1 Phase 5.3 Calibration Gary Shenk 3/31/2010

2 Calibration Method Calibration method largely unchanged for several years –P5.1 – 8/ first automated calibration –P5.2 – 6/ better constraints on parameters and regional factors –P5.3 – 2/ few small changes in reaction to new scenario builder data Reviews –WQSC –Modeling Subcommittee –STAC review

3 Watershed Model Inputs Phase 5.1 –No Scenario Builder Phase 5.2 –Half-Built Scenario Builder with known issues Phase 5.3 –Final TMDL Scenario Builder

4 Fixed Issues with Scenario Builder for phase 5.3 Realistic uptake values Realistic nutrient applications Low variability between states for uptake and application Manure spread logic improved Scenarios now possible within Scenario Builder

5 Other P5.3 changes Land Use – –Better characterization of ag land location –Better trend in urban land Point Source –Addition of “non-significant” sources Septic –Tied to land use modeling

6 River Calibration Criteria CFD only Estimator Loads for Regional Factors STAC thought this was good calibration strategy but not a representative way to present the results Recommended that results communicated in the outputs of interest (loads)

7 Comparisons Statistics –Phase 5 and Estimator Total Loads over space Loads at a point over time –Phase 5 and USGS unbiased Samples –Phase 5 and Validation Calibration Plots –Phase 4 and Phase 5 –Phase 5 all station Compare Loads to Previous Models ftp://ftp.chesapeakebay.net/modeling/phase5/calibration_pdfs/p53_2010_02/

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27 TMDL Allocations Based on No Action E3 Riverine Delivery Factors Estuarine Delivery Factors

28

29

30 First Look at Draft Scenarios

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40 Additional Analyses before WQGIT Investigate changes in progress for NY, DE, and WV Verify that WWTP is correct 2007 shows no progress for ESVA Source contributions...

41 Summary Calibration method has been stable for years. Scenario Builder is now producing reasonable input data Phase 5.3 calibration similar to phase 5.2 –Point source based changes in Potomac and Patuxent –Coastal Plain changes in unmonitored area Delivery Factors similar

42 Scenario Builder: Role, Documentation and Planned Continued Enhancements Chris Brosch Chesapeake Bay Program Nonpoint Source Analyst University of Maryland/CBPO

43 Scenario Builder A database program that generates inputs for the Phase 5 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model Snapshot: Land Use Acreage BMPs Fertilizer Manure Atmospheric Deposition Point Sources Septic Loads

44

45 Scenario Builder Planned Enhancements Version 2.2a: System Maintenance and Documentation Release –System documentation updated Version 2.3: Septic and Atmospheric Deposition –Add these are two new sub-systems Version 2.4: BMP Descriptions and Other BMP Files –Accessory BMP files that the model needs to process BMP data from Scenario Builder. –Input the Phase 5.3 watershed model outputs Version 2.5: Improve Animal Waste Management System BMPs and Dead Birds –Both are being addressed by BMPs now—will be addressed more accurately Version 2.6: Wastewater Sub System –Will automate input data generation over 3,000 facilities Version 3: NEIEN Exchange –Conversion of NEIEN BMP exchange data into Scenario Builder formats. Version 4: Data Products –Developing reports or other data products that will stream-line the process for states, locals and other partners/stakeholders to request information Version 5: User Interface –Evolution of version 2.2 User Interface for running “what if” scenarios

46 Scenario List We have –1985 (1985 and allocation air) –2007 (2007 and allocation air) (not final) –2010 No Action –2010 E3 with N-based NM (not final) –VA EPIL (not final) Next Up –1985 No Action –1985 E3 –2010 E3 with P-based NM –2008 –Trib Strategy –2009 WQGIT