THE ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION
PROGRAM
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
NSF International
ETV Joint Verification Statement
TECHNOLOGY TYPE:
APPLICATION:
TECHNOLOGY NAME:
TEST LOCATION:
COMPANY:
ADDRESS:
WEB SITE:
EMAIL:
UPFLOW WATER TREATMENT
IN-DRAIN TREATMENT DEVICE
UP-FLO™ FILTER WITH CPZ MIX™ FILTER MEDIA
PENN STATE HARRISBURG
HYDRO INTERNATIONAL
94 Hutchins Drive
Portland, Maine 04102
http://www.hydrointernational.biz/us/
stormwaterinquiries@hil-tech.com
PHONE: (207)756-6200
FAX: (207)756-6212
NSF International (NSF), in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), operates
the Water Quality Protection Center (WQPC), one of six centers under the Environmental Technology
Verification (ETV) Program. The WQPC recently evaluated the performance of the Up-Flo™ Filter,
manufactured by Hydro International. The Up-Flo™ Filter was tested at the Penn State Harrisburg
Environmental Engineering Laboratory in Midletown, Pennsylvania.
EPA created ETV to facilitate the deployment of innovative or improved environmental technologies
through performance verification and dissemination of information. The ETV program's goal is to further
environmental protection by accelerating the acceptance and use of improved and more cost-effective
technologies. ETV seeks to achieve this goal by providing high quality, peer-reviewed data on technology
performance to those involved in the design, distribution, permitting, purchase, and use of environmental
technologies.
ETV works in partnership with recognized standards and testing organizations; stakeholder groups, which
consist of buyers, vendor organizations, and permitters; and with the full participation of individual
technology developers. The program evaluates the performance of innovative technologies by developing
test plans that are responsive to the needs of stakeholders, conducting field or laboratory tests (as
appropriate), collecting and analyzing data, and preparing peer-reviewed reports. All evaluations are
conducted in accordance with rigorous quality assurance protocols to ensure that data of known and
adequate quality are generated and that the results are defensible.
07/30/WQPC-SWP
The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement.
VS-i
September 2007
-------
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION
The following description of the Up-Flo™ Filter was provided by the vendor and does not represent
verified information.
The Up-Flo™ Filter is a passive, modular filtration system that incorporates multiple elements of a
treatment train into a single, small-footprint device. The Up-Flo™ Filter uses a sedimentation sump and
screening system to pretreat runoff before it flows up through the filter media, housed in one to six filter
modules, where final polishing occurs. A high-capacity, siphonic bypass safeguards against upstream
ponding during high-flow events. The siphon also serves as a floatables baffle to prevent the escape of
floatable trash and debris from the Up-Flo™ Filter chamber.
The Up-Flo™ Filter is self-activating and operates by simple hydraulics. Challenge water enters the
chamber from an inlet pipe or an overhead grate and flows into the sump region where gross debris and
coarse grit are removed by settling. Runoff continues to fill the chamber until there is enough driving
head to initiate flow through the filter media. At this point, the water flows up through the angled screen
into the filter module. In the filter module, flow passes up through the filter media and is conveyed to the
outlet module via the flow conveyance channel. Flows in excess of the filtration capacity are discharged
directly to the outlet module by the siphonic bypass. The siphon also serves as a floatables baffle to
prevent the escape of buoyant litter and debris. The Up-Flo™ Filter is equipped with a drain-down
mechanism to ensure that the filter media sits above the standing water level during no-flow conditions, to
prevent anoxic conditions that could promote bacterial growth in the filter media and the release of
harmful leachates. As flows subside, water slowly drains out of the chamber through four small drain-
down ports located at the base of the outlet module. The drain-down ports are covered with a layer of
filter fabric to provide treatment to the drain-down flows.
Performance of a regularly maintained Up-Flo™ Filter should provide removal of over 80% of total
suspended solids (TSS) from challenge water runoff. It will also remove a portion of metals, organics and
other pollutants commonly found sorbed to the surface of suspended sediment particles. Each filter
module filled with the CPZ Mix™ will have a flow rate of 20-25 gpm when the water level in the
chamber provides 20 in. of driving head. Water will continue to be filtered up through the filter media
until the water level in the chamber falls to zero inches of driving head. When the inflows exceed the
filtration capacity, the excess flows will discharge through the bypass siphon directly to the outlet
module.
VERIFICATION TESTING DESCRIPTION
Methods and Procedures
The testing methods and procedures employed during the study were outlined in the Test Plan for Hydro
International, Inc. Up-Flo™ Filter for Stormwater Treatment (February 2006). The Up-Flo™ Filter was
installed in a specially designed testing rig to simulate a catch basin receiving surface runoff. The rig was
designed to provide for controlled dosing and sampling, and to allow for observation of system
performance.
The Up-Flo™ Filter was challenged by a variety of hydraulic flow and contaminant load conditions to
evaluate the system's performance under normal and elevated loadings. The test conditions are
summarized in Table 1. Additional tests were conducted at the vendor's request to determine the media's
sediment removal capabilities with challenge water consisting of only sediments and nutrients (no
hydrocarbons) at continuous flow. The results of these tests will be published in an addendum at a later
time.
07/30/WQPC-SWP The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement. September 2007
VS-ii
-------
Table 1. Test Phase Summary
Phase
I
II
III-l
III-2
III-3
IV
and Flow Condition
Intermittent Flow
Contaminant Capacity
Hydraulic Capacity, Clean Water
Hydraulic Capacity, Synthetic
Wastewater
Hydraulic Capacity, Spiked
Wastewater
Contaminant Capacity at High
Hydraulic Throughput
Flow
1 1 gpm, 15 min on, 15
min off
16 gpm continuous
10 to 45 gpm, increased
in 5 gpm increments
10 to 45 gpm, increased
in 5 gpm increments
10 to 45 gpm, increased
in 5 gpm increments
32 gpm continuous
Loadings
Normal
Normal
None
Normal
Spiked
(4X)
Normal
Test Duration
40 hr
Continue until
exhaustion
15 min at each
flow interval
15 min at each
flow interval
15 min at each
flow interval
Continue until
exhaustion
A synthesized wastewater mixture containing petroleum hydrocarbons (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil,
and brake fluid), automotive fluids (antifreeze and windshield washer solvent), surfactants, and sediments
(sand, topsoil and clay), was used to simulate constituents found in surface runoff from a commercial or
industrial setting. Influent and effluent samples were collected and analyzed for several parameters,
including TSS, suspended sediment concentration (SSC), total phosphorus (TP), and chemical oxygen
demand (COD). Complete descriptions of the testing and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)
procedures are included in the verification report.
PERFORMANCE VERIFICATION
System Installation and Maintenance
The Up-Flo™ Filter was found to be durable and easy to install, requiring no special tools. Maintenance
on the system during testing consisted of replacing the filter media bags, and removing sediment and
water collected in the sump. Maintenance took approximately 30-45 minutes, with the most difficult
activity being removal of the filter media bags, due to their size and weight.
Hydraulic Capacity
The hydraulic capacity of the Up-Flo™ Filter was determined using clean water (Phase III-l), synthetic
wastewater (Phase III-2), and synthetic wastewater with spiked constituents (Phase III-3). Capacity was
evaluated as a function of influent and effluent flow rates, and water levels in the sump. The testing
determined the effluent flow rates were comparable to the influent for all flow rates tested, up to and past
the point where the bypass was activated. The hydraulic capacity results are expressed graphically in
Figure 1.
An Up-Flo™ with new filter media can accept a hydraulic flow of up to approximately 30 gpm with no
bypass, depending on the concentration of contaminants in the wastewater. At flows greater than 30 gpm
the water elevation in the sump approaches the bypass siphon elevation, and a portion of the influent flow
exits the system as untreated bypass. The maximum treated flow decreases as the filter media trap
contaminants, preventing water from flowing through the filter bags. This was particularly evident with
the Phase III-3 (spiked contaminant loadings), where the effluent flow diminished prior to eventually
reaching bypass conditions.
07/30/WQPC-SWP
The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement.
VS-iii
September 2007
-------
Flow Rate - Phase I
50
30 -
20 -
10 -
Influent
IIM
11 [-2
III-3
I
10 15 20 25 30 35
Flow Conditions (GPM)
40 45
Figure 1. Comparison of influent versus effluent flow rates for Phase III hydraulics testing.
Contaminant Removal
Table 2 summarizes the influent and effluent constituent concentrations and the respective removal
efficiencies for the Phase I (intermittent flow) and Phase II (continuous flow tests). During both of these
tests, the flow was held constant at 11 gpm for Phase I and 16 gpm for Phase II, both of which are less
than the Up-Flo™ Filter's 20 gpm rated capacity. These tests were done consecutively, and were
completed when filter media exhaustion or blinding was observed. During testing, the filter media was
blinded off by contaminant loading prior to breakthrough occurring. In general, the effluent constituent
concentrations remained constant throughout testing.
Table 2. Up-Flo™ Filter Treatment Efficiency Summary for Phase I and Phase II Tests
Influent Concentration
Results (mg/L)
Effluent Concentration
Results (mg/L)
Mean Median Max. Min. Mean
Removal Efficiency ("/o)1
Median Max. Min. Mean Median Max. Min.
TSS
ssc
TP
COD
136
147
47
157
112
130
44
134
492
555
183
523
<5
<5
0.6
60
36
39
38
63
30
30
38
65
100
108
81
89
9
<5
0.6
33
73
74
19
60
73
77
14
51
92 -1,280
99 -480
91 -530
88 -3.3
1. Mean and median removal efficiencies are calculated using the calculated mean and median influent and effluent
concentrations, while maximum and minimum removal efficiencies are evaluated from the paired sample data points.
The median sediment removal efficiency is 73% and 77% for TSS and SSC, respectively, which is
slightly below the vendor's 80% sediment removal efficiency performance claim. The Up-Flo™ Filter
was also shown to be capable of reducing TP and COD, demonstrated by median removal efficiencies of
14% and 51%, respectively.
07/30/WQPC-SWP
The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement.
VS-iv
September 2007
-------
Media Blinding/Bypass
During the Phase II and Phase IV tests, the testing organization observed that when the filter media
reached capacity, it would shift within the filter module. This shift opened a preferential pathway in the
corner of the filter module for water to pass through the system without passing through the filter media.
This failure mechanism was not anticipated by the vendor. The vendor indicated that the Up-Flo™ Filter
would fail as the filter bags clog, forcing a rise of the water level in the tank to an elevation that would
eventually reach the bypass siphon and flow out through the bypass.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
NSF personnel completed a technical systems audit during testing to ensure that the testing was in
compliance with the test plan. NSF also completed a data quality audit of at least 10% of the test data to
ensure that the reported data represented the data generated during testing. In addition to QA/QC audits
performed by NSF, EPA personnel conducted an audit of NSF's QA Management Program.
Original signed by Original signed by
Sally Gutierrez October 15, 2007 Robert Ferguson October 3, 2007
Sally Gutierrez Date Robert Ferguson Date
Director Vice President
National Risk Management Research Laboratory Water Systems
Office of Research and Development NSF International
United States Environmental Protection Agency
NOTICE: Verifications are based on an evaluation of technology performance under specific,
predetermined criteria and the appropriate quality assurance procedures. EPA and NSF make no expressed
or implied warranties as to the performance of the technology and do not certify that a technology will
always operate as verified. The end user is solely responsible for complying with any and all applicable
federal, state, and local requirements. Mention of corporate names, trade names, or commercial products
does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use of specific products. This report is not an NSF
Certification of the specific product mentioned herein.
Availability of Supporting Documents
Copies of the Protocol for the Verification ofln-Drain Treatment Technologies, April 2001, the
verification statement, and the verification report (NSF Report Number 07/30/WQPC-SWP) are
available from:
ETV Water Quality Protection Center Program Manager (hard copy)
NSF International
P.O. Box 130140
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48113-0140
NSF website: http://www.nsf.org/etv (electronic copy)
EPA website: https://www.epa.gov/etv (electronic copy)
Appendices are not included in the verification report, but are available from NSF upon request.
07/30/WQPC-SWP The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement. September 2007
VS-v
------- |