DOCSLIB.ORG

Omni Environmental Final Report – February 23, 2007

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Omni Environmental Final Report – February 23, 2007 Omni Environmental Omni Environmental FINAL REPORT The Non-Tidal Passaic River Basin Nutrient TMDL Study Phase II Watershed Model and TMDL Calculations WANAQUE RI VER RAM APO RI VER PEQ UAN NO CK RIVER % % % PO M PTO N RI VER ROCKAWAY RI VER % % % DUNDEE DAM % WHIPPANY RIVER % PA SSA I C RI VER % % GREAT BRO O K % BLACK BRO O K DEAD RI VER Prepared for: Rutgers University New Jersey EcoComplex and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Division of Watershed Management February 23, 2007 Research Park • 321 Wall Street • Princeton, NJ 08540 Tel: 609-924-8821 • Fax: 609-924-8831 www.Omni-Env.com Phase II Non-Tidal Passaic River Basin Nutrient TMDL Omni Environmental Final Report – February 23, 2007 Table of Contents PAGE I. Introduction......................................................................................................................... 1 I.A. Integrated List of Waterbodies................................................................................ 1 I.B. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) .................................................................... 3 I.C. Non-Tidal Passaic River Basin TMDL Process...................................................... 3 I.D. Pollutant of Concern ............................................................................................... 5 I.E. Area of Interest ....................................................................................................... 8 I.F. Applicable Surface Water Quality Standards ....................................................... 15 II. Watershed Model Development ....................................................................................... 16 II.A. Watershed Model Purpose and Objectives ........................................................... 16 II.B. Watershed Model Overview................................................................................. 16 II.C. Spatial and Temporal Extent................................................................................. 19 II.D. Flow Model........................................................................................................... 21 II.D.1. Stream Network Setup................................................................................. 22 II.D.2. Sub-Basin Delineation................................................................................. 25 II.D.3. Model Inputs................................................................................................ 26 II.D.4. Model Outputs............................................................................................. 31 II.D.5. Cross-sectional Parameter Calibration ........................................................ 31 II.E. Water Quality Model ............................................................................................ 39 II.E.1. Stream Network Setup................................................................................. 40 II.E.2. Model Inputs................................................................................................ 41 II.E.2.a. Flow .............................................................................................. 41 II.E.2.b. Water Quality................................................................................ 42 II.E.2.c. Loads............................................................................................. 52 II.E.2.d. Model Parameters and Time Series .............................................. 63 II.E.3. Model Outputs............................................................................................. 71 II.F. Model Integration..................................................................................................74 II.F.1. Critical Issues...............................................................................................74 II.F.1.a. Model Solution Scheme................................................................ 74 II.F.1.b. Model Consistency........................................................................79 II.F.2. Watershed Model Integration Tool.............................................................. 80 II.F.2.a. WAMIT Algorithms ..................................................................... 81 II.G. Model Sensitivity Tests......................................................................................... 86 II.G.1. Time Step..................................................................................................... 86 II.G.2. Dispersion and Transport Time Scale.......................................................... 88 II.G.3. Input Time Series Resolution ...................................................................... 91 II.G.4. Mass Transport – Simulation of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS).................. 92 II.H. Model Calibration and Validation ........................................................................ 94 II.H.1. Phosphorus................................................................................................. 100 II.H.2. Ammonia ................................................................................................... 106 II.H.3. Nitrate ........................................................................................................ 108 II.H.4. Dissolved Oxygen...................................................................................... 109 II.H.5. Chlorophyll-a............................................................................................. 116 i Phase II Non-Tidal Passaic River Basin Nutrient TMDL Omni Environmental Final Report – February 23, 2007 Table of Contents PAGE III. Watershed Modeling Analyses ....................................................................................... 119 III.A. Seasonal Variation and Critical Conditions........................................................ 119 III.B. Model Scenarios.................................................................................................. 119 III.B.1. Existing Condition..................................................................................... 119 III.B.2. Baseline Future Condition ......................................................................... 120 III.B.3. Most Extreme Reduced Phosphorus Condition......................................... 125 III.C. Phosphorus Source Assessment.......................................................................... 126 III.D. Impact of Permitted Phosphorus Loads .............................................................. 131 III.E. Impact of Extreme Phosphorus Reductions........................................................ 135 III.E.1. Upper and Mid-Passaic River Mainstem................................................... 137 III.E.2. Lower Passaic River Mainstem ................................................................. 139 III.E.3. Dead River, Singac Brook, Peckman River............................................... 143 III.E.4. Whippany and Rockaway Rivers............................................................... 149 III.E.5. Wanaque, Pequannock, and Pompton Rivers............................................ 151 III.F. Sensitivity Analyses............................................................................................ 154 III.F.1. No Kinetics................................................................................................ 154 III.F.2. No CSOs.................................................................................................... 156 III.F.3. Tributary Baseflow and Passaic River Headwater Phosphorus Concentrations .......................................................................................................... 157 III.F.4. Nonpoint Source Reductions ..................................................................... 158 III.G. Summary............................................................................................................. 159 IV. Watershed-Specific Criteria............................................................................................ 161 IV.A. Critical Locations................................................................................................ 163 IV.B. End Points........................................................................................................... 165 IV.B.1. Wanaque Reservoir.................................................................................... 166 IV.B.2. Passaic River Upstream Dundee Dam (“Dundee Lake”) .......................... 166 V. TMDL Calculations........................................................................................................ 170 V.A. Reserve Capacity and Margin of Safety ............................................................. 170 V.B. Target Condition ................................................................................................. 172 V.C. Loading Capacity................................................................................................ 175 V.D. Allocations .......................................................................................................... 177 VI. Conclusions..................................................................................................................... 183 VII. References....................................................................................................................... 187 ii Phase II Non-Tidal Passaic River Basin Nutrient TMDL Omni Environmental Final Report – February 23, 2007 List of Tables PAGE TABLE
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Great Falls Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No
    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR HYDROPOWER LICENSE Great Falls Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 2814-025 New Jersey Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Office of Energy Projects Division of Hydropower Licensing 888 First Street, NE Washington, D.C. 20426 February 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................. I LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ III LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................IV ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................ V 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1 1.1 APPLICATION ............................................................................................. 1 1.2 PURPOSE OF ACTION AND NEED FOR POWER .................................. 1 1.2.1 Purpose of Action .............................................................................. 1 1.2.2 Need for Power .................................................................................. 3 1.3 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ......................... 4 1.4 PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT ......................................................... 4 1.4.1 Scoping .............................................................................................. 4 1.4.2 Interventions
    [Show full text]
  • Passaic County, New Jersey (All Jurisdictions)
    VOLUME 1 OF 5 PASSAIC COUNTY, NEW JERSEY (ALL JURISDICTIONS) COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER BLOOMINGDALE, BOROUGH OF 345284 CLIFTON, CITY OF 340398 HALEDON, BOROUGH OF 340399 HAWTHORNE, BOROUGH OF 340400 LITTLE FALLS, TOWNSHIP OF 340401 NORTH HALEDON, BOROUGH OF 340402 PASSAIC, CITY OF 340403 PATERSON, CITY OF 340404 POMPTON LAKES, BOROUGH OF 345528 PROSPECT PARK, BOROUGH OF 340406 RINGWOOD, BOROUGH OF 340407 TOTOWA, BOROUGH OF 340408 WANAQUE, BOROUGH OF 340409 WAYNE, TOWNSHIP OF 345327 WEST MILFORD, TOWNSHIP OF 340411 WOODLAND PARK, BOROUGH OF 340412 Preliminary: January 9, 2015 FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 34031CV001B Version Number 2.1.1.1 The Borough of Woodland Park was formerly known as the Borough of West Paterson. NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) may not contain all data available within the repository. It is advisable to contact the community repository for any additional data. Part or all of this FIS may be revised and republished at any time. In addition, part of this FIS may be revised by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the user to consult with community officials and to check the community repository to obtain the most current FIS components. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: September 28, 2007 Revised Countywide FIS Date: This preliminary FIS report does not include unrevised Floodway Data Tables or unrevised Flood Profiles.
    [Show full text]
  • Army Corps of Engineers Response Document Draft
    3.0 ORANGE COUNTY Orange County has experienced numerous water resource problems along the main stem and the associated tributaries of the Moodna Creek and the Ramapo River that are typically affected by flooding during heavy rain events over the past several years including streambank erosion, agradation, sedimentation, deposition, blockages, environmental degradation, water quality and especially flooding. However, since October 2005, the flooding issues have severely increased and flooding continues during storm events that may or may not be considered significant. Areas affected as a result of creek flows are documented in the attached trip reports (Appendix D). Throughout the Orange County watershed, site visits confirmed opportunities to stabilize the eroding or threatened banks restore the riparian habitat while controlling sediment transport and improving water quality, and balance the flow regime. If the local municipalities choose to request Federal involvement, there are several options, depending on their budget, desired timeframe and intended results. The most viable options include a specifically authorized watershed study or program, or an emergency streambank protection project (Section 14 of the Continuing Authorities Program), or pursing a Continuing Authorities Program study for Flood Risk Management or Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration (Section 205 and Section 206 of the Continuing Authorities Program, respectively). Limited Federal involvement could also be provided in the form of the Planning Assistance to States or Support for Others programs provide assistance and limited funds outside of traditional Corps authorities. A watershed study focusing on restoration of the Moodna Creek, Otter Creek, Ramapo River and their associated tributaries could address various problems using a systematic approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Total Maximum Daily Load Report for the Non-Tidal Passaic River Basin Addressing Phosphorus Impairments
    Amendment to the Northeast, Upper Raritan, Sussex County and Upper Delaware Water Quality Management Plans Total Maximum Daily Load Report For the Non-Tidal Passaic River Basin Addressing Phosphorus Impairments Watershed Management Areas 3, 4 and 6 Proposed: May 7, 2007 Adopted: April 24, 2008 New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Division of Watershed Management P.O. Box 418 Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0418 Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary……………………………………………………..…………….. 4 2.0 Introduction……………………………………………………………………….…... 13 3.0 Pollutant of Concern and Area of Interest…………………………………….……. 14 4.0 Source Assessment………………………………………………………………..….. 29 5.0 Analytical Approach and TMDL Calculation …………………………………..… 36 6.0 Follow-up Monitoring…………………………………………………………..…….47 7.0 Implementation Plan……………………………………………………………..……48 8.0 Reasonable Assurance…………………………………………………………….…..58 9.0 Public Participation…………………………………………………………………... 61 Appendix A: Cited References………………………………………………………..... 67 Appendix B: Municipalities and MS4 Designation in the Passaic River Basin ….… 71 Appendix C: Additional Impairments within TMDL Area ………………………….. 73 Appendix D: TMDLs completed in the Passaic River Basin ……………………...….. 75 Appendix E: Rationale for Establishing Chlorophyll-a as Watershed Criteria to Protect Designated Uses of the Wanaque Reservoir and Dundee Lake……… 78 Appendix F: Response to Comments…………………………………………………… 92 Tables Table 1. Stream segments identified on Sublists 3 and 5 of the 2004 Integrated List assessed for phosphorus impairment………………………………………6 Table 2. Assessment Units Analyzed from the 2006 Integrated List………………….....7 Table 3. Sublist 5 and Sublist 3 stream segments in spatial extent of non-tidal Passaic River basin TMDL study……………………………….. 20 Table 4. HUC 14 Assessment Units from 2006 Integrated List addressed in this and related TMDL studies………………………………………………………….. 21 Table 5. Description of Reservoirs……………………………………………………… 25 Table 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Resources of the New Jersey Part of the Ramapo River Basin
    Water Resources of the New Jersey Part of the Ramapo River Basin GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1974 Prepared in cooperation with the New Jersey Department of Conservation and Economic Development, Division of Water Policy and Supply Water Resources of the New Jersey Part of the Ramapo River Basin By JOHN VECCHIOLI and E. G. MILLER GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1974 Prepared in cooperation with the New Jersey Department of Conservation and Economic Development, Division of Water Policy and Supply UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1973 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 72-600358 For sale bv the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $2.20 Stock Number 2401-02417 CONTENTS Page Abstract.................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction............................................................................................ ............ 2 Purpose and scope of report.............................................................. 2 Acknowledgments.......................................................................................... 3 Previous studies............................................................................................. 3 Geography...................................................................................................... 4 Geology
    [Show full text]
  • Section-4.3.6-Flood.Pdf
    Section 4.3.6: Risk Assessment ‐ Flood 4.3.6 Flood The following section provides the hazard profile (hazard description, location, extent, previous occurrences and losses, probability of future occurrences, and impact of climate change) and vulnerability assessment for the flood hazard in Morris County. 2020 HMP Changes All subsections have been updated using best available data. The discussion of urban flooding has been expanded. Previous events between 2014 and 2019 are listed with a comprehensive list of previous events in Appendix E (Risk Assessment Supplement). The FEMA 2017 preliminary DFIRM was used to conduct the risk assessment. 4.3.6.1 Profile Hazard Description A flood is the inundation of normally dry land resulting from the rising and overflowing of a body of water. They can develop slowly over a period of days or develop quickly, with disastrous effects that can be local (impacting a neighborhood or community) or regional (affecting entire river basins, coastlines and multiple counties or states) (FEMA 2007). Floods are frequent and costly natural hazards in New Jersey in terms of human hardship and economic loss, particularly to communities that lie within flood-prone areas or floodplains of a major water source. The flood-related hazards most likely to impact Morris County are riverine (inland) flooding, urban flooding, and flooding as a result of a dam failure. Dam failure is discussed in Section 4.3.1 (Dam Failure). In addition, Morris County also experiences urban flooding which is the result of precipitation and insufficient drainage. Riverine (Inland) Flooding A floodplain is defined as the land adjoining the channel of a river, stream, ocean, lake, or other watercourse or water body that becomes inundated with water during a flood.
    [Show full text]
  • Pompton Lake and Ramapo River TMDL Support Study (NE-PASSAIC-1)
    Pompton Lake and Ramapo River TMDL Support Study (NE-PASSAIC-1): For Work Supporting the Department of Environmental Protection in the Development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) or Other Management Responses to Restore Impaired Waterbodies in the Non- Tidal Passaic River Basin FINAL Prepared for: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Watershed Management Division Trenton, NJ Prepared by: Quantitative Environmental Analysis, LLC Montvale, NJ Job Number: DEPpom:132 July 5, 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... ES-1 SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT............................................................................... 1-2 SECTION 2 POMPTON LAKE AND WATERSHED.......................................................... 2-1 2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND.............................................................. 2-1 2.2 WATER QUALITY....................................................................................................... 2-2 2.2.1 November 18, 2003 Sampling Event....................................................................... 2-3 2.2.2 Historical Water Quality Data ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Insurance Study Volume 3
    VOLUME 3 OF 5 PASSAIC COUNTY, NEW JERSEY (ALL JURISDICTIONS) COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER BLOOMINGDALE, BOROUGH OF 345284 CLIFTON, CITY OF 340398 HALEDON, BOROUGH OF 340399 HAWTHORNE, BOROUGH OF 340400 LITTLE FALLS, TOWNSHIP OF 340401 NORTH HALEDON, BOROUGH OF 340402 PASSAIC, CITY OF 340403 PATERSON, CITY OF 340404 POMPTON LAKES, BOROUGH OF 345528 PROSPECT PARK, BOROUGH OF 340406 RINGWOOD, BOROUGH OF 340407 TOTOWA, BOROUGH OF 340408 WANAQUE, BOROUGH OF 340409 WAYNE, TOWNSHIP OF 345327 WEST MILFORD, TOWNSHIP OF 340411 WOODLAND PARK, BOROUGH OF 340412 Preliminary: January 9, 2015 FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 34031CV001B Version Number 2.1.1.1 The Borough of Woodland Park was formerly known as the Borough of West Paterson. NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) may not contain all data available within the repository. It is advisable to contact the community repository for any additional data. Part or all of this FIS may be revised and republished at any time. In addition, part of this FIS may be revised by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the user to consult with community officials and to check the community repository to obtain the most current FIS components. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: September 28, 2007 Revised Countywide FIS Date: This preliminary FIS report does not include unrevised Floodway Data Tables or unrevised Flood Profiles.
    [Show full text]
  • Hearing Unit, State House Annex, PO 068, Trenton, New Jersey
    Panel Meeting of ASSEMBLY STATEWIDE FLOODING LEGISLATIVE PANEL "Testimony concerning flood mitigation and response from the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the New Jersey Association for Floodplain Management, the New Jersey State League of Municipalities, distinguished experts from the academic community, other invited guests, and the public" LOCATION: Council Chambers DATE: October 10, 2007 Lodi Municipal Building 6:00 p.m. One Memorial Drive Lodi, New Jersey MEMBERS OF PANEL PRESENT: Assemblyman Robert M. Gordon, Vice Chair Assemblyman John E. Rooney ALSO PRESENT: Philip R. Gennace Kate McDonnell Thea M. Sheridan Office of Legislative Services Assembly Majority Christopher Hughes Panel Aide Panel Aide Assembly Republican Panel Aides Meeting Recorded and Transcribed by The Office of Legislative Services, Public Information Office, Hearing Unit, State House Annex, PO 068, Trenton, New Jersey TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Karen Viscana Mayor Borough of Lodi 2 Louis V. D’Arminio Mayor Township of Saddle Brook 8 Richard A. Mola Mayor Elmwood Park 16 Martin Etler Deputy Mayor Fair Lawn 20 Thomas J. Duch City Manager City of Garfield 21 John Hazen Director Legislative Affairs New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 24 Arthur Halvajian Private Citizen 28 Maria Correia Private Citizen 38 Dorothy O’Haire Member Regional Flood Board Little Falls 46 Richard Kropp Director New Jersey Water Science Center United States Geological Survey 50 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page Anthony Ciorra Chief Civil Works Program New York District United States Army Corps of Engineers 50 Claude M. Epstein, Ph.D. Professor Environmental Studies Richard Stockton College 51 John Arthur Miller Legislative Committee Chair New Jersey Association for Floodplain Management, Inc., and Regional Director Association of State Floodplain Managers 54 George Nestory Private Citizen 75 James Santangelo Private Citizen 83 Albert DiChiara Private Citizen 86 Scott T.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 3. County Profile
    Section 3: County Profile SECTION 3. COUNTY PROFILE This profile describes the general information of the County (physical setting, population and demographics, general building stock, and land use and population trends) and critical facilities located within Morris County. In Section 3, specific profile information is presented and analyzed to develop an understanding of the study area, including the economic, structural, and population assets at risk and the particular concerns that may be present related to hazards analyzed (for example, a high percentage of vulnerable persons in an area). 2020 HMP Changes The “County Profile” is now located in Section 3; previously located in Section 4. It contains updated information regarding the County's physical setting, population and demographics and trends, general building stock, land use and trends, potential new development and critical facilities. This includes U.S. Census ACS 2017 data and additional information regarding the New Jersey Highlands Region in the Development Trends/Future Development subsection. Critical facilities identified as community lifelines using FEMA’s lifeline definition and seven categories were added to the inventory and described in this section. 3.1 GENERAL INFORMATION Morris County is one of the fastest growing counties in the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut metropolitan region. It is located amid rolling hills, broad valleys, and lakes approximately 30 miles northwest of New York City. The County was created by an Act of the State Legislature on March 15, 1738, separating it from Hunterdon County. Morris County was named after Colonel Lewis Morris, then Governor of the Province of New Jersey (the area that now includes Morris, Sussex, and Warren Counties).
    [Show full text]
  • Response to February 25, 2020 Deficiency Notice And
    -Accession No.: 202005265206, 202005265207 -Docket(s) No.: P-2814-025 -Submission ID: 1099837 -Docket(s) No.: P-2814-025 -Filed By: Great Falls Hydroelectric Company -Signed By: Michael Scarzello -Submission Date/Time: 5/26/2020 3:54:26 PM -Projected Filed Date/Time: 5/26/2020 3:54:26 PM May 26, 2020 Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20426 Reference: Great Falls Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2814-025) Response to February 25, 2020 Deficiency and Additional Information Requests Letter Final License Application Dear Secretary Bose: On February 28, 2019 Great Falls Hydroelectric Company (a subsidiary of Eagle Creek Renewable Energy, LLC) and the City of Paterson, New Jersey (Co-Licensees), filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) its Final License Application (FLA) to relicense the Great Falls Hydroelectric Project (Project; FERC Project No. 2814-025). On May 14, 2019, the Commission issued a letter of Deficiency of License Application and Additional Information Request concerning the FLA, to which the Co-Licensees responded in correspondence dated and filed on August 12, 2019 and November 11, 2019. On February 25, 2020, the Commission issued a letter of Acceptance of License Application and Request for Additional Information concerning the FLA. The letter lists additional information requests (AIRs) as Schedule A. The Commission granted 90-days from the date of the letter for the Co-Licensees to provide responses. The Co-Licensees hereby provide the original Schedule A AIRs received from the Commission in italic text and associated responses below and attached, as noted.
    [Show full text]
  • Regionalized Water-Budget Manual for Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Sites in New Jersey
    Regionalized Water Budget Manual for Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Sites in New Jersey State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Jon Corzine, Governor Lisa P. Jackson, Commissioner Disclaimer In addition to describing technical aspects of the hydrologic budget and related considerations for wetland mitigation site design, parts of this manual describe specific recommendations and requirements for the preparation of water budgets for wetland mitigation sites in New Jersey. These recommendations and requirements are strictly a matter of NJDEP policy and do not necessarily reflect the policy or opinion of any other organization or contributor. 1 Contents Disclaimer ....................................................................................................................... 1 Abstract ........................................................................................................................... 9 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 10 Purpose and Scope....................................................................................................... 11 Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................... 11 PART I: Background Information for Wetland Mitigation in New Jersey........................ 14 Wetland Definition and Regulation ................................................................................ 15 Growing Season...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]