Background and effluent sampling measurements are shown in Table 4. The AS-3 removed 61.4% of the test sediment at an average flow rate of 0.17 cfs. Table 5 shows that the QA/QC results for flow rate, feed rate, influent concentration and background concentration are compliant with the protocol. Table 2 Summary of AS-3 25% MTFR Test Test Date Target Flow (cfs/gpm) Detention Time (sec) Target Sediment Concentration (mg/L) Target Feed Rate (mg/min) Test Duration (min:sec) 9/14/16 0.18/80.1 241 200 60,632 67:06 Measured Values Avg. Flow Rate (cfs/gpm) Avg. Influent Conc. (mg/L) Max. Water Temp. (°F) Avg. Adjusted Effluent Conc. (mg/L) Avg. Removal Efficiency (%) QA/QC Compliance 0.17/74.8 194.5 78 75.1 61.4 Yes Table 3 AS-3 25% MTFR Sediment Feed Results Target Concentration 200 mg/L Target Feed Rate 60,632 mg/min Sample ID Sample Time (min:sec) Sample Mass (gm) Sample Duration (sec) Feed Rate (mg/min) Calculated Influent Concentration (mg/L) Feed Rate 1 0.:00 54.022 60 54,022 190.3 Feed Rate 2 13:14 56.842 60 56,842 200.2 Feed Rate 3 26:27 56.733 60 56,733 199.9 Feed Rate 4 39:40 53.957 60 53,957 190.1 Feed Rate 5 52:53 54.847 60 54,847 193.2 Feed Rate 6 66:06 59.120 60 59,120 208.5 14 Table 4 AS-3 25% MTFR Background and Effluent Measurements Sample ID Time (min:sec) Concentration (mg/L)* Background 1 12:14 2 Background 2 13:14 2 Background 3 25:57 2 Background 4 38:40 2 Background 5 39:40 2 Background 6 52:23 2 Background 7 65:06 2 Background 8 66:06 4 Sample ID Time (min:sec) Concentration (mg/L) Associated Background Concentration (mg/L) Adjusted Concentration (mg/L) Effluent 1 12:14 68 2 66 Effluent 2 12:44 67 2 65 Effluent 3 13:14 71 2 69 Effluent 4 25:27 72 2 70 Effluent 5 25:57 74 2 72 Effluent 6 26:27 75 2 73 Effluent 7 38:40 79 2 77 Effluent 8 39:10 75 2 73 Effluent 9 39:40 83 2 81 Effluent 10 51:53 81 2 79 Effluent 11 52:23 83 2 81 Effluent 12 52:53 79 2 77 Effluent 13 65:06 86 2 84 Effluent 14 65:36 83 3 80 Effluent 15 66:06 84 4 80 Average 77.3 2.2 75.1 * Background concentrations listed as 2 mg/L represent one half of the method detection limit of 4 mg/L as reported by the laboratory. 15 Table 5 AS-3 25% MTFR QA/QC Results Flow Rate Target (cfs/gpm) Average (cfs/gpm) Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV 0.18/80.1 0.17/74.8 0.007 <0.03 Feed Rate Target Average Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV (mg/min) (mg/min) 60,632 55,920 0.036 <0.1 Influent Concentration Target (mg/L) Average (mg/L) Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV 200 194.5 0.036 <0.1 Background Concentration Low High Average Acceptable Threshold (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) 2 4 2.2 <20 50% MTFR Results The 50% MTFR test was conducted in accordance with the NJDEP HDS MTD protocol at a target flow rate of 0.36 cfs. A summary of test readings, measurements and calculations are shown in Table 6. Feed calibration results are shown in Table 7. Background and effluent sampling measurements are shown in Table 8. The AS-3 removed 54.9% of the test sediment at an average flow rate of 0.35 cfs. Table 9 shows that the QA/QC results for flow rate, feed rate, influent concentration and background concentration are compliant with the protocol. 16 Table 6 Summary of AS-3 50% MTFR Test Test Date Target Flow (cfs/gpm) Detention Time (sec) Target Sediment Concentration (mg/L) Target Feed Rate (mg/min) Test Duration (min:sec) 5/19/16 0.36/160.2 120 200 121,264 46:37 Measured Values Avg. Flow Rate (cfs/gpm) Avg. Influent Conc. (mg/L) Max. Water Temp. (°F) Avg. Adjusted Effluent Conc. (mg/L) Avg. Removal Efficiency (%) QA/QC Compliance 0.35/156.7 197.3 73.5 89.0 54.9 Yes Table 7 AS-3 50% MTFR Sediment Feed Results Target Concentration 200 mg/L Target Feed Rate 121,264 mg/min Sample ID Sample Time (min:sec) Sample Mass (gm) Sample Duration (sec) Feed Rate (mg/min) Calculated Influent Concentration (mg/L) Feed Rate 1 0:00 117.521 60 117,521 196.5 Feed Rate 2 9:07 110.476 60 110,476 184.7 Feed Rate 3 18:15 125.112 60 125,112 211.9 Feed Rate 4 27:22 106.146 60 106,146 179.8 Feed Rate 5 36:30 126.124 60 126,124 210.9 Feed Rate 6 45:37 111.724 60 111,724 188.7 17 Table 8 AS-3 50% MTFR Background and Effluent Measurements Sample ID Time (min:sec) Concentration (mg/L)* Background 1 8:07 2 Background 2 9:7 2 Background 3 17:45 7 Background 4 26:22 4 Background 5 27:22 2 Background 6 36:00 5 Background 7 44:37 7 Background 8 45:37 8 Sample ID Time (min:sec) Concentration (mg/L) Associated Background Concentration (mg/L) Adjusted Concentration (mg/L) Effluent 1 8:07 87 2 85 Effluent 2 8:37 87 2 85 Effluent 3 9:07 80 2 78 Effluent 4 17:15 91 4.5 86.5 Effluent 5 17:45 92 7 85 Effluent 6 18:15 83 5.5 77.5 Effluent 7 26:22 92 4 88 Effluent 8 26:52 98 3 95 Effluent 9 27:22 95 2 93 Effluent 10 35:30 96 3.5 92.5 Effluent 11 36:00 104 5 99 Effluent 12 36:30 90 6 84 Effluent 13 44:37 106 7 99 Effluent 14 45:07 106 7.5 98.5 Effluent 15 45:37 97 8 89 Average 93.6 4.6 89.0 * Background concentrations listed as 2 mg/L represent one half of the method detection limit of 4 mg/L as reported by the laboratory. 18 Table 9 AS-3 50% MTFR QA/QC Results Flow Rate Target (cfs/gpm) Average (cfs/gpm) Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV 0.36/160.2 0.35/156.7 0.01 <0.03 Feed Rate Target Average Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV (mg/min) (mg/min) 121,264 116,017 0.07 <0.1 Influent Concentration Target (mg/L) Average (mg/L) Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV 200 197.3 0.07 <0.1 Background Concentration Low High Average Acceptable Threshold (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) 2 8 4.6 <20 75% MTFR Results The 75% MTFR test was conducted in accordance with the NJDEP HDS MTD protocol at a target flow rate of 0.54 cfs. A summary of test readings, measurements and calculations are shown in Table 10. Feed calibration results are shown in Table 11. Background and effluent sampling measurements are shown in Table 12. The AS-3 removed 43.9% of the test sediment at an average flow rate of 0.52 cfs. Table 13 shows that the QA/QC results for flow rate, feed rate, influent concentration and background concentration are compliant with the protocol. 19 Table 10 Summary of AS-3 75% MTFR Test Test Date Target Flow (cfs/gpm) Detention Time (sec) Target Sediment Concentration (mg/L) Target Feed Rate (mg/min) Test Duration (min:sec) 9/15/16 0.54/240.3 80 200 181,896 26:13 Measured Values Avg. Flow Rate (cfs/gpm) Avg. Influent Conc. (mg/L) Max. Water Temp. (°F) Avg. Adjusted Effluent Conc. (mg/L) Avg. Removal Efficiency (%) QA/QC Compliance 0.52/233.9 205.5 77.5 115.3 43.9 Yes Table 11 AS-3 75% MTFR Sediment Feed Results Target Concentration 200 mg/L Target Feed Rate 181,896 mg/min Sample ID Sample Time (min:sec) Sample Mass (gm) Sample Duration (sec) Feed Rate (mg/min) Calculated Influent Concentration (mg/L) Feed Rate 1 0:00 101.906 35 174,696 196.4 Feed Rate 2 5:08 108.710 35 186,360 210.4 Feed Rate 3 10:15 104.963 35 179,937 203.2 Feed Rate 4 15:23 104.742 35 179,558 203.6 Feed Rate 5 20:31 107.189 35 183,753 207.0 Feed Rate 6 25:38 107.605 35 184,466 209.0 20 Table 12 AS-3 75% MTFR Background and Effluent Measurements Sample ID Time (min:sec) Concentration (mg/L)* Background 1 4:08 2 Background 2 5:08 2 Background 3 9:45 2 Background 4 14:23 2 Background 5 15:23 2 Background 6 20:01 2 Background 7 24:38 2 Background 8 25:38 4 Sample ID Time (min:sec) Concentration (mg/L) Associated Background Concentration (mg/L) Adjusted Concentration (mg/L) Effluent 1 4:08 96 2 94 Effluent 2 4:38 109 2 107 Effluent 3 5:08 109 2 107 Effluent 4 9:15 118 2 116 Effluent 5 9:45 113 2 111 Effluent 6 10:15 113 2 111 Effluent 7 14:23 129 2 127 Effluent 8 14:53 115 2 113 Effluent 9 15:23 129 2 127 Effluent 10 19:31 117 2 115 Effluent 11 20:01 118 2 116 Effluent 12 20:31 121 2 119 Effluent 13 24:38 123 2 121 Effluent 14 25:08 128 3 125 Effluent 15 25:38 124 4 120 Average 117.5 2.2 115.3 * Background concentrations listed as 2 mg/L represent one half of the method detection limit of 4 mg/L as reported by the laboratory. 21 Table 13 AS-3 75% MTFR QA/QC Results Flow Rate Target (cfs/gpm) Average (cfs/gpm) Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV 0.54/240.3 0.52/233.9 0.006 <0.03 Feed Rate Target Average Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV (mg/min) (mg/min) 181,896 181,461 0.023 <0.1 Influent Concentration Target (mg/L) Average (mg/L) Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV 200 205.5 0.023 <0.1 Background Concentration Low High Average Acceptable Threshold (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) 2 4 2.2 <20 100% MTFR Results The 100% MTFR test was conducted in accordance with the NJDEP HDS MTD protocol at a target flow rate of 0.71 cfs. A summary of test readings, measurements and calculations are shown in Table 14. Feed calibration results are shown in Table 15. Background and effluent sampling measurements are shown in Table 16. The AS-3 removed 39.2% of the test sediment at an average flow rate of 0.71 cfs. Table 17 shows that the QA/QC results for flow rate, feed rate, influent concentration and background concentration are compliant with the protocol. 22 Table 14 Summary of AS-3 100% MTFR Test Test Date Target Flow (cfs/gpm) Detention Time (sec) Target Sediment Concentration (mg/L) Target Feed Rate (mg/min) Test Duration (min:sec) 9/16/16 0.71/320.4 60 200 242,528 20:57 Measured Values Avg. Flow Rate (cfs/gpm) Avg. Influent Conc. (mg/L) Max. Water Temp. (°F) Avg. Adjusted Effluent Conc. (mg/L) Avg. Removal Efficiency (%) QA/QC Compliance 0.71/320.5 203.3 77.5 123.6 39.2 Yes Table 15 AS-3 100% MTFR Sediment Feed Results Target Concentration 200 mg/L Target Feed Rate 242,528 mg/min Sample ID Sample Time (min:sec) Sample Mass (gm) Sample Duration (sec) Feed Rate (mg/min) Calculated Influent Concentration (mg/L) Feed Rate 1 0:00 126.497 30 252,994 208.2 Feed Rate 2 4:06 123.000 30 246,000 202.5 Feed Rate 3 8:11 117.574 30 235,148 192.9 Feed Rate 4 12:17 118.815 30 237,630 196.2 Feed Rate 5 16:22 124.823 30 249,646 208.1 Feed Rate 6 20:27 119.839 30 239,678 201.0 23 Table 16 AS-3 100% MTFR Background and Effluent Measurements Sample ID Time (min:sec) Concentration (mg/L)* Background 1 3:06 2 Background 2 4:06 2 Background 3 7:41 2 Background 4 11:17 2 Background 5 12:17 2 Background 6 15:52 2 Background 7 19:27 5 Background 8 20:27 5 Sample ID Time (min:sec) Concentration (mg/L) Associated Background Concentration (mg/L) Adjusted Concentration (mg/L) Effluent 1 3:06 109 2 107 Effluent 2 3:36 118 2 116 Effluent 3 4:06 116 2 114 Effluent 4 7:11 126 2 124 Effluent 5 7:41 122 2 120 Effluent 6 8:11 125 2 123 Effluent 7 11:17 133 2 131 Effluent 8 11:47 122 2 120 Effluent 9 12:17 131 2 129 Effluent 10 15:22 126 2 124 Effluent 11 15:52 128 2 126 Effluent 12 16:22 134 3.5 130.5 Effluent 13 19:27 127 5 122 Effluent 14 19:57 142 5 137 Effluent 15 20:27 135 5 130 Average 126.3 2.7 123.6 * Background concentrations listed as 2 mg/L represent one half of the method detection limit of 4 mg/L as reported by the laboratory. 24 Table 17 AS-3 100% MTFR QA/QC Results Flow Rate Target (cfs/gpm) Average (cfs/gpm) Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV 0.71/320.4 0.71/320.5 0.007 <0.03 Feed Rate Target Average Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV (mg/min) (mg/min) 242,528 243,516 0.029 <0.1 Influent Concentration Target (mg/L) Average (mg/L) Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV 200 203.3 0.029 <0.1 Background Concentration Low High Average Acceptable Threshold (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) 2 5 2.7 <20 125% MTFR Results The 125% MTFR test was conducted in accordance with the NJDEP HDS MTD protocol at a target flow rate of 0.89 cfs. A summary of test readings, measurements and calculations are shown in Table 18. Feed calibration results are shown in Table 19. Background and effluent sampling measurements are shown in Table 20. The AS-3 removed 42.1% of the test sediment at an average flow rate of 0.83 cfs. Table 21 shows that the QA/QC results for flow rate, feed rate, influent concentration and background concentration are compliant with the protocol. 25 Table 18 Summary of AS-3 125% MTFR Test Test Date Target Flow (cfs/gpm) Detention Time (sec) Target Sediment Concentration (mg/L) Target Feed Rate (mg/min) Test Duration (min:sec) 5/11/16 0.89/400.5 48 200 303,160 22:45 Measured Values Avg. Flow Rate (cfs/gpm) Avg. Influent Conc. (mg/L) Max. Water Temp. (°F) Avg. Adjusted Effluent Conc. (mg/L) Avg. Removal Efficiency (%) QA/QC Compliance 0.83/373.7 198.8 75.5 115.1 42.1 Yes Table 19 AS-3 125% MTFR Sediment Feed Results Target Concentration 200 mg/L Target Feed Rate 303,160 mg/min Sample ID Sample Time (min:sec) Sample Mass (gm) Sample Duration (sec) Feed Rate (mg/min) Calculated Influent Concentration (mg/L) Feed Rate 1 0:00 146.411 30 292,822 202.0 Feed Rate 2 4:21 140.081 30 280,162 194.3 Feed Rate 3 8:42 140.914 30 281,828 198.2 Feed Rate 4 13:03 141.189 30 282,378 201.1 Feed Rate 5 17:24 130.728 30 261,456 188.2 Feed Rate 6 21:45 246.057 60 246,057 177.7 26 Table 20 AS-3 125% MTFR Background and Effluent Measurements Sample ID Time (min:sec) Concentration (mg/L)* Background 1 3:21 2 Background 2 4:21 2 Background 3 8:12 2 Background 4 12:03 11 Background 5 13:03 5 Background 6 16:54 9 Background 7 20:45 11 Background 8 21:45 8 Sample ID Time (min:sec) Concentration (mg/L) Associated Background Concentration (mg/L) Adjusted Concentration (mg/L) Effluent 1 3:21 118 2 116 Effluent 2 3:51 129 2 127 Effluent 3 4:21 104 2 102 Effluent 4 7:42 117 2 115 Effluent 5 8:12 143 2 141 Effluent 6 8:42 124 6.5 117.5 Effluent 7 12:03 134 11 123 Effluent 8 12:33 129 8 121 Effluent 9 13:03 132 5 127 Effluent 10 16:24 122 7 115 Effluent 11 16:54 130 9 121 Effluent 12 17:24 73 10 63 Effluent 13 20:45 121 11 110 Effluent 14 21:15 127 9.5 117.5 Effluent 15 21:45 118 8 110 Average 121.4 6.3 115.1 * Background concentrations listed as 2 mg/L represent one half of the method detection limit of 4 mg/L as reported by the laboratory. 27 Table 21 AS-3 125% MTFR QA/QC Results Flow Rate Target (cfs/gpm) Average (cfs/gpm) Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV 0.89/400.5 0.83/373.7 0.017 <0.03 Feed Rate Target Average Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV (mg/min) (mg/min) 303,160 274,117 0.041 <0.1 Influent Concentration Target (mg/L) Average (mg/L) Coef. Of Variance Acceptable Parameters COV 200 198.8 0.041 <0.1 Background Concentration Low High Average Acceptable Threshold (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) 2 11 6.3 <20 Excluded Data/Results Two test sediment blends were used for the TSS removal efficiency testing. The test setup for the May 2016 testing provided random background TSS concentrations that did not consistently comply with the protocol threshold of 20 mg/L. Following trial testing of a modified test loop that included an additional reservoir tank and a 1-micron filter assembly to meet the background concentration requirement, testing resumed in September 2016 using the second PSD blend that also complied with the protocol specification. Analytical data from the May 2016 testing that did not comply with the background TSS concentration requirement were excluded from the results presented herein. Annualized Weighted TSS Removal Efficiency The annualized weighted TSS removal efficiency calculation is shown below in Table 22 based on the results of the removal efficiency testing. Testing in accordance with the provisions detailed in the NJDEP HDS MTD Protocol demonstrate that the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 achieved a 50.8% annualized weighted TSS removal at an MTFR of 0.71 cfs (33.4 gpm/ft2). This testing demonstrates that the Aqua- Swirl® Model AS-3 meets the NJDEP requirement that HDS devices demonstrate at least 50% weighted annualized TSS removal efficiency at the MTFR. 28 Table 22 Annualized Weighted TSS Removal of the AS-3 % MTFR Average Flow Rate Tested (cfs) Actual % MTFR Measured Removal Efficiency Annual Weighting Factor Weighted Removal Efficiency 25% 0.17 24% 61.4 0.25 15.4 50% 0.35 49% 54.9 0.30 16.5 75% 0.52 73% 43.9 0.20 8.8 100% 0.71 100% 39.2 0.15 5.9 125% 0.83 117% 42.1 0.10 4.2 Weighted Annualized TSS Removal Efficiency 50.8 4.3 Test Sediment PSD Analysis – Scour Testing Test sediment used for Scour Testing was independently blended by Good Harbour Laboratories of high purity silica supplied by AGSCO Corporation. Three representative sediment samples were collected from the sediment blend and delivered to Maxxam Analytics in Mississauga, Ontario for independent PSD analysis using ASTM D 422-63. The particle size distribution of each of the 3 samples were averaged and reported as the overall particle size distribution. It was determined that this test sediment blend meets the protocol specification. The test sediment was placed in shipping containers, sealed, and transported to the AquaShieldTM laboratory test facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee. The container seals were intact upon receipt and were removed by the independent observer at the initiation of the scour testing program. The results and the comparison to the protocol specification are shown in Table 23 and Figure 5. This test sediment was determined to be overall finer than the specified scour test sediment. Table 23 Scour Test Sediment PSD Particle Size (µm) Test Sediment Particle Size (% passing) NJDEP Minimum Specification QA/QC Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Average 1,000 100 100 100 100 98 PASS 500 98 97 97 97 88 PASS 250 70 67 64 67 53 PASS 150 59 56 52 56 38 PASS 100 44 42 38 41 23 PASS 75 28 24 23 25 8 PASS 50 10 9 11 10 0 PASS 29 Figure 5 Scour Test Sediment PSD vs. Protocol Specification 4.4 Scour Testing for Online Installation Scour testing for the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 was conducted in accordance with Section 4 of the NJDEP HDS protocol. A flow rate of 1.44 cfs (646.9 gpm) was used in order to establish its capability to be installed in an online configuration. Based on an MTFR of 0.71 cfs (320.4 gpm), the scour test flow rate represents 203% of the MTFR. The flow rate COV was 0.002. Flow and background concentrations are shown in Table 24. Table 24 Flow and Background Concentration Results for AS-3 Scour Testing Date May 18, 2016 Average Flow Rate = 1.44 cfs Maximum Temperature 72.5 Flow Rate COV = 0.002 Sample ID Time (min:sec) Concentration (mg/L)* Background 1 2:00 2 Background 2 4:00 2 Background 3 6:00 2 Background 4 8:00 2 Background 5 10:00 2 Background 6 12:00 2 Background 7 14:00 2 30 Background 8 16:00 2 Background 9 18:00 2 Background 10 20:00 2 Background 11 22:00 2 Background 12 24:00 2 Background 13 26:00 2 Background 14 28:00 2 Background 15 30:00 2 * Background concentrations listed as 2 mg/L represent one half of the method detection limit of 4 mg/L as reported by the laboratory. Unadjusted effluent concentrations ranged from 4 mg/L to 18 mg/L. When adjusted for background concentrations, effluent concentrations ranged from 2 to 16 mg/L and averaged 9.7 mg/L. Table 25 summarizes effluent, background and adjusted effluent concentrations. Based on the results of this scour test, the Aqua-Swirl® can be installed online. Table 25 Effluent Concentration Results for AS-3 Scour Testing at 203% MTFR Sample ID Time (min:sec) Effluent Concentration with Background Concentration (mg/L)* Adjusted Effluent Concentration (mg/L) Background Concentration (mg/L) S-1 2:00 4 2 2 S-2 4:00 5 2 3 S-3 6:00 5 2 3 S-4 8:00 6 2 4 S-5 10:00 9 2 7 S-6 12:00 16 2 14 S-7 14:00 18 2 16 S-8 16:00 17 2 15 S-9 18:00 16 2 14 S-10 20:00 13 2 11 S-11 22:00 14 2 12 S-12 24:00 14 2 12 S-13 26:00 14 2 12 S-14 28:00 14 2 12 S-15 30:00 11 2 9 * Background concentrations listed as 2 mg/L represent one half of the method detection limit of 4 mg/L as reported by the laboratory. 31 Excluded Data/Results No data or results were excluded for the scour test. 5. Design Limitations The Aqua-Swirl® is an engineered system designed to meet site -specific installation requirements. General terms of design parameters and limitations are cited below. Soil Characteristics The Aqua-Swirl® is a post-construction, flow-through modular device. AquaShieldTM specifies that stone backfill material be used. Site-specific native soils can be used as backfill provided that the material substantially conforms to the backfill specification. AquaShieldTM engineers can assist contractors with backfill questions when using native soil. Slope of Drainage Pipe There is no specific drainage pipe slope limitation. Given that both the inlet and outlet pipe elevations are identical, the site design should consider piping configurations to accommodate the level flow-through piping design. AquaShieldTM engineers can work with site design engineers to facilitate an appropriate conveyance design. Maximum Water Quality Treatment Flow Rate The maximum water quality treatment flow rate varies by Aqua-Swirl® model size and should be taken into consideration for site designs. AquaShieldTM engineers can assist site designers with managing peak flow rates. Maintenance Requirements Aqua-Swirl® stormwater systems should be inspected and maintained following the recommendations and guidelines included in the Aqua-Swirl® Inspection & Maintenance Manual at: http://www.aquashieldinc.com/uploads/1/3/6/1/13618853/aqua-swirl_i_m_manual_11-16.pdf. Section 6 herein includes additional information. Driving Head Aqua-Swirl® technology does not require a driving head, beyond that required to achieve flow, to achieve operating conditions. Installation Limitations Pick weights vary by Aqua-Swirl® model size. Aqua-Swirl® can provide contractors with model- specific pick weights prior to delivery. Configurations Aqua-Swirl® technology is based on the tangential inlet to set up the vortex separation. Both off- line and on-line configurations can accommodate clockwise and counter clockwise flow processes. In addition, Aqua-Swirl® installations can utilize a range of inlet to outlet pipe angles. 32 Loading Aqua-Swirl® systems are designed for HS-25 or greater loading. Contact AquaShieldTM engineering staff when heavier loading conditions are anticipated. Pre-treatment Requirements The Aqua-Swirl® has no pre-treatment requirements. Depth to Seasonal High Water Table Aqua-Swirl® performance is independent of high groundwater conditions. AquaShieldTM routinely performs buoyancy calculations for all system installations to ensure long term functionality. Anti-floatation controls can be added for system installations when necessary. Pipe Size Each Aqua-Swirl® system has a maximum recommended inlet and outlet pipe size. The maximum recommended pipe size for each model is shown in Table A-2 of the Verification Appendix. 6. Maintenance Plan The Aqua-Swirl® Inspection and Maintenance Manual provided at installation is available at: http://www.aquashieldinc.com/uploads/1/3/6/1/13618853/aqua-swirl_i_m_manual_11-16.pdf. The Aqua-Swirl® is designed to remove suspended sediment, debris, floatables and free-floating oil from stormwater runoff using a single chamber for both treatment and pollutant storage. Periodic removal of these captured materials is essential to ensure long term functionality. Aqua- Swirl® performance may be diminished when sediment and/or oil storage capacities are reached. An Aqua-Swirl® Inspection and Maintenance manual is provided for each site delivery to track and document system operations. Both inspection and maintenance activities of the Aqua-Swirl® are simply performed and are accomplished from the surface. There are no moving parts, no internal components that need replacement, and no product-specific tools are needed from AquaShieldTM. A typical maintenance event for the cleaning of the swirl chamber can be accomplished with a vacuum truck. Aqua-Swirl® units utilize one or two manholes depending on model size to facilitate inspection and maintenance events. Inspection Upon installation and during construction, AquaShieldTM recommends that an Aqua-Swirl® treatment system be inspected every three months and the system be cleaned as needed. Essential elements of a swirl chamber inspection include observing floating materials and measuring the accumulated sediment at the base of the swirl chamber. The Aqua-Swirl® should be inspected and cleaned at the end of construction regardless of whether it has reached its capacity for sediment or oil storage. During the first year post -construction, the Aqua-Swirl® should again be inspected every three months and cleaned as needed depending on site conditions. The ultimate 33 inspection frequency will be determined by site-specific runoff conditions. Yet, AquaShieldTM recommends a minimum inspection frequency of once per year post-construction. AquaShieldTM recommends that the units be cleaned when sediment depth reaches 7 inches, representing 50% sediment storage capacity. The full sediment storage depth in the Aqua-Swirl® is 14 inches. Maintenance Clean-out frequency will ultimately be determined by post-installation and post-construction runoff conditions. As a general rule, AquaShieldTM recommends that Aqua-Swirl® systems be maintained at a minimum of once per year. There is no need to enter an Aqua-Swirl® chamber for inspections or maintenance activities. If entry is necessary, confined space entry procedures should be employed. Cleaning is performed by a vacuum truck, but it may be warranted to remove gross debris and floatable objects by an alternate suitable means (i.e., skimming pole with net). Any accumulated oil can be vacuumed from the surface. Accumulated sediment at the base of the swirl chamber can be removed via vacuum through the manhole(s) opening from the surface. There are no hidden or blind access chambers in the Aqua-Swirl® which allows for a complete cleaning of the unit. The manhole lid(s) should be replaced at the conclusion of inspection and maintenance activities. AquaShieldTM advises that all removed pollutants be disposed in accordance with all applicable local regulations and ordinances. 7. Statements The following signed statements from the manufacturer, third party observer and NJCAT are required to complete the NJCAT verification process. Additionally, this report has been subjected to public review and all comments and concerns have been satisfactorily addressed. 34 35 36 37 38 Center for Environmental Systems Stevens Institute of Technology One Castle Point Hoboken, NJ 07030-0000 October 7, 2016 Titus Magnanao NJDEP Division of Water Quality Bureau of Non-Point Pollution Control 401-02B PO Box 420 Trenton, NJ 08625-0420 Dear Mr. Magnanao, Based on my review, evaluation and assessment of the testing conducted on the Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System by AquaShield and observed by Dr. Gregory Williams, P.E. of Good Harbour Laboratories, Ltd., Mississauga, Ontario, the test protocol requirements contained in the “New Jersey Laboratory Testing Protocol to Assess Total Suspended Solids Removal by a Hydrodynamic Sedimentation Manufactured Treatment Device” (NJDEP HDS Protocol) were met or exceeded. Specifically: Test Sediment Feed The mean PSD of the AquaShield test sediments comply with the PSD criteria established by the NJDEP HDS protocol. The AquaShield removal efficiency test sediment PSD analysis was plotted against the NJDEP removal efficiency test PSD specification. The test sediment was shown to be finer than the sediment blend specified by the protocol (<75µ); the test sediment d50 was approximately 50 microns. The scour test sediment PSD analysis was plotted against the NJDEP removal efficiency test PSD specification and shown to be finer than specified by the protocol. 39 Removal Efficiency Testing In accordance with the NJDEP HDS Protocol, removal efficiency testing was executed on the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3, a 3.5 ft. diameter commercially available unit, in order to establish the ability of the Aqua-Swirl to remove the specified test sediment at 25%, 50%, 75%, 100% and 125% of the target MTFR. The Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 demonstrated 50.8% annualized weighted solids removal as defined in the NJDEP HDS Protocol. The flow rates, feed rates and influent concentration all met the NJDEP HDS test protocol’s coefficient of variance requirements and the background concentration for all five test runs never exceeded 20 mg/L. Scour Testing In order to demonstrate the ability of the Aqua-Swirl to be used as an online treatment device scour testing was conducted at greater than 200% of MTFR in accordance with the NJDEP HDS Protocol. The average flow rate during the online scour test was 1.44 cfs, which represents 203% of the MTFR (MTFR = 0.71 cfs). Background concentrations were 2 mg/L throughout the scour testing, which complies with the 20 mg/L maximum background concentration specified by the test protocol. Unadjusted effluent concentrations ranged from 4 mg/L to 18 mg/L. When adjusted for background concentrations, the effluent concentrations range from 2 to 16 mg/L with a mean of 9.7 mg/L. These results confirm that the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 did not scour at 203% MTFR and meets the criteria for online use. Maintenance Frequency The predicted maintenance frequency for all models is 56 months. Sincerely, Richard S. Magee, Sc.D., P.E., BCEE 40 8. References ASTM D422-63. Standard Test Method for Particle Size Analysis of Soils. ASTM D3977-97. Standard Test Methods for Determining Concentrations in Water Samples. AquaShieldTM, Inc. April 2016, layout revised June 2016. Verification Testing of the Aqua- Swirl® Model AS-3 in Accordance with the NJDEP Laboratory Testing Protocol 2013, Quality Assurance Project Plan. NJDEP 2013a. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Procedure for Obtaining Verification of a Stormwater Manufactured Treatment Device from New Jersey Corporation for Advanced Technology. Trenton, NJ. January 25, 2013. NJDEP 2013b. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Laboratory Protocol to Assess Total Suspended Solids Removal by a Hydrodynamic Sedimentation Manufactured Treatment Device. Trenton, NJ. January 25, 2013. 41 VERIFICATION APPENDIX 42 Introduction  Manufacturer: AquaShieldTM, Inc., 2733 Kanasita Drive, Suite 111, Chattanooga, Tennessee 37343. General Phone: (423) 870-8888. Website: www.aquashieldinc.com.  MTD: Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System (Aqua-Swirl®). Verified Aqua-Swirl® models are shown in Table A-1.  TSS Removal Rate: 50%  Offline or Online installation Detailed Specification  NJDEP sizing tables attached as Table A-1 and Table A-2.  Pick weights and installation procedures vary with model size. AquaS hieldTM provides contractors with project-specific unit pick weights and installation instructions as warranted prior to delivery.  Maximum recommended sediment depth prior to cleanout is 14 inches for all models.  An Inspection and Maintenance Manual is provided for each project installation and is available at: http://www.aquashieldinc.com/uploads/1/3/6/1/13618853/aqua- swirl_i_m_manual_11-16.pdf.  According to N.J.A.C. 7:8-5.5, NJDEP stormwater design requirements do not allow a hydrodynamic separator such as the Aqua-Swirl® to be used in series with another hydrodynamic separator to achieve an enhanced TSS removal rate. 43 Table A-1 MTFRs and Required Sediment Removal Intervals for Aqua-Swirl® Models Model Manhole Diameter (ft) NJDEP 50% TSS Maximum Treatment Flow Rate (cfs) Treatment Area (ft2) Hydraulic Loading Rate (gpm/ft2) 50% Maximum Sediment Storage Volume (ft3) Required Sediment Removal Interval1 (months) AS-2 2.5 0.36 4.9 33.4 2.86 56 AS-3 3.5 0.71 9.6 33.4 5.60 56 AS-4 4.5 1.18 15.9 33.4 9.28 56 AS-5 5 1.46 19.6 33.4 11.43 56 AS-6 6 2.11 28.3 33.4 16.51 56 AS-7 7 2.87 38.5 33.4 22.46 56 AS-8 8 3.74 50.3 33.4 29.34 56 AS-9 9 4.73 63.6 33.4 37.10 56 AS-10 10 5.84 78.5 33.4 45.79 56 AS-11 11 7.07 95.0 33.4 55.42 56 AS-12 12 8.42 113.1 33.4 65.98 56 AS-13 13 9.87 132.7 33.4 77.41 56 1Sediment Removal Interval (months) = (50% HDS MTD Max Sediment Storage Volume * 3.57) (MTFR * TSS Removal Efficiency) Required sediment removal interval calculated using equation specified in Appendix B, Part B of the NJDEP Laboratory Protocol for HDS MTDs. 44 Table A-2 Standard Dimensions for Aqua-Swirl® Models Model Maximum Treatment Flow Rate (cfs) Depth Below Invert (DBI)1 (ft) Scaling Depth2 (ft) Aspect Ratio Depth: Dia3 Sediment Sump Depth (ft) Maximum Pipe Diameter (in) AS-2 0.36 4.21 3.63 1.45 1.17 15 AS-3 0.71 5.67 5.08 1.45 1.17 21 AS-4 1.18 6.13 5.55 1.23 1.17 27 AS-5 1.46 6.75 6.17 1.23 1.17 30 AS-6 2.11 7.98 7.40 1.23 1.17 36 AS-7 2.87 9.22 8.64 1.23 1.17 42 AS-8 3.74 10.45 9.87 1.23 1.17 48 AS-9 4.73 11.68 11.10 1.23 1.17 54 AS-10 5.84 12.92 12.34 1.23 1.17 60 AS-11 7.07 14.15 13.57 1.23 1.17 66 AS-12 8.42 15.38 14.80 1.23 1.17 72 AS-13 9.87 16.62 16.04 1.23 1.17 78 1 DBI is the depth from the invert of inlet pipe to the bottom of the unit. 2 Scaling depth is the DBI minus 0.58 ft (7 in.), the location of the false floor of the tested unit. 3 The aspect ratio of scaling depth/model diameter for the tested unit is 1.45. An aspect ratio of 1.45±15% indicates that the treatment depth of the model is proportional as required by the protocol based on the tested model ratio of scaling depth to manhole diameter.