DOCSLIB.ORG

Rio Grande Salinity Management Program: Preliminary Economic Impact Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rio Grande Salinity Management Program: Preliminary Economic Impact Assessment Rio Grande Salinity Management Program: Preliminary Economic Impact Assessment Ari M. Michelsen - Texas AgriLife Research Tom McGuckin – New Mexico State University Zhuping Sheng - Texas AgriLife Research Ron Lacewell - Texas A&M University Bobby Creel – New Mexico Water Resources Research Institute Prepared for the Rio Grande Salinity Management Coalition December 2009 TX AgriLife Research NMSU NMWRRI Support for this project was provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Albuquerque Office, New Mexico Office of the State Engineer, Texas AgriLife Research, Texas Water Resources Institute, Texas A&M University System, New Mexico State University, New Mexico Water Resources Research Institute and USDA, CSREES, Rio Grande Basin Initiative. DISCLAIMER The United States Army Corps of Engineers and the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission on behalf of the Rio Grande Salinity Management Coalition (Coalition), in part, funded the work herein reported. This document fulfills or partially fulfills a contractual requirement and was sought by and provided to the Coalition to help meet the goals of the Coalition. The work was also supported by Texas AgriLife Research, Texas A&M University System, New Mexico State University, New Mexico Water Resources Research Institute and the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture under Agreement No. 2008-34461-19061. This report is the work of a contractor and the findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the funding agencies and the Coalition. Implementation of any recommendations or formal adoption of the information is subject to further consideration of the Coalition. Preliminary Economic Impact Assessment Report Contact Dr. Ari M. Michelsen Research Director and Professor Texas AgriLife Research Center at El Paso Texas A&M University System 1380 A&M Circle El Paso, TX 79927-5020 (915) 859-9111 e-mail: [email protected] Salinity Economic Impact Assessment i TABLE OF CONTENTS DISCLAIMER............................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES...................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES .........................................................................................................v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................ vi INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................1 Study Area .................................................................................................................................. 1 The Rio Grande Salinity Management Coalition........................................................................ 3 The Economic Assessment Process............................................................................................ 4 Types of Salinity Impacts........................................................................................................ 5 Previous Economic Assessment Studies................................................................................. 6 HYDROLOGY, SALINITY AND WATER USE .................................................................9 Study Area Water Allocation Compact, Treaty and Delivery Infrastructure .............................. 9 Characterization of the Rio Grande Flow ................................................................................. 10 Data Sources ......................................................................................................................... 11 Study Area River Flow.......................................................................................................... 11 Spatial and Temporal Variation of TDS................................................................................ 12 Statistical Analysis of Flow, TDS and Salt Load ..................................................................... 13 Statistical Analysis Results....................................................................................................... 14 Station at San Acacia ............................................................................................................ 14 Station below Caballo Dam .................................................................................................. 14 Station below Leasburg Dam................................................................................................ 16 Station below Mesilla Dam................................................................................................... 16 Station at El Paso .................................................................................................................. 16 Station at Hudspeth Canal Heading ...................................................................................... 17 Water Use.................................................................................................................................. 17 Agricultural Irrigation........................................................................................................... 18 Urban (El Paso) Supplies...................................................................................................... 19 ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY................................................21 Agricultural Impacts ................................................................................................................. 21 Urban Municipal and Industrial Impacts .................................................................................. 25 Residential Impacts............................................................................................................... 26 Urban Landscape Impacts..................................................................................................... 28 Commercial Impacts ............................................................................................................. 29 Industrial Impacts.................................................................................................................. 29 Surface Water Treatment Plants Impacts .............................................................................. 31 ASSESSMENT OF ECONOMIC IMPACTS ....................................................................33 Agriculture Impact Estimates ................................................................................................... 33 Urban M&I Impact Estimates................................................................................................... 39 Residential Impact ................................................................................................................ 39 Urban Landscape Impact ...................................................................................................... 41 Commercial Impact............................................................................................................... 41 Industrial Impact ................................................................................................................... 42 Treatment Plants Impact ....................................................................................................... 42 Salinity Economic Impact Assessment ii Summary of Damages............................................................................................................... 43 Incremental Damages and Potential Benefits of Reducing Salinity ......................................... 43 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...............................................................46 REFERENCES............................................................................................................49 APPENDIX A .............................................................................................................59 Salinity Economic Impact Assessment iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Study area showing selected gauge stations, communities, and agricultural areas.......... 1 Figure 2 Average monthly discharges at selected gauge stations in the Study Area for the period of 1934 to 1993. ............................................................................................................................ 12 Figure 3 Average TDS of the river water for each month at different stations for the period of 1934 to 1993. ................................................................................................................................ 13 Figure 4 El Paso Water Utilities typical water distribution supply pattern................................... 26 Figure 5 Summary of benefits of incremental 200 mg/L TDS decrease in salinity...................... 44 Salinity Economic Impact Assessment iv LIST OF TABLES Table E-1 Summary of economic damages from Rio Grande salinity by water user category...viii Table E-2 Summary of economic benefits of reducing Rio Grande salinity ...............................viii Table 1 Study area damage estimate zones..................................................................................... 2 Table 2 Statistical analysis of flow rate, TDS, and salt load at selected Rio Grande stations ...... 15 Table 3 Crop acreage by crop; Socorro, Sierra, Dona Counties, NM, El Paso and Hudspeth Counties, TX................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4-Year Work Plan by District for Fys 2015-2018
    4 Year Work Plan by District for FYs 2015 - 2018 Overview Section §201.998 of the Transportation code requires that a Department Work Program report be provided to the Legislature. Under this law, the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) provides the following information within this report. Consistently-formatted work program for each of TxDOT's 25 districts based on Unified Transportation Program. Covers four-year period and contains all projects that the district proposes to implement during that period. Includes progress report on major transportation projects and other district projects. Per 43 Texas Administrative Code Chapter 16 Subchapter C rule §16.106, a major transportation project is the planning, engineering, right of way acquisition, expansion, improvement, addition, or contract maintenance, other than the routine or contracted routine maintenance, of a bridge, highway, toll road, or toll road system on the state highway system that fulfills or satisfies a particular need, concern, or strategy of the department in meeting the transportation goals established under §16.105 of this subchapter (relating to Unified Transportation Program (UTP)). A project may be designated by the department as a major transportation project if it meets one or more of the criteria specified below: 1) The project has a total estimated cost of $500 million or more. All costs associated with the project from the environmental phase through final construction, including adequate contingencies and reserves for all cost elements, will be included in computing the total estimated cost regardless of the source of funding. The costs will be expressed in year of expenditure dollars. 2) There is a high level of public or legislative interest in the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to MS042 International Boundary and Water Commission Records
    University of Texas at El Paso ScholarWorks@UTEP Finding Aids Special Collections Department 12-9-1975 Guide to MS042 International Boundary and Water Commission records Raymond Daguerre Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.utep.edu/finding_aid This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Special Collections Department at ScholarWorks@UTEP. It has been accepted for inclusion in Finding Aids by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UTEP. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Guide to MS042 International Boundary and Water Commission records Span dates, 1850 – 1997 Bulk dates, 1953 – 1974 3 feet, 5 inches (linear) Processed by Raymond P. Daguerre December 9, 1975 Donated by Joseph Friedkin, International Boundary and Water Commission. Citation: International Boundary and Water Commission, 1975, MS042, C.L. Sonnichsen Special Collections Department. The University of Texas at El Paso Library. C.L. Sonnichsen Special Collections Department University of Texas at El Paso IBWC Biography or Historical Sketch Established in 1889, the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) has responsibility for applying the boundary and water treaties between the United States and Mexico and settling differences that may arise in their application. The IBWC is an international body composed of the United States Section and the Mexican Section, each headed by an Engineer-Commissioner appointed by his/her respective president. Each Section is administered independently of the other. The United States Section of the International Boundary and Water Commission (USIBWC) is a federal government agency and is headquartered in El Paso, Texas. The IBWC operates under the foreign policy guidance of the Department of State.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of the Rio Grande Compact of 1938
    The Rio Grande Compact: Douglas R. Littlefield received his bache- Its the Law! lors degree from Brown University, a masters degree from the University of Maryland and a Ph.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles in 1987. His doc- toral dissertation was entitled, Interstate The History of the Water Conflicts, Compromises, and Com- Rio Grande pacts: The Rio Grande, 1880-1938. Doug Compact heads Littlefield Historical Research in of 1938 Oakland, California. He is a research histo- rian and consultant for many projects throughout the nation. Currently he also is providing consulting services to the U.S. Department of Justice, Salt River Project in Arizona, Nebraska Department of Water Resources, and the City of Las Cruces. From 1984-1986, Doug consulted for the Legal Counsel, New Mexico Office of the State Engineer, on the history of Rio Grande water rights and interstate apportionment disputes between New Mexico and Texas for use in El Paso v. Reynolds. account for its extraordinary irrelevancy, Boyd charged, by concluding that it was written by a The History of the congenital idiot, borrowed for such purpose from the nearest asylum for the insane. Rio Grande Compact Boyds remarks may have been intemperate, but nevertheless, they amply illustrate how heated of 1938 the struggle for the rivers water supplies had become even as early as the turn of the century. And Boyds outrage stemmed only from battles Good morning. I thought Id start this off on over water on the limited reach of the Rio Grande an upbeat note with the following historical extending just from southern New Mexicos commentary: Mesilla Valley to areas further downstream near Mentally and morally depraved.
    [Show full text]
  • Index of Surface Water Stations in Texas
    1 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY I AUSTIN, TEXAS INDEX OF SURFACE WATER STATIONS IN TEXAS Operated by the Water Resources Division of the Geological Survey in cooperation with State and Federal Agencies Gaging Station 08065000. Trinity River near Oakwood , October 1970 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Geological Survey - Water Resources Division INDEX OF SURFACE WATER STATIONS IN TEXAS OCTOBER 1970 Copies of this report may be obtained from District Chief. Water Resources Division U.S. Geological Survey Federal Building Austin. Texas 78701 1970 CONTENTS Page Introduction ............................... ................•.......•...•..... Location of offices .........................................•..•.......... Description of stations................................................... 2 Definition of tenns........... • . 2 ILLUSTRATIONS Location of active gaging stations in Texas, October 1970 .•.•.•.••..•••••..•.. 1n pocket TABLES Table 1. Streamflow, quality, and reservoir-content stations •.•.•... ~........ 3 2. Low-fla.o~ partial-record stations.................................... 18 3. Crest-stage partial-record stations................................. 22 4. Miscellaneous sites................................................. 27 5. Tide-level stations........................ ........................ 28 ii INDEX OF SURFACE WATER STATIONS IN TEXAS OCTOBER 1970 The U.S. Geological Survey's investigations of the water resources of Texas are con­ ducted in cooperation with the Texas Water Development
    [Show full text]
  • THE RIO GRANDE Inside: Putting the Pieces Together on This Important Binational Water Source
    Winter 2021 THE RIO GRANDE Inside: Putting the pieces together on this important binational water source Texas A&M AgriLife Research Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service Texas A&M University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Message from Assistant Director of TWRI, Allen Berthold Published by Texas Water Resources Institute Editor Working to make Kerry Halladay Texas Water Resources Institute every drop count Art Direction When you think about the Rio Grande, what comes to mind? The songs written about it? The cultures surrounding it? That it’s a physical border between two Audrey Guidry countries? The growing populations on both sides of the border that rely on that Texas A&M AgriLife Marketing water? The fact that in recent history it hasn’t reached the Gulf of Mexico? Or and Communications maybe it seems like some mystical landmark you only hear about on the news? Whatever your thoughts, the Rio Grande is an extremely important landmark, Assistant Editors resource and cultural icon in our history. Wars have been fought over using it as a border. There have been battles in courtrooms over allocation of its water. There is Danielle Kalisek a strong sense of culture and pride among those who live within close proximity Sarah Richardson of it. All viewpoints on the importance of the Rio Grande are valid, but they also present some unique challenges and have caused the river to be classified as one C hantal C ough-Schulze of the top most endangered American and world rivers according to the World Ava English Texas Water Resources Institute Wildlife Fund.
    [Show full text]
  • Leasburg Diversion Dam Flows Along the Rio Grande River About a Mile and a Half Northwest of Fort Selden Historic Site
    H. Davis with the U.S. military was Explore History, Where It Happened surveying the area for use as a military Visit New Mexico Historic Sites and explore the state’s most important places. post. These seven historic sites and one historic property highlight the traditions and Today, the Diversion Dam is part of culture of New Mexico. It is an experience LEASBURG Leasburg Dam State Park, designated a you won’t forget. state park in 1971. DIVERSION DAM Help Preserve Fort Selden Help us preserve Fort Selden by becoming a site volunteer or by making a designated gift to the Museum of NM Foundation for the Fort’s preservation and interpretation. 100% of your gifts will be used to support Fort Selden. Become a Friend of Fort Selden Join other community members as we work to form a non-profit group to support the Fort. Call us for more information at 575-202-1638. The Leasburg Diversion Dam flows along the Rio Grande River about a mile and a half northwest of Fort Selden Historic Site. This diversion dam is vitally important to the region because water is one of New Mexico’s most important commodities. For thousands of years the Rio Grande has been a source of water for travelers, settlers, and livestock and provided water for crop irrigation. Fort Selden Historic Site However, the Rio Grande is an extremely powerful force of nature. It 1280 Ft. Selden Rd. Radium Springs, NM 88054 is a naturally moving river whose path changes on an almost yearly basis. Phone (575) 526-8911 Regional Office: (575) 202-1638 nmhistoricsites.org In the mid-19th century, settlers in the two flood controls in Picacho North and through to the Juarez Valley can have Upper Mesilla Valley were looking for Picacho South; and diversion dams access to water when needed.
    [Show full text]
  • Sharing the Colorado River and the Rio Grande: Cooperation and Conflict with Mexico
    Sharing the Colorado River and the Rio Grande: Cooperation and Conflict with Mexico December 12, 2018 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45430 {222A0E69-13A2-4985-84AE-73CC3DFF4D02}-R-065134085251065165027250227152136081055238021128244192097047169070027044111226189083158176100054014174027138098149076081229242065001223143228213208120077243222253018219014073197030033204036098221153115024066109133181160249027233236220178084 SUMMARY R45430 Sharing the Colorado River and the December 12, 2018 Rio Grande: Cooperation and Conflict with Nicole T. Carter Specialist in Natural Mexico Resources Policy The United States and Mexico share the waters of the Colorado River and the Rio Grande. A bilateral water treaty from 1944 (the 1944 Water Treaty) and other binational agreements guide Stephen P. Mulligan how the two governments share the flows of these rivers. The binational International Boundary Legislative Attorney and Water Commission (IBWC) administers these agreements. Since 1944, the IBWC has been the principal venue for addressing river-related disputes between the United States and Mexico. The 1944 Water Treaty authorizes the IBWC to develop rules and to issue proposed decisions, Charles V. Stern called minutes, regarding matters related to the treaty’s execution and interpretation. Specialist in Natural Resources Policy Water Delivery Requirements Established in Binational Agreements. The United States’ and Mexico’s water-delivery obligations derive from multiple treaty sources and vary depending on the body of water. Under the 1944 Water Treaty, the United States is required to provide Mexico with 1.5 million acre-feet (AF) of Colorado River water annually. The 1944 Water Treaty also addresses the nations’ respective rights to waters of the Rio Grande downstream of Fort Quitman, TX. It requires Mexico to deliver to the United States an annual minimum of 350,000 AF of water, measured in five-year cycles (i.e., 1.75 million AF over five years).
    [Show full text]
  • History of the Rio Grande Reservoirs in New Mexico: Legislation and Litigation
    University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Law of the Rio Chama The Utton Transboundary Resources Center 2007 History of the Rio Grande Reservoirs in New Mexico: Legislation and Litigation Susan Kelly UNM School of Law, Utton Center Iris Augusten Joshua Mann Lara Katz Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/uc_rio_chama Recommended Citation Kelly, Susan; Iris Augusten; Joshua Mann; and Lara Katz. "History of the Rio Grande Reservoirs in New Mexico: Legislation and Litigation." (2007). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/uc_rio_chama/28 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the The Utton Transboundary Resources Center at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law of the Rio Chama by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. SUSAN KELLY, IRIS AUGUSTEN, JOSHUA MANN & LARA KATZ* History of the Rio Grande Reservoirs in New Mexico: Legislation and Litigation" ABSTRACT Nearly all of the dams and reservoirson the Rio Grandeand its tributaries in New Mexico were constructed by the federal government and were therefore authorized by acts of Congress. These congressionalauthorizations determine what and how much water can be stored, the purposesfor which water can be stored, and when and how it must be released. Water may be storedfor a variety of purposes such as flood control, conservation storage (storing the natural flow of the river for later use, usually municipal or agricultural),power production, sediment controlfish and wildlife benefits, or recreation. The effect of reservoir operations derived from acts of Congress is to control and manage theflow of rivers.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Written Testimony Submitted to the United States Senate Committee On
    Written Testimony Submitted to the United States Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on S. 1012 New Mexico Drought Preparedness Act of 2017 Respectfully Submitted By Mike A. Hamman, PE Chief Executive Officer Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District Rio Grande Water Development in New Mexico The Upper Rio Grande originates in the San Juan and Sangre de Cristo mountain ranges in southern Colorado and northern New Mexico. It bisects the San Luis Valley in Colorado and the entire state of New Mexico with this reach culminating at Fort Quitman, Texas. This portion of the Rio Grande is administered under the Rio Grande Compact by a federal appointee and three Commissioners from Colorado, New Mexico and Texas with support from the United States Geological Survey, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Army Corps of Engineers. The annual mean flow as measured at the Otowi gage in New Mexico is 1 million acre-feet with wide variation, ranging from 250,000 to 2.5 million acre-feet. Irrigated agriculture consists of approximately 600,000 acres in Colorado, 200,000 acres in New Mexico, 100,000 acres in Texas. Additionally, up to 60,000 acre-feet is delivered to lands within the Republic of Mexico via the Rio Grande Project under the 1906 Convention between the United States and Mexico. The predominate crop due to climate, water supplies and labor considerations is alfalfa. Other crops include potatoes, chilé, corn, fruit, onions and pecans. There is an improving ‘farm to table’ market serving a demand for locally produced agricultural products ranging from lettuces to melons as well as organically grown products particularly near and in municipalities.
    [Show full text]
  • Rio Grande Project
    Rio Grande Project Robert Autobee Bureau of Reclamation 1994 Table of Contents Rio Grande Project.............................................................2 Project Location.........................................................2 Historic Setting .........................................................3 Project Authorization.....................................................6 Construction History .....................................................7 Post-Construction History................................................15 Settlement of the Project .................................................19 Uses of Project Water ...................................................22 Conclusion............................................................25 Suggested Readings ...........................................................25 About the Author .............................................................25 Bibliography ................................................................27 Manuscript and Archival Collections .......................................27 Government Documents .................................................27 Articles...............................................................27 Books ................................................................29 Newspapers ...........................................................29 Other Sources..........................................................29 Index ......................................................................30 1 Rio Grande Project At the twentieth
    [Show full text]
  • Results of Streamflow Gain-Loss Studies in Texas, with Emphasis on Gains from and Losses to Major and Minor Aquifers
    DistrictCover.fm Page 1 Thursday, February 14, 2002 1:33 PM In cooperation with the Texas Water Development Board Results of Streamflow Gain-Loss Studies in Texas, With Emphasis on Gains From and Losses to Major and Minor Aquifers Open-File Report 02–068 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Results of Streamflow Gain-Loss Studies in Texas, With Emphasis on Gains From and Losses to Major and Minor Aquifers By Raymond M. Slade, Jr., J. Taylor Bentley, and Dana Michaud U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 02–068 In cooperation with the Texas Water Development Board Austin, Texas 2002 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. For additional information write to District Chief U.S. Geological Survey 8027 Exchange Dr. Austin, TX 78754–4733 E-mail: [email protected] Copies of this report can be purchased from U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services Box 25286 Denver, CO 80225–0286 E-mail: [email protected] ii CONTENTS Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Introduction .........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rio Grande Project
    RIO GRANDE PROJECT El Paso Field Division 10737 Gateway Blvd. West, Suite 350 El Paso, TX 79935 U. S Dept. of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation RIO GRANDE PROJECT CURRENT HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS OF UPPER RIO GRANDE BASIN U. S Dept. of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation ALBUQUERQUE AREA OFFICE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION ~ I CO ·· - ·· - ·· AZ:NM I • AMARILLO RIO GRANDE PROJECT MEXICO %OF AVG. SNOW WATER EQUIVALENT vs TIME %OF AVG. SNOW WATER EQUIVALENT vs TIME Upper Rio Grande Basin (Basin Avg.) Rio Chama Basin (Basin Avg.) 600 ~-----------------., 140 ...--:-------------:--;:--:-;:-=--~ w ~500 .------------~ ~ 120 ~~-------~~~~ ~ Avg=Avgo ~400 #---------------~~~~ ~ 100 ~H*--~.----~~=-~ ~ Avg=Avg o w 9SNOTEL 4 SNOTEL ~300 ~-----------~ Sites ~ 8o ~UW~~.J~~~----~ ~ 60 ~~~~----~~--~ Sites ~200 rr~----------~ 0 40 ~-----------~ ~ ~100 ~~~~~""~~~-----~ 20 ~-----------~ o ~~~~~TITITTI~~~~Trrrrrn 10/1 11/6 12/18 1/29 3/12 4/23 6/4 7/16 10/1 11/6 12/18 1/29 3/12 4/23 6/4 7/16 OCT. 01,2006 to APR. 30,2007 OCT. 01,2006 to APR. 30,2007 %OF AVG. SNOW WATER EQUIVALENT vs TIME %OF AVG. SNOW WATER EQUIVALENT vs TIME Sangre de Cristo Mtn Basins (Basin Avg.) Jemez River Basin (Basin Avg.) 160 ...-----------------., w 140 +-----~------~ ~ 120 ~---~~~~-~--~ w 120 ...-------~--~-----------­ ~ Avg=Avgo ~ 100 ~------~1r~r---~~~~ ffi 100 +--+--~----+-~------~ ~ Avg=Avgo ~ 80 ~~~-~---~---~ 9SNOTEL ffi 80 +------1~----r---------­ Sites 3 SNOTEL ~ 60 ~~~~-----~==~~ ~ 60 ~----~------~---------­ Sites ~ 40 ++~~~-----~~-"~ o~ 40 ~~r-~------~~-------­ 20 ++--------~~~~ ~ 20 ~~~~--------+--------- o ~~~~~~~~~~~~nTM o ~~~~~~~ITTI~ITnTITITTITIT 10/1 11/6 12/18 1/29 3/12 4/23 6/4 7/16 10/1 11 /6 12/18 1/29 3/12 4/23 6/4 7/16 OCT.
    [Show full text]