June 20, 2014

Mr. Robert Cooper

Office of Stormwater Management

Virginia Department of Environmental Quality

Re: Approval Request for Manufactured Treatment Device,

Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System

Dear Mr. Cooper,

AquaShieldTM

, Inc. is pleased to submit information in support of this approval request for the Aqua-

Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System. This approval request is submitted in accordance with Guidance

Memo No. 14-2009 dated May 15, 2014, Interim Use of Stormwater MTDs.

We are requesting that the Aqua-Swirl® be granted a Total Phosphorus (TP) removal credit of 40% based

on NJCAT-verified field testing of an Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5 for 80% TSS removal efficiency

following the TARP Tier II protocol. The Aqua-Swirl® currently holds NJDEP Laboratory Certification

and Washington State Department of Ecology General Use Level Designation (GULD) for Pretreatment

and Conditional Use Level Designation (CULD) for Basic (TSS) treatment. The CULD is based on the

NJCAT-verified field test allowing the Aqua-Swirl® to be used as a standalone device for 80% TSS

removal efficiency on a per storm event basis.

The following documents are attached for your evaluation in support of this 40% TP removal credit

approval request:

Attachment 1, MTD Registration Form

NJCAT Field Test Verification Report for Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5, November 2012

NJCAT Field Test Summary Letter, February 15, 2013

NJDEP Aqua-Swirl® Laboratory Test Certification Letter, August 31, 2011

Washington State Department of Ecology GULD and CULD for Aqua-Swirl®, October 2013

Aqua-Swirl® Inspection & Maintenance Manual

AquaShieldTM

Limited Warranty

Thank you for considering this information, and of course please let me know if additional information is

needed at this time.

Respectfully submitted,

AquaShieldTM

, Inc.

Mark B. Miller, P.G.

Research Scientist

27

33

Kan

asi

ta D

riv

e,

Su

ite 1

11 •

Ch

att

an

oo

ga

, T

N 3

73

43

• P

ho

ne (

423)

870-8

88

8 •

ww

w.a

qu

ash

ield

inc.c

om

1

Attachment 1

Manufactured Treatment Device (MTD) Registration

1. Manufactured Treatment Device Name:

Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System

2. Company Name: AquaShieldTM

, Inc.

Mailing Address: 2733 Kanasita Drive, Suite 111

City: Chattanooga

State: Tennessee

Zip: 37343

3. Contact Name (to whom questions should be addressed): Mark B. Miller

Mailing Address: 2733 Kanasita Drive, Suite 111

City: Chattanooga

State: Tennessee

Zip: 37343

Phone number: (423) 870-8888

Fax number: (423) 826-2112

E-mail address: mmiller@aquashieldinc.com

Web address: www.aquashieldinc.com

4. Technology

Specific size/capacity of MTD assessed (include units):

The Aqua-Swirl® is a single chamber vortex-type hydrodynamic separator. The effective

treatment area in the swirl chamber ranges from 2.5 feet to 13 feet in diameter, or an area

of 4.9 to 132.7 ft2. The Aqua-Swirl

® can be installed in a twin configuration to allow for

doubling the flow capacity. Aqua-Swirl® model names reflect the approximate or actual

diameter of the unit including sequential model numbers AS-2 through AS-13 (see sizing

chart below).

Range of drainage areas served by MTD (acres):

The customization of the Aqua-Swirl® design allows for a wide range of drainage areas to

be treated; hence, there is no absolute range of drainage areas served by the device. The

maximum drainage area is ultimately limited by the practicality of utilizing an Aqua-

Swirl® to meet the water quality flow rate for a given site. See sizing criteria below.

Include sizing chart or describe sizing criteria:

The Aqua-Swirl® is sized to meet the maximum water quality treatment flow rate

(WQTFR). The current NJDEP sizing chart is included in the attached Laboratory Test

Certification letter dated August 31, 2011. Subsequent to that certification letter, the

2

Aqua-Swirl® is now available in Models AS-11 and AS-13. Those two additional models

are listed in Table 1 of the Aqua-FilterTM

Field Certification letter dated June 13, 2014 for

the Hydrodynamic Pretreatment Chamber Sizing Chart (submitted separately). The Aqua-

Swirl® sizing chart for NJDEP is as follows:

Aqua-Swirl® Sizing Chart per NJDEP Criteria

Aqua-Swirl®

Model

Swirl Chamber

Diameter (ft)

Maximum

WQTFR

(cfs)

AS-2 2.5 0.6

AS-3 3.25 0.9

AS-4 4.25 1.6

AS-5 5 2.2

AS-6 6 3.2

AS-7 7 4.3

AS-8 8 5.6

AS-9 9 7.1

AS-10 10 8.8

AS-11 11 10.6

AS-12 12 12.6

AS-13 13 14.8

AS-XX Custom/Multiple

Intended application: on-line or offline:

The Aqua-Swirl® can be installed in an offline or on-line configuration. NJDEP

certification limits the Aqua-Swirl® to an offline application. The Washington State

Department of Ecology General Use Level Designation (GULD) for Pretreatment and

Conditional Use Level Designation (CULD) for Basic (TSS) standalone treatment allows

both offline or on-line applications.

Media used (if applicable):

Not applicable.

5. Warranty Information (describe, or provide web address):

See attached AquaShieldTM

Limited Warranty.

6. Treatment Type

X Hydrodynamic Structure

Filtering Structure

Manufactured Bioretention System

Provide Infiltration Rate (in/hr):

Other (describe):

3

7. Water Quality Treatment Mechanisms (check all that apply)

X Sedimentation/settling

Infiltration

Filtration

Adsorption/cation exchange

Chelating/precipitation

Chemical treatment

Biological uptake

Other (describe):

8. Performance Testing and Certification (check all that apply):

Performance Claim (include removal efficiencies for treated pollutants, flow criteria,

drainage area):

The Aqua-Swirl® NJCAT Field Test Verification Report for an offline AS-5 dated November

2012 is attached and is available on the NJCAT website at:

http://www.njcat.org/uploads/newDocs/AquaSwirlNJCATFieldVerification1112.pdf. An

NJCAT letter dated February 15, 2013 is also attached hereto that summarizes the AS-5 field

test results. From that letter:

“The Aqua-Swirl®, having a WQTFR of 41.2 gpm/ft

2, has demonstrated a suspended

sediment removal efficiency in excess of 80% on a net annual basis for a clay-loam textured

sediment in this field test.”

The field test drainage area was 1.19 acres. The average influent particle size was less than

100 microns (µm), with 72% of the particles being less than 63 µm in size. Average influent

TSS concentration was 132 mg/L. Average annual TSS removal efficiency was 86% and

87% for TSS and SSC, respectively.

The NJDEP Laboratory Test Certification letter for the Aqua-Swirl® is attached and available

on the NJDEP website at: http://www.njstormwater.org/treatment.htm. NJDEP certifies the

use of the Aqua-Swirl®

at a TSS removal rate of 50% based on a laboratory test loading rate

of 52.6 gpm/ft2. It should be kept in mind that NJDEP limits all hydrodynamic separators to a

50% TSS removal rate regardless of whether testing results demonstrate a greater removal

rate. The NJCAT-verified laboratory report dated 2005 of an AS-3 is available on the

NJCAT website at:

http://www.njcat.org/uploads/newDocs/AquaSwirl_AquaFilterNJCATLaboratoryVerificatio

n905.pdf. Note that the NJCAT field verification results supersede the NJCAT laboratory

verification results.

Specific size/Capacity of MTD assessed:

The AS-5 uses a single 5-foot diameter swirl chamber as the effective treatment area.

4

Has the MTD been "approved" by an established granting agency, e.g. New Jersey

Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) , Washington State Department of

Ecology, etc.

No X Yes; For each approval, indicate (1) the granting agency, (2) use level if awarded (3)

the protocol version under which performance testing occurred (if applicable), and (4)

the date of award, and attach award letter.

Attached is the NJDEP Laboratory Test Certification letter for the Aqua-Swirl® dated August

31, 2011 and is available on the NJDEP website at:

http://www.njstormwater.org/treatment.htm. Testing was performed by Tennessee Tech

University and followed the American Public Works Association Protocol, Appendix B: “An

Approach to Lab testing of Stormwater Treatment Facilities.”

The Aqua-Swirl® does not currently hold NJDEP Field Certification but is eligible to seek

that certification based on the NJCAT-verified AS-5 field test. A WQTFR of 41.2 gpm/ft2 is

supported based on the loading rates experienced during the testing period. The current

NJDEP Laboratory Test Certification provides for a higher WQTFR of 52.6 gpm/ft2.

AquaShieldTM

has elected to keep the current NJDEP laboratory certification in effect for the

time being, as there is no regulatory requirement that NJDEP certification automatically be

sought subsequent to the NJCAT verification.

Attached is the Washington State Department of Ecology GULD (Pretreatment) and CULD

(TSS) for the Aqua-Swirl® dated October 2013. The GULD was first issued based on the

results of the NJCAT-verified laboratory test. The CULD was issued based on the AS-5

NJCAT-verified field test. The GULD/CULD is available on Ecology’s website at:

http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/stormwater/newtech/technologies.html.

Was an established testing protocol followed?

No X Yes, (1) Provide name of testing protocol followed, (2) list any protocol deviations:

The AS-5 field test was performed in accordance with the TARP Tier II protocol (TARP,

2003) and New Jersey Tier II Stormwater Test Requirements – Amendments to TARP Tier II

Protocol (NJDEP, 2006). There were no deviations to the field protocol.

Laboratory testing of an AS-3 was performed by Tennessee Tech University and followed

the American Public Works Association Protocol, Appendix B: “An Approach to Lab testing

of Stormwater Treatment Facilities.”

Provide the information below and provide a performance report (attach report):

For lab tests:

i. Summarize the specific settings for each test run (flow rates, run times,

loading rates) and performance for each run:

5

The NJCAT verified laboratory test of the Aqua-Swirl® is attached and available

on the NJCAT website at http://www.njcat.org/verification-process/technology-

verification-database.html. Test runs and results are summarized as follows:

Flow Rate

(cfs / gpm/ft2)

TSS Removal

Efficiency (%)

0.2 / 10.8 89

0.5 / 27.1 82

0.8 / 43.3 57

1.2 / 64.9 18

ii. If a synthetic sediment product was used, include information about the

particle size distribution of the test material:

OK-110 test sediment is manufactured by US Silica and has a particle gradation

range from approximately 50 to 150 microns (µm), and a reported median (d50) of

110 µm. Other product development testing programs for the Aqua-Swirl®

performed by Alden Research Laboratory demonstrated that the d50 for OK-110

can be as low as 90 µm. Specific gravity for OK-110 is reported to be 2.65.

iii. If less than full-scale setup was tested, describe the ratio of that tested to the

full-scale MTD:

A full scale commercially available Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 was tested in the

laboratory.

For field tests:

i. Provide the address, average annual rainfall and characterized rainfall

pattern, and the average annual number of storms for the field-test location:

Field test site address: Burnt Mills Shopping Center

10731 Columbia Pike

Silver Spring, MD 20901

A total of 18 TARP-qualifying storms and 15.16 inches of rainfall were sampled

over 26 months between March 2009 and June 2011. The required minimum

number of storm is 15 and at least 15 inches of rain are to be sampled. A TARP-

qualifying storm is ≥0.1 inch. Available information indicates that the area

6

receives approximately 42 inches of annual rainfall. An average of 60% storm

flow volume was sampled, TARP requires at least 60%.

According to the NRCS document 210-VI-TR-55, Second Edition, June 1986, the

field test site is located in the Type II rainfall distribution region. This same

rainfall distribution type covers all of Virginia except the extreme southeastern

coastal area. It is considered that the AS-5 rainfall conditions would be consistent

with rainfall patterns for the greatest majority of Virginia (~95%).

ii. Provide the total contributing drainage area for the test site, percent of

impervious area in the drainage area, and percentages of land uses within the

drainage area (acres):

The AS-5 field test drainage area is approximately 1.19 acres with an estimated

100% impervious area. An asphalt covered parking lot represents ± 85% of the

drainage area, roof runoff ± 15%. A precise determination of roof runoff

contribution could not be ascertained but probably does not exceed 20%.

iii. Describe pretreatment, bypass conditions, or other special circumstances at

the test site:

The AS-5 is installed in an offline configuration using an upstream divergence

structure and a downstream convergence structure. It does not appear that bypass

conditions occurred during the testing period. No special or adverse

circumstances were encountered during the testing program.

iv. Provide the number of storms monitored and describe the monitored storm

events (amount of precipitation, duration, etc.):

A total of 18 TARP-qualifying storms were sampled. A total of 15.16 inches of

rain was sampled. The TARP protocol requires at least 15 inches of rain be

sampled. Storm durations ranged from 30 minutes up to 12 hours 5 minutes.

Storm sizes ranged from 0.11 to 4.4 inches and averaged 0.84 inches. A TARP-

qualifying storm is ≥0.1 inch.

v. Describe whether or not monitoring examined seasonal variation in MTD

performance:

The field test spanned 27 months that commenced in March 2009 and ended in

June 2011. Seasonal variations were monitored during the field testing program.

7

vi. If particle size distribution was determined for monitored runoff and/or

sediment collected by the MTD, provide this information:

Refer to pages 18-23, Tables 4 and 6, and Figures 6 and 7 of the NJCAT

verification report for a discussion of particle size distribution (PSD) for the AS-5

field test. Serial filtration was used to determine PSD and particles greater than

1,000 µm were excluded from all analyses. From Table 4, the influent PSD

distribution from three storms (as required by TARP protocol) indicates that

100% of the particles are finer than 1,000 µm, 94.2% are finer than 500 µm,

91.68% are finer than 250 µm, 85.57% are finer than 125 µm, 71.74% are finer

than 63 µm and no particles are finer than 1.5 µm. The AS-5 field test PSD is

finer grained than the PSD specified by the NJDEP January 2013 laboratory

protocol for hydrodynamic separators.

Figure 21 depicts the sediment layer that accumulated in the swirl chamber as

measured at the conclusion of the testing period. Table 6 summarizes the PSD of

the captured material. As designed, the sediment profile exhibits similarity to a

conical shaped sediment layer at the base of the swirl chamber.

9. MTD History:

How long has this specific model/design been on the market?

The Aqua-FilterTM

has been commercially available for 16 years, since 1998. The Aqua-

Swirl® is a well established product within the stormwater community.

List no more than three locations where the assessed model size(s) has/have been

installed in Virginia. If applicable, provide permitting authority. If known, provide

latitude & longitude:

The Aqua-Swirl® has been installed at several thousand locations nationwide and

internationally. AquaShieldTM

can provide additional information on installation

locations on a confidential basis. Three example Virginia locations are listed below:

(1) Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-8, Interstate Warehouse, Newport News, VA

(2) Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-4, The Prescott Condominiums, Alexandria, VA

(3) Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-6, Mine Road Square, Stafford, VA

List no more than three locations where the assessed model size(s) has/have been

installed outside of Virginia. If applicable, provide permitting authority. If known,

provide latitude & longitude:

In addition to the AS-5 test site, three example installation locations near Virginia are

listed below. AquaShieldTM

can provide additional information about installation

locations on a confidential basis.

8

(1) Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5, Beltway Plaza, Beltsville, MD

(2) Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5, Market Square, Rockville, MD

(3) Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5, Giant Foods, Waldorf, MD

10. Maintenance:

What is the generic inspection and maintenance plan/procedure? (attach necessary

documents):

See attached Aqua-Swirl® Inspection & Maintenance Manual. We recommend at least

quarterly inspections during the first year of installation to determine site runoff

conditions and predict maintenance cycles. We also recommend at least annual

inspections and maintenance of the swirl chamber and any external conveyance flow

structure(s). Inspections of the swirl chamber are performed from the surface without the

need for entry. The single swirl chamber allows for easy and quick inspections for

floatables and accumulated sediment at the base of the chamber.

Maintenance events typically require a vacuum truck to remove captured materials from

the chamber and any external structures. Confined space entry is not needed for the swirl

chamber maintenance event.

Is there a maintenance track record/history that can be documented?

X No, no track record.

Yes, track record exists; (provide maintenance track record, location, and sizing

of three to five MTDs installed in Virginia [preferred] or elsewhere):

AquaShieldTM

does not maintain a track record system for its systems, nor does it operate

its own fleet of maintenance equipment. Instead, AquaShieldTM

recommends that end

users/owners contract with independent local maintenance providers. We can assist with

that service at no cost upon request. AquaShieldTM

also has a nationwide service

agreement with a maintenance provider. We do not keep maintenance track records of

services provided by other independent contractors. End users, owners, contractors, etc.

can contact their local AquaShieldTM

representative or our corporate office directly to

order maintenance. It is not necessary for AquaShieldTM

personnel or its representative to

be present during inspections or maintenance events.

It is recognized in the industry that Montgomery County, Maryland administers and

operates a robust maintenance program for MTDs. AquaShieldTM

has a large number of

systems installed in that county, and to our knowledge the Aqua-Swirl® overall meets the

maintenance criteria that has been established by the county’s Department of Permit

Services.

Aqua-Swirl® systems have been installed in a number of state transportation departments

that perform maintenance on a routine basis. To our knowledge, there have been no

instances of adverse system functionality or maintenance circumstances.

9

Recognizing that maintenance is an integral function of the MTD, provide the

following: amount of runoff treated, the water quality of the runoff, and what is the

expected maintenance frequency for this MTD in Virginia, per year?

Aqua-Swirl® systems are sized according to local stormwater regulations. There is no

limitation to the amount of runoff the Aqua-Swirl® is capable of conveying provided that

maintenance is performed as required to ensure functionality. Annual maintenance

frequency is expected (and recommended) for Aqua-Swirl® systems in Virginia as

supported through field testing. Site conditions will ultimately dictate maintenance

frequency.

Total life expectancy of MTD when properly operated in Virginia and, if relevant,

life expectancy of media:

The Aqua-Swirl® will have a life expectancy of 50 years or more. There is no filter media

in the Aqua-Swirl®

.

For media or amendments functioning based on cation exchange or adsorption, how

long will the media last before breakthrough (indicator capacity is nearly reached)

occurs?

Not applicable.

For media or amendments functioning based on cation exchange or adsorption, how

has the longevity of the media or amendments been quantified prior to

breakthrough (attach necessary performance data or documents)?

Not applicable.

Is the maintenance procedure and/or are materials/components proprietary?

Yes, proprietary

X No, not proprietary

There are no proprietary maintenance procedures or materials used for the Aqua-Swirl®.

Maintenance complexity (check all that apply):

Confined space training required for maintenance

No confined space access is needed to clean the Aqua-Swirl®.

X Liquid pumping and transportation

Specify method:

A standard vacuum truck is commonly used to pump and transport liquids and floatable

oil for disposal according to local guidelines.

1

NJCAT TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION

AQUA-SWIRL® MODEL AS-5 STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM

AquaShieldTM, Inc.

November 2012

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction 5 1.1 NJCAT Program 5 1.2 Interim Certification 6 1.3 Applicant Profile 6 1.4 Key Contacts 7

2. The Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System 7

3. Technology System Evaluation: Project Plan 8

3.1 Introduction 8 3.2 Site and System Description 8 3.3 Sampling Design 9 3.4 Test Equipment and Apparatus 13 3.5 Test Methods and Procedures 13 3.6 Precipitation Measurements 14 3.7 Flow Measurements 14 3.8 Stormwater Data Collection 15 3.9 Treatment System Maintenance 17

4. Technology System Performance 17

4.1 Data Quality Assessment 17 4.2 Test Results 18 4.3 Statistical Analysis 22 4.4 Summary 24

5. Performance Verification 25

6. Net Environmental Benefit 26

7. References 26

Appendix A: Individual Storm Events 27

3

List of Tables

Table 1 Summary of Analytical Methods 14 Table 2 Summary of Storm Sampling Events – Storm Duration 15 Table 3 Storm Characteristics-(duration, size, peak intensity and peak loading rate) 16 Table 4 Influent PSD Summary (percent finer than each sieve/filter) 18 Table 5 Summary of TSS and SSC Removal Efficiencies and Influent Organic Content 19 Table 6 Captured Sediment PSD in Swirl Chamber 20 Table 7 Suspended Solids Event Sum of Loads Removal Efficiencies 23 Table 8 Storm Characteristics vs. Performance 24

4

List of Figures

Figure 1 Aqua-Swirl® Mode of Operation 8

Figure 2 Site Location Map 10 Figure 3 Site Plan 11 Figure 4 Sample Locations 12 Figure 5 Storm Intensity vs. Peak Loading Rate 16

Figure 6 Field Test PSD vs. Laboratory PSD 19 Figure 7 Sediment Accumulation Profile in AS-5 Swirl Chamber 21 Figure 8 Swirl Chamber PSD - Influent (side), Center, Effluent (side) 22 Figure 9 AS-5 Field Performance Curves 25

5

1. Introduction 1.1 New Jersey Corporation for Advance Technology (NJCAT) Program NJCAT is a not-for-profit corporation to promote in New Jersey the retention and growth of technology-based businesses in emerging fields such as environmental and energy technologies. NJCAT provides innovators with the regulatory, commercial, technological and financial assistance required to bring their ideas to market successfully. Specifically, NJCAT functions to:

• Advance policy strategies and regulatory mechanisms to promote technology commercialization;

• Identify, evaluate, and recommend specific technologies for which the regulatory and commercialization process should be facilitated;

• Facilitate funding and commercial relationships/alliances to bring new technologies to market and new business to the state; and

• Assist in the identification of markets and applications for commercialized technologies.

The technology verification program specifically encourages collaboration between vendors and users of technology. Through this program, teams of academic and business professionals are formed to implement a comprehensive evaluation of vendor specific performance claims. Thus, suppliers have the competitive edge of an independent third party confirmation of claims. Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 13:1D-134 et seq. (Energy and Environmental Technology Verification Program) the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) and NJCAT have established a Performance Partnership Agreement (PPA) whereby NJCAT performs the technology verification review and NJDEP certifies that the technology meets the regulatory intent and that there is a net beneficial environmental effect of the technology. In addition, NJDEP/NJCAT work in conjunction to develop expedited or more efficient timeframes for review and decision-making of permits or approvals associated with the verified/certified technology. The PPA also requires that: • The NJDEP shall enter into reciprocal environmental technology agreements concerning the

evaluation and verification protocols with the United States Environmental Protection Agency, other local required or national environmental agencies, entities or groups in other states and New Jersey for the purpose of encouraging and permitting the reciprocal acceptance of technology data and information concerning the evaluation and verification of energy and environmental technologies; and

• The NJDEP shall work closely with the State Treasurer to include in State bid specifications,

as deemed appropriate by the State Treasurer, any technology verified under the Energy and Environment Technology Verification Program.

6

1.2 Interim Certification AquaShieldTM, Inc. (AquaShieldTM) manufactures a stormwater treatment system known as the Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System. Treatment to stormwater runoff is accomplished via hydrodynamic separation technology. AquaShieldTM received NJCAT verification of claims for the Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System in September 2005 and a Conditional Interim Certification (CIC) was issued by NJDEP dated November 28, 2005 based upon the results of independent laboratory studies. The Aqua-Swirl® received Manufactured Treatment Device (MTD) Laboratory Test Certification from NJDEP effective September 1, 2011. This certification was issued subsequent to rescinding the Conditional Interim Certification for the Aqua-Swirl®. The current laboratory certification status applies to all eligible hydrodynamic separators. A major condition of the 2005 CIC was the execution of a field evaluation in accordance with the Technology Acceptance Reciprocity Partnership (TARP) Tier II Protocol (TARP, 2003) and New Jersey Tier II Stormwater Test Requirements—Amendments to TARP Tier II Protocol (NJDEP, 2006). A Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Field Evaluation was completed in December of 2009 and revised in May 2010; monitoring activities commenced in March 2009. The TARP Tier II Protocol is designed to evaluate Total Suspended Solids (TSS) removal on an annual basis.

1.3 Applicant Profile

AquaShieldTM manufactures stormwater treatment systems used worldwide to protect sensitive receiving waters from the harmful effects of stormwater. The commitment of AquaShieldTM to provide quality environmental solutions began in the early 1980s with its founder solving surface water and groundwater contaminant issues at industrial and commercial facilities through his previously owned environmental consulting/contracting companies. The first product, a catch basin insert (now known as the Aqua-Guardian™), was introduced in 1997 for use at point source problem sites such as gas stations, fast food restaurants and high traffic parking lots. The AquaShieldTM stormwater filtration technology expanded into underground structures in 1999 with the installation of a "treatment train" structure utilizing pretreatment sediment removal incorporated with a filtration chamber to remove fine contaminants. This became the Aqua-FilterTM Stormwater Filtration System.

Early in 2000, AquaShieldTM formed its corporate office in Chattanooga, Tennessee. AquaShieldTM received patents for treatment systems that integrated hydrodynamic swirl separation technology for pretreatment with high flow filtration technology in a single device. In 2001, the stand- alone Aqua-Swirl® hydrodynamic swirl concentrator was introduced to meet the increasing requests for primary pollutant removal of sediment and floatable debris and oils. Accordingly, AquaShieldTM offers three essential patented alternatives for treating stormwater and industrial runoff: the Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System, the Aqua-FilterTM Stormwater Filtration System, and the Aqua-Guardian™ Catch Basin Insert. Other derivatives of these core products have been adapted for customers needing further enhanced water treatment. These products distinguish themselves from other systems with their high performance and lightweight construction material, providing flexibility and adaptation to site-specific conditions. Each product arrives at the project job site completely assembled and ready for installation.

7

1.4 Key Contacts

Richard S. Magee, Sc.D., P.E., BCEE Technical Director NJ Corporation for Advanced Technology Center for Environmental Systems Stevens Institute of Technology Castle Point on Hudson Hoboken, NJ 07030 201-216-8081 973-879-3056 mobile rsmagee@rcn.com

Mr. J. Kelly Williamson President AquaShieldTM Inc. 2705 Kanasita Drive Chattanooga, Tennessee 37343 423-870-8888 jkwilliamson@aquashieldinc.com

Mr. Mark B. Miller, P.G. Research Scientist AquaShieldTM, Inc. 2705 Kanasita Drive Chattanooga, Tennessee 37343 423-870-8888 mmiller@aquashieldinc.com

2. The Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System The Aqua-Swirl® is a single chamber hydrodynamic separator that provides for the removal of sediment, debris and free-floating oil. The Aqua-Swirl® uses a swirl chamber as the effective horizontal treatment area that creates a swirling or vortex motion. The decreasing flow rate in the swirl chamber causes suspended material to fall out of suspension and settle to the bottom of the chamber. An inner arched baffle minimizes the potential for oil and debris to be discharged. Operation begins when stormwater enters the Aqua-Swirl® through a tangential inlet pipe which produces a circular (or vortex) flow pattern that causes contaminants to settle. Since stormwater flow is intermittent by nature, the Aqua-Swirl® retains water between storm events providing both dynamic and quiescent settling of inorganic solids. Dynamic settling occurs during each storm event, while the quiescent settling takes place between successive storms. A combination of gravitational and hydrodynamic drag forces allows the solids to drop out of the flow and migrate toward the center of the chamber where velocities are the lowest. It is recognized that the small sized settleable solids in stormwater runoff exhibit low settling velocities. Therefore, the volume of water retained in the Aqua-Swirl® provides the quiescent settling that increases suspended sediment removal performance. Furthermore, due to finer sediment adhering onto larger particles, these large particles settle rather than remain in suspension.

8

The Aqua-Swirl® provides full treatment of the most contaminated first flush, while the cleaner peak storm flow is diverted and channeled through the main conveyance pipe. The treated flow exits the Aqua-Swirl® behind the arched inner baffle. The top of the baffle is sealed across the treatment channel, thereby eliminating any possibility of floatable pollutants to escape the system. A vent pipe is extended up the riser to expose the back side of the baffle to atmospheric conditions, thereby preventing a siphon from forming at the bottom of the baffle. Figure 1 illustrates stormwater flow through the Aqua-Swirl® treatment unit. The Aqua-Swirl® can be operated in an offline configuration providing full treatment of the first flush with installation of additional manhole structures for diverging flow to the Aqua-Swirl® for treatment and converging back to the exiting main conveyance storm drainage.

Figure 1. Aqua-Swirl® Mode of Operation Cleanout of captured material is required when the sediment storage capacity has been reached. The depth to the sediment pile can easily be determined using a stadia rod or tape. A vacuum truck is typically used to remove the accumulated sediment and debris. 3. Technology System Evaluation: Project Plan 3.1 Introduction The TARP field test of the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5 (5-ft. swirl diameter chamber; 45 ft3 sediment storage capacity) that is the subject of this report (AECOM 2012) was conducted by AECOM, 4 Neshaminy Interplex, Suite 300, Trevose, Pennsylvania 19053. Prior to initiating the field test the source area rainfall and pollutant characteristics were reviewed with NJCAT and confirmed as acceptable for performing a TARP field study.

Outlet

9

3.2 Site and System Description Field verification testing was conducted at the Burnt Mills Shopping Center in Silver Spring, Montgomery County, Maryland. The test site drainage area is an asphalt covered parking lot with landscaped areas and roof runoff on an urban retail shopping center. The total drainage area is estimated at 1.19 acres. An offline Aqua-Swirl® AS-5 treatment unit was installed as the upstream component of a treatment train system to provide sediment removal from parking lot stormwater runoff. An aerial site plan of the Burnt Mills Shopping Center is presented as Figure 2. A site plan of the Burnt Mills Shopping Center including the location of the Aqua-Swirl® is presented as Figure 3. Parking lot stormwater runoff is collected in catch basins and conveyed to the Aqua-Swirl® via underground piping. Specific requirements for field verification testing under the TARP Tier II protocol includes the definition of a qualified storm event, representative sample collection, the number of storm events required to be tested and specific conditions regarding the influent characteristics of the stormwater to be treated. Qualified storm event sampling is defined as:

• a storm event with at least 0.1 inch of rainfall; • a minimum inter-event period of six hours, where cessation of flow from the system is

the inter-event period; • flow-weighted composite samples were obtained covering a minimum of 60% of the total

storm flow, including as much of the first 20% of the storm as possible; and • a minimum of six water quality samples were collected per storm event.

3.3 Sampling Design

Sampling activities involved the collection of stormwater influent and effluent sample pairs during qualified storm events. Sampling procedures were developed according to guidance given in TARP and in the "Field Sampling Procedures Manual," NJDEP, August 2005. The influent and effluent samples were collected from locations that were as close in proximity to the Aqua-Swirl® as possible to minimize potential sources of contamination that would impact the Best Management Practice (BMP) efficiency data. Influent samples were collected immediately upstream of the Aqua-Swirl®. Piping from the divergence structure conveys stormwater to the Aqua-Swirl®. Effluent samples were collected from the effluent pipe that leads directly from the swirl chamber to the downstream component of the treatment train system. Figure 4 presents the sampling locations for the Aqua-Swirl®.

10

11

12

13

3.4 Test Equipment and Apparatus The ISCO Portable Sampler Model 6712 was used as the programmable automatic sampler for field verification testing. This sampler can be programmed to collect specific sample volumes over specified time periods and can be used in conjunction with an area velocity meter to allow flow proportional composite sampling. An ISCO 750 Area Velocity Meter was used to record flow during a storm event. The ISCO 750 uses Doppler technology to measure average velocity in the flow stream. A pressure transducer measures liquid depth to determine flow area. The ISCO 6712, when interfaced with the ISCO 750, calculates flow rate (cubic feet per second) by multiplying the area (square feet) of the flow stream by its average velocity (feet per second). A liquid level actuator was used to simultaneously activate the ISCO 750 Area Velocity Meter and the ISCO 6712 sampler once flow was present ensuring that the first flush of each storm event was sampled. Six influent and effluent sample pairs were collected and submitted to the laboratory for 17 of the 18 storm events. For the 18th event five samples were collected and submitted. Collected samples were transferred through a cone sample splitter (Dekaport Cone Sample Splitter) fitted with a 4-inch diameter 1,000 micron (μm) sieve. Particles smaller than 1,000 µm passed through the sieve and were collected in sample bottles. The sample bottles were placed on ice and promptly shipped to the laboratory to ensure that all analytical methodology holding times were met. The TARP requirement for a minimum of six samples to be collected from each storm was interpreted that a minimum of six individual composite samples of the influent and effluent were required to be submitted for laboratory analysis. The six individual sample analytical results were then averaged to establish an overall influent and effluent composite analytical result. For 17 of the 18 events a total of twenty-four 1-liter aliquots were collected during each sampling event providing the volume required to prepare six individual composite samples for laboratory analysis. For one event only twenty 1-liter aliquots were collected since the samplers shut off due to insufficient flow (liquid level actuator). The collection of six individual samples from 24 aliquots provided additional data concerning the fluctuation of influent loading and removal efficiency over the storm period, and well exceeded the TARP guidelines of a minimum of six and a goal of 10 sample aliquots collected during each storm. Due to the need to collect sufficient sample volumes for the required analyses, storm durations had to be conservatively predicted which led to varying sampling durations, and consequently event coverage, within the rainfall period. Sampling was suspended when the 24 1-liter aliquots were collected.

3.5 Test Methods and Procedures Table 1 presents the analytical methods used for the field testing program. Suspended sediment was determined by both the Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Suspended Sediment Concentration (SSC) methods. Total Volatile Suspended Solids (TVSS) analysis was also performed to assess the organic content of the suspended sediment. The TSS, SSC and TVSS results are reported as mg/L by the laboratory. Particle size distribution (PSD) was determined by serial filtration techniques using sieves sized at 1,000, 500, 250, 125, 63 µm and filter paper at 1.5 µm.

14

Table 1 Summary of Analytical Methods

Parameter Matrix Method Reference

Total Suspended Solids Suspended-Sediment Concentration

Total Volatile Suspended Solids

Water (Influent, Effluent)

SM 2540D ASTM D3977

EPA Method 160.4

Particle Size Distribution Water (Influent, Effluent) Serial Filtration Method

All analyses of samples were performed by a NELAC and New Jersey certified laboratory, Test America, Inc. of Burlington, Vermont.

3.6 Precipitation Measurements An on-site rain gauge was used to measure the total precipitation for each sampling event. In addition, the nearest available documented weather station (Kemp Mill/Silver Spring), located approximately 1.5 miles from the Burnt Mills Shopping Center, was used to verify qualified storm events and the total precipitation for each sampling event. The weather station’s recorded precipitation data over time was also used to determine rainfall intensity during each sampling event. Table 2 presents a summary of the sampling precipitation events and sampling duration for each event. The total precipitation sampled was 15.16 inches with storm sizes ranging from a low of 0.11 inches to a high of 4.40 inches. TARP guidelines specify that a minimum qualifying event is 0.1 inches. Storm durations ranged from 30 minutes to 12 hours 5 minutes. The average precipitation during the stormwater sampling program was 0.84 inches. The storm duration coverage for each storm fluctuated from 30 to 80 percent with an overall average sampling time period of the storms of 60%. Storm durations were estimated based upon the recorded precipitation at the Kemp Mill/Silver Spring weather station, which only had a 2.6% variance from the test site measured participation. For all storm events, samples were collected from the first 20% of the total storm event flow. Hydrographs of the recorded effluent flows over time during each sampling event and the measured precipitation over time as recorded at the Kemp Mill/Silver Spring weather station were developed and are presented in Appendix A. The hydrographs provide a graphic illustration of the recorded flows, rainfall intensity and when flow-weighted composite samples were collected during each storm event. The hydrographs also provide a graphic presentation of the sampling duration for each storm event; the area under the precipitation curve illustrates the percent storm coverage (Table 3).

3.7 Flow Measurements Flows were recorded during each sampling event, downloaded and summarized to provide flow measurements for each sampling interval. These flow measurements were used to calculate

15

hydraulic loading rates to the Aqua-Swirl® as well as to determine mass loading of suspended solids during each sampling event.

Table 2 Summary of Storm Sampling Events – Storm Duration

Sampling Event Sample Date Storm Duration

Storm Size

Sampling Duration

Storm

Coverage (%)

(hr:min) (inches) (hr:min) 1 March 14, 2009 0:30 0.11 0:22 70 2 April 1, 2009 0:50 0.18 0:33 70 3 April 6, 2009 2:00 0.15 1:15 60 4 December 25-26, 2009 11:45 0.56 7:22 60 5 January 17, 2010 4:48 0.59 3:15 70 6 July 25, 2010 0:46 0.55 0:38 80 7 August 12, 2010 3:00 1.82 1:42 60 8 September 12, 2010 3:45 0.61 2:59 80 9 September 29-30, 2010 12:05 4.40 4:52 40 10 December 1, 2010 6:20 0.71 3:12 50 11 December 11, 2010 3:40 0.72 1:25 40 12 February 25, 2011 2:15 0.29 1:30 70 13 March 6, 2011 4:50 1.42 1:59 40 14 March 15-16, 2011 5:06 0.42 3:00 60 15 April 8, 2011 3:55 0.52 1:31 40 16 April 28, 2011 2:19 0.23 1:33 70 17 May 14, 2011 3:05 0.85 1:12 40 18 June 16, 2011 3:20 1.03 0:59 30 Average 0.84 60 Total 15.16

3.8 Stormwater Data Collection

Table 3 summarizes the storm characteristics (coverage, size, peak intensity and peak loading rate). Peak storm intensities ranged from 0.15 to 5.49 inches per hour (in/hr.). Peak loading rates ranged from 1.9 to 35.4 gallons per minute per square foot (gpm/ft2). The AS-5 uses a five foot diameter (19.6 square foot) effective treatment area. The recorded flows for each sampling interval were converted from cfs to gpm. The loading rates were then calculated by dividing the flow rate for each sampling interval by the cross-sectional area of the AS-5. Figure 5 compares the storm intensities to the peak loading rates for the 18 storms. The plot demonstrates that the relationship between peak intensities and peak loading rates were consistent during the testing period. TARP guidelines specify that at least two storms must exceed 75% of the design treatment capacity. Sampling events #7 and #9 exhibited the highest loading rates of 30.9 and 35.4 gpm/ft2 respectively, only exceeding 75% of a treatment capacity of 41.2 gpm/ft2.

16

Table 3 Storm Characteristics-(coverage, size, peak intensity and peak loading rate)

Sampling Event Sample Storm

Duration Storm Size

Storm Coverage

Peak Storm

Intensity

Peak Loading

Rate Date (hr:min) (inches) (%) (in/hr) (gpm/ft2) 1 March 14, 2009 0:30 0.11 60 0.26 4.1 2 April 1, 2009 0:50 0.18 50 0.46 8.1 3 April 6, 2009 2:00 0.15 60 0.26 4.8 4 December 25-26, 2009 11:45 0.56 60 0.38 4.8 5 January 17, 2010 4:48 0.59 60 0.42 10.4 6 July 25, 2010 0:46 0.55 100 1.21 16.9 7 August 12, 2010 3:00 1.82 90 5.49 30.9 8 September 12, 2010 3:45 0.61 80 0.49 13.1 9 September 29-30, 2010 12:05 4.40 20 2.56 35.4 10 December 1, 2010 6:20 0.71 70 1.82 4.1 11 December 11, 2010 3:40 0.72 50 0.58 2.3 12 February 25, 2011 2:15 0.29 80 0.25 4.1 13 March 6, 2011 4:50 1.42 50 0.46 11.0 14 March 15-16, 2011 5:06 0.42 40 0.35 1.9 15 April 8, 2011 3:55 0.52 80 0.15 3.4 16 April 28, 2011 2:19 0.23 90 0.23 12.5 17 May 14, 2011 3:05 0.85 20 0.47 5.7 18 June 16, 2011 3:20 1.03 80 0.91 13.1 Average 0.84 60 0.93 10.4

Total 15.16

Figure 5. Storm Intensity vs. Peak Loading Rate

17

Sizing a hydrodynamic separator is typically based on a peak design water quality flow. This peak flow is calculated by one of several different methodologies that can include the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) methodology, the Rational Method or the Modified Rational Method. Utilizing the NRCS methodology to size a hydrodynamic separator for this site, pertinent site-specific data was entered into Technical Release 20 – Computer Program for Project Formulation: Hydrology (TR-20). This sizing method established a peak runoff flow rate of 2.3 cfs which required installation of an Aqua-Swirl® AS-5 (NJDEP certified water quality treatment flow rate (WQTFR) of 52.6 gpm/ft²). Field test data indicates a maximum storm intensity of 5.49 in/hr. with an associated peak loading rate of 30.9 gpm/ft². The highest peak loading rate recorded was 35.4 gpm/ft2 with an associated maximum storm intensity of 2.56 in/hr. Unfortunately, these two storms did not generate a loading rate greater than 75% of the NJDEP certified WQTFR of 52.6 gpm/ft2, thus limiting the field verification WQTFR to 41.2 gpm/ft2. These results demonstrate that a calculated site design loading rate may not actually occur within the field testing program timeline.

3.9 Treatment System Maintenance Annual maintenance of the Aqua-Swirl® system was conducted at the Burnt Mills Shopping Center by technicians affiliated with the Montgomery County Stormwater Sewer Maintenance Program. A vacuum truck was used to empty all captured materials (floatables and settleable solids) and flush the Aqua-Swirl® and associated catch basins and divergence and convergence structures. Continued inspections of the Aqua-Swirl® during the testing program indicated that the device exhibited long term functionality and had been properly maintained as recommended by the manufacturer. Disposal of recovered materials from the Aqua-Swirl® was not the responsibility of AquaShieldTM or its agent(s) during the testing program. 4. Technology System Performance

4.1 Data Quality Assessment In accordance with the QAPP, quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) samples were collected during the certification program to confirm the precision and accuracy of the sampling and analysis program. Two types of QA/QC samples were collected: field duplicates and field blanks. Field duplicate stormwater samples were collected in identical, laboratory prepared bottles and analyzed for the same parameters. The field duplicate sample was collected at the same location and from the same sample aliquot as the original sample. One field duplicate stormwater sample and one field blank sample was collected for each of the last 15 sampling events (the first three sampling events characterized the site). The field blank was collected by pouring laboratory provided distilled/deionized water through the cone sample splitter into a decontaminated sample bottle, then into the appropriate sample containers for analysis. Field duplicate analytical results showed acceptable reproducibility of the majority of sampling events. There were two isolated events with field duplicate sample results that were outliers; however, the overall relative percent difference (RPD) indicated acceptable reproducibility in

18

sampling results. The overall average RPD was within 30%. If the two identified outliers (3/15/2011 and 5/14/2011) were not included, the average RPD decreased to less than 20% which is the RPD objective identified in the QAPP. All field blank results were below the method detection limits with the exception of two sampling events (12/11/2010 and 4/8/2011) that exhibited very low TVSS, TSS and SSC concentrations compared to measured influent and effluent concentrations.. The field blank results confirmed that the decontamination procedures used for the sampling apparatus and the cone splitter were effective at minimizing any cross contamination during sampling and analysis. Review of the overall QA/QC procedures and analytical results confirmed that the field sampling procedures and analytical methodologies employed produced reliable and representative analytical results.

4.2 Test Results Particle Size Distributions (PSD) Influent samples from three storm events were analyzed for PSD by the serial filtration method. Table 4 summarizes the influent particle size gradations. Average particle sizes from the three samples exhibited 72% silt (2 to 63 µm), 20% very-fine to fine-grained sand (>63 to 250 µm), 2% medium-grained sand (>250 to 500 µm) and 6% coarse sand (>500 to 1,000 µm) .

Table 4 Influent PSD Summary (percent finer than each sieve/filter)

Storm Event 1,000 µm

500 µm

250 µm

125 µm

63 µm

1.5 µm

September 12, 2010 100.00 97.41 92.48 84.44 62.96 0.00 December 1, 2010 100.00 93.16 90.99 87.19 73.71 0.00 December 11, 2010 100.00 92.04 91.59 85.08 78.56 0.00

Average 100.00 94.20 91.68 85.57 71.74 0.00 TARP protocol specifies that influent particles PSD d50 be <100 µm in size. The site PSD complies with the testing protocol and indicates a clay-loam texture sediment influent. Figure 6 compares the test site influent PSD to the NJDEP laboratory test PSD standard for hydrodynamic separators. The graph indicates overall that the test site particulates were finer grained than the NJDEP PSD standard. Particulate Matter Removal Efficiency Six influent and effluent sample pairs (in one case only 5 pairs) were composited for laboratory analysis from the 24 (or in one case 20) 1-liter aliquots that were collected during each sampling event. Table 5 summarizes the average of the six (or 5) TSS and SSC influent and effluent results and the average of the six (or 5) removal efficiencies for each stormwater event.

19

Figure 6. Field Test PSD vs. Laboratory PSD

Table 5 Summary of TSS and SSC Removal Efficiencies and Influent Organic Content

Sampling Event Date

Average Influent TSS

Concentration (mg/L)

Average Effluent TSS Concentration

(mg/L)

Average TSS

Removal Efficiency

(%)

Average. Influent

SSC (mg/L)

Average Effluent

SSC (mg/L)

Average SSC

Removal Efficiency

(%)

% TVSS of TSS

1 March 14, 2009 221 3.7 98.3 169.5 1.0 99.3 NA

2 April 1, 2009 85.0 9.6 86.8 57.8 10.0 80.0 NA

3 April 6, 2009 93.8 14.3 82.5 59.8 7.7 85.5 NA

4 December 25-26, 2009 223.7 2.2 99.0 297.3 1.4 99.5 NA

5 January 17, 2010 174.0 8.1 94.8 169.7 5.9 96.3 NA

6 July 25, 2010 55.7 2.2 94.1 73.4 1.7 96.5 38.8

7 August 12, 2010 27.9 8.6 63.9 27.0 7.0 68.0 22.3

8 September 12, 2010 266.3 6.1 96.5 352.7 6.7 96.6 31.0

9 September 29-30, 2010 338.9 78.8 59.9 420.0 104.6 57.4 20.9

10 December 1, 2010 72.2 6.2 89.1 98.2 7.4 86.9 16.7

11 December 11, 2010 85.7 3.1 96.1 85.9 1.6 97.7 29.2

12 February 25, 2011 183.3 18.5 73.0 241.3 25.8 72.8 29.0

13 March 6, 2011 95.4 12.9 86.1 275.8 17.0 92.5 25.4

14 March 15-16, 2011 40.3 5.3 88.1 79.7 6.8 91.7 24.4

15 April 8, 2011 91.9 3.5 94.1 113.1 3.6 95.8 25.2

16 April 28, 2011 132.9 12.3 80.4 168.7 13.1 82.0 71.4

17 May 14, 2011 155.5 11.6 90.6 154.6 12.9 90.3 48.9

18 June 16, 2011 27.8 6.0 74.3 34.3 5.1 82.7 48.9

Average 131.7 11.8 86.0 144.5 13.3 87.3 33.2

20

Cumulative average sediment removal efficiencies for the 18 storms was 86% for the TSS method and 87% for the SSC method. Individual removal efficiencies ranged from 60 to 99% for TSS, and 57 to 99% for SSC. Average influent TSS and SSC concentrations were 132 and 145 mg/L, respectively. Average effluent TSS and SSC concentrations were 12 and 13 mg/L, respectively. Data indicates that the sediment concentrations determined by the TSS and SSC methods compare closely. The average TVSS removal rate was 68%, with an average influent concentration of 39 mg/L. The percentage TVSS of the TSS concentrations averaged 33% (Table 5). It is concluded that the influent TSS concentrations and percentages of organic material in the suspended sediment are acceptable for this field evaluation program. Particle Size Distribution of Captured Sediment In order to determine the PSD of the solids that had settled and have been retained within the swirl chamber since the prior maintenance event on November 30, 2010, three sediment samples were collected on October 13, 2011. Samples were collected on the influent side, center and effluent side of the accumulated sediment layer. The PSD analysis was performed by the serial filtration method as cited above. Table 6 summarizes the PSD of samples retained in the swirl chamber. Figure 7 illustrates the accumulated form of the captured sediment in cross-sectional view. The influent side, center and effluent side locations were measured to be three, six and two inches thick, respectively. As designed, the vortex motion of water within the swirl chamber provides for the capture of sediment and retention toward the center of the chamber. AquaShield cites a maximum of 30 inches sediment depth to trigger a maintenance event. This is based on a cone shaped sediment pile such that the edges of the cone measure 24 inches up from the base and the crest (top) of the cone measures 36 inches up from the base.

Table 6 Captured Sediment PSD in Swirl Chamber

% Finer than Each Filter Summary

Sample ID Filter Size (µm)

1,000 500 250 125 63 1.5 SWIRL Influent (side) 100.00% 62.93% 43.10% 30.60% 30.60% 0.00%

SWIRL Center 100.00% 93.32% 85.80% 59.29% 59.29% 0.00% SWIRL Effluent (side) 100.00% 87.61% 77.04% 59.69% 38.81% 0.00%

Average 100.00% 81.29% 68.65% 49.86% 42.90% 0.00% The swirl chamber PSD data indicates that the solids retained within the tested Aqua-Swirl® can be classified a sandy-clay textured sediment. Average particle sizes from the three swirl chamber sediment samples exhibited 43% silt (2 to 63 µm), 26% very-fine to fine-grained sand (>63 to 250 µm), 12% medium-grained sand (>250 to 500 µm) and 19% coarse sand (>500 to 1,000 µm).

21

22

Figure 8 illustrates the particulate distribution for the three swirl chamber samples. Data indicates that the sediment accumulation in the center portion of the swirl chamber is finer grained than the influent and effluent edge samples. This would be expected as the fine-grained, low-settling velocity sediment continues to accumulate in the center of the swirl chamber as a result of the vortex water motion during repeated storm events.

Figure 8. Swirl Chamber PSD – Influent (side), Center, Effluent (side)

4.3 Statistical Analysis Statistical analysis was conducted on the sampling program data to ensure that the collected data were reliable, significant and within confidence limits. Initially the removal efficiency for each analytical parameter was evaluated to determine confidence intervals and associated variance. The coefficient of variation (COV) was calculated using the calculated TSS and SSC removal efficiencies for all sampling events. The calculated COV for TSS and SSC removal efficiencies for all sampling events was estimated at 13%. Review of the removal efficiency data revealed there was one data set (September 29-30, 2010) that was an outlier with reduced removal efficiencies for TSS and SSC (59.9% and 57.4%, respectively) when compared to the remaining removal efficiencies. If this one outlier event is removed from the data set the COV reduces to 10% indicating that the calculated removal efficiencies for both TSS and SSC removal were within acceptable limits identified in the TARP protocol. To evaluate the significance of differences between influent and effluent mean concentrations, the Mann-Whitney Rank U Test was used. The Mann-Whitney Rank U Test is a non-parametric statistical hypothesis test for assessing whether two independent samples of observations have equally large values. The null hypothesis concluded that there was a statistically significant difference between influent and effluent mean TSS and SSC concentrations.

23

The summation of loads method was used to validate calculated removal efficiencies. This method defines removal efficiency as a percentage based on the ratio of the summation of all incoming loads to summation of all outlet loads. The loads were calculated based upon the sample concentrations and associated recorded flow through the treatment unit. For values that were reported as non-detect, one-half of the laboratory method detection limit was used for calculating loadings. Table 7 presents a summary of the calculated summation of loads for each sampling event and the overall removal efficiencies. The summation of loads method calculated an overall removal efficiency of 84% for TSS and SSC. The summation of loads calculations were affected by the September 29-30, 2011 storm event that had significantly higher loadings and reduced removal efficiency when compared to the other 17 events. If this outlier storm event is excluded from the summation of loads calculations, the overall removal efficiency increases to 95% for TSS and 96% for SSC. The summation of loads calculations confirmed the calculated removal efficiencies based upon TSS and SSC concentrations as applied to the overall sampling program.

Table 7 Suspended Solids Event Sum of Loads Removal Efficiencies

Sampling Event Date

Influent TSS Mass (lbs)

Effluent TSS Mass (lbs)

Influent SSC Mass (lbs)

Effluent SSC Mass (lbs)

1 March 14, 2009 3.3 0.06 2.1 0.02 2 April 1, 2009 3.8 0.32 2.7 0.33 3 April 6, 2009 1.3 0.73 0.9 0.38 4 December 25-26, 2009 64.6 0.60 92.1 0.36 5 January 17, 2010 43.3 2.16 42.5 1.57 6 July 25, 2010 4.0 0.17 5.4 0.14 7 August 12, 2010 5.2 0.87 5.2 0.71 8 September 12, 2010 37.3 0.76 42.5 0.87 9 September 29-30, 2010 109.7 42.1 135.9 57.3 10 December 1, 2010 7.9 0.59 10.9 0.74 11 December 11, 2010 1.7 0.07 1.7 0.03 12 February 25, 2011 5.7 0.74 7.3 1.01 13 March 6, 2011 11.7 1.79 34.5 2.3 14 March 15-16, 2011 1.4 0.18 2.8 0.23 15 April 8, 2011 3.4 0.15 4.1 0.17 16 April 28, 2011 14.4 0.67 18.5 0.71 17 May 14, 2011 3.1 0.31 3.1 0.35 18 June 16, 2011 2.4 0.38 3.0 0.29

Total 324.2 52.65 415.2 67.51

Removal Efficiency 84% 84%

24

4.4 Summary Table 8 summarizes the storm characteristics (duration, size, intensity, peak loading rate) as well as the associated sediment removal efficiencies. Figure 9 presents performance curves based upon both the TSS and SSC analytical results. The curves are derived for any given storm by plotting average removal efficiency (%) against peak surface area loading rate (gpm/ft2). The TSS and SSC performance curves are similar, with the SSC curve showing slightly higher performance

Table 8 Storm Characteristics vs. Performance

Sampling Event Sample Date

TSS Removal

Efficiency

SSC Removal

Efficiency

Storm Duration

Storm Size

Peak Storm

Intensity

Peak Loading

Rate (%) (%) (hr:min) (inches) (in/hr) (gpm/ft2) 1 March 14, 2009 98.3 99.3 0:30 0.11 0.26 4.1 2 April 1, 2009 86.8 82.7 0:50 0.18 0.46 8.1 3 April 6, 2009 82.5 85.5 2:00 0.15 0.26 4.8

4 December 25-26, 2009 99.0 99.5 11:45 0.56 0.38 4.8

5 January 17, 2010 94.8 96.3 4:48 0.59 0.42 10.4 6 July 25, 2010 94.1 96.5 0:46 0.55 1.21 16.9 7 August 12, 2010 63.9 68.0 3:00 1.82 5.49 30.9 8 September 12, 2010 96.5 96.6 3:45 0.61 0.49 13.1

9 September 29-30, 2010 59.9 57.4 12:05 4.40 2.56 35.4

10 December 1, 2010 89.1 86.9 6:20 0.71 1.82 4.1 11 December 11, 2010 96.1 97.7 3:40 0.72 0.58 2.3 12 February 25, 2011 73.0 72.8 2:15 0.29 0.25 4.1 13 March 6, 2011 86.1 92.5 4:50 1.42 0.46 11.0 14 March 15-16, 2011 88.1 91.7 5:06 0.42 0.35 1.9 15 April 8, 2011 94.1 95.8 3:55 0.52 0.15 3.4 16 April 28, 2011 80.4 82.0 2:19 0.23 0.23 12.5 17 May 14, 2011 90.6 90.3 3:05 0.85 0.47 5.7 18 June 16, 2011 74.3 82.7 3:20 1.03 0.91 13.1 Average 86.0 87.3 0.84 0.93 10.4 Total 15.16

25

Figure 9. AS-5 Field Performance Curves

5. Performance Verification A 27-month field test of an Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5 has been completed at an urban shopping center in Silver Spring, Montgomery County, Maryland. Analytical results and performance analysis from 18 storm events and over 15 inches of rainfall demonstrated that 78% of the storms achieved greater than 80% TSS removal efficiency and 83% of the storms achieved greater than 80% SSC removal efficiency for the clay-loam textured sediment influent. The TARP requirement that a minimum of six samples be collected from each storm was interpreted by AECOM that a minimum of six individual composite samples of the influent and effluent were required to be submitted for laboratory analysis. To ensure that sufficient sample volumes were collected for the required analyses, storm durations had to be conservatively predicted which led to varying sampling durations, and consequently event coverage, within the rainfall period. The storm duration coverage for each storm fluctuated from 30 to 80 percent with an overall average sampling duration of 60%. The storm flow coverage (round to the nearest 10%) varied between 20 and 100 percent with an overall average storm event coverage of 60%. For all storm events, samples were collected from the first 20% of the total storm event flow. TARP qualifying storms require flow-weighted composite samples be obtained covering a minimum of 60% of the total storm flow. An average of 60% storm flow coverage and 60% storm duration coverage was achieved over the field testing period. Six of the 18 sampled storm events had flow coverage below 60%. Analysis of the TSS and SSC removal efficiencies for

26

these six events indicated slightly lower removal efficiencies than for the other 12 qualifying events. Consequently, utilizing these six storms for the AS-5 performance evaluation resulted in a lower average removal efficiency and a more conservative assessment. Similarly, seven storm events had less than 60% storm duration coverage; these events also had slightly lower removal efficiencies than for the other 11 storm events. Finally, the four storm sampling events that fell below either 60% storm flow coverage or 60% storm duration coverage had slightly lower removal efficiencies than for the other 14 storm events. Hence, it is concluded that including the results from all 18 storms resulted in a lower overall removal efficiency for the AS-5 and consequently a more conservative performance evaluation. This is also true when evaluating the suspended solids event sum of loads removal efficiencies (Table 7). The relatively high TSS and SSC removal efficiencies for the AS-5 achieved under typical rainfall conditions for the geographic area was largely a result of the resulting storm intensities sampled over the 27-month field performance test. Specifically, 10 (55.6%) of the 18 storm events had peak loading rates below 25% of an Aqua-Swirl® stormwater treatment system loading rate of 41.2 gpm/ft2 and another 6 events (33.3%) had peak loading rates between 10- 20 gpm/ft2. 6. Net Environmental Benefit The Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5 requires no input of raw material, has no moving parts and therefore uses no water or energy other than that provided by stormwater runoff. For the 18 storm events monitored during the 27-month monitoring period the mass of materials captured and retained by the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5 would otherwise have been released to the environment. 7. References AECOM (2010). Quality Assurance Project Plan for Field Performance Verification Testing of the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5 Stormwater Treatment System, Burnt Mills Shopping Center, Silver Spring, Maryland. Kennedy, John B. and Neville, Adam M. Basic Statistical Methods for Engineers and Scientists. Second Edition, Pun-Donnelly Publisher, New York. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). (2006). New Jersey Tier II Stormwater Test Requirements-Amendment to TARP Tier II Protocol. Trenton, New Jersey. Available online: http://water.usgs.gov/osw/pubs/WRIR00-419l.pdf Technology Acceptance and Reciprocity Partnership (TARP). (2003). The Technology Acceptance Reciprocity Partnership for Protocol for Stormwater Best Management Practice Demonstrations. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2006). Data Quality Assessment: A Reviewer’s Guide EPA Q

27

APPENDIX A

INDIVIDUAL STORM REPORTS

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

Center for Environmental Systems Stevens Institute of Technology

Castle Point Station Hoboken, NJ 07030-0000

February, 15, 2013

Mr. Mark B. Miller, P.G. AquaShield™, Inc. 2705 Kanasita Dr. Chattanooga, TN 37343

Re: Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System Mark, A 27-month field test of an Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5 has been completed at an urban shopping center in Silver Spring, Montgomery County, Maryland. Analytical results and performance analysis from 18 storm events and over 15 inches of rainfall demonstrated that 78% of the storms achieved greater than 80% TSS removal efficiency and 83% of the storms achieved greater than 80% SSC removal efficiency for the clay-loam textured sediment influent. The TARP requirement that a minimum of six samples be collected from each storm was interpreted by AECOM, independent environmental testing entity, that a minimum of six individual composite samples of the influent and effluent were required to be submitted for laboratory analysis. To ensure that sufficient sample volumes were collected for the required analyses, storm durations had to be conservatively predicted which led to varying sampling durations, and consequently event coverage, within the rainfall period. The storm duration coverage for each storm fluctuated from 30 to 80 percent with an overall average sampling duration of 60%. The storm flow coverage (rounded to the nearest 10%) varied between 20 and 100 percent with an overall average storm event coverage of 60%. For all storm events, samples were collected from the first 20% of the total storm event flow. The relatively high TSS and SSC removal efficiencies for the AS-5 achieved under typical rainfall conditions for the geographic area was largely a result of the resulting storm intensities sampled over the 27-month field performance test. Unfortunately, none of the storms generated a loading rate greater than 75% of the NJDEP certified Water Quality Treatment Flow Rate (WQTFR) of 52.6 gpm/ft2, thus limiting the field

verification WQTFR to 41.2 gpm/ft2. Further, 10 (55.6%) of the 18 storm events had peak loading rates below 25% of an Aqua-Swirl® WQTFR of 41.2 gpm/ft2 and another 6 events (33.3%) had peak loading rates between 10- 20 gpm/ft2. The Aqua-Swirl®, having a WQTFR of 41.2 gpm/ft2, has demonstrated a suspended sediment removal efficiency in excess of 80% on a net annual basis for a clay-loam textured sediment in this field test. NJCAT is pleased to provide a copy of the verification report, “NJCAT Technology Verification – Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5 Stormwater Treatment System”, detailing the procedures that evaluated the technology performance. The report documents the final verification of the Aqua-Swirl® technology having completed field evaluation in accordance with the TARP Tier II Protocol (TARP, 2003) and New Jersey Tier II Stormwater Test Requirements—Amendments to TARP Tier II Protocol (NJDEP, 2006). The report is available for downloading from the NJCAT website at: http://www.njcat.org/verification/Verifications_detail.cfm?LinkAdvID=103146 Regards,

Richard S. Magee, Sc.D., P.E., BCEE Technical Director

October 2013

GENERAL USE LEVEL DESIGNATION FOR PRETREATMENT

CONDITIONAL USE LEVEL DESIGNATION FOR BASIC TREATMENT

For

AquaShieldTM

, Inc.’s Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System

Ecology’s Decision:

Based on AquaShieldTM

, Inc. application submissions, Ecology hereby issues the following

use level designations:

1. General Use Level Designation (GULD) for the Aqua-Swirl® for pretreatment use (a)

ahead of infiltration treatment, or (b) to protect and extend the maintenance cycle of a

Basic or Enhanced Treatment device (e.g., sand or media filter). This GULD applies to

Aqua-SwirlTM

units sized at water quality design flow rate of no more than 23 GPM/sf

at the Water Quality design flow rate.

2. Conditional Use Level Designation (CULD) for the Aqua-Swirl® for standalone Basic (TSS)

treatment, sized at a water quality design flow rate of rate of no more than 23 GPM/sf.

3. The water quality design flow rates are calculated using the following procedures:

Western Washington: for treatment installed upstream of detention or retention,

the water quality design flow rate is the peak 15-minute flow rate as calculated using

the latest version of the Western Washington Hydrology Model or other Ecology-

approved continuous runoff model.

Eastern Washington: For treatment installed upstream of detention or retention,

the water quality design flow rate is the peak 15-minute flow rate as calculated using

one of the three methods described in Chapter 2.2.5 of the Stormwater Management

Manual for Eastern Washington (SWMMEW) or local manual.

Entire State: For treatment installed downstream of detention, the water quality

design flow rate is the full 2-year release rate of the detention facility.

Table 1 lists the Standard Aqua-Swirl® Models available. The model designated AS-XX

allows for custom designs including multiple (twin) units.

Table 1. Standard Aqua-Swirl® Models

Model Swirl Chamber

Diameter (ft)

Area

(ft2)

AS-2 2.5 4.9

AS-3 3.3 8.6

AS-4 4.3 14.5

AS-5 5.0 19.6

AS-6 6.0 28.3

AS-7 7.0 38.5

AS-8 8.0 50.3

AS-9 9.0 63.6

AS-10 10.0 78.5

AS-11 11.0 95.0

AS-12 12.0 113.1

AS-13 13.0 132.7

AS-XX* Custom

* Custom designs to meet site-specific water quality treatment flow.

Can include multiple (twin) and custom units.

The GULD designation has no expiration date but it may be amended or revoked by

Ecology and is subject to the conditions specified below.

The CULD expires on November 1, 2015 unless extended by Ecology, and is subject to the

conditions specified below.

Ecology’s Conditions of Use:

1. Design, assemble, install, operate, and maintain Aqua-Swirl® units in accordance with

AquaShieldTM

, Inc.’s applicable manuals and documents and the Ecology Decision.

2. AquaShieldTM

, Inc. commits to submitting a QAPP for Ecology review and approval by

March 1, 2014 that meets the TAPE requirements for attaining a GULD for basic

treatment. The selected field-testing site(s) should reflect the product’s treatment intent.

3. AquaShieldTM

, Inc. shall complete all required testing and submit a TER for Ecology

review by August 1, 2015.

4. AquaShieldTM

, Inc. may request Ecology to grant deadline or expiration date

extensions, upon showing cause for such extensions.

5. Discharges from the Aqua-Swirl®

shall not cause or contribute to water quality

standards violations in receiving waters.

Applicant: AquaShieldTM

, Inc.

Applicant’s Address: 2719 Kanasita Drive

Chattanooga, TN 37343

Application Documents:

Aqua-Filter™ Stormwater Treatment System, Application for Stormwater Quality

Treatment Pilot Use Designation (Short-Term) for Basic, Enhanced, Oil, and Treatment

Train Treatment in Western Washington submitted to Stan Ciuba, Washington State

Department of Ecology (August 21, 2003)

NJCAT Technology Verification: Aqua-Swirl™ Concentrator and Aqua-Filter™

Stormwater Treatment System (September 2005)

NJCAT Technology Verification. Aqua-Swirl®

Model AS-5 Stormwater Treatment

System, AquaShield™, Inc. November 2012

NJCAT Field Test Verification Report Letter, Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5, February 15,

2013.

Applicant’s Use Level Request:

General Use Level Designation as a Basic Treatment device in accordance with Ecology’s 2012

Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington.

Applicant’s Performance Claims:

Based on laboratory studies, the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3, has been shown to have a total

suspended solids removal efficiency (measured as suspended sediment concentration) of 60%

when operated at 60% of its water quality treatment flow using OK-110 silica with a d50 particle

size of 110 microns, and average influent of 320 mg/L and zero initial sediment loading.

Ecology’s Recommendations:

Ecology finds that:

AquaShieldTM

, Inc. qualifies for the opportunity to demonstrate, through field-testing in

the Pacific Northwest, whether the Aqua-Swirl® can attain Ecology’s Basic treatment

goals. The GULD approval for Pre-Treatment using the Aqua-Swirl® remains in effect.

Findings of Fact:

1. The Aqua-Swirl®, sized at no more than 23 GPM/sf, should provide equivalent performance

to a presettling basin as defined in the most recent version of Stormwater Management

Manual for Western Washington, Volume V, Chapter 6 (BMP T6.10). Note: This reference

applies to use in Eastern Washington as well.

2. Tennessee Tech University completed laboratory testing for removal of US Silica OK-110

silica using an Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3. Laboratory results for this 50 to 125-micron silica

showed 80% removal at about 23 GPM/sf operating rate. Estimated annual TSS removal

efficiency, based on Portland, ME rainfall, is 91%.

3. Findings from the NJCAT Technology Verification report for field testing an Aqua-Swirl®

Model AS-5 include:

a. Aqua-Swirl® monitored 18 storm events in Maryland from 2009 through 2011.

b. Influent TSS was greater than 100 mg/L for 8 events. Average annual TSS removal

was 86.6 percent.

c. Influent TSS was less than 100 mg/L for 10 events. Effluent TSS for all 10 events

was less than 20 mg/L.

d. Influent particle size was 72 percent silt (based on three samples).

e. Aqua-Swirl® monitored the system up to a maximum of 41.2 GPM/sf. They

maintained an 80 percent removal of TSS per storm event up to approximately 23

GPM/sf.

Other Aqua-Swirl® Related Issues to be Addressed By the Company:

1. Resuspension: The Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-5 field test included 16 storm events at less than

23 GPM/sf. Effluent TSS for these 16 storms was less than 20 mg/L and averaged 7.9 mg/L.

Influent TSS ranged from 27.8 to 266.3 mg/L and averaged 125.3 mg/L. Given the lack of

resuspension at less than 23 GPM/sf, users can install the Aqua-Swirl® off-line or on-line.

2. AquaShield should test the system under normal operating conditions, such as partially

filling the swirl concentrator with pollutants. Results obtained for “clean” systems may not

be representative of typical performance.

Technology Description: Download at http://www.aquashieldinc.com

Contact Information:

Applicant: Mark B. Miller

AquaShieldTM

, Inc.

888-344-9044

mmiller@aquashieldinc.com

Applicant website: http://www.aquashieldinc.com

Ecology web link: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/stormwater/newtech/index.html

Ecology: Douglas C. Howie, P.E.

Department of Ecology

Water Quality Program

(360) 407-6444

douglas.howie@ecy.wa.gov

Revision History

Date Revision

November 2006 GULD for Pre-Treatment

August 2007 Document updated

December 2012 Modified Design Storm Description, added Revision Table

October 2013 CULD for Basic Treatment

Page 1 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

Aqua-Swirl®

Stormwater Treatment System

Inspection and Maintenance Manual

AquaShieldTM, Inc. 2733 Kanasita Drive

Suite 111 Chattanooga, TN 37343 Toll free (888) 344-9044 Phone: (423) 870-8888

Fax: (423) 826-2112 Email: info@aquashieldinc.com

www.aquashieldinc.com

March 2014

Page 2 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

Table of Contents

Page(s)

AquaShieldTM

Stormwater Treatment Systems 3

Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System 4 – 9

Inspection and Maintenance Worksheets and Attachments 10 – 13

Aqua-Swirl® Tabular Maintenance Schedule 14

AquaShieldTM

, Inc.

2733 Kanasita Drive

Suite 111

Chattanooga, Tennessee 37343

Toll free (888) 344-9044

Phone (423) 870-8888

Fax (423) 826-2112

www.aquashieldinc.com

Page 3 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

AquaShield™, Inc

Stormwater Treatment Solutions The highest priority of AquaShield

TM, Inc. (AquaShield™) is to protect waterways by providing

stormwater treatment solutions to businesses across the world. These solutions have a reliable

foundation based on over 20 years of water treatment experience.

Local regulators, engineers, and contractors have praised the AquaShield™ systems for their

simple design and ease of installation. All the systems are fabricated from high performance,

durable and lightweight materials. Contractors prefer the quick and simple installation of our

structures that saves them money.

The patented line of AquaShield™ stormwater treatment products that provide high levels of

stormwater treatment include the following:

Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System: hydrodynamic separator, which

provides a highly effective means for the removal of sediment, floating debris and free-

oil.

Aqua-FilterTM

Stormwater Filtration System: treatment train stormwater filtration

system capable of removing gross contaminants, fine sediments, waterborne

hydrocarbons, heavy metals and total phosphorous.

Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater

Treatment System

Aqua-Filter™ Stormwater

Filtration System

Page 4 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment

System The patented Aqua-Swirl

® Stormwater Treatment System is a single chamber hydrodynamic

separator which provides a highly effective means for the removal of sediment, free oil, and

floating debris. Both treatment and storage are accomplished in the swirl chamber without the

use of multiple or “blind” chambers. Independent laboratory and field performance verifications

have shown that the Aqua-Swirl® achieves over 80% suspended solids removal efficiency on a

net annual basis.

The Aqua-Swirl® is most commonly installed in an “off-line” configuration. Or, depending on

local regulations, an “in-line” (on-line) conveyance flow diversion (CFD) system can be used.

The CFD model allows simple installation by connecting directly to the existing storm

conveyance pipe thereby providing full treatment of the “first flush,” while the peak design

storm is diverted and channeled through the main conveyance pipe.

The patented Aqua-Swirl

® Stormwater Treatment System provides a highly effective means for

the removal of sediment, floating debris, and free oil. Swirl technology, or vortex separation, is a

proven form of treatment utilized in the stormwater industry to accelerate gravitational

separation.

Page 5 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

Floatable debris in the Aqua-Swirl®

Each Aqua-Swirl® is constructed of high performance, lightweight and durable materials

including polymer coated steel (PCS), high density polyethylene (HDPE), or fiberglass

reinforced polymer (FRP). These materials eliminate the need for heavy lifting equipment during

installation.

System Operation

The treatment operation begins when stormwater enters the Aqua-Swirl® through a tangential

inlet pipe that produces a circular (or vortex) flow pattern that causes contaminates to settle to

the base of the unit. Since stormwater flow is intermittent by nature, the Aqua-Swirl® retains

water between storm events providing both dynamic and quiescent settling of solids. The

dynamic settling occurs during each storm event while the quiescent settling takes place between

successive storms. A combination of gravitational and hydrodynamic drag forces encourages the

solids to drop out of the flow and migrate to the center of the chamber where velocities are the

lowest.

The treated flow then exits the Aqua-Swirl® behind the arched outer baffle. The top of the baffle

is sealed across the treatment channel, thereby eliminating floatable pollutants from escaping the

system. A vent pipe is extended up the riser to expose the backside of the baffle to atmospheric

conditions, preventing a siphon from forming at the bottom of the baffle.

Custom Applications

The Aqua-Swirl® system can be modified to fit a variety of purposes in the field, and the angles

for inlet and outlet lines can be modified to fit most applications. The photo below demonstrates

the flexibility of Aqua-Swirl® installations using a “twin” configuration in order to double the

Page 6 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

Custom designed AS-9 Twin Aqua-Swirl®

water quality treatment capacity. Two Aqua-Swirl® units were placed side by side in order to

treat a high volume of water while occupying a small amount of space.

Retrofit Applications

The Aqua-Swirl® system is designed so that it can easily be used for retrofit applications. With

the invert of the inlet and outlet pipe at the same elevation, the Aqua-Swirl®

can easily be

connected directly to the existing storm conveyance drainage system. Furthermore, because of

the lightweight nature and small footprint of the Aqua-Swirl®, existing infrastructure utilities

(i.e., wires, poles, trees) would be unaffected by installation.

AquaShield™ Product System Maintenance

The long term performance of any stormwater treatment structure, including manufactured or

land based systems, depends on a consistent maintenance plan. Inspection and maintenance

functions are simple and easy for the AquaShieldTM

Stormwater Treatment Systems allowing all

inspections to be performed from the surface.

It is important that a routine inspection and maintenance program be established for each unit

based on: (a) the volume or load of the contaminants of concern, (b) the frequency of releases of

contaminants at the facility or location, and (c) the nature of the area being drained.

In order to ensure that our systems are being maintained properly, AquaShieldTM

offers a

maintenance solution to all of our customers. We will arrange to have maintenance performed.

Page 7 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

Inspection

All AquaShieldTM

products can be inspected from the surface, eliminating the need to enter the

systems to determine when cleanout should be performed. In most cases, AquaShieldTM

recommends a quarterly inspection for the first year of operation to develop an appropriate

schedule of maintenance. Based on experience of the system’s first year in operation, we

recommend that the inspection schedule be revised to reflect the site-specific conditions

encountered. Typically, the inspection schedule for subsequent years is reduced to semi-annual

inspection.

Aqua-Swirl® Maintenance

The Aqua-Swirl® has been designed to minimize and simplify the inspection and maintenance

process. The single chamber system can be inspected and maintained entirely from the surface

thereby eliminating the need for confined space entry. Furthermore, the entire structure

(specifically, the floor) is accessible for visual inspection from the surface. There are no areas of

the structure that are blocked from visual inspection or periodic cleaning. Inspection of any free-

floating oil and floatable debris can be directly observed and maintained through the manhole

access provided directly over the swirl chamber.

Aqua-Swirl® Inspection Procedure

To inspect the Aqua-Swirl®, a hook is needed to remove the manhole cover. AquaShield

TM

provides a customized manhole cover with our distinctive logo to make it easy for maintenance

crews to locate the system in the field. We also provide a permanent metal information plate

Page 8 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

Sediment inspection using a

stadia rod in a single chamber

Maintenance trigger for Aqua-Swirl® Models AS-

3 through AS-13 occurs when sediment pile is

42-48 inches below water surface.

Maintenance trigger for Aqua-Swirl® Model

AS-2 occurs when sediment pile is 30 to 32

inches below water surface.

affixed inside the access riser which provides our contact information, the Aqua-Swirl® model

size, and serial number.

The only tools needed to inspect the Aqua-Swirl® system are a flashlight and a measuring device

such as a stadia rod or pole. Given the easy and direct accessibility provided, floating oil and

debris can be observed directly from the surface. Sediment depths can easily be determined by

lowering a measuring device to the top of the sediment pile and to the surface of the water.

It should be noted that in order to avoid underestimating the volume of sediment in the chamber,

the measuring device must be carefully lowered to the top of the sediment pile. Keep in mind

that the finer sediment at the top of the pile may offer less resistance to the measuring device

than the larger particles which typically occur deeper within the sediment pile.

The Aqua-Swirl® design allows for the sediment to accumulate in a semi-conical fashion as

illustrated above. That is, the depth to sediment as measured below the water surface may be less

in the center of the swirl chamber; and likewise, may be greater at the edges of the swirl

chamber.

42-48”

42-48” AS-2:

30-32”

Page 9 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

Vacuum truck quickly cleans the Aqua-Swirl®

from a single chamber

Aqua-Swirl® Cleanout Procedure

Cleaning the Aqua-Swirl® is simple and quick. Free-floating oil and floatable debris can be

observed and removed directly through the 30-inch service access riser provided. A vacuum

truck is typically used to remove the accumulated sediment and debris. An advantage of the

Aqua-Swirl® design is that the entire sediment storage area can be reached with a vacuum hose

from the surface (reaching all the sides). Since there are no multiple or limited (hidden or

“blind”) chambers in the Aqua-Swirl®, there are no restrictions to impede on-site maintenance

tasks.

Disposal of Recovered Materials

Disposal of recovered material is typically handled in the same fashion as catch basin cleanouts.

AquaShieldTM

recommends that all maintenance activities be performed in accordance with

appropriate health and safety practices for the tasks and equipment being used.

AquaShieldTM

also recommends that all materials removed from the Aqua-Swirl® and any

external structures (e.g, bypass features) be handled and disposed in full accordance with any

applicable local and state requirements.

Aqua-Swirl® Inspection and Maintenance Work Sheets

on following pages

Page 10 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

Aqua-Swirl® Inspection and Maintenance Manual

Work Sheets

SITE and OWNER INFORMATION

Site Name:

Site Location:

Date: Time:

Inspector Name:

Inspector Company: Phone #:

Owner Name:

Owner Address:

Owner Phone #: Emergency Phone #:

INSPECTIONS

I. Floatable Debris and Oil

1. Remove manhole lid to expose liquid surface of the Aqua-Swirl®.

2. Remove floatable debris with basket or net if any present.

3. If oil is present, measure its depth. Clean liquids from system if one half (½) inch or more

oil is present.

Note: Water in Aqua-Swirl® can appear black and similar to oil due to the dark body of

the surrounding structure. Oil may appear darker than water in the system and is usually

accompanied by oil stained debris (e.g. Styrofoam, etc.). The depth of oil can be

measured with an oil/water interface probe, a stadia rod with water finding paste, a

coliwasa, or collect a representative sample with a jar attached to a rod.

II. Sediment Accumulation

1. Lower measuring device (e.g. stadia rod) into swirl chamber through service access

provided until top of sediment pile is reached.

2. Record distance to top of sediment pile from top of standing water: inches

3. For Aqua-Swirl® Models AS-3 through AS-13, schedule cleaning if value in Step #2 is

48 to 42 inches or less.

4. For Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-2, schedule cleaning if value in Step #2 is 32 to 30 inches or

less.

Page 11 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

III. Diversion Structures (External Bypass Features)

If a diversion (external bypass) configuration is present, it should be inspected as follows:

1. Inspect weir or other bypass feature for structural decay or damage. Weirs are more

susceptible to damage than off-set piping and should be checked to confirm that they are

not crumbling (concrete or brick) or decaying (steel).

2. Inspect diversion structure and bypass piping for signs of structural damage or blockage

from debris or sediment accumulation.

3. When feasible, measure elevations on diversion weir or piping to ensure it is consistent

with site plan designs.

4. Inspect downstream (convergence) structure(s) for sign of blockage or structural failure

as noted above.

CLEANING

Schedule cleaning with local vactor company or AquaShieldTM

to remove sediment, oil and other

floatable pollutants. The captured material generally does not require special treatment or

handling for disposal. Site-specific conditions or the presence of known contaminants may

necessitate that appropriate actions be taken to clean and dispose of materials captured and

retained by the Aqua-Swirl®. All cleaning activities should be performed in accordance with

property health and safety procedures.

AquaShieldTM

always recommends that all materials removed from the Aqua-Swirl® during the

maintenance process be handled and disposed in accordance with local and state environmental

or other regulatory requirements.

MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE

I. During Construction

Inspect the Aqua-Swirl®

every three (3) months and clean the system as needed. The

Aqua-Swirl® should be inspected and cleaned at the end of construction regardless of

whether it has reached its maintenance trigger.

II. First Year Post-Construction

Inspect the Aqua-Swirl® every three (3) months and clean the system as needed.

Inspect and clean the system once annually regardless of whether it has reached its

sediment or floatable pollutant storage capacity.

III. Second and Subsequent Years Post-Construction

If the Aqua-Swirl®

did not reach full sediment or floatable pollutant capacity in the First

Year Post-Construction period, the system can be inspected and cleaned once annually.

If the Aqua-Swirl®

reached full sediment or floatable pollutant capacity in less than 12

months in the First Year Post-Construction period, the system should be inspected once

Page 12 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

every six (6) months and cleaned as needed. The Aqua-Swirl® should be cleaned annually

regardless of whether it reaches its sediment or floatable pollutant capacity.

IV. Bypass Structures

Bypass structures should be inspected whenever the Aqua-Swirl®

is inspected.

Maintenance should be performed on bypass structures as needed.

MAINTENANCE COMPANY INFORMATION

Company Name:

Street Address:

City: State/Prov.: Zip/Postal Code:

Contact: Title:

Office Phone: Cell Phone:

ACTIVITY LOG

Date of Cleaning: (Next inspection should be 3 months from

this data for first year).

Time of Cleaning: Start: End:

Date of Next Inspection:

Floatable debris present: Yes No

Notes:

Oil present: Yes No Oil depth (inches):

Measurement method and notes:

STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS and OBSERVATIONS

Structural damage: Yes No Where:

Page 13 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

Structural wear: Yes No Where:

Odors present: Yes No Describe:

Clogging: Yes No Describe:

Other Observations:

NOTES

Additional Comments and/or Actions To Be Taken Time Frame

ATTACHMENTS

Attach site plan showing Aqua-Swirl® location.

Attach detail drawing showing Aqua-Swirl® dimensions and model number.

If a diversion configuration is used, attach details showing basic design and elevations

(where feasible).

Page 14 of 14 © AquaShield

TM, Inc. 2014. All rights reserved.

Aqua-Swirl®

TABULAR MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE

Date Construction Started:

Date Construction Ended:

During Construction

Month

Activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Inspect and Clean

as needed X X X X

Inspect Bypass and maintain as needed X X X X

Clean System* X*

* The Aqua-Swirl® should be cleaned once a year regardless of whether it has reached full pollutant storage

capacity. In addition, the system should be cleaned at the end of construction regardless of whether it has reach full

pollutant storage capacity.

First Year Post-Construction

Month

Activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Inspect and Clean

as needed X X X X

Inspect Bypass and

maintain as needed X X X X

Clean System* X*

* The Aqua-Swirl® should be cleaned once a year regardless of whether it has reached full pollutant storage

capacity.

Second and Subsequent Years Post-Construction

Month

Activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Inspect and Clean

as needed X*

Inspect Bypass, maintain as needed X*

Clean System* X*

* If the Aqua-Swirl® did not reach full sediment or floatable pollutant capacity in the First Year Post-Construction

period, the system can be inspected and cleaned once annually.

If the Aqua-Swirl® reached full sediment or floatable pollutant capacity in less than 12 months in the First Year

Post-Construction period, the system should be inspected once every six (6) months or more frequently if past

history warrants, and cleaned as needed. The Aqua-Swirl® should be cleaned annually regardless of whether it

reaches its full sediment or floatable pollutant capacity.

W:\Limited Warranty\AquaShield - Limited Warranty 8-12.docx August 6, 2012

LIMITED WARRANTY

WARRANTY: AquaShield, Inc., warrants its products against failure due to improper

workmanship or defective materials, for a period of twelve (12) months from delivery date;

provided, however, that AquaShield, Inc.’s, liability shall be limited to the least of the following:

(1) the cost to repair such product; (2) the cost to replace the product; or (3) the purchase price of

the product. If the product is replaced, such replacement shall be F.O.B. point of manufacture

with freight allowed. In no case shall the cost of dismantling or installation be covered. In no

event shall AquaShield, Inc., be liable for any other damages, including, but not limited to,

consequential or incidental damages or loss of income. AquaShield, Inc., makes no warranty

express or implied as to the merchantablity or fitness for any particular purpose of the property

sold subject to this Limited Warranty.

Except as expressed in this section, AquaShield, Inc., makes no warranties, express or implied.

AquaShield, Inc.’s liability shall be limited to the warranties expressed herein, and AquaShield,

Inc., shall not be liable for any direct or consequential damages, including loss of use, which

customers may suffer.

This Limited Warranty shall not apply to any products which are abused or misused.

Independent Sales Agent is not and cannot represent itself as an employee of AquaShield, Inc.,

and shall not make any representations or warranties on behalf of AquaShield, Inc. Independent

Sales Agent will not assume or create any obligation on behalf of AquaShield, Inc., other than as

evidenced by this Limited Warranty.

This Limited Warranty shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the

State of Tennessee, and any claim or cause of action relating to any of AquaShield’s products or

installations shall be brought in a state of federal court in Hamilton County, Tennessee, and the

parties agree that the exclusive venue for any such action shall be in said courts.

2

705

Ka

na

sita

Dri

ve, • C

ha

ttan

ooga

, T

N 3

73

43

• P

hon

e (4

23

) 870

-88

88

• F

ax

(4

23

) 826

-21

12

• w

ww

.aq

uash

ield

inc.c

om