training/testing for registered products

November 25, 2008 1

Training/Testing for Registered Products - Draft 1 -

Information:

1. Rules 2. MPCA website 3. Basic Fact Sheet on MPCA website about the registration process 4. How to Use the List of Registered Treatment and Distribution Products 5. List of Registered Products and related information (posted on website) 6. All the information that goes with the product listing

Things to Know:

1. Basic rule requirements about product registration 2. Application requirements and process- initial and renewal 3. Information on MPCA site - Listing of Registered Products 4. How to Use the List 5. Understand information contained under ‘Product Information’ in the Listing of

Registered Products • Notice of Product Listing – registration and conditions by MPCA • Submitted Drawings • Known Limitations • Service Contract • Installation Manual • Operation and Maintenance Standards • Owners manual • Regulators Checklist • Operating Permit (Management Plan)

6. Understand basic treatment processes (suspended growth, fixed film….) 7. Understand mechanisms of distribution of wastewater to the soil’s infiltrative surface 8. Pros and cons of different treatment and distribution products registered in Minnesota 9. Understand information contained in Recommended Standards and Guidance documents 10. Management Plans 11. Operating Permits

December 12, 2008 – Incorporated ARM comments Public Domain Distribution Technologies: Drain Rock Distribution Media

Recommended Standards and Guidance for Performance, Application, Design, and Operation & Maintenance Public Domain Distribution Technologies for Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems Drainfield Rock Distribution Media For Trenches, Seepage Beds, At-grades and Mounds December 12, 2008 - Draft for Advisory Committee Meeting; Draft modified per ARM comments

For information or additional copies of this document contact: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency – Municipal Division Mailing address: 525 South Lake Avenue, Duluth, Minnesota 55804 Telephone: 218-723-4710 Webpage: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/programs/ists/productregistration.html. For persons with disabilities, this document is available upon request in other formats. To submit a request, please call xx MPCA Publication #

Page 1 of 10


How this document is organized: Standards Section Explanation Introduction Purpose of the document, general background

information

Performance Standards How this technology is expected to perform

Application Standards How this technology is to be applied. This section includes conditions that must be met prior to proceeding with design. Topics in this section describe the “registered” status of the technology, listing requirements, permitting, installation, testing, and inspection requirements.

Design and Installation How this technology is to be designed and constructed (includes minimum standards that must be met).

Operation and Maintenance General information regarding system operation and maintenance

References List of references cited in the document

Introduction The purpose of this Recommended Standards and Guidance document is to identify specifications and other requirements for drainfield rock distribution media to ensure it is suitable for use in soil treatment and dispersal systems. This document also identifies quality control measures and best practices used to ensure drainfield rock stays ‘clean’ when stored, transported, stockpiled and handled prior to system construction. This document was written to provide technical information regarding the quality and use of what is commonly called ‘drainfield rock’ in the Subsurface Sewage Treatment System (SSTS) industry. Drainfield rock is a type of distribution media used in soil treatment systems, including trenches, beds, at-grades, mounds, sand filters and other treatment and dispersal systems. Public domain drainfield rock distribution media is the material addressed in these standards. The Recommended Standards and Guidance contained in this document were developed for statewide application.

Page 2 of 10


Public domain distribution technologies are products developed without a patent. Drainfield rock is a public domain distribution technology (Minnesota Rules Chapter 7083.4000 Subp. 1.B.3.). Another example of a public domain material is the specified sand filter media used in a mound or sand filter. The purpose of drainfield rock is to temporarily store and convey wastewater to the soil’s infiltrative surface (absorption area) in all soil treatment and dispersal systems. The infiltrative surface is the interface where effluent moves from the distribution media and into the treatment media or native soil (Decentralized Wastewater Glossary, 2007). General Background Drainfield rock is a natural material obtained from different aggregate sources. The rock is produced by screening, grading and washing to meet the desired specifications. In some regions of Minnesota, sand and aggregate deposits are common; other areas lack significant suitable deposits. Proper washing of the rock is critical to remove fine particles, such as silt and clay. If the aggregate washing process is inadequate, fine particles could ‘wash off’ the rock surface when the system is loaded with effluent. This could cause of layer of fines to accumulate along the infiltrative surface, potentially reducing its ability to transmit wastewater into the native soil or sand mound media. Distribution media also include proprietary distribution products typically produced from recycled or synthetic materials. A companion document for proprietary distribution media is proposed and will be found on the MPCA website at the following location: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/programs/ists/productregistration.html. Performance Standards This section provides the standards for drainfield rock distribution media and the recommended quality control assurance that certified or licensed designers, installers and local governmental units (LGUs) use when drainfield rock is the selected distribution media in trenches, beds, at-grades and mounds. Drainfield rock must meet minimum specifications when used in soil treatment and dispersal systems. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) does not require that each gravel pit owner ‘register’ drainfield rock when used in soil treatment and dispersal systems. However, drainfield rock must meet minimum requirements. In general, drainfield rock shall be clean, sound and durable. Drainfield rock needs to be properly washed to remove the fine silt and clay particles that can contribute to soil clogging. Uniform rock size is preferred to obtain the maximum void space for the temporary storage of effluent. The hardness of the rock is also important; as limestone has been an issue of concern in some parts of southern Minnesota. Drainfield rock must not break down during transport or when used in sewage treatment and dispersal systems.

Page 3 of 10


Ultimately, the MPCA licensed Installer is responsible to ensure that all products, including suitable drainfield rock, are used in the construction of soil treatment and dispersal systems (Chapter 7083.0760 Subpart 2. D and G). Performance Criteria All distribution media used in subsurface sewage treatment systems shall meet four basic criteria (Chapter 7080.4070):

• be non-decaying and non-deteriorating and does not leach unacceptable chemicals when exposed to sewage and soil;

• provides adequate void space for the passage and temporary storage of effluent while maintaining a stable density throughout the life of the system;

• supports the distribution pipe, provides for suitable effluent distribution, and presents an interface with the infiltrative surface—trench bottom and side-wall soil—for absorption of the wastewater; and,

• maintains the integrity of the excavation, supports soil backfill and cover material, and weight of equipment used in backfilling.

Application Standards General Conditions Drainfield rock distribution media may be used in trenches, beds, at-grades and mounds and in systems Types I through Type V. Drainfield rock distribution media may incorporate any combination of the following design elements:

• gravity flow distribution • pressurize distribution • timed dosing • zoned or alternating systems

Permitting Permitting of systems using drainfield rock distribution media are subject to state and local

• Name, mailing address, telephone number and email address. • Property Identification Number and address or other description of property location. • Site Evaluation Report as described in Chapter 7080.1730. • Design Report as described in Chapter 7080.2430. • Management Plan as described in Chapter 7082.0600.

Other items normally required by the local governmental unit jurisdiction will also be included in the construction permit.

Page 4 of 10


Influent Wastewater Characteristics Wastewater from residential sources must be of strength at least equal to that commonly found in a residential septic tank before final discharge to the drainfield rock distribution media. Wastewater from non-residential sources, or high-strength wastewater from residential sources, must receive pre-treatment sufficient to lower the waste-strength to the level of that commonly found in domestic residential septic tank effluent before discharge to a drain rock distribution media as described in Chapter 7081.0130. Specifications for Drainfield Rock Distribution Media Drainfield rock must be clean, durable, broken or crushed stones, or screened gravel, meeting the requirements of Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Specification 3137. The drainfield rock shall meet the size requirements for coarse aggregate contained in MnDOT Specification 3137, CA-3, as shown below in Tables 1 and 2. Drainfield rock shall be meet the requirements of MnDOT Specification 3137 for silt, lumps of clay, mud, dirt, organic material, wood, other deleterious substances and fines. Drainfield rock shall not contain more than 1 percent fines (passing the #200 sieve). Table 1. Drainfield rock size requirements, MnDOT Specification Coarse Aggregate 3137, CA-3.

SIEVE SIZE

PERCENT PASSING (by weight)

1-½ inch

100

1-¼ inch

85 – 100

¾-inch

5 – 35

#4

0 – 5

#200

0 – 1

Limestone and other potentially soft rocks shall be tested for 1) loss of abrasion and 2) loss of soundness. The purpose of these two tests, as suggested by the Aggregate and Ready-mix Association of Minnesota, is to help ensure that limestone and other potentially soft rock does not break down when transported and used in sewage treatment systems. Thus, drainfield rock shall: 1) have a loss of abrasion of not more than 40 percent using AASHTO Method T 96 (Los Angeles Rattler Test) and 2) not have a loss of soundness using magnesium sulfate of more than 15 percent at the end of 5 cycles for any coarse fraction using AASHTO Method T 104.

Page 5 of 10


Table 2. Limestone testing requirements for ‘hardness’. DESCRIPTION

METHOD RESULTS REQUIRED

Abrasion determines if rock breaks down when moved around

AASHTO Method T 96 (LAR)

Not more than 40% loss

Soundness determines if rock breaks down over time

AASHTO Method T 104 (magnesium sulfate)

Not more than 15% loss at end of 5 cycles

At the pit, sufficient material must be produced and stockpiled to permit proper sampling and testing of the material, as specified in MnDOT Specification 3137. The material shall be tested at the pit to ensure the material leaving the pit meets the required specifications. Design and Installation When drainfield rock is used in the construction of trenches, beds, at-grades and mounds, the following practices apply:

• For trenches, the bottom absorption area (infiltrative surface) in a one-foot long by three-feet wide trench filled with six-inches of drainfield rock below the gravity distribution pipe is three (3) square feet.

• For trenches using gravity distribution, the bottom absorption area may be reduced by the

following percentages: o 20 percent for loading 12 to 17 inches of sidewall absorption below the gravity

distribution pipe o 34 percent for loading 18 to 23 inches of sidewall absorption below the gravity

distribution pipe o 40 percent for 24 inches of sidewall absorption below the gravity distribution

pipe.

• For seepage beds, the bottom absorption area (infiltrative surface) is one (1) square foot per square foot of rockbed.

• For trenches and seepage beds, the minimum sidewall adsorption is six inches; at least

six inches of drainfield rock distribution media is required below the distribution pipe (Chapter 7080.2200 Subp.3.B). Each trench and seepage bed requires a 4-inch vertical inspection pipe be installed in the distribution rock at the end of each trench and seepage bed (Chapter 7080.2210 Subp.3 B).

• For at-grades, the bottom absorption area (infiltrative surface) is 1.0 square foot per square

foot of rockbed. A 4-inch vertical inspection pipe must be installed at the drainfield rock and soil interface along the downslope bed (Chapter 7080.2230 Subp.3.G).

Page 6 of 10


• For mounds, the bottom absorption area (infiltrative surface) is 1.0 square foot per square foot of rockbed. A 4-inch vertical inspection pipe must be installed at the drainfield rock and sand interface (Chapter 7080.2220 Subp.3. O).

• For all systems, the following items apply:

o Any excavation into the adsorption area must be in a manner that maintains soil structure in an unsmeared and uncompacted condition. Excavation and placement of drainfield rock is allowed when:1) the soil moisture is less than the plastic limit and 2) the soil is not frozen or freezing (Chapter 7080.2150. Subp. 3.G). Furthermore, placement of drainfield shall be done in a manner that does not embed drainfield rock into the native soil.

o Non-woven geotextile fabric must be used to cover the drainfield rock distribution

media. The fabric must be of sufficient strength to undergo installation without rupture. The fabric must permit the passage of water without passage of overlying soil material into the drainfield rock medium (Chapter 7080.2150. Subp.3.F).

o The top and bottom of the drainfield rock distribution media must be level along the

contour. Sidewalls must be as vertical as practical and not intentionally sloped (Chapter 7080.2210 Subp. 4 C).

o The minimum depth of soil cover, including topsoil borrow over the drainfield rock

distribution media, is 12 inches (Chapter 7080.2210 Subp.4.D).

Quality Control Considerations When placing drainfield rock into an excavation, the licensed Installer shall ensure the rock is of suitable quality and placed into the excavation in a fashion that maintains the absorption area (infiltrative surface) of the soil. The licensed Installer shall verify the quality of drainfield rock at the pit and/or when delivered to the site to ensure it meets the required specifications. If the quality of the aggregate washing process is poor, the silt and clay particles remaining on the surface of the drain rock will likely wash off when the system is loaded with effluent. This can result in a layer of fines to accumulate along the infiltrative surface, thereby reducing the soil’s infiltrative capacity. Furthermore, if drainfield rock is ‘mishandled’ on site, it can become contaminated with grass, soil and other materials and debris as the rock is moved with heavy equipment. The pit operator and licensed Installer can follow some simple Best Practices when loading and moving drainfield rock so it remains clean and will not become contaminated with fines, silt and clay clods and other undesirable materials.

Page 7 of 10


The following techniques can be used to help determine the suitability of drainfield rock:

• Test Results from the Plant. This would include the sieve analyses, soundness test and abrasion test (if limestone) that the aggregate meets MnDOT Specifications 3137, CA-3 and contains less than 1 percent fines. This is the best technique; actual test results.

• Collect Independent Samples. Properly collect drainfield rock samples and have them

tested at a materials testing laboratory.

• Use of Field Screening Techniques. Screening tools do not replace the testing performed by qualified laboratories. However, screening tools can help both the licensed Installer and Inspector to ‘verify’ the general suitability of drainfield rock.

Field Screening Tool for Fines – Jar Test A tool known as the ‘jar test’ can be used to evaluate the relative fines content in a load of drainfield rock delivered to a construction site. This tool has also been used by licensed Installers and local inspectors to evaluate fines in mound sand. For drainfield rock, the procedure can be used as a ‘quick check’ on fines in a load of drainfield rock. Fill a quart size glass jar nearly full with rock. Add water and shake for 1 minute. Let the jar sit for 30 minutes, then check to see if a film forms on the surface or if fines collect on the bottom (Installation of Wastewater Treatment Systems, Consortium of Institutes for Decentralized Wastewater Treatment, Draft 2008). There should be less than 1/16-inch of fines in the bottom of the jar. If the measured fines layer is 1/16-inch or greater, a sieve analysis needs to be run (#200 sieve wash) to determine if the rock is acceptable or not.

Field Screening Tool for Rock Hardness – Mohs Test Another field tool that can be used to help evaluate the suitability of drainfield rock is the Mohs Test. Drainfield rock must have a hardness of 3 or more on the Mohs Scale of Hardness. Hardness is a measure of a rock’s resistance to abrasion and is measured against a standard scale called the Mohs Scale of Hardness. The scale consists of 10 fairly common minerals of known hardness, which are numerically ordered from the softest rock (1) to the hardest rock (10), as follows:

1. Talc (H=1)

2. Gypsum (H=2) 3. Calcite (H=3) 4. Fluorite (H=4) 5. Apatite (H=5)

6. Orthoclase (H=6)

7. Quartz (H=7) 8. Topaz (H=8) 9. Corundum (H=9) 10. Diamond (H=10)

The Mohs Scale of Hardness is based on the fact that a harder material will scratch a softer one. By using a simple scratch test, you can determine the relative hardness of drainfield rock. Please be advised this simple test is not suitable for all rock types. For example, chert and shale, which would ‘pass’ using this field tool would, in fact, break down using the AASHTO Methods for loss of abrasion and soundness tests because of the structure of these rocks.

Page 8 of 10


There are several simple tools that can be used in determining the relative hardness of drainfield rock. For example, your fingernail has a hardness of 2.5. If you can scratch the surface of a rock with it, its hardness is less than 2.5; slightly harder than gypsum (H=2) but softer than calcite (H=3). A penny has a hardness of 3.0. If you can't scratch the rock with your fingernail (H=2.5), but can with a penny, the rock is at least as hard as calcite (H=3). The steel blade of the average knife commonly has a hardness of about 5.5. If a penny does not scratch your rock but the knife blade does, then it is harder than calcite (H=3) but softer than orthoclase (H=6).

If your drainfield rock…

Give it a hardness number…

Can be rubbed off on the fingers 1

Can be scratched with a fingernail 2

Can be scratched with a penny1 3

Can be scratched easily with a butter knife 4

Is hard to scratch with a butter knife 5

Can be scratched with a steel nail but not glass 6

Can be used to scratch glass 7

Too hard to be tested in this scale 8 - 10

1 Drainfield rock must have a hardness of 3 or more on the Mohs Scale of Hardness.

Best Practices A few simple Best Practices can be used to minimize contamination of drainfield rock with fines, dust, clods of silt and clay, woody materials and other undesirable materials. Best Practices can be used by operators loading drainfield rock at the pit and by licensed Installers moving rock around the construction site

• Best Practices at the Gravel Pit or Quarry: o Leave a bottom layer of rock (6 inches) at the pit when loading the truck. Do not

scoop up all the rock because it will mix with the underlying soil and the load will become contaminated with soil and/or fines

o Don’t let the rock get too dusty (it may need to be washed again due to excess fines)

• Best Practices at the Construction Site: o Take rock directly from the truck to the soil treatment system, don’t store or

stockpile drainfield rock, install it immediately

Page 9 of 10


Page 10 of 10

o If rock is stockpiled, use a clean, undisturbed area for temporary storage of drainfield rock. Consider covering stockpiled materials if conditions are excessively dusty

o If stockpiled, make sure different materials are kept separate (i.e. clean sand, pea

rock, and drainfield rock) o Make sure the bucket is clean before scooping up materials

o Take care not to mix any soil in with drainfield rock when moving it

o Carefully place drainfield rock into the excavation, make sure soil is at the proper

moisture content. Make sure the bottom and sides of the excavation are not smeared; minimize walking in the excavation. Carefully place drainfield rock into the excavation by minimizing drop distance into the excavation.

Operation and Maintenance The owner of the residence or facility served by the subsurface soil treatment system is responsible for assuring proper operation and providing timely maintenance for all components of the system. The licensed designer, installer or inspector should instruct, or assure that instruction is provided to, the owner of the residence or facility in the proper operation and maintenance of the system. The goal is to make the owner aware of the system’s Management Plan, its’ purpose, and the need for proper operation and maintenance. Septic system owners can obtain additional information related to operation and maintenance at the University of Minnesota’s website http://www.extension.umn.edu. The publication entitled Septic System Owner’s Guide is available for purchase from the University of Minnesota. References Decentralized Wastewater Glossary. 2007. The Consortium of Institutes for Decentralized Wastewater Treatment. Available online: http://onsiteconsortium.org/files/Glossary.pdf Installation of Wastewater Treatment Systems. Draft 2008. Consortium of Institutes for Decentralized Wastewater Treatment. Minnesota Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Construction. 2005. MnDOT Specification 3137, Coarse Aggregate for Portland Cement Concrete. Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080, 7081, 7082 and 7083. February 2008. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency website http://www.pca.state.mn.us/programs/ists/rules.html Mohs Hardness. 2008. Website http://www.rocksandminerals.com/hardness/mohs.htm

http://www.extension.umn.edu/

http://www.rocksandminerals.com/hardness/mohs.htm

Checklist for Product Registration Submittal Requirements for Proprietary Treatment Products

December 12, 2008

Name of Manufacturer: HOOT SYSTEMS, LLC. Identification Number: 2008-007 Proprietary Treatment Product Checklist Application: New - Submittal - Initial email 11/04/08; Revised (Homeowner Manual) 12/04/08; Discussed at TAP 12/12/08

New

Application Status: • Incomplete: If incomplete, return application (Return letter with comments, Action

Date Returned). • Complete: If complete, review process done within 60 days and Complete Listing

of the Product (Approval letter, Listing of Product, Action Date Approval)

Submittal Requirements to List Treatment Products as a Registered Product:

Applicant Information: Manufacture’s name, mailing address, street address, telephone number Hoot Systems, LLC

X

Contact individual name (vested with authority to act as agent), address, telephone number Ron Suchecki

X

Product Information: Name of product, including brand and model H-Series, Hoot Aerobic Treatment Tanks – 4 models H-500A, H-600A; H-750A; H-1000A

X

Description of the function of the product On ‘page 4’ of the Application – comprised of 5 components but only lists 4 parts; Notes – provide Trash Tank as part of the components.

X

Description of any known limitations on the use of the product See page 85 in ‘Installation Manual’ and in revised ‘Homeowner Manual’ on page 1.

X

Product description and technical information to include: • Process flow diagrams and schematics – yes (Appendix C) • Materials and characteristics – yes (page 5) • Component design specifications – yes (page 6) • Design capacity – yes (page 6) – Clarification of the 600 gpd unit – it is listed by

NSF at both 500 and 600 gpd. • Volumes and flow assumptions and calculations – yes (page 6); includes minimum

and maximum sizes for pre-treatment tanks. • Components – yes (page 7) • Dimensioned drawings –yes (Appendix F). • Photos – no photo’s – but website contains some additional information, no pictures

of the unit itself

X

1

For treatment systems in Category B, daily capacity of the model or models in lb/day CBOD – Not applicable – stated for residential applications

Siting and installation requirements- yes (Appendix G- Installation Manual)

X

Detailed description, procedure, and schedule of routine service, system maintenance events – yes on Service and Inspection Form in REVISED Homeowner Manual (page 10). Note: Owner Manual indicates on page 8 that “Intermittent use of the system is not recommended.”

X

Estimated operation costs for the 1st 5 years of the treatment components life (both estimated annual electricity costs and routine maintenance costs, including replacement of parts). On page 9 estimated at $342 per year (excludes tank pumping)

X

Identification of information subject to be protected from disclosure of trade secrets or confidential business information – NSF Report (like other applications)

X

Copies of product brochures and manuals:

• Sales and promotional Note: Appendix I (sales and promotional materials) 1 item from Wisconsin.

• Design – more needed? • Installation - yes • Operation and Maintenance - yes • Homeowner Instructions - yes

Testing Results: The most recently available product test protocol and results report

1. Baylor University – Performance Testing and Evaluation Certification Report Hoot 500 with Models 750 and 1000, December 14, 2001 – CBOD and TSS.

2. NSF Letter – dated Nov 13, 2003. Reporting on test data for Hoot H-600. (additional testing done at Baylor University in 2003). NSF authorized use of the test data to approve the 600 gpd rating for the original 500 gpd unit.

3. Bacteriological reduction testing results provided in Appendix L – raw data over 18 months, collected weekly. Data from Hoot unit.

All available product testing results, including a listing of state approvals and denials Listing provided on page 10 – 17 states, local approvals in California and Colorado. No denials.

X

Certification Statement: Signed and dated certification statement by authorized senior executive or authorized agent, with the following statement: “I certify that I represent (MANUFACTURING COMPANY NAME ) and I am authorized to prepare or direct the preparation of this application for registration. I attest, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments are true, accurate, and complete. I understand and accept that the product testing results reported in this application for registration are the parameters and values to be used for determining conformance with treatment system performance testing levels established in Minnesota Rules, part 7083.4030.”

X

Signed and dated certification statement from the testing entity including the statement: “ I certify that I represent (INSERT TESTING ENTITY NME) and that I am authorized to report the testing results for this proprietary product. I attest, under penalty of law, that the report about the test protocol and results is true, accurate, and complete.”

X

Final Review Sign-off:

2

3

Application meets all specified requirements for Proprietary Treatment Product Registration

TAP Meeting Date – December 12, 2008 Date of Application Approval –

Reviewer(s) Name: Barbara McCarthy

Discussion Items:

1. Note – Baylor Report (unaltered) with information not relevant to Minnesota, Contained in the Report

2. Registration in Washington, Approval in Wisconsin 3. Category A 4. Testing for 600 gpd unit - clarification – NSF letter dated November 13, 2003 5. Bacteriological Reduction Testing (18 months testing at Baylor site) – report - Baylor letter

dated December 14, 2007 with data 6. Chlorine tablets - Texas - identified several places in submittal- ie (Declaration of Warnings) 7. Treatment Level(s) 8. Service Policy - Texas - page 99 of 105, #4 Homeowner responsible to maintain chlorine

tablets – part of Baylor report 9. Service and Inspection Form – page 100 of 105; Chlorinator and Chlorine residual – part of

Baylor report. 10. Sampling protocol 11. Costs – Service Call 12. Appendix I – 1 page, any other sales and promotional materials – from Wisconsin (direct

people to their website, it is being updated, too. 13. Explain Stone Flush – under O and M on page 6-7. 14. Explain Probe O and M - on page 97 of 105 in Baylor Report 15. Winterization of blower and piping – under O and M page 8. – Small building used 16. Minimum and maximum trash tank sizing 17. Homeowner Troubleshooting – (page 8 of revised Homeowners Manual – Intermittent Use

not recommended). Are these systems appropriate for seasonal cabins? 18. What damage has fire ants caused? 19. Design sufficient? – 1 pager would be good with 600 and 1000 gpd design example for sizing

the units. 20. Installation Manual – follow design of PE or Registered Sanitarian – Advanced Designers 21. Regulators Checklist – plan review, construction 22. Management Plan 23. Operating Permit requirements

December 12, 2008 TAP Meeting

1

HOOT SYSTEMS DRAFT 1

Listing of Registered Treatment and Distribution Products for Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS) The products on this list have been determined to meet the requirements in Minnesota Rules Chapter 7083. The purpose of this listing is to ensure products are protective of public health and the environment while providing long-term performance to consumers when properly operated and maintained. The list is intended to be a valuable resource to designers, installers, service providers, local regulatory officials, and consumers.

• How to Use the List of Registered Treatment and Distribution Products The listing of registered products does not constitute approval of marketing, advertising, or labeling practices used by the manufacturer. Listing does not constitute endorsement of these products by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Information obtained from the manufacturer is the sole responsibility of the manufacturer or other provider. Links to external resources are provided as a public service, and do not imply endorsement by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. When choosing products from this listing, consumers are advised to check with the Product Manufacturer to ensure that the actual company proposed to do work for you is properly trained in the use of their product(s).

Manufacturers of Registered Category A (Residential) Proprietary Treatment Products Hoot Systems, LLC 2885 Highway 14 East Lake Charles, LA 70607 Phone: 254-498-3015 Fax: 254-299-0822 Email: [email protected] Web: http:www.hootsystems.com

Product Name Model

Design Flow

Treatment Process

Treatment Level

Product Information

Hoot Series Hoot Aerobic Treatment Tanks

H-500-A H-600-A H-750-A H-1000-A

500 600 750 1000

Suspended growth process Need report -

with 30 day geometric

means

• Notice of Product Listing • Submitted Drawings • Known Limitations • Service Contract • Installation Manual • Operation and

Maintenance Standards • Owners Manual • Regulators Checklist • Operating Permit

Draft 1 - Notification Letter Hoot Systems LLC – TAP Dec 12, 2008

Date Mr. Ron Suchecki Hoot Systems, LLC 2885 Highway 14 East Lake Charles LA 70607 RE: Product Registration Process – Notice of Proprietary Treatment Product Listing Description: Sewage Treatment System, Suspended Growth Manufacturer: Hoot Systems, LLC. Product Name: H-Series Hoot Aerobic Treatment Tanks – Suspended Growth Model Numbers: H-500-A, H-600A, H-750A, and H-1000-A (Design Flow 500 GPD for H-500-A, 600 GPD for H-600-A, 750 GPD for H-750-A, and 1000 GPD for H-1000-A) Product Listing: Category A (residential sewage) Product File No: 2008-007 Dear Mr. Suchecki: Thank you for your application for product registration for the H-Series Hoot Aerobic Treatment Tanks. In accordance with Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080 through 7083, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has reviewed your submitted materials for Category A (residential) treatment product listing. Our review of the H-Series Hoot Aerobic treatment Tanks in this application (design rated capacity of 500 to 1000 gallons per day) indicates it meets the requirements for proprietary treatment product registration. The H-Series Hoot Aerobic Treatment Tanks are considered a Category A (designed to treat residential sewage) treatment product in the State of Minnesota that meet Treatment Levels ___ as shown below. H-Series Hoot Aerobic Treatment Tanks

Product Name Model

Design Flow

Treatment Process

Treatment Level

Product Information

H-Series Hoot Aerobic treatment Tanks

H-500-A H-600-A H-750-A H-1000-A

500 600 750 1000

Suspended Growth

• Notice of Product Listing

• Submitted Drawings • Known Limitations • Service Contract • Installation Manual • Operation and

Maintenance Standards • Owners Manual • Regulators Checklist • Operating Permit

Page 1 of 3


Subject to this determination, the H-Series Hoot Aerobic Treatment Tanks Models H-500-A, H-600-A, H-750-A, and H-1000-A) will be placed on the List of Registered Subsurface Sewage Treatment System (SSTS) Products as shown above. The product information listed in this Notice of Proprietary Product Listing will be maintained on the MPCA website and may not be altered by the manufacturer without permission from the MPCA. The registration of the product in Minnesota is contingent upon compliance with the following conditions:

1. Product must be used in compliance with MPCA rules and the plans and design specifications provided. Any deviation from the plans and specifications shall not be permitted unless authorized by NSF and, in writing, by the MPCA for registered use.

2. The manufacturer shall have readily accessible information, specific to a product’s

registered use in Minnesota, for designers, installers, service providers, regulators, and systems owners for the following items: a) product manual, b) design instructions, c) installation instructions, d) operation and maintenance requirements, e) homeowner instructions, and f) list of manufacturer-certified service providers, as contained in Minnesota Rules Chapter 7083.4040.

3. Systems may only be designated as Type IV systems when designed and installed per the

drawings submitted with the Application for Registration, dated November 3, 2008. 4. The design flows for the registered products are 500 gallons per day for H-500-A, 600

gallons per day for H-600-A, 750 gallons per day for H-750-A and 1000 gallons per day for H-1000-A.

5. Septic/trash tank capacity for dwellings shall meet the manufacturer’s minimum and

maximum size requirements as specified in the Application for Registration. The tank(s) shall be designed to withstand the pressures to which it will be subject to. The tank(s) and all pipe penetrations, risers, and other connections to the tank shall be watertight.

6. Each system must be delivered with an installation manual and owners manual. Each unit

must be installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s installation manual.

7. This treatment product is a Minnesota-registered product for Type IV systems. For Treatment Level __, effluent loading rates to the soil, method of distribution, and vertical separation requirements shall meet the minimum requirements contained in Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080.2350.

8. All systems shall be designed and operated with a suitable alarm(s) should the treatment

device and its components malfunction.

9. As a Type IV system, the system must be constructed and operated under the required local permits.

Page 2 of 3


Page 3 of 3

10. The level of maintenance required for Hoot Aerobic Treatment Tanks shall be as specified

in the products Operation and Maintenance Manual. This includes, but is not limited to, maintenance every 6 months.

11. As specified in known limitations of the product, specified in the Declaration of Warnings

in the Installer and Homeowners Manuals, backwash from water softeners and other unsuitable wastes must not be discharged to the Hoot Aerobic Treatment Tanks. The manufacturer is responsible to provide a listing of other known limitations, made available on the company’s website or other means.

Please be advised that this registration expires December 31, 2011. Manufacturers desiring to continue product registration beyond this date must obtain MPCA renewal according to the requirements in Minnesota Rules Chapter 7083.4080. If the product has changed or is retested according to the protocol required for registration, renewal shall be based on the most recent test results. If the MPCA finds the product has changed in any way that affects performance, it may not be renewed and must meet the requirements for initial registration. The MPCA is in no way endorsing this products or any advertising, and is not responsible for any situation which may result from its use. If you have any questions, please contact Barbara McCarthy at 218-723-4710 or by email at [email protected]. Sincerely, Barbara J. McCarthy, P.S.S. Soil Scientist

mailto:[email protected]

Submitted on behalf of Infiltrator Systems Inc., Advanced Drainage Systems Inc. and Ring Industrial Group on December 4, 2008 Recommended Standards and Guidance for Performance, Application, Design, and Operation & Maintenance Proprietary Distribution Technologies for Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems Proprietary Distribution Technologies For Trenches, Seepage Beds, At-grades and Mounds December 12, 2008 Draft for Technical Advisory Panel Meeting

For information or additional copies of this document contact: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency – Municipal Division Mailing address: xx Tel: xx FAX: xx Webpage: http://www. For persons with disabilities, this document is available upon request in other formats. To submit a request, please call xx

Proprietary Distribution Technologies – Recommended Standards and Guidance

MPCA Publication # Page 2 of 11

How this document is organized: Standards Section Explanation Introduction Purpose of the document, general background

information

Performance How this technology is expected to perform

Application How this technology is to be applied. This section includes conditions that must be met prior to proceeding with design. Topics in this section describe the “registered” status of the technology, listing requirements, permitting, installation, testing, inspection requirements, etc.

Design and Construction How this technology is to be designed and constructed (includes minimum standards that must be met).

Operation and Maintenance How this technology is to be operated and maintained (includes responsibilities of various parties, recommended maintenance tasks and frequency, assurance measures, etc)

References List of references cited in the document



Introduction Proprietary distribution technologies are the material addressed in these standards. The Recommended Standards and Guidance contained in this document were developed for statewide application. The document was specifically written to provide technical information regarding the use of what are commonly called “gravelless products” in the industry. Gravelless products (proprietary distribution technologies) are a type of distribution media used in soil treatment systems, including trenches, beds, at-grades, and mounds. Proprietary distribution products, typically produced from recycled or synthetic materials, are developed by private companies to take the place of drainfield rock and distribution pipe commonly used in soil treatment systems. These products are often patented by the inventor, to protect the product from being manufactured by others. Proprietary distribution technologies provide similar functions to those offered by drainfield rock media: they temporarily store and convey wastewater to the soil’s infiltrative surface. The use of proprietary distribution technologies addresses some of the concerns presented with the use of drainfield rock media. Among these are:

The negative impact of solid objects embedding into the infiltrative surface and reducing the long-term acceptance rate of the infiltrative surface.

The detrimental effect of drainfield rock impacting and compressing the infiltrative surface when dumped into the drainfield trench from the front-end loader of a backhoe, which may lower the infiltrative capacity of the soil.

If the quality of the drainfield rock washing process is poor, the silt particles remaining on the surface of the drainfield rock may be washed off when the drainfield is placed into use, resulting in a silt layer on the infiltrative surface and thereby reducing its infiltrative capacity.

The damaging effect that the transportation of drainfield rock across yards can have on lawns, flowerbeds, shrubs, etc. and the reduced air transport to the infiltrative surface from compacted soils, all due to the weight of the material and the size of the heavy equipment needed to effectively move it from the stock pile to the drainfield area.

There are pros and cons for using different types of distribution media. A companion document for drainfield rock media is found on the MPCA website at http://www.xx. The purpose of this Recommended Standards and Guidance document is to identify requirements for proprietary distribution technologies to ensure that they are suitable for use, and used appropriately, in soil treatment systems in Minnesota.



Performance Standards Listing Proprietary distribution technologies must minimum certain specifications in order to be used in soil treatment systems. The MPCA requires manufacturers to register each of their proprietary distribution technologies for use in soil treatment systems. The MPCA reviews and lists proprietary distribution technologies when the manufacturer or designated manufacturer representative demonstrates that the product meets or exceeds the performance criteria of this document. Only listed models of proprietary distribution technologies may be used as distribution media. This document provides the standards for proprietary distribution technologies and the recommended practices that designers, installers, and local governmental units (LGU’s) use when proprietary distribution technologies are used as the selected distribution media in trenches, beds, at-grades, and mounds. The installer is responsible to ensure that appropriately registered proprietary distribution technologies are used in the construction of all soil treatment systems (Chapter 7083.0760.Subpart 2. D and G). Performance Criteria Any proprietary distribution technology shall meet four basic criteria (Chapter 7080.4070):

• be non-decaying and non-deteriorating and does not leach unacceptable chemicals when exposed to sewage and soil;

• provide adequate void space (for the passage and temporary storage of effluent) while

maintaining a stable density throughout the life of the system;

• support the distribution pipe (where required), provide for suitable effluent distribution, and present an interface with the infiltrative surface—trench bottom and side-wall soil—for absorption of the wastewater; and,

• maintain the integrity of the excavation, support soil backfill and cover material, and

weight of equipment used in backfilling. Application Standards Permitting



Permitting and installation of systems using proprietary distribution technologies are subject to state and local requirements. The local governmental unit construction permit must specify, among other items normally required within the specific local governmental unit jurisdiction, the following items:

• Name, mailing address, telephone number and email address.

• Property Identification Number and address or other description of property location.

• Site Evaluation Report as described in Chapter 7080.1730.

• Design Report as described in Chapter 7080.2430.

• Management Plan as described in Chapter 7082.0600. General Conditions Proprietary distribution technologies may be used in trenches, beds, at-grades, and mounds and all systems types (Type I through Type V). Proprietary distribution technologies may incorporate any combination of the following design elements:

• gravity flow distribution

• pressurized distribution

• timed dosing

• zoned or alternating subsurface sewage treatment systems Influent Wastewater Characteristics Wastewater from residential sources must receive pre-treatment at least equal to that provided in a septic tank before discharge to the proprietary distribution technology and into the soil or mound sand media as described in Chapter 7080.xxxx and Chapter 7081.xxxx. Wastewater from non-residential sources, or high-strength wastewater from residential sources must receive pre-treatment sufficient to lower the waste-strength to the level of that commonly found in domestic residential septic tank effluent before discharge to a proprietary distribution technology as described in Chapter 7080.xxxx and Chapter 7081.xxxx. Specifications for Proprietary Distribution Technologies



There are a number of different proprietary distribution technologies, not all of which are included in this Guidance. At the present time, soil treatment systems comprised of gravelless chambers and bundled expanded polystyrene (EPS) aggregate are considered as acceptable proprietary distribution technologies. Gravelless Chambers (see Figure 1): Molded chambers, of various dimensions, are used. The chambers replace the drainfield rock-supported void space with chamber-supported void space and replace the pipe in a gravity-fed system. The trench, or bed, bottom infiltrative surface is open, sidewalls are generally louvered, and the top is generally solid. The chambers are placed, connected end-to-end, in the bottom of the trench (and placed side-by-side in a bed) and backfilled with native material (or as otherwise directed by the manufacturer depending upon soil conditions). At each end of each drainfield chamber line, solid end plates are installed for structural support and as a barrier to soil backfill. The use of a geotextile barrier between the chamber and the soil backfill varies from manufacturer to manufacturer and model to model (depending upon sidewall design), and may depend on the type of soil in which the drainfield is installed.

Figure 1. Typical Gravelless Chamber Drainfield, Cross-Section (not to scale)



Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) Aggregate (See Figure 3): Expanded polystyrene (EPS) aggregate is manufactured in a netting to form cylindrical bundles, for ease of installation and/or as an element of design. These bundles replace the drainfield rock-supported void space with EPS-supported void space. The trench, or bed, bottom and sidewall infiltrative surfaces are partially open and partially in contact with the surrounding soil. Circular bundles of netted EPS, in various diameters, are most common. The particular shape and configuration of individual or multiple EPS bundles may provide additional void space within the trench or bed depending on how the units are placed and the depth and width of the drainfield trench. A geotextile material is either fabricated within the top aspect of individual bundles, or placed on top of the bundles, as a barrier to soil backfill infiltration. Some product manufacturers, due in part to the shape of their product, prefer the use of other types of barrier materials, such as 60 pound untreated building paper. In loose soils such as uniform sands non-deteriorating geotextile barrier material may be needed, however, to assure long-term protection. In either case, the manufacturer’s recommendations to prevent or minimize soil backfill infiltration should be followed.

Figure 3. Typical Cross Section of EPS Aggregate System (not to scale)



Design and Installation Considerations using Proprietary Distribution Technologies Proprietary distribution technologies shall have, at least equal to that provided by drainfield rock distribution media, the following attributes:

• Be constructed or manufactured from materials that are nondecaying and

nondeteriorating and do not leach chemicals when exposed to sewage and the subsurface soil environment;

• Provide liquid storage volume at least equal to the storage volume provided within the

thirty percent void space in a twelve-inch layer of drain rock in a drain rock-filled distribution system. This storage volume must be established by the proprietary distribution technology, system design and installation, and must be maintained for the life of the system. This requirement may be met on a lineal-foot, or on an overall system design basis;

• Provide suitable effluent distribution to the infiltrative surface at the soil interface; and

• Maintain the integrity of the trench or bed. The material used, by its nature and its

manufacturer-prescribed installation procedure, must withstand the physical forces of the soil sidewalls, soil backfill and the weight of equipment used in the backfilling.

The infiltrative surface area of proprietary distribution technologies shall be determined by dividing the design flow (Gallons Per Day) by the appropriate soil loading rate (Gallons per Day per Square Foot) and multiplying that area by an efficiency factor of 0.75.

Once the drainfield area required is determined (square feet of trench or bed bottom area) the total length of trenches or beds can be determined. The lineal amount of proprietary distribution technology required to provide the total drainfield area depends on the amount of bottom area infiltrative surface area per lineal foot provided by each registered proprietary distribution technology product.

To determine the total length of trenches or beds required divide the total square footage of drainfield required by the amount of infiltrative area per lineal foot of the type of drainfield material selected (see Table 1).



Table 1. Gravelless Product Drainfields Sizing For sizing based on a

trench width of (inches)

Infiltrative Area The measured width of the product must be at least (inches)

36 3.0 sf/lf 32.4 30 2.5 sf/lf 27.0 24 2.0 sf/lf 21.6 18 1.5 sf/lf 16.2 12 1.0 sf/lf 10.8

When proprietary distribution technologies are used in the construction of trenches, beds, at-grade and mounds, the following practices apply:

• The top and bottom of the distribution technology must be approximately level along the contour.

• The minimum depth of soil cover, including topsoil borrow over the distribution

technology is 6 inches.

• For trenches and beds, there needs to be a layer of at least six inches of distribution media below the invert elevation of the inlet pipe.

• For trenches and seepage beds, a 4-inch vertical inspection pipe must be installed in the

distribution technology within four feet of the end of each trench and seepage bed.

• For mounds, a 4-inch vertical inspection pipe must be installed at the distribution technology and sand interface.

• For at-grades, a 4-inch vertical inspection pipe must be installed at the distribution technology soil interface along the downslope bed.

Mound design standards for proprietary distribution technologies The mound distribution media bed area consists of bottom area only and must be calculated by dividing the design flow by 1.2 gallons per day per square foot and multiplying that area by the 0.75 efficiency factor. The original soil mound absorption area shall not be reduced. The original soil mound absorption area is determined by multiplying the original soil mound absorption length by the original soil mound absorption width. The original soil mound absorption width is calculated by multiplying the predetermined mound distribution media bed width by the mound absorption ratio found in Table IX or IXa in part 7080.2150, subpart 2, item E. All other mound system requirements found in 7080.2200 shall be adhered to.



At-grade design standards for proprietary distribution technologies The at-grade absorption system utilizing proprietary distribution technologies must be calculated by dividing the design flow by the appropriate soil loading rate found in Table IX or IXa in part 7080.2150, subpart 2, item E, and multiplying that area by the efficiency factor of 0.75. All other at-grade system requirements found in 7080.2230 shall be adhered to.

Installation and Quality Control Considerations Drainfields using proprietary distribution technologies must be installed according to the manufacturer's instructions, in a manner that is consistent with these standards and with state and local rules. If the manufacturer's instructions and these standards are in conflict, the matter must be discussed with, and decided by, the local governmental unit (LGU) agent. Operation and Maintenance Standards General The owner of the residence or facility served by the soil treatment system is responsible for assuring proper operation and providing timely maintenance for all components of the on-site wastewater treatment and dispersal system. The on-site wastewater system designer or installer should instruct, or assure that instruction is provided to, the owner of the residence or facility regarding proper operation of the entire on-site wastewater system. Operation and Maintenance Activities Assure that no surface water collects on the soil treatment system or its components (i.e.: sewage tanks). Fix leaks in the home to prevent hydraulic failure of the system. Use the system according to the Management Plan or according to conditions of the Operating Permit (if issued by local government). Prohibit any type of vehicular or livestock traffic over the drainfield area. No wildlife feeding near the system. Maintain a suitable, non-invasive shallow-rooted vegetative cover over the soil treatment system. Observe the entire treatment system at a frequency appropriate for the site conditions and sewage system. This can be done by the homeowner or service provider.



When observation reveals hydraulic failure, the owner of the system must take appropriate action to alleviate the situation according to the direction and satisfaction of the local governmental unit. Appropriate action may include:

• Repair or modification of the soil treatment system.

• Expansion of the soil treatment system.

• Modifications or changes within the structure relative to wastewater strength or hydraulic flow.

References Decentralized Wastewater Glossary. 2007. The Consortium of Institutes for Decentralized Wastewater Treatment. Available online at: http://onsiteconsortium.org/files/Glossary.pdf Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080 Minnesota Rules Chapter 7071 Minnesota Rules Chapter 7082 Minnesota Rules Chapter 7083 Others

Research Summary on Infiltration Efficiency of Gravelless Drainfields Compared to Gravel Aggregate Drainfields

November 2008

Research Study Description of Study Difference in

Septic Tank Effluent Infiltration

Rate Efficiency (Gravelless vs.

Gravel Aggregate) Sweeny, Robert. 2008. Field Inspection and

Evaluation of the Hydraulic Performance of EZflow 1201P Gravel Substitute Drainfield Systems in Clackamas, Marion, Multnomah and Deschutes Counties, Oregon. Presented at 2008 OR DEQ

Technical Advisory Committee meeting

436 field evaluations of 103 EZflow systems over a five year period for determining product failure rate

2.0

Christopherson et al. 2008. Field Comparison of Rock-Filled and Chambered Trench Systems in

Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, Vol. 13, No. 8,

Field evaluation of over 100 gravel and chamber systems 5 to

10 years old

No failures detected for either

system type Lowe et al. 2008. Controlled Field Experiment for Performance Evaluation of Septic Tank Effluent Treatment during Soil Evaluation, , Journal of

Environmental Engineering,

Two-year field study of 30 pilot-scale test cells.

1.4 – 1.8

Walsh, R. 2006. Infiltrative Capacity of Receiving Media as Affected by Effluent Quality, Infiltrative Surface Architecture, and Hydraulic Loading Rate,

Master Thesis at Colorado School of Mines

One dimensional column study 3.2

Uebler et al. 2006. Performance of Chamber and EZ1203H Systems Compared to Conventional

Gravel Septic Tank Systems in North Carolina, , Proceedings of NOWRA

Field evaluation of failure rates of approximately 300 of each type

system (gravel, chamber, EPS) 2-12 years old

1.4

Radcliffe et al. 2005. Gravel and Sidewall Flow Effects in On-Site System Trenches, , Soil Science

Society of America Journal

Two dimensional computer model (HYDRUS-2D)

1.5 – 1.93

Siegrist et al.2004. Wastewater Infiltration into Soil and the Effects of Infiltrative Surface Architecture, ,

Small Flows Quarterly

Two one dimensional column studies and pilot-scale field study

1.5 – 2.0

White and West. 2003. In-Ground Dispersal of Wastewater Effluent: The Science of Getting Water

into the Ground. Small Flows Quarterly, 2003

Literature Review and One dimensional column study

measuring the impact of gravel and fines (clean water)

2.5

King et al. 2002. Surface Failure Rates of Chamber and Traditional Aggregate-Laden Trenches in

Oregon, Small Flows Quarterly

Field evaluation of failure rates of 198 chamber systems and 191 gravel systems 2-5 years old

1.6

Burcham, T. 2001. A Review of Literature and Computations for Chamber-Style Onsite

Wastewater Distribution Systems, , Report commissioned by the Mississippi Department of

Health

Literature review and computer model

1.43– 2.0

Joy, Douglas. 2001. Review of Chamber Systems and Their Sizing for Wastewater Treatment

Systems, Ontario Rural Wastewater Centre Report, University of Guelph

Literature Review 1.67

Van Cuyk et al, 2001. Hydraulic and Purification Behaviors and their Interactions During Wastewater Treatment in Soil Infiltration Systems”, Journal of

Water Resources

Three-dimensional lysimeter study of treatment performance

1.67

Casper, Jay. 1997. Final Report: Infiltrator Side-by-Side Test Site, Killarney Elementary School, Winter

Park, Florida. Report to State of Florida, Department of HRS.

Pilot-scale side-by-side study of 15 trenches (gravel and chamber).

1.6 – 2.3

Keys, JR. 1996. Septic Tank Effluent Infiltration and Loading Rates for Gravel and Chamber

Absorption Systems. MS Thesis. University of Wisconsin-Madison

Triplicate comparison of 8 year old gravel and chamber systems i. No difference in performance of silt loam systems even though chambers loaded 1.65 x higher. No comparison made in sand.

1.65

Tyler, EJ, Milner, M, Converse, JC. 1992. Soil Acceptance of Wastewater from Chamber and

Gravel Infiltration Systems, in Proceedings of 7th Northwest On-site Wastewater Treatment Short Course and Equipment Exhibition, University of

Washington, Seattle, WA. September 1992, Pp. 93-104.

Earlier report (after 4 years) on study described above.

No conclusions made.

Barranco, EJ, Sherman, KM, 1991. Florida's Onsite Sewage Disposal (OSD) Experimental System Protocol, in On-Site Wastewater Treatment: Proceedings of 6th National Symposium On

Individual and Small Community Sewage Systems, American Society of Agricultural Engineers, St.

Joseph, MI, December 1991, Pp. 266 - 275

Field performance assessment of 50 Florida chamber systems (no gravel control) with an average

age of 16.8 months. Success rate was 82%. Recommendations on effective evaluations (side-by-

side) were incorporated in Casper evaluation described above.

No conclusions made

Amerson, RS, Tyler, EJ, Converse, JC. 1991. Infiltration as Affected by Compaction, Fines and Contact Area of Gravel, in On-Site Wastewater

Treatment: Proceedings of 6th National Symposium On Individual and Small Community Sewage Systems, American Society of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, MI, December 1991

Evaluation of 30 soil cells to assess impact of gravel

compaction, contact area and fines. Ratios are the clean water infiltration rate ratios of an open

soil surface (control) compared to one with gravel compaction,

embedment, and fines.

2.1 – 2.6

Other References 2006. Uniform Plumbing Code. International Standard 1.43

Siegrist, Robert. 2006. Evolving a Rational Design Approach for Sizing Soil Treatment Units, Small

Flows Quarterly. Summer 2006

Proposed design methodology that takes into account BOD

loading, soil type and infiltrative surface architecture.

1.33 – 2.0

2001. U.S. EPA Decentralized Systems Technology Fact Sheet – Septic Tank Leaching Chambers.

Literature Review and Recommended Usage

1.4

Dec 12, 2008 TAP Meeting Nov 20, 2008 TAP Meeting; Contact: Tom Stevens at National Sanitation Foundation International (NSF) at 734-769-5347 Dec 3, 2008 Technical staff follow-up: Bill Priebe, Corey Hower, Mark Westpetal, Gretchen Sabel, Barb McCarthy (MPCA) and Sara Christopherson (U of M)

Bio-Microbics Submittal Follow-up to Oct 23, 2008 and Nov 20, 2008 TAP Meeting

1. Residential Waste

• NSF certifies systems to 1500 gpd based on smallest model (i.e.: 500 gpd) tested. • For flows >1500 gpd, NSF can provide an engineering review for up-scaling, based on

‘proportional equivalency’ (see NSF letter dated Nov. 19, 2008 pertaining to Bio-Microbics application).

• For flows >1500 gpd, engineering review provided by NSF for ‘bigger’ modules include

media sizing, hydraulic retention time, sludge storage, aeration (both oxygen and mixing demands). For flows >1500 gpd where multiple modules are used (i.e.: >3 modules), this is less of an issue. However, flow splitting becomes important when multiple modules are used.

• Perhaps MPCA can provide engineering ‘oversight’ of NSF letters to verify proportional

equivalency used in the scale-up to the desired flow (for each manufacturer). MPCA preliminary recommendations: • At this time, MPCA is in agreement with the approach used by NSF in providing an up-

scale review of treatment units, based on proportional equivalency for the removal of CBOD and TSS. We understand that this a common engineering practice. The up-scaling would be suitable for treatment systems, as proposed by Bio-Microbics, with design flows >1500 to 9000 gpd for CBOD and TSS. The up-scale approach does not work the same for up-scaling UV disinfection devices.

• For UV disinfection devices (other than Salcor; already tested at 500 gpd) for design

flows >1500 to 9000 gpd, Bio-Microbics would need to provide independent, third party testing to be registered at Treatment Level A (1000 cfu) or Treatment Level B (10,000 cfu). For product listing at Treatment Level C, no additional bacteriological reduction testing is required. It is our understanding the Salcor disinfection unit will be used on smaller flows (<1501 gpd). For flows >1500 to 9000 gpd, a MPCA engineering review of the disinfection data will be needed.

• For module treatment and disinfection devices, a review of flow splitting devices will be

needed as part of product registration. Flow splitting may be used to: 1) split flow among multiple module treatment devices and 2) split flows among multiple disinfection devices. This will be needed for more then two Salcor UV units.

• Nitrogen – placeholder for flows >2500 gpd.

Dec 12, 2008 TAP Meeting Nov 20, 2008 TAP Meeting; Contact: Tom Stevens at National Sanitation Foundation International (NSF) at 734-769-5347 Dec 3, 2008 Technical staff follow-up: Bill Priebe, Corey Hower, Mark Westpetal, Gretchen Sabel, Barb McCarthy (MPCA) and Sara Christopherson (U of M)

2. High-Strength Waste

• ETV – Protocol for the Verification of Wastewater Treatment Technologies • No manufacturer has gone through this testing process; in fact, there is no testing entity

approved by the EPA.

• Another issue – no typical ‘high-strength waste’ – large variations in composition (food service, bakery, office building, DQ, McDonalds, etc…)

• NSF does have a protocol that manufacturers can use – location for testing needed, waste

characterized, test plan developed, testing organization identified, test plan specific to test site (type of waste). Then test for 1 year (verification testing), document power, O/M, residuals, etc. Takes another 6 months + for data and report preparation. Very expensive to test for only one type of high-strength waste.

• Bio-Microbics has 20+ high strength waste systems in Minnesota.

• There is also performance data from the University of Minnesota ‘milk house waste’

study using FAST Bio-Microbics.

• Bio-Microbics has provided ‘review’ letters to permitting authorities – to ensure proper design and review by the Manufacturer (waste is properly characterized, flow determined, etc.)

MPCA preliminary recommendations: • There is no easy approach. • Begin with attempting to develop a ‘Testing Protocol’ for manufacturer to follow for high

Strength Waste (include Sara, Corey, Barb, Jim Bell with Bio-Microbics, others. Input needed on this process. Check other states (Massachusetts and Virginia).

8450 Cole Parkway ■ Shawnee, KS 66227 ■ Phone: 913-422-0707 ■ Fax: 913-422-0808

e-mail: [email protected] ■ www.biomicrobics.com

Testing Protocol for FAST® Wastewater Treatment System

At any time plants manufactured by Bio-Microbics, Inc. can be tested for performance, it is imperative that samples are collected properly and analyzed correctly by appropriate methods so that the results provide accurate representation of the performance of our plants. Anything short of that can result in misleading results and unnecessary or ineffective process changes. All representatives of Bio-Microbics, Inc. will use the following protocol when sampling FAST® Wastewater Treatment Systems. I. Sampling Equipment

A. It is required that equipment designed for proper sampling be used. All samples should be collected in sample bottles provided by a certified laboratory. A means to collect samples where the sampling point is difficult to reach shall be provided, i.e. a pole with a sampling container attached.

B. Each sample will require at least 3 labeled sample bottles. 1. Samples collected for TKN and ammonia concentrations require a

preservative and should have the preservative put in the bottles by the laboratory.

2. Samples collected for NO3 and NO2 will have one bottle. 3. Samples collected for BOD and TSS will have one bottle. 4. Samples collected for pH may require another bottle.

C. Dissolved oxygen and pH meters that are calibrated at the site by a trained individual and a thermometer will be provided.

D. A sludge measurement device, such as a "Sludge Judge". E. A logbook to record pH, DO and temperature will be provided. Sample

time, flow conditions, sampler’s name and a verbal description of the effluent indicating the relative amount of solids, the clarity, and any color or odor, detected will also be recorded.

F. A cooler stocked with wet ice will be provided every day that samples are to be collected.

G. A chain of custody sheet to be completed by the sampler. H. A brush will be provided to facilitate cleaning of the effluent discharge

pipe in preparation for the collection of effluent samples. I. A garden hose with a back-flow preventor attached to the end hooked

to the home. This will be used for inducing hydraulic flow for sampling in situations where there is not a free flowing effluent at the time of

collection. The hose should be inserted into the wastewater system far enough upstream of the treatment system to induce the flow through the system, but not affect the sample collected in any way. The preventor is necessary to protect the water supply of the home from possible contamination. An apparatus should be supplied that would help hold the hose up out of the sewage when possible.

J. Antibacterial soap and distilled water will also be provided for cleaning of collection equipment.

K. Latex gloves and eye protection will be provided.

II. Sampling techniques A. A grab sample must be taken from a free flowing effluent pipe. The

pipe will most likely be located in a distribution box or pump chamber down stream from the treatment unit. It is very important that the pipe be cleaned (see D).

B. If flow is not present, connect the garden hose to an outdoor faucet. The hose should be inserted into the wastewater system far enough upstream of the treatment system to induce the flow through the system, but not affect the sample collected in any way. For most residential units this would be in the inlet to the septic tank. For this location, the hose should be placed in the inlet tee to best simulate influent into the septic tank. The hose should not be allowed to run at this location longer than 10 minutes.

C. Put on protective eye wear and latex gloves. D. To the extent possible, use the brush to clean the discharge pipe of

attached growth that may dislodge during the process of collecting Rinse the pipe with the garden hose. (Note: If the pipe is not accessible for cleaning in this manner – the sampler must be mindful not to touch the pipe when sampling to avoid knocking loose large solids that could contaminate the sample.)

E. Place the end of the garden hose in position to add water to the first compartment of the septic tank (See step B) – not the reaction chamber. Take care to not touch the sewage with the end of the hose. Turn the faucet on.

F. After the effluent has been flowing out of the pipe for a minimum of 10 minutes, place the collection container into the stream of effluent and rinse any collection containers (including sample bottles) that will contain effluent. DO NOT rinse TKN and ammonia sample bottles that contain a preservative.

G. If a free flowing sample cannot be taken from a pump chamber, then the operator must determine if the contents of the pump chamber are representative of the effluent. The first evaluation of whether this sample will be representative will be to determine if there are settable solids in the pump chamber. A sludge measurement device should be used to determine if there are any settled solids in the bottom of the pump chamber. If there are any solids, then the pump chamber must

be cleaned out before a representative sample can be taken. The second test for evaluation of the pump chamber will be to measure the dissolved oxygen in the pump chamber. The dissolved oxygen in this chamber must be above 1.0 mg/l for the sample to be representative of an aerobic effluent. If the dissolved oxygen is below 1.0 mg/l, then the pump chamber should not be used for sampling. The third test for evaluation of the pump chamber will be to collect a sample from the pump chamber and compare it to a sample from the reaction chamber. Samples collected from a pump chamber should be taken from six inches to a foot below the surface. This will help to eliminate any floatable solids from affecting the sample. This sample should be compared to a sample collected off of the spray from the reaction chamber. This sample should be allowed to settle for 5 minutes and then compared to the sample from the pump chamber. If the clarity of the two samples are similar, then it can be assumed that the samples are similar. If the pump chamber sample is cloudy or obviously darker than the settled aeration sample, then the pump chamber sample should not be used as a representative sample. If the sample can not be collected from the pump chamber, then a sample should be collected from the reaction chamber. This information should be noted in the log as well as the other observations used to collect this sample.

H. Take the sample for pH and temperature and test for those parameters immediately. When finished with this sample discard it back into the system and rinse it several times with water.

I. Take the DO reading inside the reaction chamber and outside the unit in the anoxic zone of the tank.

J. Record the pH, DO and temperature in the logbook along with the date address and time.

K. Take the sample bottles and place them into the cooler with the wet ice. The bottles should be well covered by the ice in order to facilitate faster cooling.

L. Clean the sampling containers with antibacterial soap and water and rinse them with distilled water before collecting another sample.

M. Fill out the chain of custody sheet with correct sample ID numbers and all other required information and/or pertinent comments. Be sure and sign this sheet and observe the laboratory personnel signing it when you deliver a sample. The samples should be delivered the same day it is collected. If necessary arrangements should be made to deliver the samples after normal business hours.

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ONE WINTER STREET, BOSTON, MA 02108 617-292-5500

DEVAL L. PATRICK Governor TIMOTHY P. MURRAY Lieutenant Governor

IAN A. BOWLES

Secretary

LAURIE BURT Commissioner

This information is available in alternate format. Call Donald M. Gomes, ADA Coordinator at 617-556-1057. TDD Service - 1-800-298-2207.

MassDEP on the World Wide Web: http://www.mass.gov/dep Printed on Recycled Paper

MODIFIED PROVISIONAL USE APPROVAL

Pursuant to Title 5, 310 CMR 15.000 Name and Address of Applicant: Bio-Microbics, Inc. 8450 Cole Parkway Shawnee, KS 66227 Trade name of technology and models: MicroFAST® Treatment System Models MicroFAST® 0.5, 0.75, 0.9, 1.5, 3.0, 4.5, 9.0, HighStrengthFAST® Treatment System Models HighStrengthFAST® 1.0, 1.5, 3.0, 4.5, 9.0 and NitriFAST® Treatment System Models NitriFAST® 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 1.5, 3.0, 4.5, 9.0 (hereinafter the "System"). Schematic drawings illustrating each of the models and an Inspection Checklist are attached and are part of this Modified Approval. Transmittal Number: W019014 Date of Issuance: January 27, 2004, Modified December 6, 2005 and October 9, 2007 Expiration date: January 27, 2009 Authority for Issuance Pursuant to Title 5 of the State Environmental Code, 310 CMR 15.000, the Department of Environmental Protection hereby issues this Modified Approval to: Bio-Microbics, Inc., 8450 Cole Parkway, Shawnee, KS 66227 (hereinafter "the Company"), for Provisional Use in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for the System described herein. Sale and use of the System are conditioned on and subject to compliance by the Company and the owner(s) of each installed system (hereinafter, the “owner(s)” or the “System owner(s)”) with the terms and conditions set forth below. Any noncompliance with the terms or conditions of this Modified Approval constitutes a violation of 310 CMR 15.000.

___________________________________ October 9, 2007 Glenn Haas, Acting Assistant Commissioner Date Bureau of Resource Protection

Modified Provisional Use Approval <2000 gpd Systems Bio-Microbics Treatment System Page 2 of 10

I. Purpose

1. The purpose of this Modified Approval is to allow installation and operation of all approvable Systems submitted to the local approving authorities as of January 27, 2004 on a Provisional Use basis, in order to further evaluate the capabilities and performance of the System. The specific goals of the further evaluation are to determine:

i. if the System is capable of consistently reducing the total nitrogen (TN = TKN+NO2+NO3) concentration in the effluent discharged to the soil absorption system (SAS) so that the Department may allow an increase in the loading rate per acre on a General Use basis in areas subject to nitrogen loading limitations, and

ii. if at least 90 percent of the installed Systems limit Total Nitrogen in the effluent to 19 mg/L or less.

iii. if the System is capable of meeting or exceeding effluent limitations for a Recirculating Sand Filter (RSF) set forth at 310 CMR 15.202 (4), and

2. With the necessary local permits and local approvals required by 310 CMR 15.000, this Modified Provisional Use Approval authorizes the use and installation of the System in Massachusetts for Systems less than 2000 gpd and requires testing so that the Department can determine whether the System consistently can or cannot function to effectively reduce total nitrogen in the effluent.

3. The System may only be installed on facilities that meet the criteria of 310 CMR 15.286(4) and are approved by the local approving authority.

II. Design Standards 1. The System is a Fixed Activated Sludge Treatment (FAST) system. The System units,

MicroFAST® 0.5, 0.75, 0.9, 1.5, 3.0, 4.5 and 9.0, and, HighStrengthFAST® 1.0, 1.5, 3.0, 4.5 and 9.0, and, NitriFAST® 0.5, 0.75, 0.9, 1.5, 3.0, 4.5 and 9.0, are installed in a tank or tanks having a primary settling zone and an aerobic biological zone. Solids settle in the primary settling zone that is quiescent. In the aerobic zone, the sewage is continually agitated and aerated. Bacteria in the sewage attach to the surface of a submerged plastic media; they reproduce by consuming the organic material in the sewage.

2. The MicroFAST® 0.5, 0.75 and 0.9, HighStrengthFAST® 1.0 and NitriFAST® 0.5,

0.75 and 0.9 are installed in the second compartment of a two-compartment tank with a total liquid capacity of at least 1,500 gallons constructed in accordance with 310 CMR 15.226. The units are installed between the building sewer and the SAS, designed and constructed in accordance with 310 CMR 15.100 - 15.279 and subject to the provisions of this Certification.

3. The MicroFAST®, HighStrengthFAST® and NitriFAST® 1.5 are installed in the

second compartment of a two compartment 3000-gallon tank constructed in accordance with 310 CMR 15.226. The units are installed between the building sewer


and the SAS, designed and constructed in accordance with 310 CMR 15.100 - 15.279 and subject to the provisions of this Certification.

4. The MicroFAST®, HighStrengthFAST® and NitriFAST® 3.0, 4.5, and 9.0 units are

installed in a separate tank constructed in accordance with 310 CMR 15.226. The units are located between a standard Title 5 septic tank, designed in accordance with 310 CMR 15.223 and 15.224, and the SAS.

5. The alarms and controls shall be housed within an enclosure mounted in a location

readily accessible to the operator. 6. All access ports and manhole covers shall be installed and maintained at grade to

allow for maintenance of the System. 7. New Construction : In accordance with 310 CMR 15.217(2), an increase in calculated

allowable nitrogen loading per acre is allowed for facilities with a design flow of less than 2,000 gallons per day (gpd), with the use of the System in areas subject to the nitrogen loading limitations of 310 CMR 15.214. When used in such areas:

i. for residential facilities, the design flow shall not exceed 660 gallons per

day per acre (gpda), and the System shall not exceed 19 milligrams per liter (mg/L) total nitrogen (TN) concentration in the effluent measured as the total TKN (total Kjeldhal Nitrogen), NO3-N (Nitrate nitrogen) and NO2-N (Nitrite nitrogen).

III. General Conditions 1. All provisions of 310 CMR 15.000 are applicable to the use and operation of this

System, the System Owner and the Company, except those that specifically have been varied by the terms of this Modified Approval.

2. This Modified Approval shall be binding on the System Owner and on its agents, contractors, successors, and assigns, and the Company and its officers, employees, agents, contractors, successors, and assigns. Violation of the terms and conditions of this Modified Approval by any of the foregoing persons or entities, respectively, shall constitute violation of this Modified Approval by the System owner or the Company unless the Department determines otherwise.

3. Any required operation and maintenance, monitoring and testing shall be performed by the Company or its approved operators in accordance with a Department approved plan. Any required sample analysis shall be conducted by an independent U.S. EPA or Department approved testing laboratory, or a Department approved independent university laboratory, unless otherwise approved by the Department in writing. It shall be a violation of this Modified Approval to falsify any data collected pursuant to an approved testing plan, to omit any required data or to fail to submit any report required by such plan.


4. The facility served by the System and the System itself shall be open to inspection and sampling by the Department and the local approving authority at all reasonable times.

5. In accordance with applicable law, the Department and the local approving authority may require the System owner(s) to cease operation of the system and/or to take any other action deemed necessary to protect public health, safety, welfare and the environment.

6. The Department has not determined that the performance of the System will provide a level of protection to public health, safety, welfare and the environment that is at least equivalent to that of a sanitary sewer system. Accordingly, no System shall be upgraded or expanded, if it is feasible to connect the facility to a sanitary sewer, unless as allowed by 310 CMR 15.004.

7. Design, installation and operation shall be in strict conformance with the Company's approved plans and specifications, 310 CMR 15.000 and this Modified Approval.

8. The System is approved in connection only with the discharge of sanitary wastewater. Any non-sanitary wastewater generated or used at the facility served by the System shall not be introduced into the System and shall be lawfully disposed of.

9. All effluent samples shall be taken at a flowing discharge point, i.e.- distribution box, pipe entering a pump chamber or other location from the treatment unit approved by the Department in writing. Any required influent sample shall be taken at a location that will provide a representative sample of the influent. Influent sample locations shall be determined by the System designer and the Company and shall be selected so that the influent characteristics are not changed by the System recycle.

10. Effluent discharge concentrations shall meet or exceed secondary treatment standards of 30 mg/L carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD5) and 30 mg/L total suspended solids (TSS).

11. For Systems installed at residential facilities with design flows less than 2,000 gpd, TN concentration in the System effluent shall not exceed 19 mg/L.

IV. Conditions Applicable to the System Owner 1. Prior to installation of the System, the proposed owner shall obtain a Disposal

System Construction Permit in accordance with 310 CMR 15.020 from the local approving authority. The application to the local approving authority shall include a certification signed by the Company or its designee that the System has been designed in accordance with the Company’s requirements, 310 CMR 15.000 (Title 5) and this Modified Approval. The Certification shall be consistent with the model attached hereto as Exhibit A. This Company certification in no way changes the requirements of 310 CMR 15.220 (1) and (2). Department approval of the System design is not required unless the Department determines on a case-by-case basis pursuant to its authority at 310 CMR 15.003(2)(e) that the proposed System requires its review.


2. The System owner shall at all times have the System properly operated and maintained in accordance with this Modified Approval, the designer's operation and maintenance requirements and the Company's Department approved procedures and sampling protocols.

3. Operation and Maintenance agreement:

i. Throughout its life, the System shall be under an operation and maintenance (O&M) agreement. The System owner shall be responsible for maintaining a contract with the Company or the Company’s approved operation and maintenance contractor throughout the Provisional Use Approval period unless and until the System is Certified for General Use by the Department. Subsequent to General Use Certification of the system, O&M agreements shall be for at least one year and may be with any Massachusetts certified operator of the appropriate grade that has received training by the Company on the operation of the System.

ii. No System shall be used until an O&M agreement is submitted to the local approving authority which:

a. provides for the contracting with the Company or a Company approved operation and maintenance contractor that has been trained by the Company to operate the System consistent with the System's specifications and any additional operation and maintenance requirements specified by the designer, the local approving authority, or the Department;

b. contains procedures for notification to the Department and the local approving authority within five days of knowledge of a System failure and for corrective measures to be taken immediately;

c. contains a plan to determine the cause of effluent total nitrogen limit violations that occur any time after the first three months of operation, if such violations occur on two consecutive sampling events;

d. provides the name of an operator, which must be a Massachusetts certified operator if one is required by 257 CMR 2.00, that will operate and monitor the System (hereinafter the "System operator"). The System operator must inspect and operate and maintain the System at least every three months and anytime there is an alarm event.

4. Anytime the System operator is changed, within seven days of such change, the System owner shall notify the local approving authority and Company in writing and submit a copy of the new agreement to operate and monitor the System to the local approving authority and the Company. The new operator must have received Company approved training on the System.


5. The System owner shall furnish the Department or the local approving authority any information, which either entity may request regarding the System, within 21 days of the date of receipt of that request.

6. Prior to transferring any or all interest in the facility served by the System, or any portion of the facility, including any possessory interest, the System owner shall provide written notice of all conditions contained in this Modified Approval to the transferee(s). Any and all instruments of transfer and any leases or rental agreements shall include as an exhibit attached thereto and made a part thereof a copy of this Modified Approval for the System.

7. For Systems in use year round: effluent from the System shall be monitored at least once per calendar quarter. Any sample collected within 60 days or more than 90 days of a previous sample shall not be considered a required quarterly sample. The following parameters shall be monitored: pH, effluent CBOD5, TSS, alkalinity and TN. Each time the System is monitored, the water meter, if a water meter is installed, shall be read and the water use recorded. All monitoring data shall be submitted to the Department and the local approving authority per item 9. After two years of monitoring and at the written request of the System owner, the local approving authority may reduce the inspection and monitoring requirements for residential systems to semi-annual inspections with field testing for pH, DO and turbidity and laboratory testing for TN.

8. For Systems in use seasonally, where the facility is occupied fewer than six months per year; effluent from the System shall be monitored twice per season; initially 45 days after occupancy, and if the facility is occupied during an additional calendar quarter, once during that following quarter prior to System shut down. The following parameters shall be monitored: pH, CBOD5, TSS, TN and alkalinity. Each time the System is monitored, the water meter, if a water meter is installed, shall be read and the water use recorded. All monitoring data shall be submitted to the Department and the local approving authority per item 9. After two years of monitoring and at the written request of the System owner, the local approving authority may reduce the inspection and monitoring requirements for residential systems to annual inspections with field testing for pH, DO and turbidity and laboratory testing for TN.

9. By March 1st of each year, the System owner shall submit to the Department and the local approving authority an O&M and technology checklist, completed by the System operator for each inspection performed during the previous 12 months.

10. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance for the System, the System owner shall record and/or register in the appropriate Registry of Deeds and/or Land Registration Office, a Notice disclosing the existence of the alternative septic system subject to this Modified Approval on the property. If the property subject to the Notice is unregistered land, the Notice shall be marginally referenced on the owner's deed to the property. Within 30 days of recording and/or registering the Notice, the System owner shall submit the following to the local approving authority: (i) a certified Registry copy of the Notice bearing the book and page/instrument number and/or document number; and (ii) if the


property is unregistered land, a Registry copy of the owner's deed to the property, bearing the marginal reference.

11. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance for the System, the Company shall submit to the local approving authority and the System owner a signed certification that the System has been installed in accordance with the Company’s requirements and this Modified Approval. The certification shall be consistent with the model attached hereto as exhibit B. This certification in no way changes the requirements of 310 15.021(3). The System owner shall not make any changes to the System including landscaping that changes access to the System without the approval of the Company and the local approving authority.

V. Conditions Applicable to the Company

1. By March 1st of each year, the Company shall submit an annual report to the Department signed by a corporate officer, general partner or Company owner that contains all sampling and inspection information collected on the System for the previous calendar year and presents a report on the System’s capability to meet the Modified Approval’s effluent requirements. The report shall include the following information:

i. Details on total number of units of the System sold for use in Massachusetts during the previous year; the address of each installed System, the owner's name and address, the type of use (e.g. residential, commercial, school, institutional) and the design flow and model;

ii. Date when system was installed and started up;

iii. Tabulation of the sampling parameters and results with backup inspection and laboratory sheets available upon request;

iv. Statistical analysis of the sampling results including but not limited to average and mean values with the percentage of systems that are meeting the effluent limits compared to the systems that are out of compliance;

v. Tabulation of systems that are out of compliance, reasons for non-compliance and any corrective action taken including but not limited to design, installation and/or operation or maintenance changes required to reach compliance;

vi. The inspection results recorded on a Department approved inspection form and a technology checklist, copies of which are attached to this Modified Approval. The forms must be completed by the System operator and submitted to the Department with the annual report.

vii. A general summary of the results for the year, any recommended changes to the design, installation and/or operation and maintenance procedures and a schedule for implementing those changes; and

viii. The three year report on the operation of the System shall be prepared as required by item 8 below.

2. The Company shall notify the Director of the Wastewater Management Program at least 30 days in advance of the proposed transfer of ownership of the


technology for which this Modified Approval is issued. Said notification shall include the name and address of the proposed new owner and a written agreement between the existing and proposed new owner containing a specific date for transfer of ownership, responsibility, coverage and liability between them. All provisions of this Modified Approval applicable to the Company shall be applicable to successors and assigns of the Company, unless the Department determines otherwise.

3. The Company shall make available to owners, operators, designers and installers of the System, in printed and electronic format: minimum installation requirements; an operating manual, including information on substances that should not be discharged to the System; a protocol for collecting samples; a maintenance checklist; and a recommended schedule for maintenance of the System.

4. The Company shall institute and maintain a program of operator training and continuing education. The Company shall maintain and annually update, and make the list of qualified operators available by March 1st of each year. The Company shall also make the list known to the local approving authorities, the Department and users of the technology.

5. The Company or its designee shall conduct a review of the System prior to the sale of any unit to ensure that the proposed use of the System is consistent with the unit’s capabilities and shall certify in writing, as described in paragraph IV.1. above, that the intended use conforms to this Modified Approval and any requirements of the Company and submit a copy of that certification to the local approving authority and the System owner.

6. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance for the System, the Company or its designee shall conduct an inspection of the facility prior to system startup and certify in writing to the local approving authority and the System owner that the unit has been installed in accordance with the Company’s requirements and this Modified Approval. The Certification shall be consistent with the model attached hereto as Exhibit B. This certification in no way changes the requirements of 310 CMR 15.021(3).

7. The Company or the Company’s approved operation and maintenance contractor shall maintain a contract with the System owner throughout the Provisional Use Modified Approval period until the System is Certified for General Use by the Department that:

a. provides for operating and maintaining the System with an operator that has been trained by the Company to operate the System consistent with the System's specifications and any additional operation and maintenance requirements specified by the designer or by the Department;

b. contains procedures for notification to the System owner, the Department and the local approving authority within five days of knowledge of a System failure and for corrective measures to be taken immediately;


c. contains a plan to determine the cause of effluent limit violations for total nitrogen excluding the first three months of operation, if such violations occur on two consecutive sampling events; and

d. provides the name of an operator, which must be a Massachusetts certified operator if one is required by 257 CMR 2.00, that will operate and monitor the System (hereinafter the "System operator"). The System operator must inspect and operate and maintain the System at least every three months and anytime there is an alarm event.

8. The Company shall conduct a performance evaluation in accordance with 310 CMR 15.286(6) starting after at least 50 systems have been installed under this Modified Approval or for prior versions of these approvals and operating for at least three years. In those cases where the Company also installed and collected operating results from Pilot Use Systems or other Systems located in areas not defined as DEP nitrogen sensitive areas, the results from those Systems can be used in the 50 System total, provided that the Company can document that the models installed are the same models this Modified Approval applies to, and that inspection and sampling was conducted in accordance with this Modified Approval, and that the results were collected over a three year period. A report shall be submitted to the Department no more than 180 days beyond the three year period evaluating whether at least 90 percent of the units installed for at least three years are meeting the effluent limits as presented in Section III items 10 and 11 and describing any changes in the design, installation and/or operation or maintenance that have been or will be taken to meet the 90 percent target. If the System does not meet the 90 percent requirement, the report shall detail the changes that must be made in design, installation and/or operation or maintenance to meet the goal and include a schedule containing a deadline for implementing those changes.

9. The Company shall furnish the Department any information that the Department requests regarding the System within 21 days of the date of receipt of that request.

10. The Company shall include copies of this Modified Approval with each System that is sold. In any contract executed by the Company for distribution or re-sale of the System, the Company shall require the distributor or re-seller to provide each purchaser of the System with copies of this Modified Approval

11. If the Company wishes to continue this Modified Approval beyond its expiration date, the Company shall apply for and obtain a renewal of this Modified Approval. The Company shall submit a renewal application at least 180 days before the expiration date of this Modified Approval, unless written permission for a later date has been granted in writing by the Department. This Modified Approval shall continue in force until the Department has acted on the renewal application.


12. The Department may require the Company to perform evaluations of system performance, conduct tests, and take corrective action when, based upon a preponderance of the available data and information, it is necessary to take such actions to ensure technology performance complies with this Modified Approval.

VI. Reporting

1. All notices and documents required to be submitted to the Department by this Modified Approval shall be submitted to:

Director Wastewater Management Program Department of Environmental Protection One Winter Street - 5th floor Boston, Massachusetts 02108

2. All inspection forms and sampling results collected by Operation and Maintenance contractors shall be submitted to both the Department and the Company.

VII. Rights of the Department

1. The Department may suspend, modify or revoke this Modified Provisional Use Approval for cause, including, but not limited to, non-compliance with the terms of this Modified Approval, non-payment of the annual compliance assurance fee, for obtaining the Modified Approval by misrepresentation or failure to disclose fully all relevant facts or any change in or discovery of conditions that would constitute grounds for discontinuance of the Modified Approval, or as necessary for the protection of public health, safety, welfare or the environment, and as authorized by applicable law. The Department reserves its rights to take any enforcement action authorized by law with respect to this Modified Approval and/or the System against the System owner, System operator, and/or the Company.

VIII. Expiration date

1. Notwithstanding the expiration date of this Modified Approval, any System sold and installed prior to the expiration date of this Modified Approval or any continuation of this Modified Approval, that is approved, installed and maintained in compliance with this Modified Approval (as it may be modified) and 310 CMR 15.000, may remain in use unless the Department, the local approving authority, or a court requires the System to be modified or removed, or requires discharges to the System to cease.

w019014 mod2.doc

training/testing for registered products

Documents