Abstract: The Storm Water Management Model was used to simulate runoff and nutrient export from a lowimpact development (LID) watershed and a watershed using traditional runoff controls. Predictions werecompared to observed values. Uncalibrated simulations underpredicted weekly runoff volume and average peakflow rates from the multiple subcatchment LID watershed by over 80%; the single subcatchment traditionalwatershed had better predictions. Saturated hydraulic conductivity, Manning’s n for swales, and initial soilmoisture deficit were sensitive parameters. After calibration, prediction of total weekly runoff volume for theLID and traditional watersheds improved to within 12 and 5% of observed values, respectively. For the valida-tion period, predicted total weekly runoff volumes for the LID and traditional watersheds were within 6 and 2%of observed values, respectively. Water quality simulation was less successful, Nash–Sutcliffe coefficients >0.5for both calibration and validation periods were only achieved for prediction of total nitrogen export from theLID watershed. Simulation of a 100-year, 24-h storm resulted in a runoff coefficient of 0.46 for the LIDwatershed and 0.59 for the traditional watershed. Results suggest either calibration is needed to improve predic-tions for LID watersheds or expanded look-up tables for Green–Ampt infiltration parameter values that accountfor compaction of urban soil and antecedent conditions are needed.(KEY TERMS: SWMM; low impact development; modeling; simulation; calibration; runoff; infiltration; nutri-ents.)Rosa, David J., John C. Clausen, and Michael E. Dietz, 2015. Calibration and Verification of SWMM for LowImpact Development. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 1-12. DOI: 10.1111/jawr.12272INTRODUCTIONThe Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) isa widely used rainfall-runoff simulation model whoselatest version has the ability to model low impactdevelopment (LID) techniques (Rossman, 2009). Thegoal of LID is to maintain the pre-developmenthydrology of a site, thereby reducing negative effectson receiving waters (Prince George’s County, 1999a).Example LID practices include cluster development,bioretention areas, permeable pavement, and grassedswales that serve to reduce imperviousness and man-age stormwater runoff through storage, infiltration,evapotranspiration, and retention. LID practices usedat a watershed level have been demonstrated tosignificantly reduce stormwater runoff volume, peakflow and the mass exports of several pollutants instormwater compared with traditional development(Dietz and Clausen, 2008; Bedan and Clausen, 2009).LID design has traditionally been aimed at cap-turing and treating storms with return periods less