DEQ-CFW_00070463

JFwd: [Fwd: Re: Updates of EFDC WQ model for LCFR]]
Subject: [Fwd: [Fwd: Re: Updates of EFDC WQ model for LCFR]]
From: Jeff Manning <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:45:32 -0500
To: Elizabeth Kountis <[e-mail]>
you were asking about the lower Cape Fear .... here's probably more than you wanted to know... enjoy.
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Updates of EFDC WQ model for LCFR]
From: Alan Clark <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:14:21 -0500
To: jeff manning <[e-mail]>, Connie Brower <[e-mail]>
CC: Rich Gannon <Rich.Gannon@nomail,net>, Kathy Stecker <[e-mail]>
M. Thought you'd be interested in this since you've been in on some discussions over the years with Bill K. and others concerning the lower Cape Fear DO levels and the
ongoing model and TMDL efforts. The model has been calibrated with corrected NPDES discharge locations. Runs are starting comparing DO with and without various
combinations of NPDES discharges. Don't know exactly where the results will lead at this point, but wanted you to know where it stands in case we start getting into
discussions on reclassifications and UAAs in the not too distant future.
Alan
-------- Original Message ------ --
Subject:Re: Updates of EFDC WQ model for LCFR
Date:Thu, 28 Feb 2008 09:20:14 -0500
Frommarayan B. rajbhandari <naravan. raibhandari(a)ncmail.net>
Organization:NC DWQ
To:Kathy Stecker <Kathy. Stecker(a)ncnrail.net>, Alan Clark <Alan.Clarkna,ncmail.net>
CC:narayan B. rajbhandari <naravan. raibhandarit7a,ncmail.net>, Gil Vinzani <Gil.Vinzani(a,)ncmall.net>, Paul Rawls <Paul.Rawls(d,)ncmail.net>, Matt Matthews
<Matt,Matthewsna,ncmail.net>, Cam Mcnutt <cam.mcnutt(a)nemail.net>, Nora Deamer <Nora.Deamerpncmail.net>, James D. Bowen <jdbowen n uncc.edu>
References:<47A36719.9010203 nncmail.net> <47B9BFD2.5000805 cnincmail.net>
Dear Kathy and Alan,
I am working with Dr. Bowen to obtain significant scenario test results
by next week. After adding the a few missing point sources into the
EFDC input files, we found some differences between the model prediction
and observed DO concentration at Navasa. Therefore, it took a few days
more to re-ca'SYGrate the model for WQ. However, re -calibration of the
model is successfully completed now. Attached is an example time
history plot of the calibration run, showing predicted vs. observed DO
at Navassa. A predicted vs. observed cumulative frequency plot is also
attached herewith. The model fits the DO data amazingly well (R-Square
= 0.80+).
Setting up the scenarios as per my last email (below) is also almost
done. Things are going well now. Thanks.
With regards,
Raj
narayan B. rajbhandari wrote:
> Hi Kathy and Alan,
> I met with Dr. Bowen last week (2l23) at his office and briefed him
> our comments (collected during our meeting with Chuck Wakild last
> week) on the cumulative graph. He has agreed to do further analysis to
> see the cumulative responses of DO with and without NPDES permits at
> the critical area - from upstream mouth of Toomers Cr to Snows cut,
> including Brunswick River. The analysis will focus DO load during
> summer period vs whole years (2003 through 2005).
> Dr. Bowen and I reviewed the NPDES permits in the LCFRS and found some
> permits missing in Northeast Cape Fear River as well as in Cape Fear
> River. I have collected all the required data for the missing permits
> and have sent the data to Dr. Bowen to be included in his final model
> simulation. I have attached a google earthmap herewith, showing the
> ambient stations, USGS stations, and NPDES permit locations for your
> information.
> Dr. Bowen is currently setting up the model to test the following
> scenarios.
> 1. Brtunswick Co WWTP flow @ 1.65 mgd (exiting max permit)
> 2. Brtunswick Co WWTP flow @ 4.65 mgd (first phase permit request)
> 3. Brtunswick Co WWTP flow @ 15 mgd (final phase permit request)
> 4. All WWTP's turned off
> 5. All WWPP's NH4 turned off
> 6. Just Wilmington WWTP's turned off
> Please suggest me if you have further proposals for the scenario test.
> I am expecting the scenario test results by next week.
> I have brought back the training computer (out of order) to set up
> password and user -id. Daniel Price helped me to fix it and now it can
> be turned on without any problem.
> I am sorry to be late to send this modeling progress report. I was
> fixing and collecting the missing NPDES data for the model. I think it
> is all set now. Thank you for your patience.
> With regards,
> Raj
[ of 3
3/3/2008 10:12 AM
DEQ-CFW 00070463

[Fwd: [Fwd: Re: Updates of EFDC WQ model for LCFR]]
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
" 0.6
m
a� 0.5
E 0.4
U
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0
2 4
6 8 10
Constituent DOXTS
DO for layers 2 and 7 at Navassa
12 14
2of3
3/3/2008 10:12 AM
DEQ-CFW 00070464

�Fwd: [Fwd: Re: Updates of EFDC WQ model for LCFR]]
L
2 Layer 7 - Model
Top - Observed
Layer 2 - Model
Bottom - Observed
7700 750 800
Content -Type: message/rfc822
iFwd: Re: Updates of EFDC WQ model for LCFR] Content -Encoding: 8bit
Content -Type: image/jpeg
DOXTScumfreq.jpeg Content -Encoding: base64
Content -Type: image/jpeg
DOXTS10jpeg Content -Encoding: base64
3 of 3 3/3/2008 10:12 AM
DEQ-CFW 00070465