DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessment for the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Assessment for the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category United States Office of Water EPA-821-R-15-006 Environmental Protection Washington, DC 20460 September 2015 Agency Environmental Assessment for the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category Environmental Assessment for the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category EPA-821-R-15-006 September 2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water (4303T) Engineering and Analysis Division 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 Acknowledgements and Disclaimer This report was prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Neither the United States Government nor any of its employees, contractors, subcontractors, or their employees make any warrant, expressed or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any third party’s use of or the results of such use of any information, apparatus, product, or process discussed in this report, or represents that its use by such party would not infringe on privately owned rights. Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................. VIII GLOSSARY ..................................................................................................................................... XI SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................1-1 SECTION 2 BACKGROUND AND SCOPE ........................................................................................2-1 SECTION 3 ENVIRONMENTAL AND HUMAN HEALTH CONCERNS..............................................3-1 3.1 Types of Pollutants Discharged in Steam Electric Power Plant Wastewater ...........3-2 3.1.1 Metals and Toxic Bioaccumulative Pollutants .............................................3-2 3.1.2 Nutrients .......................................................................................................3-9 3.1.3 TDS...............................................................................................................3-9 3.2 Loadings Associated with Steam Electric Power Plant Wastewater ......................3-12 3.2.1 Annual Baseline Pollutant Loadings ..........................................................3-13 3.2.2 Comparison of Steam Electric Power Plant Loadings to Other Industries ....................................................................................................3-15 3.2.3 Comparison of Steam Electric Power Plant Loadings to Publicly Owned Treatment Works ...........................................................................3-16 3.3 Environmental Impacts from Steam Electric Power Plant Wastewater .................3-20 3.3.1 Ecological Impacts .....................................................................................3-20 3.3.2 Human Health Effects ................................................................................3-27 3.3.3 Damage Cases and Other Documented Surface Water Impacts ................3-28 3.3.4 Damage Cases and Other Documented Ground Water Impacts ................3-35 3.3.5 Potential for Impacts to Occur in Other Locations .....................................3-37 3.4 Discharge to Sensitive Environments .....................................................................3-38 3.4.1 Pollutant Loadings to the Great Lakes Watershed .....................................3-38 3.4.2 Pollutant Loadings to the Chesapeake Bay Watershed ..............................3-40 3.4.3 Proximity to Impaired Waters ....................................................................3-42 3.4.4 Proximity to Fish Consumption Advisory Waters .....................................3-44 3.4.5 Proximity to Threatened and Endangered Species Habitats .......................3-45 3.4.6 Proximity to Drinking Water Resources ....................................................3-46 3.5 Long Environmental Recovery Times Associated with Pollutants in Steam Electric Power Plant Wastewater............................................................................3-47 SECTION 4 ASSESSMENT OF EXPOSURE PATHWAYS ..................................................................4-1 4.1 Discharge and Leaching to Surface Waters ..............................................................4-2 4.1.1 Factors Controlling Environmental Impacts in Surface Waters ...................4-2 4.1.2 Assessment of the Surface Water Exposure Pathway ..................................4-4 4.2 Leaching to Ground Water .......................................................................................4-7 4.2.1 Factors Controlling Environmental Impacts to Ground Water ....................4-7 4.2.2 Assessment of the Ground Water Exposure Pathway ................................4-12 4.3 Combustion Residual Surface Impoundments as Attractive Nuisance ..................4-12 i Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page SECTION 5 SURFACE WATER MODELING...................................................................................5-1 5.1 Immediate Receiving Water (IRW) Model ..............................................................5-1 5.1.1 Water Quality Module..................................................................................5-3 5.1.2 Wildlife Module ...........................................................................................5-8 5.1.3 Human Health Module ...............................................................................5-10 5.2 Ecological Risk Modeling ......................................................................................5-12 SECTION 6 CURRENT IMPACTS FROM STEAM ELECTRIC POWER GENERATING INDUSTRY.........................................................................................................................6-1 6.1 Water Quality Impacts ..............................................................................................6-1 6.2 Wildlife Impacts .......................................................................................................6-3 6.2.1 Impacts to Wildlife Indicator Species ..........................................................6-3 6.2.2 Impacts to Fish and Waterfowl due to Dietary Selenium Exposure ............6-4 6.2.3 Impacts to Benthic Organisms ......................................................................6-6 6.3 Human Health Impacts .............................................................................................6-7 6.3.1 National-Scale Cohort Analysis ...................................................................6-8 6.3.2 Environmental Justice Analysis .................................................................6-12 SECTION 7 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS UNDER THE FINAL RULE................................7-1 7.1 Pollutant Removals Under the Regulatory Options..................................................7-5 7.2 Key Environmental Improvements ...........................................................................7-9 7.2.1 Improvements in Water Quality Under the Final Rule ................................7-9 7.2.2 Reduced Threat to Wildlife Under the Final Rule ......................................7-13 7.2.3 Reduced Human Health Cancer Risk Under the Final Rule ......................7-15 7.2.4 Reduced Threat of Non-Cancer Human Health Effects Under the Final Rule ...................................................................................................7-15 7.2.5 Reduced Human Health Risk for Environmental Justice Analysis ............7-15 7.3 Pollutant-Specific Improvements ...........................................................................7-16 7.3.1 Arsenic........................................................................................................7-16 7.3.2 Mercury ......................................................................................................7-19 7.3.3 Selenium .....................................................................................................7-21 7.3.4 Cadmium ....................................................................................................7-25 7.3.5 Thallium .....................................................................................................7-25 7.4 Improvements to Sensitive Environments .............................................................7-28 7.4.1 Impaired Waters .........................................................................................7-28 7.4.2 Threatened and Endangered Species ..........................................................7-31 7.4.3 Fish Advisory Waters .................................................................................7-31 7.5 Improvements to Watersheds............................................... ..................................7-31 7.6 Environmental and Human Health Improvements in Downstream Surface Water.......................................................................................................................7-34 7.7 Attractive Nuisances ...............................................................................................7-37 7.8 Other Secondary Improvements .............................................................................7-37 7.9 Unresolved Drinking Water Impacts Due to Bromide Discharges ........................7-38 SECTION 8 CASE STUDY MODELING...........................................................................................8-1
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Belews WW Permit 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, N.C., 27699-1617 [email protected] [email protected]
    February 15, 2017 VIA EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL Mr. S. Jay Zimmerman, Acting Director DENR Division of Water Resources Attn. Belews WW Permit 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, N.C., 27699-1617 [email protected] [email protected] Re: Draft NPDES Wastewater Permit – Belews Creek Steam Station, #NC0024406 Dear Mr. Zimmerman: On behalf of Appalachian Voices, the Southern Environmental Law Center submits the following comments on the 2017 draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permit noticed for public comment by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (“DEQ”), Division of Water Resources (“DWR”), which purports for the first time to allow Duke Energy Carolinas LLC (“Duke Energy”) to discharge increased and in many cases unlimited pollution into the Dan River, Belews Lake, and other waters of North Carolina and the United States. We have previously submitted comments on an earlier draft permit in November 2016, and those comments remain applicable, except as explained below. As set forth below, the proposed permit violates the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) because, among other things: it allows unlimited toxic pollution of the Dan River and Belews Lake; it authorizes a wastewater treatment facility to malfunction and leak wastewater; it illegally turns North Carolina streams into wastewater ditches with no clean water protections; it puts in place excessive and ineffective limits for many toxic pollutants; and it reduces substantially clean water protections that have been contained in NPDES permits
    [Show full text]
  • Analyzing the Energy Industry in United States
    +44 20 8123 2220 [email protected] Analyzing the Energy Industry in United States https://marketpublishers.com/r/AC4983D1366EN.html Date: June 2012 Pages: 700 Price: US$ 450.00 (Single User License) ID: AC4983D1366EN Abstracts The global energy industry has explored many options to meet the growing energy needs of industrialized economies wherein production demands are to be met with supply of power from varied energy resources worldwide. There has been a clearer realization of the finite nature of oil resources and the ever higher pushing demand for energy. The world has yet to stabilize on the complex geopolitical undercurrents which influence the oil and gas production as well as supply strategies globally. Aruvian's R'search’s report – Analyzing the Energy Industry in United States - analyzes the scope of American energy production from varied traditional sources as well as the developing renewable energy sources. In view of understanding energy transactions, the report also studies the revenue returns for investors in various energy channels which manifest themselves in American energy demand and supply dynamics. In depth view has been provided in this report of US oil, electricity, natural gas, nuclear power, coal, wind, and hydroelectric sectors. The various geopolitical interests and intentions governing the exploitation, production, trade and supply of these resources for energy production has also been analyzed by this report in a non-partisan manner. The report starts with a descriptive base analysis of the characteristics of the global energy industry in terms of economic quantity of demand. The drivers of demand and the traditional resources which are used to fulfill this demand are explained along with the emerging mandate of nuclear energy.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of the Broken Aro Flue-Gas Desulfurization
    EVALUATION OF THE BROKEN ARO FLUE-GAS DESULFURIZATION SLUDGE MINE SEAL PROJECT TO ABATE ACID MINE DRAINAGE LOCATED IN COSHOCTOW COUNTY, OHIO A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Fritz J. Dolores H. Russ College of Engineering and Technology Ohio University In Partial Fullfillment of the Requirement for the Degree Master of Science by Michael T. Rudisell August, 1999 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would first like to thank Dr. Ben Stuart for guiding me through these last two years. Ben has been an exceptional advisor as well as a good friend to me as he has led me down this path I chose. He has spent much time with me in the field and classroom teaching me hands-on experience as well as the theory behind it. Also, a number of hours in his office were spent working on projects, assignments, and even just philosophizing about life's problems. A special thanks goes to Dr. Kenneth Edwards for his contributions to the project and for serving on my graduate committee. I would also like to thank Dr. James Lein for being on my graduate committee and the Geography Department for allowing us to use their digitizing equipment in developing our GIs. I would also like to thank graduate student, Branko Olujic, for his many hours spent in the field at Broken Aro taking water samples and measuring flowrates. Next, I would like to thank graduate student, Rajesh Ramachandran, for all his fieldwork assistance and for helping and guiding me through the GIs software used in the Broken Aro project. Thanks also to all the engineering undergraduates at Ohio University that volunteered to help collecting water samples and measuring flowrates in the field.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Revised, 2011
    Disclaimer DISCLAIMER The discussion in this document is intended solely as a summary of existing guidance. This document is not a regulation, nor does it substitute for any requirements under the Clean Water Act (CWA) or U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) regulations. Thus, it does not impose legally binding requirements on EPA, states, municipalities, or the regulated community. The general descriptions provided in this document might not apply to a particular situation based on the circumstances. This document does not confer legal rights or impose legal obligations on any member of the public. Among other things, the document describes existing requirements with respect to industrial dischargers and publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) under the CWA and its implementing regulations at Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 122, 123, 124, and 403 and chapter I, subchapter N. Although EPA has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the discussion in this document, a discharger’s obligations are determined, in the case of directly discharging POTWs, by the terms of its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit and EPA’s regulations or, in the case of indirect dischargers, by permits or equivalent control mechanisms issued to POTW industrial users or by regulatory requirements. Nothing in this document changes any statutory or regulatory requirement. If a conflict arises between this document’s content and any permit or regulation, the permit or regulation would be controlling. EPA and local decision makers retain the discretion to adopt approaches on a case- by-case basis that differ from those described in this document where appropriate and authorized by EPA regulations, state law, or local ordinances.
    [Show full text]
  • 64650 Federal Register / Vol
    64650 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 198 / Tuesday, October 13, 2020 / Rules and Regulations ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Although listed in the index, some • Supplemental Environmental AGENCY information is not publicly available, Assessment for Revisions to the Effluent e.g., Confidential Business Information Limitations Guidelines and Standards 40 CFR Part 423 (CBI) or other information whose for the Steam Electric Power Generating [EPA–HQ–OW–2009–0819; FRL–10014–41– disclosure is restricted by statute. Point Source Category (Supplemental OW] Certain other material, such as EA), Document No. EPA–821–R–20– copyrighted material, is not placed on 002. The Supplemental EA summarizes RIN 2040–AF77 the internet and will be publicly the potential environmental and human Steam Electric Reconsideration Rule available only in hard copy form. health impacts that are estimated to Publicly available docket materials are result from implementation of this final AGENCY: Environmental Protection available electronically through http:// rule. Agency. www.regulations.gov. • Benefit and Cost Analysis for ACTION: Final rule. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Revisions to the Effluent Limitations technical information, contact Richard Guidelines and Standards for the Steam SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Benware, Engineering and Analysis Electric Power Generating Point Source Agency (EPA or the Agency) is Category (BCA Report), Document No. finalizing a regulation to revise the Division, Telephone: 202–566–1369; Email: [email protected]. For EPA–821–R–20–003. The BCA Report technology-based effluent limitations summarizes estimates of the societal guidelines and standards (ELGs) for the economic information, contact James Covington, Engineering and Analysis benefits and costs resulting from steam electric power generating point implementation of this final rule.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Waste and Water Quality: EPA’S Response to the Waterkeeper Alliance Court Decision on Regulation of Cafos
    Animal Waste and Water Quality: EPA’s Response to the Waterkeeper Alliance Court Decision on Regulation of CAFOs Claudia Copeland Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy November 8, 2011 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL33656 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Animal Waste and Water Quality Summary In October 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a regulation to revise a 2003 Clean Water Act rule governing waste discharges from large confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs). This action was necessitated by a 2005 federal court decision (Waterkeeper Alliance et al. v. EPA, 399 F.3d 486 (2nd Cir. 2005)), resulting from challenges brought by agriculture industry groups and environmental advocacy groups, that vacated parts of the 2003 rule and remanded other parts to EPA for clarification. The Clean Water Act prohibits the discharge of pollutants from any “point source” to waters of the United States unless authorized under a permit that is issued by EPA or a qualified state, and the act expressly defines CAFOs as point sources. Permits limiting the type and quantity of pollutants that can be discharged are derived from effluent limitation guidelines promulgated by EPA. The 2003 rule, updating rules that had been in place since the 1970s, revised the way in which discharges of manure, wastewater, and other process wastes from CAFOs are regulated, and it modified both the permitting requirements and applicable effluent limitation guidelines. It contained important first-time requirements: all CAFOs must apply for a discharge permit, and all CAFOs that apply such waste on land must develop and implement a nutrient management plan.
    [Show full text]
  • (SO2) Emissions Review
    State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Division of Air Pollution Control Ohio’s 2021 Annual Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Emissions Review Prepared by: The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Division of Air Pollution Control DRAFT April 2021 [This page intentionally left blank] Background The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) promulgated the revised National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for sulfur dioxide (SO2) on June 2, 2010. U.S. EPA replaced the 24-hour and annual standards with a new short-term 1-hour standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb). The new 1-hour SO2 standard was published on June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520) and became effective on August 23, 2010. The standard is based on the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. On August 15, 2013, U.S. EPA published (78 FR 47191) the initial, first round, SO2 nonattainment area designations for the 1-hour SO2 standard across the country based upon areas with monitored violations (effective October 4, 2013). On March 2, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California accepted as an enforceable order an agreement between the U.S. EPA and Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council to resolve litigation concerning the deadline for completing designations. As explained in U.S. EPA’s March 20, 2015 memorandum Updated Guidance for Area Designations for the 2010 Primary Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard, the court’s order directs U.S. EPA to complete the remaining designations in three steps: round two by July 2, 2016; round three by December 31, 2017 and round four by December 31, 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • F a C T S H E
    National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Program F A C T S H E E T Regarding an NPDES Permit To Discharge to Waters of the State of Ohio for Columbus Southern Power Company, Conesville Generating Station Public Notice No.: 07-10-033 OEPA Permit No.: 0IB00013*LD Public Notice Date: October 24, 2007 Application No.: (OH #) OH0005371 Comment Period Ends: November 24, 2007 Name and Address of Facility Where Name and Address of Applicant: Discharge Occurs: Columbus Southern Power Company Columbus Southern Power Company c/o American Electric Power Conesville Generating Station 1 Riverside Plaza 47201 County Road 273 Columbus, Ohio 43215 Conesville, Ohio 43811 Coshocton County Receiving Water: Muskingum River Subsequent Stream Network: Ohio River Introduction Development of a Fact Sheet for NPDES permits is required by Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 124.8 and 124.56. This document fulfills the requirements established in those regulations by providing the information necessary to inform the public of actions proposed by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, as well as the methods by which the public can participate in the process of finalizing those actions. This Fact Sheet is prepared in order to document the technical basis and risk management decisions that are considered in the determination of water quality based NPDES Permit effluent limitations. The technical basis for the Fact Sheet may consist of evaluations of promulgated effluent guidelines and other treatment-technology based standards, existing effluent quality, instream biological, chemical and physical conditions, and the allocations of pollutants to meet Ohio Water Quality Standards.
    [Show full text]
  • Coal Power Station
    Copyright © Tarek Kakhia. All rights reserved. http://tarek.kakhia.org Coal Power Station ( Fly Ash , Bottom Ash & Flue Gas Desulfurization ) BY Tarek Ismail Kakhia 1 Copyright © Tarek Kakhia. All rights reserved. http://tarek.kakhia.org Contents No Item Page 1 Fossil - fuel power station 3 2 Chimney 11 3 Fly Ash -1 21 4 Fly Ash -2 44 5 Electrostatic precipitator 44 4 Bottom Ash 52 7 Flue - Gas Desulfurization ( FGD ) 53 8 Flue-gas emissions from fossil-fuel combustion 44 1 Flue - gas stack 47 10 Calcium Sulfite 72 11 Calcium bi sulfite 73 12 Calcium sulfate 74 2 Copyright © Tarek Kakhia. All rights reserved. http://tarek.kakhia.org Fossil - fuel power station Contents 1 Basic concepts o 1.1 Heat into mechanical energy 2 Fuel transport and delivery 3 Fuel processing 4 Steam - electric 5 Gas turbine plants 6 Reciprocating engines 7 Environmental impacts o 7.1 Carbon dioxide o 7.2 Particulate matter o 7.3 Radioactive trace elements o 7.4 Water and air contamination by coal ash . 7.4.1 Range of mercury contamination in fish 8 Greening of fossil fuel power plants o 8.1 Low NOx Burners o 8.2 Clean coal 9 Combined heat and power 10 Alternatives to fossil fuel power plants o 10.1 Relative cost by generation source - Introduction : A fossil - fuel power station is a power station that burns fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas or petroleum (oil) to produce electricity. Central station fossil - fuel power plants are designed on a large scale for continuous operation. In many countries, such plants provide most of the electrical energy used.
    [Show full text]
  • Belews Creek Jester Hairston Was Born in Duke Energy’S Most Efficient Power Station in the US Little Egypt, Which Was Flooded to Build Belews Lake in 1972
    AuGust sePtemBeR 24th July mAy noVemBeR May Your God is first Statewide Press first meeting of ACT against coal ash Prayer for a Better Way Press conference Write-in campaign cnn Visits Belews creek Too Small conference in Raleigh held at Belews creek sePtemBeR against unopposed with Sanjay Gupta artwork sePtemBeR 28th sePtemBeR People’s Power Party at Beloved community candidate to elect activates charles mitchell, first AuGust annie Brown, mother of Passage of Local no fracking moratorium; in Greensboro Celebrating Courage Weekend & Visit from Belews Creek Tracey Edwards, died In two days, ncGa passes state law Prayer Vigil on Good neighbor Day african-american mayor decemBeR Rev. Barber, former VP al Gore coal ash after suffering from a overturning local ordinances during of Walnut Cove appalachian noVemBeR & Karenna Gore movement massive heart attack midnight session Voices begins Roy cooper eventually beats Pat mccrory organizing in coal ash Press conference in Raleigh on by 10,277 votes.There are about 1000 nc Belews Creek Day Pope Visits White House families living on bottled water in nc. billion gallons into the Dan River without filtering any of the toxins. the of any filtering without River Dan the into gallons billion River since 2006, impacting downstream drinking water supplies. water drinking downstream impacting 2006, since River ust 13th, 2018 13th, ust G Au y, A ond m 14 draining and seeps illegal 30-year-old permit to plans DEQ nc Duke has discharged water from this pit continuously into the Dan Dan the into continuously pit this from water discharged has Duke nc e, V o c lnut A W ch, R hu c st I t AP B AR t s G n I s I R Former Vice President Al Gore & Karenna Gore Karenna & Gore Al President Vice Former <-- Dan RIver, 30 miles upstream from the Dan River Spill of 2014 of Spill River Dan the from upstream miles 30 RIver, Dan <-- Walnut Tree Community --> Community Tree Walnut Bishop William J.
    [Show full text]
  • Commonwealth of Kentucky Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet File No
    COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC PROTECTION CABINET FILE NO. DAQ-26003-037 and DAQ-26048-037 SIERRA CLUB, VALLEY WATCH, INC., LESLIE BARRAS, HILARY LAMBERT, and ROGER BRUCKER, PETITIONERS, VS. ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC PROTECTION CABINET, and THOROUGHBRED GENERATING COMPANY, LLC RESPONDENTS. ************* HEARING OFFICER’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDED SECRETARY’S ORDER ************* TABLE OF CONTENTS ..........................................................................................................i-iv I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...............................................................................................1 II. STATEMENT OF THE CASE.........................................................................................6 III. BURDEN OF PROOF .....................................................................................................15 IV. SUMMARY OF THE EVIDENCE ................................................................................15 V. GENERAL FINDINGS OF FACT.................................................................................24 VI. FINDINGS RELATING TO MAMMOTH CAVE NATIONAL PARK....................41 VII. FINDINGS RELATING TO IDEM...............................................................................45 VIII. FINDINGS OF FACT RELATED TO EACH COUNT, ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES, AND CONCLUSIONS ON COUNTS 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 17 AND 18 .....................................................................48 COUNT 1 – Air Toxics, Risk ..........................................................................................48
    [Show full text]
  • Printable Dan River Basin
    Campbell Bedford 80°30'0"W 80°0'0"W 79°30'0"W 79°0'0"W UV43 ¤£220 ¨¦§81 UV8 Bedford Campbell ¤£501 [ UV40 UV122 Pulaski Leesville Reservoir Smith Mountain Lake Dan River Basin ¤£29 Charlotte Dan River Basin Association 37°0'0"N Rocky Mount ^ 37°0'0"N BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY UV40 UV47 [ [ CROOKED ROAD MUSIC TRAIL [ Franklin UV40 CROOKED ROAD [ Smart View Recreation Area [ MUSIC TRAIL [ RT. 640 BRIDGE UV8 !| RT. 667 BRIDGE STAUNTON RIVER UV40 !| B BATTLEFIELD BEACHES TO BLUEGRASS an 220 is TRAIL (PROPOSED IN GREY) ¤£ SOUTHWEST PIEDMONT LOOP te r R !| RT. 682 BRIDGE iv Floyd [ er Fairy Stone Farms WMA TURKEYCOCK MOUNTAIN RYAN'S BRANCH WILDLIFE MGMT. AREA [ !| IC DEHART PARK BEACHES TO BLUEGRASS Saddle Overlook ROCK CASTLE PHILPOTT RESERVOIR !| RT. 642 BRIDGE TRAIL (PROPOSED IN GREY) UV57 Rocky Knob & CREEK GORGE Chatham e[ 501 [ Rock Castle Gorge [ UV108 ^ ¤£ [ £360 [ [ ¤ [ Mountain Rose Inn B&B !| IRON BRIDGE B [ [ Goose Point [ a SOUTHWEST PIEDMONT LOOP [[ ROCKY KNOB n FAIRYSTONE i REC AREA TRAIL Woolwine [ s DIFFICULT CREEK STATE JOHN H. KERR RESERVOIR [ t e Belcher Mtn Rd !| RT. 618 ACCESS STATE PARK r WHITEOAK MOUNTAIN NATURAL AREA PRESERVE River US 501 BRIDGE FAIRYSTONE FARMS [ !| WILDLIFE MGMT. AREA Hillsville PHILPOTT !| WILDLIFE MGMT. AREA [ [ !| UV41 ^ [ BASSETT BANISTER LAKE SWEET MTN r CROOKED ROAD TURKEYCOCK LOOP LAUREL LOOP e MUSIC TRAIL Bassett ^ RT. 614 BRIDGE Mecklenburg Mabry Mill iv UV57 Halifaxe[ UV57 108 !| [ R UV 360 th UV8 ¤£ TERRY'S BRIDGE Smi [ [ Martinsville City Reservoir ¤£29 !| FRED CLIFTON PARK North M DICK AND WILLIE TRAIL [ JACK E.
    [Show full text]