Chesapeake Assessment Scenario Tool CAST Olivia H. Devereux Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin 12/13/2011.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
creating a sustainable world The Chesapeake Bay TMDL A Policy Model for Nutrient Pollution Reductions James Noonan October.
Advertisements

Pennsylvania Nonpoint Source BMP Effectiveness, Cost-Effectiveness and Potential for Reducing Loads Jeff Sweeney University of Maryland PA Chesapeake Bay.
Frank J. Coale Mark P. Dubin Chesapeake Bay Program Partnerships Agriculture Workgroup BMP Verification Review Panel Meeting Annapolis, Maryland December.
Planning for Our Future:
RTI International RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute. Economic Study of Nutrient Credit Trading for the Chesapeake.
Howard County, MD Phase II Watershed Implementation Plan October 6, 2011 Howard Saltzman Howard County Department of Public Works.
Commonwealth of Virginia Chesapeake Bay TMDL Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) Russ Baxter, Chesapeake Bay Coordinator.
The Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Watershed Model Gary Shenk Presentation to COG 10/4/2012.
Historic Record of Practice Implementation Jeff Sweeney Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program Office
Overview of TMDL Plans TMDL Plan Workshop April 24, 2015 Karl Berger, COG staff Outline: Details Schedule Plan Elements Issues 1.
Christopher Brosch University of Maryland Modeling Subcommittee Meeting January 11, 2012.
Current Planning for 2017 Mid-Point Assessment Gary Shenk COG 10/4/2012 presentation credit to Katherine Antos and the WQGIT ad hoc planning team.
Chesapeake Bay and New York State Water Quality and the Potential for Future Regulations Presented by the Upper Susquehanna Coalition.
Mark Dubin Agricultural Technical Coordinator University of Maryland Extension-College Park Modeling Quarterly Review Meeting April 17, 2012.
Chesapeake Bay Program Incorporation of Lag Times into the Decision Process Gary Shenk 10/16/12 1.
Jim Edward, Deputy Director Chesapeake Bay Program (EPA) 1 CBP Program Update Citizens Advisory Committee February 27, 2014.
Update on Forest Goals and Progress in the Chesapeake Bay Partnership Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting, 8/23/13 Sally Claggett & Julie Mawhorter, US.
Ann Swanson Executive Director Chesapeake Bay Commission May 2012 Market Solutions and Restoring the Chesapeake The Economics of Nutrient Trading.
Forest harvesting practices are a suite of BMPs that minimize the environmental impacts of road building, log removal, site preparation and forest management.
Progress Update: Evaluation of Federal Facilities in WIPs and Milestones CBPO Management Board March 6, Jim Edward, EPA Greg Allen, EPA.
The Chesapeake Bay Program’s Scenario Builder Gary Shenk CCMP workshop 5/11/2010.
1 “ Understanding the Local Role of Improving Water Quality” Virginia Association of Counties November 14, 2011 Virginia Association of Counties November.
Best Management Practices and the Chesapeake Bay Program Watershed Model Jeff Sweeney University of Maryland Chesapeake Bay Program Office
Update on the Development of EPA’s Chesapeake Bay TMDL and Virginia’s Watershed Implementation Plan Russ Perkinson Potomac Roundtable October 8, 2010.
Virginia Assessment Scenario Tool VAST Developed by: Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin.
Review of Scenario Builder BMP crediting Christopher F. Brosch University of Maryland Extension Chesapeake Bay Program Office
1 Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board Meeting March 6, 2012 Discussion for the Final Evaluation of Milestones.
Phase II WIP Background & Development Process Tri-County Council – Eastern Shore June 2,
Developing Final Phase II WIPs and Milestones Jim Edward EPA Deputy Director Chesapeake Bay Program Office DDOE Meeting with Federal Partners February.
Lessons Learned from BMP evaluation studies in the nontidal streams and river in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Katie Foreman University of Maryland Center.
District of Columbia Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) Blue Plains Regional Committee 1 District Department of the Environment Watershed Protection Divsion.
Status Report on Chesapeake Bay Clean Up Plan Wastewater Sector June 2, 2010.
Chesapeake Bay Policy in Virginia - TMDL, Milestones and the Watershed Agreement Russ Baxter Deputy Secretary of Natural Resources for the Chesapeake Bay.
Chesapeake Bay Program Decision Support System Management Actions Watershed Model Bay Model Criteria Assessment Procedures Effects Allocations Airshed.
Patapsco and Back River HSPF Watershed Model Part II – Water Quality Maryland Department of the Environment.
2004 Tributary Strategies: Assessment of Implementation Options Steve Bieber Water Resources Program Presented at: COG Chesapeake Bay Policy Committee.
Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Basinwide BMP Verification Framework: Building Confidence in Delivering on Pollution Reductions to Local Waters Maryland.
Clifton Bell, P.E., P.G. Chesapeake Bay Modeling Perspectives for the Regulated Community.
Lessons Learned from BMP evaluation studies in the nontidal streams and river in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Katie Foreman University of Maryland Center.
1 Phase 5.3 Calibration Gary Shenk 3/31/ Calibration Method Calibration method largely unchanged for several years –P5.1 – 8/ first automated.
Preserving York County 2010 Municipal Educational Series January 28, 2010 Rick Keister, Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay Jake Romig, York County Circuit.
Is the Mid-Atlantic Region Water Rich? Presentation to 5 th Mid-Atlantic Regional Planning Roundtable November 7, 2008 Joseph Hoffman, Executive Director.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Ensuring Full Access to Federal Cost Shared Conservation Practices W. Dean Hively, Ph.D. U.S. Geological.
JULIE MAWHORTER MID-ATLANTIC URBAN & COMMUNITY FORESTRY COORDINATOR CHESAPEAKE TREE CANOPY STRATEGY & WORKPLAN UPDATE CITIZEN’S ADVISORY.
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE SPRING MEETING MARCH 1—2, 2012 CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA EPA’s Evaluation of Bay Jurisdictions’ Draft Phase II WIPs & Final
Northern Virginia Regional Commission MS4 Meeting March 17, 2011 Virginia Phase II Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) Approach.
For EBTJV meeting October 26, 2010 Executive Order Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
Williamsburg’s Local Strategies to meet the ChesBay TMDL March 2012 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Virginia Maryland Pennsylvania New York Delaware West Virginia.
1 Chesapeake Bay TMDL Watershed Implementation Plan – Phase II James Davis-Martin, Chesapeake Bay TMDL Coordinator Citizens Advisory Committee to the Chesapeake.
Milestones, Progress and the Mid-point Assessment APPROACHING 2017 James Davis-Martin Chesapeake Bay Program Manager Department of Environmental Quality.
It’s The Final Countdown To The Mid-point Assessment:
Moving to Phase II: Watershed Implementation Plans
WIP Regional Meetings Jason Keppler
Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Citizens Advisory Committee
Local Planning Process…
2025 Chesapeake Bay Climate Change Load Projections
Chesapeake Bay Program Principals’ Staff Committee December 20, 2017
Current VA Ag Initiatives
U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office June 1, 2012
Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement Outcomes and Phase III WIPs
What is a Watershed Implementation Plan?
Chesapeake Bay TMDL Milestones, Progress, Mid-point Assessment
Jim Edward Acting Director Chesapeake Bay Program Office May 23,2018 EPA’s Draft Final Phase III WIP Expectations.
James Davis-Martin Chesapeake Bay Program Manager
Chesapeake Bay Program Climate Change Modeling 2.0
Expectations for Federal Agencies in Support if Chesapeake WIPs/TMDL
Citizen Advisory Committee November 30, 2018
Watershed Restoration, Chesapeake Bay
2018 BMP Verification Assessment
VIRGINIA’S Phase iii watershed implementation plan
Presentation transcript:

Chesapeake Assessment Scenario Tool CAST Olivia H. Devereux Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin 12/13/2011

GOALS FOR CAST Provide a mechanism for the states to get input and commitment from multiple federal and local jurisdictions Guarantee that calculations are consistent and replicable Create transparency Integrate data in a uniform format for WIP and Milestones 212/13/2011

PROJECT INITIATION Maryland Department of the Environment requested that ICPRB develop MAST to facilitate their WIP 2 process – CBRAP and MD General Funds Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation asked that ICPRB customize MAST to meet Virginia’s needs (VAST). Chesapeake Bay Program requested that ICPRB develop CAST to apply MAST to the entire watershed. – CBRAP funding to MD was expanded – Tetra Tech hired ICPRB to perform training 12/13/20113

CAST FEATURES Consistent with EPA Phase and WIP Phase II Consistent process for WIP teams Approved and interim BMPs Consistent input scale 12/13/20114

Facilitate an adaptive process, scenario development is iterative Serve as a data management system Facilitate stakeholder involvement, show implications of decisions 12/13/20115 Tracking CAST Planning Implementation Reporting – Watershed Model 2-Year Cycle

VALUE FOR JURISDICTIONS 12/13/20116 Builds load reduction strategies (by local area) Identifies the BMPs that give the greatest load reductions Specifies the extent these BMPs are to be implemented Meets the allocations Compares among scenarios Produces CBP Scenario Builder model inputs Assesses WIPs and 2-Year Milestones

12/13/20117 GROUPUSERS VAST320 MAST224 CAST:Virginia77 West Virginia67 Pennsylvania65 Maryland64 District of Columbia 49 New York48 Delaware47

12/13/20118 DateStateWorkshop Location 6/15/2011WVFreshwater Institute, Shepardstown, WV 7/11/2011MDMDE, Baltimore, MD 7/14/2011MDMDE, Baltimore, MD 7/19/2011MDWebinar -DNR, Annapolis, MD 7/21/2011MDMDE, Baltimore, MD 7/26/2011MDMDE, Baltimore, MD 7/28/2011MDMDE, Baltimore, MD 8/2/2011MDMDE, Baltimore, MD 8/8/2011PAConference Call Demo of MAST 8/16/2011MDWebinar Federal Facilities-DNR, Annapolis, MD 8/24/2011MDMDE, Baltimore, MD 9/1/2011WVMartinsburg, WV 9/27/2011CBPWebinar in Annapolis to entire CB Watershed 9/27/2011CBP Management BoardAnnapolis, MD 10/3/2011VARichmond, VA 10/4/2011PAHarrisburg PA, 10/11/2011VAFairfax County Government Center, 10/19/2011DEDover, DE 10/20/2011VAWeyers Cave, VA 10/24/2011VAVirginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point, VA 10/25/2011DCDistrict Department of the Environment, Washington, DC 10/26/2011WVMartinsburg, WV 10/28/2011NYOwego, NY 11/16/2011CBPFederal Facilities Conf. Call (at request of Greg Allen)

/13/20119

METHODOLOGY FOR BMP CALCULATIONS CAST calculates all BMPs identically to CBP’s Scenario Builder except for Animal BMPs Animal BMPs affect the amount of manure CAST calculates manure lbs based on user-selected BMP implementation level, same as Scenario Builder Distribution of manure lbs based on regressions Three classifications of manure – direct deposit manure (pasture land uses only) – storage loss manure (AFO/CFO) – stored manure (crop and pasture land) 12/13/201110

ANIMAL BMPs BMPs that increase stored manure, which is then applied to crops and pasture Alum Lagoon Covers AWMS Mortality Composting BMPs that decrease total manure Dairy Precision Feeding Poultry Phytase Swine Phytase Based on user’s selection of % Implementation of these BMPs and the interaction effects with nutrient management, CAST calculates the amount of manure The regression equations translate the manure into a loading rate by FIPS, LU, and TN or TP. 12/13/

MAINTAINING CONSISTENCY WITH THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM Change on Nov. 30, 2011 to Scenario Builder: – Street Sweeping may now only be entered in terms of Mechanical Monthly as acres on an annual basis or in terms of pounds of sediment removed. Note that mechanical monthly has a nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment benefit whereas street sweeping-pounds only has a sediment benefit. Changes on Dec. 7, 2011 to Scenario Builder: – Poultry injection and dairy manure infection are no longer allowed on nursery. – Crop irrigation management is no longer available for alfalfa, nutrient management alfalfa, hay without nutrients, hay with nutrients, nutrient management hay, and pasture. 12/13/201112

VALIDATION USING 2009 PROGRESS 12/13/ /- 10% of Watershed Model Output by land use and FIPS Acres per LU99.82% TN EOS95.68% TP EOS97.94% TSS EOS99.93% Most of the error is on agricultural land uses. Urban land uses match within +/- 1%.

State Specific Practices MD—Heavy Use Area Concrete Pads – Poultry VA—Conservation No Till implemented in two ways 12/13/201114

CHANGES TO SCENARIO BUILDER AND THE WATERSHED MODEL Using multiple models strengthens all models. Comparisons between MAST/CAST/VAST and Scenario Builder/Watershed Model led to changes to Scenario Builder and/or the Watershed Model including: – Processing of agricultural forest buffers, agricultural grass buffers, agricultural wetland restoration and urban forest buffers in Scenario Builder when these BMPs are submitted as a percent. There were also problems with the processing of these upland efficiencies of these BMPs, regardless of how they are submitted (acres or percent). Fixed by CBP last week. – Comparisons of CAST with Scenario Builder also showed that the BMP StreetSweepFt is not given credit in Scenario Builder. – Working with Maryland and the Chesapeake Bay Program, we updated MD urban data in both MAST and the Watershed Model. – There was an error in the Watershed Model that involved pulling data from a previously run scenario where BMPs were not specified. This led to the incorrect base loads that were initially used in MAST/CAST/VAST. – The Watershed Model was changed so that groups of overlapping BMPs were better defined, preventing issues related to over-crediting certain BMPs. (This fix needs still to be implemented in Scenario Builder, but is controlled for in the WSM). 12/13/

Future Refinements Users input acres or percent implementation BMP costs Data Quality – P on AFO/CFO – Garret County Sediment delivery factor – Improved estimation of animal BMPs – Additional testing Speed—upgrade tool to accommodate increased usage, larger scenarios Show results as percent implementation, not just loads Continued technical support and updating documentation 12/13/201116

Olivia H. Devereux Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin/ Potomac Valley Conservancy District /13/201117