**DROUGHT MONITORING TASK FORCE**

Drought Status Report

March 14, 2002

The Virginia Drought Monitoring Task Force held a conference call on
March 8, 2002 to discuss the current moisture conditions in the
Commonwealth. The Department of Environmental Quality compiled the
following report from information provided by the State Climatologist,
the Virginia Departments of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Health,
Forestry, Emergency Services, Game and Inland Fisheries; the Virginia
Cooperative Extension Service, Farm Service Agency-USDA, the National
Weather Service, and the U. S. Geological Survey.

## OVERVIEW 

Drought conditions remain relatively unchanged since the report of
February 21, 2002. Current drought conditions have been persistent since
the fall of 1999 with minor periods of improved moisture conditions
within that period. Three consecutive winters of below average
precipitation have resulted in significant reductions in ground water
recharge and ground water monitoring wells for near surface aquifers
show the lowest ground water levels for the period of record. These
historic low ground water levels have resulted in a condition where
there is little ground water discharge available to support stream
flows. Stream flows across the Commonwealth were less than the 95^th^
percentile for stream flow exceedance on March 8 (historically 95% or
more of the time stream flows have been greater than those measured for
March 8). New record minimum daily flows for March are expected at
approximately half the streamgages across the State except for those
streamgages in southwest Virginia. Discharges from large reservoirs such
as Smith Mountain Lake, Lake Anna, and Lake Moomaw have been reduced in
an attempt to fill these reservoirs for future water demands. Low stream
and reservoir levels are impacting recreational opportunities due to
lack of access (water levels below boat ramps) and cancellation of
stream trout stockings. Livestock producers began feeding hay two to
three months earlier than usual due to poor pasture conditions. Winter
small grain crops are making little progress due to dry conditions and
should these conditions persist, impacts are expected on spring
plantings. Many farm ponds that are used for livestock watering and
irrigation are at very low levels or dry, especially in the Shenandoah
Valley. Public water supplies, both ground water based and surface water
based, are in relatively good condition with only a few cases of
voluntary and mandatory water use restrictions. While little is known on
private ground water based supplies, it is anticipated that individual
domestic users, especially those that utilize water table aquifers, have
been or will be impacted by low ground water levels. Forest fuel
moisture conditions at the moment are not quite as dry as what they were
in the fall. As the state returns to warmer daytime temperatures over
the next month, forest fuels will dry out quickly resulting in the
potential for significant forest fire threats.

CLIMATOLOGICAL CONDITIONS

#### National Weather Service

Rainfall this past weekend (March 9 and 10) ranged from a trace to .10
across the Commonwealth, which continues to leave the region with below
average precipitation for the month and year. There are two
opportunities for rain during the next ten days. The first is Tuesday
(March 12) into early Wednesday, then this coming weekend (March 16 and
17). Amounts of one-half inch are possible on March 12 and 13,
especially in central and southern Virginia. Over the next 7-10 days
(March 14 through 23), two weather systems are forecast to affect the
region. The first system will arrive Saturday. A cold front associated
with this system will cross and stall to the south of Virginia. A wave
of low pressure is expected to develop and move east along the front.
Preliminary rainfall amounts are estimated to be less than two-tenths
(.20) of an inch. The next chance for measurable rainfall is forecast
for the Wednesday and Thursday (March 20 and 21) time frame. If this
system evolves, more widespread precipitation is possible which would be
beneficial, however it is too early to determine specific amounts for
next weeks system. One item of note is that we appear to have undergone
a pattern change in the last 2-3 days, with the computer models
suggesting a more favorable pattern for rain during the next 2 weeks.
Whether the rainfall will be widespread and/or significant remains to be
seen. There is, however, more short-term hope than existed on Friday
March 8.

The latest NOAA drought monitor expanded the coverage of category D-3
(extreme drought) to include the Virginia Blue Ridge, Northern Neck, and
Eastern Shore. The drought monitor is included as Appendix A. The NOAA
seasonal drought outlook remains unchanged from the February 21 report
and is included as Appendix B.

#### Report of the State Climatologist

#### Virginia's severe drought continues, with conditions generally worsening in an east-to-west transect of the state. Conditions are especially severe in the Western Piedmont, the Shenandoah Valley and surrounding mountains, and Northern Virginia. In these regions, this drought is severe both from short and long-term perspectives. 

Included are six-month (Appendix C) and 43-month (Appendix D)
accumulated departures for a sample of Virginia stations. The six-month
deficit is especially large in Northern Virginia, and it is the second
largest six-month deficit in the Washington DC record that goes back to
1870. The six-month deficit of record is in 1930, which is the
short-term drought of record in Virginia. (The Washington record is a
composite of Reagan National Airport and downtown data and can be
thought of as "Northern Virginia").

Notably the current Northern Virginia deficit is already very close to
that of 1930, with 13 inches this year vs. 14 inches in 1930. Six-month
deficits in the Shenandoah Valley station with the longest period of
record, Dale Enterprise (near Harrisonburg) were only exceeded in 1930
and in the mid-1960's drought. The latter event is the largest long-term
drought in the Virginia record, although it was not as severe in the
shorter term as the 1930 event.

Note that the six-month deficits for both Dale Enterprise and Northern
Virginia are very similar to those observed in 1999, which is why the
long-term figures for these locations are so low.

The longer-term shortages maximize at 43 months, beginning in the summer
of 1998. They are also worth noting because of the abundance of moisture
that preceded this drought, peaking in the late 1990's. Arguments have
been made that this excess was a result of higher-than normal El Niño
frequencies, although long-term statistical tests do not support a
substantial El Niño-precipitation link in Virginia. The start of another
El Niño in recent weeks is therefore either positive or neutral for
Virginia precipitation.

The table included in Appendix E breaks down precipitation departures
into the six Virginia climatological divisions for one, two, three, six
and twelve month periods.

One month (February) deficits average the 4^th^-greatest for all
Februarys in the Virginia 107-year record, with again the Northern and
Shenandoah Valley (officially known as the "Central Mountain" Division)
divisions showing the greatest deficits, at 19% of the long-term
average. As noted above, the deficits maximize at 6 months in terms of
absolute amount of precipitation. The recent September-February period
is the driest September-February in the record, but note that there are
12 possible six-month combinations each year.

Palmer Index values for the week ending March 9, 2002 are shown in
Appendix F and range from --2.33 to --3.66. They place the Tidewater,
Eastern Piedmont and Central Mountain Climatic Divisions in the \"Severe
Drought\" category and the rest of the state in the \"Moderate Drought\"
category. It is important to remember that the Palmer Index provides a
general description of drought conditions. The classifications assigned
by Palmer Index values appear reasonable for the Tidewater and Eastern
Piedmont. Existing conditions indicate that it would be more accurate to
describe much of the Western Piedmont as being in \"Severe Drought\" and
much of Northern Virginia and the Shenandoah Valley (Central Mountain
Division) as in \"Extreme Drought".

PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT OF HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS IN VIRGINIA

#### United States Geological Survey

Streamflows across the State are well below the normal range of flow
expected during winter months despite recent rain on March 2-3, 2002.
Streamflows are at levels expected during the late fall months when
flows generally are at annual minimums.

New record minimum daily flows for March are expected at approximately
half the streamgages across the State except for those streamgages in
southwest Virginia. The minimum flows occurred on March 1-2, 2002,
before the statewide rainfall elevated streamflows slightly.
Statistically, March has the highest minimum streamflow values for the
year.

The drought of 1930-32, was the worst drought in Virginia in at least
100 years. Current streamflow, while low, is not consistently at the low
levels experienced during the 1930's drought. Appendix G contains a
hydrograph for the North Fork Shenandoah River at Strasburg, Va., and
compares current streamflow values with streamflow values during 1931.
Ground-water levels also are not at levels experienced during the early
1930's; however, ground-water data in Virginia are very limited. Only
one well in Virginia has measurements that date back to 1931. Appendix H
contains a hydrograph for a well in Arlington County, Va. (53V 1). The
data show that the well was basically dry in 1931. Low water levels also
are shown for the droughts in 1942, 1955, 1966, and 1982. Currently, the
well water level is 5 or 6 feet above the minimum level observed in 1931
and approximately 2 feet above minimum water levels observed in the
1942, 1955, 1966, and 1982 droughts. Appendix I contains a hydrograph
for a well in Colonial Heights, Va. (51G 1). The data show ground-water
levels during the droughts in 1942, 1964-1966, and 1982. Currently, the
well water level is approximately 1 foot above the minimum water levels
observed during 1942 and 1964.

Appendix J gives flow duration and current flow conditions for selected
U.S. Geological Survey and Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
surface-water gaging stations. Data are provisional and subject to
revision. The normal range of flows is defined as flows in the middle
two quartiles (between those flows equaled or exceeded 75 percent of the
time and those flows equaled or exceeded 25 percent of the time).

#### Department of Environmental Quality, Status of Major Reservoirs

Smith Mountain Lake near Lynchburg is 3.8 feet below normal and mostly
stable with inflow equal to outflow. Minimum releases are 250 cfs.
Normal releases would be 650 cfs. The minimum release has been
authorized under a variance since September 3rd. The current variance
expires April 15^th^. DEQ will have to take action at that time to
extend the variance. Recreation at the lake could be severely impacted
and the annual release to support the Striped Bass spawning run is in
severe jeopardy.

Lake Moomaw in western Virginia is 19 feet below full with only 28% of
the conservation storage remaining. The lake is stable with a minimum
release of 100 cfs and inflow approximately the same. The minimum
releases would normally be 171 cfs. This current variance expires April
30^th^.

Kerr Reservoir in Southside is at 294.6 feet above mean sea level and
very slowly rising. The Wilmington District has been operating the Lake
under reduced releases since December. The lake is only currently about
one foot below the guide curve. However the guide curve target rises 5.5
feet in March, so by the end of the month, the lake will probably be six
feet below its guide curve target. Low inflows and low lake levels may
jeopardize the ability to release up to 4000 cfs into the lower Roanoke
River to enhance the spawning run of Striped Bass. Inflows to the lake
are only on the order of 3000 cfs.

Philpott Reservoir near Martinsville is 10 feet below normal and rising
slowly. Minimum releases have been cut back to one fourth of their
normal condition.

FISHERIES AND RECREATIONAL IMPACTS

#### Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries

In spite of last week's widespread rainfalls, water levels for many
rivers, streams and impoundments are at record low levels for this time
of year. As reported at last month's meeting, stockings of trout to some
small streams in the Shenandoah Valley have been cancelled, and more
widespread cancellations in small streams can be expected if water flows
do not improve. Daily information on trout stocking is posted on the
Department web page at
[www.dgif.state.va.us](http://www.dgif.state.va.us/) or by calling
1/434/525-3475. Fortunately for anglers, most of the trout stocking
waters are larger streams and small impoundments, which remain at levels
high enough to support stocking and fishing. To date, cancellations have
been limited to less than 10% of the scheduled stockings.

Stream and river levels may pose a problem for canoeists and float
fishermen in some areas. The upper reaches of the Shenandoah and
Rappahannock Rivers as well as many tributaries across the state may be
difficult to float through.

Most large reservoirs are significantly below scheduled water levels.
Boating access is available at all reservoirs, however, some public and
private boat ramps are closed due to low lake levels. Of particular
concern are levels at Smith Mountain Lake and Lake Moomaw. Spring
spawning of striped bass begins in April and additional flows from Smith
Mountain/Leesville are required to operate the Vic Thomas Striped Bass
hatchery and to enhance natural spawning.

The drought will have impacts on natural wildlife populations. Breeding
populations of most amphibians have declined significantly in recent
years. Most frog and salamander species depend on seasonal ponds and
pools created by winter and spring rains for breeding habitat. Likewise,
many fish species move upriver and utilize springtime runoff for
spawning.

As the state agency with ownership of the greatest number of acres of
land (195,000), we are concerned with the potential for wildfires and
the impacts on outdoor recreation. Hunting, fishing, boating and
wildlife related outdoor recreation generate more than three billion
dollars annually toward Virginia's economy. Spring and summer are the
primary seasons for angling and boating. April 13 marks the beginning of
spring turkey season when over 70,000 hunters from both Virginia and
other states plan vacations and hunting trips. The one-month spring
turkey season is restricted to morning hours when fire danger is lowest.
March, April and May are the most popular months for trout anglers with
over 100,000 fishermen visiting the rivers, streams, and lakes in
Virginia's western mountains. Additionally, thousands of visitors to our
public and private lands will begin taking trips outdoors for
picnicking, camping, bird watching and many other outdoor activities.
Outdoor users need to be reminded to be extremely careful with the use
of fire.

As a special fund agency, VDGIF does not have access to emergency fire
fighting funds, and subsequently absorbs fire suppression costs from
existing operations.

### PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS

### 

#### Virginia Department of Health

Public water supply conditions have remained relatively stable since the
last report with some improvement in the central and southeast portions
of the Commonwealth. Conditions have continued to deteriorate in the
Shenandoah Valley. Portsmouth, Chesapeake, Suffolk, Front Royal, James
River Correctional Center, Spotsylvania, Fredricksburg, and Stafford
have initiated voluntary water conservation. The City of Roanoke and
Craigsville have initiated mandatory water conservation requirements.
Ground water based public water supplies have shown few adverse impacts
due to ground water level declines. Appendix K contains detailed reports
of public water supply conditions in the six field offices.

VIRGINIA AGRICULTURAL SITUATION

#### Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services

Local Requests for Disaster Designation

The Governor of Virginia has received requests for drought disaster
designation from eleven Virginia counties. They are Augusta, Bland,
Brunswick, Buckingham, Cumberland, Fluvanna, Goochland, Louisa, Prince
Edward, Rockingham and Wythe. Requests from the Governor have been sent
to the Secretary of Agriculture for Goochland and Prince Edward. On
March 1, 2002, the Secretary approved the gubernatorial request that
Goochland be declared a primary disaster area. The Secretary also gave
contiguous designation to the counties of Chesterfield, Cumberland,
Fluvanna, Hanover, Henrico, Louisa, and Powhatan. On behalf of Governor
Warner, the Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services has
requested that the United States Department of Agriculture prepare
damage assessment reports on the nine counties whose requests are
pending. It is anticipated that additional counties will seek drought
disaster designation.

#### General Comments about Drought Impact

An important question being asked is what is the status/outlook for the
various crop sectors as we approach the coming spring. The dry
conditions did hamper planting activities last fall. Some plantings did
not germinate, but it does not appear that this was widespread. The
persistent dry conditions since the fall may have an affect on the
winter wheat crop, but it is too early to tell. As long as the crops
remain dormant, lack of moisture is not a major factor. Once crops break
dormancy (usually in mid-March), the moisture situation will become
critical. For most farmers, plans for planting row crops in 2002 have
not yet changed. Row crop producers will begin to worry about moisture
when it becomes time to plant, and when the crop is in the ground.
Livestock producers who rely on pasture to feed their livestock are
currently impacted. These producers are probably feeding hay to their
livestock at a greater than normal rate, or are culling their herds. The
Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, through its
livestock marketing program, is helping these producers with sales to
make sure they get the most for their cattle. When producers need to
find sources of hay, VDACS will also provide that information about the
availability and price through the Division of Marketing.

Probably the biggest concern for livestock producers is the possible
loss of water for their livestock. The persistent dryness has lowered
water levels in streams, ponds and some wells. For farmers whose farms
are irrigated by water from rivers in the Tidewater area, reduced
precipitation may affect their ability to use river water to irrigate.
It is reported that reduced flow in the Northern Neck area has already
allowed salt water to intrude further upstream, making the river water
too salty for irrigating crops.

In general, farmers across the state are trying to keep a positive
attitude and hoping that Virginia gets the precipitation it needs to
turn the situation around.

Grain Crops

Currently, the statewide drought is having a limited impact on grain
crops. Small grains (soft red winter wheat and six-rowed barley) are now
in a dormant stage. Once spring is here, the small grain crop will need
some moisture to head out, but small grains are relatively drought
tolerant. Corn, however, needs significant levels of moisture and, if
conditions continue, it may even be too dry to plant this spring. This
would cause a serious cutback in corn planting and production in the
state. These unplanted acres then would go into soybeans.

#### Vegetables and Fruits

It is too early to tell the degree of impact that the lack of rain will
have on fruit and vegetable production. Most vegetable growers are not
too concerned with the drought conditions at this time. Potatoes are the
only crop being planted now and they prefer dry conditions, although,
some rain would loosen the dirt and keep the dust down. Also, dry
conditions will retard Fusarium Tuber Rot infection of the potato seed
pieces.

Fruit growers are concerned with the impact the dry conditions may have
on their apple and peach trees. Apple trees may not be affected yet, as
they have a deeper root system than peach trees. Growers are concerned
that the stress put on the trees will affect the size of the fruit and
production.

Most commercial growers have irrigation ponds and will be able to water
for a while, although, the level of these ponds is beginning to get
quite low. Most areas are reporting about a seven-inch shortfall in rain
over last year.

Peanuts, Cotton, Soybeans and Tobacco

There is still time for conditions to improve before farmers begin to
plant their peanuts, cotton, soybeans and tobacco. In recent droughty
years timely rains have helped farmers make a decent crop. Dry weather
would affect crops like peanuts and cotton more in late July and August,
when the plants are maturing, than at any other time. Peanuts and cotton
are actually fairly drought resistant. Drought conditions in the past
have encouraged more farmers to purchase irrigation equipment. Much of
the state\'s tobacco acreage is irrigated.

This year peanut farmers are facing an uncertainty that overshadows the
current drought conditions. The 2002 Farm Bill as drafted will make very
dramatic changes in the national peanut program. The changes offered by
the House and the Senate have caused Virginia\'s peanut farmers to be
very concerned about the future of one of Virginia\'s top cash crops.

#### Livestock

In the northwest area of Virginia, cattle in backgrounding operations
are gaining weight ahead of schedule because of the mild and dry weather
and will be coming to market sooner than normal. It is expected that
large numbers will be marketed this month. Farmers in this area have not
seen any winter growth of their pastures. Where cattle have been
grazing, the pastures have been grazed to the ground. There is ample hay
for the time being. Ponds are almost dry or dry. Streams are barely
running. Up until now, there has not been much selling of cattle because
of the dry weather, but if conditions continue, some producers will
start selling their livestock. Well, digging operations in the area are
busy. Well drillers are reporting drilling to depths that are 100-300
feet deeper than normal to find ample water. In the northern Piedmont
area, farmers are also concerned about the dry conditions. Those with
failing water sources have serious problems. Some farmers are moving
their cattle to other pastures. (In previous drought years, some farmers
actually relocated their cattle to other states.) There are reports that
small farm ponds are drying up and that some streams are very low.
Cattle have been gaining weight well, thanks to the warmer than usual
weather. Hay supplies are still adequate, and prices for grass/cattle
type hay is lower than usual. There has been no increased movement of
cattle to market thus far, but the situation could change if dry
conditions continue.

The Valley region of Virginia is extremely dry. If it were summer, the
area would be a dust bowl. There is little or no pasture for livestock,
although, in some areas, there has been minimal winter growth due to
mild weather. Hay supplies going into winter were adequate, but farmers
have had to feed hay to their cattle at a faster than normal rate.
Farmers report that for the first time in memory some springs and
streams have stopped running. The first confirmed reports of selling
cattle caused by a lack of water supply took place at Staunton near the
end of February. Some producers are hauling water to cattle. More cattle
sales are planned. Some local stock buyers are limiting purchases. There
are reports that fertilizer applications to pastures are being delayed
or cancelled due to dry weather.

#### Virginia Cooperative Extension Service

Agricultural conditions have not improved significantly since the last
Drought Monitoring Task Force meeting on February 15, 2002. Recent rains
(March 1-2, 2002) have improved agricultural conditions somewhat;
however, Virginia agriculture continues to be affected by droughty
conditions. Small grains and forage grasses are depressed because of
lack of moisture. Farmers in some parts of the state are reducing herd
numbers as a result of significant reduction in forage and lack of
drinking water for animals. Some farmers are hauling water to livestock.
Hay feeding began 2-3 months earlier than normal for lack of pasture.

Stream flows are critically low over much of the state. Many ponds are
either very low or dry. This will create critical conditions for crops,
which need irrigation. Dry wells are reported in numerous counties
across the state; Fluvanna County reports that 80 wells have been
re-drilled since September 1, 2001.

The Warsaw Agriculture Research and Extension Center (AREC) reports the
following departures from normal rainfall:

-   September, 2001 - .93 inches

-   October, 2001 -2.25 inches

-   November, 2001 -2.90 inches

-   December, 2001 -1.22 inches

-   January, 2002 - .54 inches

Appendix L contains recommendations and educational information supplied
to agricultural producers by Agriculture and Natural Resources Extension
Agents.

FOREST FIRE SITUATION IN VIRGINIA

#### Virginia Department of Forestry

The Department of Forestry has now entered our spring fire season. The
extended drought has left forest fuels in a condition that will
potentially create very severe wildfires should weather patterns
continue. The normal wet winter did not develop, and the agency has
experienced wildfire activity on a periodic basis since the first of the
year. There has been a significant increase in wildfire activity over
the course of the last three weeks, as would normally be expected with
weather conditions changing to more of a springtime influence. The
statewide nature of the drought and wildfire conditions has lead to some
difficulty in moving agency resources around the state to respond to
wildfire emergencies, as activity has been occurring in all regions of
the state. This problem could potentially lead to a serious shortage of
wildfire resources as spring conditions become more severe, or if
multiple large fires develop in several different geographical areas of
the state. The DOF is making preparations to deal with this potential
problem by establishing contract resources, maintaining cooperative
agreements with in state resources such as the National Guard and other
agencies, and by keeping in close communications with federal
cooperators, and other eastern states. The DOF has already responded to
more than 850 wildfires for more than 6000 acres, and this is close to
three times the normal average for this point in the calendar year.

**\
**

##### APPENDIX A

![](media/image1.png){width="6.651388888888889in"
height="4.623611111111111in"}

**National Drought Summary -- March 14, 2002**

**The East:** Moderate precipitation fell on parts of upstate New York
and northern New England while light amounts fell on the Northeast,
southern Appalachians, central North Carolina, the Georgia and South
Carolina Piedmont, and the western slopes and foothills of the
Appalachians. Little or none fell elsewhere. As a result, dryness and
drought remained unchanged in the Northeast, and expanded or intensified
in parts of the mid-Atlantic, Southeast, and the central and southern
Appalachians. D3 conditions were extended to cover central North
Carolina, the Virginia Blue Ridge and Northern Neck, eastern West
Virginia, and the entire Delmarva Peninsula while D0 to D2 conditions
made new forays into parts of Kentucky, Tennessee, north Georgia,
Alabama, and northern Florida. In addition, the approach of the growing
season and above-normal temperatures prompted the removal of the (W)
designation from the mid-Atlantic, central Appalachians, and Carolinas.
Precipitation totals for the last 30 days were 2 to 4 inches below
normal from southern Virginia and central Kentucky southward through
western South Carolina, northern Georgia, and Alabama while 90-day
totals 4 to 8 inches below normal were measured in southern New England,
the lower Northeast, the mid-Atlantic, and portions of central South
Carolina, southwestern Georgia, southern Alabama, and the Florida
Panhandle. Relative to historic data from the National Climatic Data
Center, September 2001 through February 2002 was the driest of any
6-month period in 107 years of records for the states of Connecticut,
New Jersey, Delaware, and Virginia.

##### APPENDIX B

![](media/image2.png){width="5.997222222222222in"
height="4.611111111111111in"}

Latest Seasonal Assessment - In mid-February, moderate to severe drought
extended from Georgia to Maine, with drought reaching extreme levels in
Maine and South Carolina. Storms during the past 30 days have eased
dryness in some areas, such as northern New England, upstate New York,
northern Georgia and the Carolinas, but dryness intensified over the
mid-Atlantic region and southern New England. The latest forecast
indications present a mixed picture for the East Coast. Occasional
storms should provide slow overall improvement, but water shortages will
continue in a few areas. With recent near-record low streamflows and
reservoir levels for this time of year being reported over portions of
the mid-Atlantic and New England states, it will take some time for the
region to work its way out of drought conditions.

**APPENDIX C**

Accumulated six-month precipitation departures from the long-term
average for representative Virginia stations.

![](media/image3.png){width="6.499305555555556in" height="4.49375in"}

![](media/image4.png){width="6.470833333333333in"
height="4.763888888888889in"}

![](media/image5.png){width="6.470833333333333in"
height="4.763888888888889in"}

![](media/image6.png){width="6.470833333333333in"
height="4.763888888888889in"}

![](media/image7.png){width="6.470833333333333in" height="4.8in"}

**APPENDIX D**

Accumulated forty three-month precipitation departures from the
long-term average for representative Virginia stations.

![](media/image8.png){width="6.470833333333333in"
height="4.941666666666666in"}

![](media/image9.png){width="6.470833333333333in"
height="4.728472222222222in"}

![](media/image10.png){width="6.470833333333333in"
height="4.6930555555555555in"}

![](media/image11.png){width="6.470833333333333in"
height="4.6930555555555555in"}

![](media/image12.png){width="6.470833333333333in"
height="4.728472222222222in"}

##### APPENDIX E

One, two, three, six and twelve-month precipitation departures by
Climatological Division.

  ------------------- --------------- ----------- -------------- -------------
                      PRELIMINARY                                
                      PRECIPITATION                              
                      SUMMARY                                    

                                                                 

  Climatic Division   FEB             FEB         FEB            FEB

                      2002            NORMAL      DEPARTURE      \% DEPART.

  Tidewater           1.1             3.4         -2.3           33%

  Eastern Piedmont    1.0             3.3         -2.3           31%

  Western Piedmont    1.1             3.3         -2.2           33%

  Northern            0.5             2.7         -2.2           19%

  Central Mountain    0.5             2.7         -2.2           19%

  Southwestern        0.9             3.3         -2.4           27%
  Mountain                                                       

  Statewide           0.8             3.0         -2.2           27%

                                                                 

  Climatic Division   JAN-FEB         JAN-FEB     JAN-FEB        JAN-FEB

                      2002            NORMAL      DEPARTURE      \% DEPART.

  Tidewater           5.4             7.0         -1.6           77%

  Eastern Piedmont    4.8             6.6         -1.8           73%

  Western Piedmont    3.5             6.5         -3.0           54%

  Northern            1.5             5.4         -3.9           28%

  Central Mountain    1.2             5.3         -4.1           23%

  Southwestern        5.7             6.4         -0.6           90%
  Mountain                                                       

  Statewide           4.0             6.2         -2.2           64%

                                                                 

  Climatic Division   DEC 2001 -      DEC-FEB     DEC-FEB        DEC-FEB

                      FEB 2002        NORMAL      DEPARTURE      \% DEPART.

  Tidewater           7.6             10.3        -2.7           74%

  Eastern Piedmont    5.8             9.9         -4.1           59%

  Western Piedmont    7.0             9.8         -2.8           72%

  Northern            3.3             8.4         -5.1           40%

  Central Mountain    4.3             8.1         -3.8           53%

  Southwestern        6.7             9.6         -2.9           70%
  Mountain                                                       

  Statewide           6.0             9.4         -3.4           64%

                                                                 

  Climatic Division   SEP 2001 -      SEP-FEB     SEP-FEB        SEP-FEB

                      FEB 2002        NORMAL      DEPARTURE      \% DEPART.

  Tidewater           12.0            20.3        -8.3           59%

  Eastern Piedmont    8.7             20.5        -11.8          43%

  Western Piedmont    10.9            20.9        -10.0          52%

  Northern            7.6             18.9        -11.3          40%

  Central Mountain    7.8             18.3        -10.5          43%

  Southwestern        10.4            19.7        -9.3           53%
  Mountain                                                       

  Statewide           9.8             18.6        -8.8           53%
  ------------------- --------------- ----------- -------------- -------------

  ------------------- ----------- ----------- -------------- -------------
                                                             

  Climatic Division   MAR 2001 -  MAR-FEB     MAR-FEB        MAR-FEB

                      FEB 2002    NORMAL      DEPARTURE      \% DEPART.

  Tidewater           34.5        43.7        -9.2           79%

  Eastern Piedmont    32.3        43.3        -11.0          75%

  Western Piedmont    33.2        44.8        -11.6          74%

  Northern            33.5        40.8        -7.3           82%

  Central Mountain    30.1        39.4        -9.3           76%

  Southwestern        36.5        43.3        -6.8           84%
  Mountain                                                   

  Statewide           33.6        42.2        -8.6           80%
  ------------------- ----------- ----------- -------------- -------------

##### 

##### 

##### APPENDIX F

Palmer Drought Severity Index values for week ending March 9, 2002.

  ------------------------------------------ ----------------------------
  Climatic Division                          Palmer Drought

                                             Severity Index

  Tidewater                                  -- 3.66

  Eastern Piedmont                           -- 3.01

  Western Piedmont                           -- 2.65

  Northern                                   -- 2.70

  Central Mountain                           -- 3.42

  Southwestern Mountain                      -- 2.33
  ------------------------------------------ ----------------------------

##### APPENDIX G

Hydrograph of the North Fork of the Shenadoah River near Strasburg,
Virginia

![](media/image13.png){width="6.014583333333333in"
height="4.488194444444445in"}

##### APPENDIX H

Hydrograph of a well in Arlington, Virginia

![](media/image14.png){width="6.041666666666667in"
height="4.954861111111111in"}

##### APPENDIX I

Hydrograph of a well in Colonial Heights, Virginia

![](media/image15.png){width="6.041666666666667in" height="5.0in"}

##### APPENDIX J

Flow duration and current flow conditions for selected U.S. Geological
Survey and Virginia Department of Environmental Quality surface-water
gaging stations

+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              | M   | M   | 7Q2 | 7   | P   |     |     | CU    |
|              | INI | INI |     | Q10 | ERC |     |     | RRENT |
|              | MUM | MUM | (C  |     | ENT |     |     | CONDI |
|              | DA  | MAR | FS) | (C  | OF  |     |     | TIONS |
|              | ILY | FL  |     | FS) | T   |     |     | FLOW  |
|              |     | OW, |     |     | IME |     |     | (     |
|              | FL  |     |     |     | F   |     |     | CFS)/ |
|              | OW, | PER |     |     | LOW |     |     | DUR   |
|              |     | IOD |     |     | E   |     |     | ATION |
|              | PER | OF  |     |     | QUA |     |     | (PER  |
|              | IOD | REC |     |     | LED |     |     | CENT) |
|              | OF  | ORD |     |     | OR  |     |     |       |
|              | REC |     |     |     | EX  |     |     |       |
|              | ORD | (C  |     |     | CEE |     |     |       |
|              |     | FS) |     |     | DED |     |     |       |
|              | (C  |     |     |     | FOR |     |     |       |
|              | FS) |     |     |     | MAR |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | DA  |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | ILY |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | M   |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | EAN |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | FL  |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | OWS |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | (CU |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | BIC |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | F   |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | EET |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | PER |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | S   |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | ECO |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | ND) |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     | 75% | 50% | 25% | March |
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | 08,   |
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | 2002  |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| SHENANDOAH   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| RIVER BASIN  |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| South River  | 17  | 36  | 30  | 24  | 125 | 192 | 318 | 44    |
| near         |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| Waynesboro,  |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| South Fork   | 107 | 268 | 344 | 235 | 1,  | 1,  | 3,  | 424   |
| Shenandoah   |     |     |     |     | 280 | 990 | 240 | /\>95 |
| River at     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Front Royal, |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| North Fork   | 0.2 | 11  | 3.2 | 0   | 116 | 213 | 408 | 60/93 |
| Shenandoah   |     |     |     | .77 |     |     |     |       |
| River at     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Cootes       |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Store, Va.   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| North Fork   | 35  | 89  | \-  | \-  | 442 | 713 | 1,  | 139   |
| Shenandoah   |     |     |     |     |     |     | 280 | /\>95 |
| River near   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Strasburg,   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| POTOMAC      |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| RIVER BASIN  |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Goose Creek  | 0.4 | 24  | 12  | 2.5 | 263 | 422 | 690 | 60    |
| near         |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| Leesburg,    |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| RAPPAHANNOCK |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| RIVER BASIN  |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Rappahannock | 2.9 | 185 | 50  | 11  | 564 | 848 | 1,  | 222   |
| River at     |     |     |     |     |     |     | 340 | /\>95 |
| Remington,   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Rapidan      | 2.2 | 94  | \-  | \-  | 430 | 611 | 957 | 174   |
| River near   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| Culpeper,    |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| YORK RIVER   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| BASIN        |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Pamunkey     | 47  | 180 | \-  | \-  | 816 | 1,  | 2,  | 279   |
| River near   |     |     |     |     |     | 230 | 070 | /\>95 |
| Hanover,     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.\*        |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Mattaponi    | .78 | 149 | 48  | 14  | 545 | 868 | 1,  | 183   |
| River near   |     |     |     |     |     |     | 330 | /\>95 |
| Beulahville, |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+

+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              | M   | M   | 7Q2 | 7   | P   |     |     | CU    |
|              | INI | INI |     | Q10 | ERC |     |     | RRENT |
|              | MUM | MUM | (C  |     | ENT |     |     | CONDI |
|              | DA  | MAR | FS) | (C  | OF  |     |     | TIONS |
|              | ILY | FL  |     | FS) | T   |     |     | FLOW  |
|              |     | OW, |     |     | IME |     |     | (     |
|              | FL  |     |     |     | F   |     |     | CFS)/ |
|              | OW, | PER |     |     | LOW |     |     | DUR   |
|              |     | IOD |     |     | E   |     |     | ATION |
|              | PER | OF  |     |     | QUA |     |     | (PER  |
|              | IOD | REC |     |     | LED |     |     | CENT) |
|              | OF  | ORD |     |     | OR  |     |     |       |
|              | REC |     |     |     | EX  |     |     |       |
|              | ORD | (C  |     |     | CEE |     |     |       |
|              |     | FS) |     |     | DED |     |     |       |
|              | (C  |     |     |     | FOR |     |     |       |
|              | FS) |     |     |     | MAR |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | DA  |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | ILY |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | M   |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | EAN |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | FL  |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | OWS |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | (CU |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | BIC |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | F   |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | EET |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | PER |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | S   |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | ECO |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | ND) |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     | 75% | 50% | 25% | March |
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | 08,   |
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | 2002  |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| JAMES RIVER  |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| BASIN        |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Jackson      | 13  | 47  | 26  | 20  | 146 | 230 | 419 | 55    |
| River near   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| Bacova, Va.  |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Potts Creek  | 15  | 31  | 24  | 17  | 156 | 242 | 411 | 69    |
| near         |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| Covington,   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Cowpasture   | 40  | 120 | 73  | 54  | 432 | 668 | 1,  | 225   |
| River near   |     |     |     |     |     |     | 210 | /\>95 |
| Clifton      |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Forge, Va.   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Craig Creek  | 25  | 50  | 43  | 31  | 326 | 515 | 883 | 124   |
| at Parr, Va. |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| James River  | 257 | 400 | 378 | 271 | 2,  | 3,  | 5,  | 885   |
| at Buchanan, |     |     |     |     | 190 | 290 | 680 | /\>95 |
| Va.\*        |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Maury River  | 22  | 154 | 89  | 62  | 576 | 922 | 1,  | 197   |
| near Buena   |     |     |     |     |     |     | 580 | /\>95 |
| Vista, Va.   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Hardware     | 0.1 | 26  | 24  | 7.5 | 104 | 146 | 227 | 34    |
| River below  |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| Briery Run   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| near         |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Scottsville, |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va           |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Rivanna      | 5.2 | 164 | \-  | \-  | 534 | 784 | 1,  | 169   |
| River at     |     |     |     |     |     |     | 270 | /\>95 |
| Palmyra, Va. |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| James River  | 330 | 1,  | 1,  | 584 | 6,  | 9,  | 15, | 2,740 |
| at           |     | 840 | 120 |     | 440 | 640 | 300 | /\>95 |
| C            |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| artersville, |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Appomattox   | 6.3 | 93  | 52  | 21  | 211 | 297 | 469 | 100   |
| River at     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| Farmville,   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Appomattox   | 13  | 230 | 86  | 30  | 536 | 766 | 1,  | 251   |
| River at     |     |     |     |     |     |     | 390 | /\>95 |
| Mattoax, Va. |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Chickahominy | 0   | 55  | 16  | 4.0 | 236 | 382 | 581 | 143/  |
| River near   | .07 |     |     |     |     |     |     | 95    |
| Providence   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Forge, Va.   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| CHOWAN RIVER |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| BASIN        |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Nottoway     | 14  | 268 | 82  | 24  | 1,  | 2,  | 3,  | 605   |
| River near   |     |     |     |     | 352 | 250 | 540 | /\>95 |
| Sebrell, Va. |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Blackwater   | 0   | 117 | \-  | \-  | 668 | 1,  | 1,  | 138   |
| River near   | .07 |     |     |     |     | 040 | 600 | /\>95 |
| Franklin,    |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Meherrin     | 4.2 | 127 | 52  | 16  | 377 | 543 | 884 | 150   |
| River near   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| La           |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| wrenceville, |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+

+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              | M   | M   | 7Q2 | 7   | P   |     |     | CU    |
|              | INI | INI |     | Q10 | ERC |     |     | RRENT |
|              | MUM | MUM | (C  |     | ENT |     |     | CONDI |
|              | DA  | MAR | FS) | (C  | OF  |     |     | TIONS |
|              | ILY | FL  |     | FS) | T   |     |     | FLOW  |
|              |     | OW, |     |     | IME |     |     | (     |
|              | FL  |     |     |     | F   |     |     | CFS)/ |
|              | OW, | PER |     |     | LOW |     |     | DUR   |
|              |     | IOD |     |     | E   |     |     | ATION |
|              | PER | OF  |     |     | QUA |     |     | (PER  |
|              | IOD | REC |     |     | LED |     |     | CENT) |
|              | OF  | ORD |     |     | OR  |     |     |       |
|              | REC |     |     |     | EX  |     |     |       |
|              | ORD | (C  |     |     | CEE |     |     |       |
|              |     | FS) |     |     | DED |     |     |       |
|              | (C  |     |     |     | FOR |     |     |       |
|              | FS) |     |     |     | MAR |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | DA  |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | ILY |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | M   |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | EAN |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | FL  |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | OWS |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | (CU |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | BIC |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | F   |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | EET |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | PER |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | S   |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | ECO |     |     |       |
|              |     |     |     |     | ND) |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     | 75% | 50% | 25% | March |
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | 08,   |
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | 2002  |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Roanoke      | 19  | 73  | 58  | 35  | 295 | 474 | 750 | 72    |
| River at     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| Roanoke,     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.\*        |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Pigg River   | 25  | 153 | 96  | 47  | 277 | 368 | 539 | 149   |
| near Sandy   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| Level, Va.   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Roanoke      | 179 | 598 | 847 | 426 | 2,  | 3,  | 5,  | 880   |
| River at     |     |     |     |     | 140 | 520 | 690 | /\>95 |
| Randolph,    |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.\*        |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Dan River at | 244 | 1,  | \-  | \-  | 2,  | 3,  | 4,  | 1,230 |
| Paces, Va.   |     | 140 |     |     | 140 | 020 | 680 | /\>95 |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Hyco River   | 2.5 | 31  | \-  | \-  | 148 | 253 | 579 | 25    |
| near         |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| Denniston,   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.\*        |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| KANAWHA      |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| RIVER BASIN  |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| New River at | 453 | 960 | 1,  | 725 | 2,  | 3,  | 5,  | 1,540 |
| Allisonia,   |     |     | 040 |     | 920 | 900 | 570 | /\>95 |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Little River | 47  | 60  | 109 | 69  | 307 | 416 | 577 | 152   |
| at           |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| Graysontown, |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Walker Creek | 24  | 50  | 44  | 33  | 299 | 458 | 778 | 120   |
| at Bane, Va. |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| BIG SANDY    |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| RIVER BASIN  |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Russell Fork | 0.2 | 35  | 8.7 | 1.0 | 259 | 430 | 795 | 102   |
| at Haysi,    |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
|              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| TENNESSEE    |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| RIVER BASIN  |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| South Fork   | 40  | 156 | 99  | 73  | 463 | 667 | 1,  | 175   |
| Holston      |     |     |     |     |     |     | 010 | /\>95 |
| River near   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Damascus,    |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| North Fork   | 2.0 | 61  | 34  | 24  | 267 | 398 | 666 | 103   |
| Holston      |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | /\>95 |
| River near   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Saltville,   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Clinch River | 37  | 131 | 81  | 54  | 625 | 973 | 1,  | 196   |
| at           |     |     |     |     |     |     | 624 | /\>95 |
| Cleveland,   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| Powell River | 18  | 82  | 42  | 24  | 454 | 716 | 1,  | 194   |
| near         |     |     |     |     |     |     | 234 | /\>95 |
| Jonesville,  |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| Va.          |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+
| \* indicates |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| some         |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
| regulation   |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |       |
+--------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-------+

##### APPENDIX K

Virginia Department of Health Field Office Reports for Public Water
Systems

  ----------- ---------------- ---------------- ------------------ ---------------------
              **Abingdon Field                  N-No               B-Better
              Office 3/02/02**                                     

                                                M-Mandatory        S-Stable/Same

                                                V-Voluntary        W-Worse

                                                                   

  **PWSID**   **Waterworks**   **Source Name**  **Restrictions**   **Situation**

  1195050     Appalachia                        N                  Reservoir is full.

  1195100     Big Stone Gap                     N                  Both reservoirs are
                                                                   full.

  1195950     Wise                              N                  262 days left, no
                                                                   alternate source in
                                                                   use, no conservation
                                                                   measures.

  1720076     Norton                            N                  Both reservoirs are
                                                                   full.

  1155635     Pulaski                           N                  Both reservoirs are
                                                                   down a few feet but
                                                                   nothing abnormal.

                                                                   

                                                                   

                                                                   

              Note: No                                             
              significant                                          
              impact from the                                      
              drought at this                                      
              time.                                                
  ----------- ---------------- ---------------- ------------------ ---------------------

  ----------- -------------------- ---------------- ------------------ ------------------------
              **South East                          N-No               B-Better
              Virginia Field                                           
              Office 3/02/02**                                         

                                                    M-Mandatory        S-Stable/Same

                                                    V-Voluntary        W-Worse

                                                                       

  **PWSID**   **Waterworks**       **Source Name**  **Restrictions**   **Situation**

  3700500     Newport News         Little Creek,    N                  As of 03/07/02,
                                   Diascund,                           reservoirs were 84% full
                                   Skiffes Creek,                      and rising. RO plant at
                                   Harwoods Mill                       1.7 mgd. No
                                   and Lee Hall                        Restrictions-Situation
                                   Reservoirs                          is Better than previous
                                                                       report (previous report
                                                                       83% full and RO plant at
                                                                       2 mgd)

  3830850     Williamsburg         Waller Mill      N                  As of 03/06/02, Waller
                                   Reservoir                           Mill reservoir is 17
                                                                       inches below the primary
                                                                       spillway and is tending
                                                                       to rise very slowly (in
                                                                       the previous report it
                                                                       was 18.5 inches below
                                                                       the primary spillway).
                                                                       Williamsburg is still
                                                                       purchasing 2 mgd of raw
                                                                       water from Newport News.
                                                                       No restrictions.
                                                                       Situation is Better

  3650150     Ft. Monroe           Big Bethel       N                  The water plant was shut
                                   Reservoir System                    down in mid-December for
                                                                       replacement of valves,
                                                                       and switched to Newport
                                                                       News water. Plant is
                                                                       scheduled to be back on
                                                                       line near the end of
                                                                       this month (March 26).

  3095490     James City Service                    N                  No significant impact on
              Authority Central                                        water levels in wells.
              System                                                   

  3670800     Virginia-American,   Appomattox       N                  Both rivers continue to
              Hopewell             River/James                         be low. No problems with
                                   River                               water quantity as yet.
                                                                       TDS, sodium, and
                                                                       alkalinity are still at
                                                                       increased levels.
                                                                       Situation is Stable.

  3183550     Jarratt              Nottoway River   N                  Markings on an adjacent
                                                                       bridge piling indicate a
                                                                       level of approximately
                                                                       0.75 feet, although it
                                                                       is unknown if 0 feet is
                                                                       at the river bed. No
                                                                       quality or quantity
                                                                       problems noted.
                                                                       Situation is Stable.

  3595250     Emporia              Meherrin River   N                  The reservoir levels are
                                                                       still at \"normal\". No
                                                                       recent restrictions to
                                                                       power plant (see item 3,
                                                                       below). Situation is
                                                                       Stable.

  3710100     Norfolk                               N                  As of 03/06, reservoirs
                                                                       are at 84.3% of total
                                                                       capacity (minor
                                                                       improvement). Historic
                                                                       level at this time of
                                                                       year is 94.9% full.
                                                                       Pumping from Lake
                                                                       Gaston, at rate of 27.0
                                                                       mgd. Wells are OFF Not
                                                                       currently considering
                                                                       conservation measures,
                                                                       but that could change
                                                                       with continued dry
                                                                       weather.

  3740600     Portsmouth           Lakes Cohoon,    V                  As of 5 Mar 02,
                                   Meade, Kilby,                       reservoirs are at \"77%
                                   and Speights Run                    of useful capacity\".
                                                                       This is a +1% change
                                                                       since last report.
                                                                       Median capacity for this
                                                                       time of year is 100%,
                                                                       average capacity is 98%
                                                                       (period of 1969-2001).
                                                                       Emergency wells are OFF.
                                                                       City Council voted to
                                                                       establish Voluntary
                                                                       Conservation at meeting
                                                                       of 11/27/01. The
                                                                       restrictions took effect
                                                                       on 11/30/01. Marginally
                                                                       Better.

  3550050     Chesapeake - Western Western Branch   V                  This portion of the city
              Branch system        system                              is consecutive to
                                                                       (receives water from)
                                                                       the city of Portsmouth.
                                                                       Because Portsmouth
                                                                       decided to go on
                                                                       voluntary restrictions,
                                                                       Chesapeake has decided
                                                                       to follow Portsmouth\'s
                                                                       lead, for ALL residents
                                                                       of the city. City
                                                                       Council voted to
                                                                       establish Voluntary
                                                                       Conservation at the
                                                                       meeting on 11/27/01. The
                                                                       restrictions took effect
                                                                       on 11/30/01.

  3550052     Chesapeake - South   South Norfolk    V                  This portion of the city
              Norfolk system       system                              is consecutive to
                                                                       (receives water from)
                                                                       the city of Norfolk.
                                                                       Because Portsmouth
                                                                       decided to go on
                                                                       voluntary restrictions,
                                                                       Chesapeake has decided
                                                                       to follow Portsmouth\'s
                                                                       lead, for ALL residents
                                                                       of the city. City
                                                                       Council voted to
                                                                       establish Voluntary
                                                                       Conservation at the
                                                                       meeting on 11/27/01. The
                                                                       restrictions took effect
                                                                       on 11/30/01.

  3550051     Chesapeake - NW      NW River system  V                  As of 3/7, chloride
              River system                                             levels in the Northwest
                                                                       River are back to normal
                                                                       and well water levels
                                                                       have been recovering due
                                                                       to increased production
                                                                       from the surface WTP.
                                                                       Because a portion of the
                                                                       city (a separate system
                                                                       from the NW River
                                                                       system) is served from
                                                                       Portsmouth, Chesapeake
                                                                       has decided to follow
                                                                       Portsmouth\'s lead, for
                                                                       ALL residents of the
                                                                       city. City Council voted
                                                                       to establish Voluntary
                                                                       Conservation at the
                                                                       meeting on 11/27/01. The
                                                                       restrictions took effect
                                                                       on 11/30/01.

  3800805     City of Suffolk      Central System   V                  As of 3/7, reservoir
                                                                       system is 71% full in
                                                                       Crumps Mill and 81% full
                                                                       in Lone Star Lakes.
                                                                       These levels are lower
                                                                       than in the last report.
                                                                       The city also purchase
                                                                       finished water from
                                                                       Portsmouth, which enters
                                                                       the central system in
                                                                       downtown Suffolk. As
                                                                       such, this system has
                                                                       followed the lead of the
                                                                       Portsmouth system and
                                                                       has adopted Voluntary
                                                                       Conservation. Suffolk
                                                                       will rescind Voluntary
                                                                       Conservation following
                                                                       Portsmouth\'s lead.
                                                                       Situation is stable.

  3800787     City of Suffolk      Route 17         V                  This system is
                                   Corridor                            consecutive to
                                                                       (purchases water from)
                                                                       the Portsmouth system.
                                                                       As such, this system has
                                                                       followed the lead of the
                                                                       Portsmouth system, and
                                                                       has adopted Voluntary
                                                                       Conservation. If
                                                                       Portsmouth goes to
                                                                       Mandatory Conservation,
                                                                       Suffolk will probably
                                                                       switch the supply source
                                                                       to their Central System
                                                                       (groundwater).

                                                                       

              Notes:                                                   

              1\. Systems listed                                       
              for the first time                                       
              are shown **in                                           
              bold**.                                                  

              2\. As of this date,                                     
              SEVFO has not                                            
              received any reports                                     
              of impacts to                                            
              groundwater systems.                                     

              3\. (Note added on                                       
              11/28/01) While                                          
              there have been no                                       
              lasting                                                  
              drought-related                                          
              impacts to the                                           
              waterworks at the                                        
              City of Emporia,                                         
              there have been                                          
              impacts at the power                                     
              plant located                                            
              immediately across                                       
              the reservoir from                                       
              the water plant.                                         
              When the power plant                                     
              operates at full                                         
              capacity, it                                             
              withdraws sufficient                                     
              water to cause the                                       
              water level in the                                       
              reservoir to drop,                                       
              to the point where                                       
              water stops going                                        
              over the dam. This                                       
              in turn has an                                           
              impact on the water                                      
              plant. The water                                         
              plant and power                                          
              plant have a                                             
              \"gentlemen\'s                                           
              agreement\" that, at                                     
              such times, the                                          
              water plant notifies                                     
              the power plant and                                      
              the power plant                                          
              shuts down. This                                         
              allows the water                                         
              level in the                                             
              reservoir to build                                       
              back up. Currently,                                      
              the power plant is                                       
              operating about 10                                       
              to 12 hours per day.                                     
              (Update as of                                            
              2/19/02) No recent                                       
              restrictions on                                          
              power plant                                              
              operations.                                              
  ----------- -------------------- ---------------- ------------------ ------------------------

+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
|     | **Lynchburg   |                | N-No   | B-Better           |
|     | Field Office  |                |        |                    |
|     | 3/02/02**     |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
|     |               |                | M-Man  | S-Stable/Same      |
|     |               |                | datory |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
|     |               |                | V-Vol  | W-Worse            |
|     |               |                | untary |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
|     |               |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| **P | *             | **Source       | **Re   | **Situation**      |
| WSI | *Waterworks** | Name**         | strict |                    |
| D** |               |                | ions** |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 2   | Roanoke       | Carvins Cove   | M      | W:                 |
| 770 | City -        | Re             |        |                    |
| 650 | Carvins Cove  | servoir/Tinker |        | Reservoir level    |
|     |               | Creek/Catawba  |        | 23.9\' below       |
|     |               | Creek          |        | spillway -         |
|     |               |                |        | situation steadily |
|     |               |                |        | worsening. Partial |
|     |               |                |        | Mandatory          |
|     |               |                |        | restrictions       |
|     |               |                |        | imposed when       |
|     |               |                |        | reservoir level is |
|     |               |                |        | between 22 and 26  |
|     |               |                |        | feet below         |
|     |               |                |        | spillway.          |
|     |               |                |        | (restricts outdoor |
|     |               |                |        | usage between 10   |
|     |               |                |        | am and 7 pm).      |
|     |               |                |        | (Stage 3)          |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 2   | Craigsville   |                | M      | S:                 |
| 015 |               |                |        |                    |
| 150 |               |                |        | Craigsville spring |
|     |               |                |        | production         |
|     |               |                |        | off-well           |
|     |               |                |        | production         |
|     |               |                |        | off-pursuing       |
|     |               |                |        | emergency          |
|     |               |                |        | construction to    |
|     |               |                |        | connect to Augusta |
|     |               |                |        | springs-plans and  |
|     |               |                |        | specifications for |
|     |               |                |        | 6700 feet of       |
|     |               |                |        | interconnecting    |
|     |               |                |        | water line have    |
|     |               |                |        | been approved, and |
|     |               |                |        | construction       |
|     |               |                |        | started.           |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 2   | South River   | Coles Run      | N      | S:                 |
| 015 | S.D. (ACSA)   |                |        |                    |
| 575 |               |                |        | Coles Run          |
|     |               |                |        | reservoir level    |
|     |               |                |        | down 5-6 feet-no   |
|     |               |                |        | impact on system   |
|     |               |                |        | due to multiple    |
|     |               |                |        | sources.           |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 2   | Monterey      |                | N      | S:                 |
| 091 |               |                |        |                    |
| 150 |               |                |        | Monterey well      |
|     |               |                |        | production off.    |
|     |               |                |        | New well           |
|     |               |                |        | construction       |
|     |               |                |        | completed, testing |
|     |               |                |        | operation of       |
|     |               |                |        | components.        |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 2   | Staunton      |                | N      | S:                 |
| 790 |               |                |        |                    |
| 600 |               |                |        | Staunton-middle    |
|     |               |                |        | river flow         |
|     |               |                |        | reduced.           |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 2   | Front Royal   |                | V      | B:                 |
| 187 |               |                |        |                    |
| 406 |               |                |        | Operating under    |
|     |               |                |        | voluntary water    |
|     |               |                |        | conservation per   |
|     |               |                |        | VWPP requirements. |
|     |               |                |        | Conservation       |
|     |               |                |        | controls           |
|     |               |                |        | implemented at 30% |
|     |               |                |        | (voluntary), 17%   |
|     |               |                |        | (mandatory), 15%   |
|     |               |                |        | (emergency), and   |
|     |               |                |        | 13% (rationing) of |
|     |               |                |        | mean stream flow   |
|     |               |                |        | based on 14-day    |
|     |               |                |        | running average.   |
|     |               |                |        | At present, 14-day |
|     |               |                |        | running average    |
|     |               |                |        | stream flow is 19% |
|     |               |                |        | of mean stream     |
|     |               |                |        | flow.              |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 2   | Albemarle     | Beaver Creek   | N      | W:                 |
| 003 | County /      | Reservoir      |        |                    |
| 250 | Crozet        |                |        | Beaver Creek       |
|     |               |                |        | Reservoir is       |
|     |               |                |        | currently down     |
|     |               |                |        | nearly 8 feet from |
|     |               |                |        | normal \"full\".   |
|     |               |                |        | This low level has |
|     |               |                |        | exceeded the all   |
|     |               |                |        | time low water     |
|     |               |                |        | level on record.   |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 2   | Charlottesvil | Sugar Hollow   | N      | S:                 |
| 003 | le/Albermarle | (Observatory   |        |                    |
| 600 | County        | WTP)           |        | The Sugar Hollow   |
|     |               |                |        | reservoir          |
|     |               |                |        | (Observatory WTP)  |
|     |               |                |        | is 22 feet below   |
|     |               |                |        | normal levels and  |
|     |               |                |        | remains out of     |
|     |               |                |        | service. Ragged    |
|     |               |                |        | Mountain reservoir |
|     |               |                |        | is 6.0 feet below  |
|     |               |                |        | normal. Overall    |
|     |               |                |        | source water       |
|     |               |                |        | availability is at |
|     |               |                |        | 77.7% of \"full    |
|     |               |                |        | available          |
|     |               |                |        | capacity\" (this   |
|     |               |                |        | includes both the  |
|     |               |                |        | South Rivanna      |
|     |               |                |        | system and the     |
|     |               |                |        | Suggar             |
|     |               |                |        | hollow/Ragged      |
|     |               |                |        | Mountain system).  |
|     |               |                |        | Mandatory          |
|     |               |                |        | conservation is    |
|     |               |                |        | being considered   |
|     |               |                |        | if the situation   |
|     |               |                |        | does not improve.  |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 2   | Charlottesvil | South Rivanna  | N      | B:                 |
| 003 | le/Albermarle | (South Rivanna |        |                    |
| 725 | County        | WTP)           |        | Their main         |
|     |               |                |        | reservoir-South    |
|     |               |                |        | Rivanna (South     |
|     |               |                |        | Rivanna WTP) is    |
|     |               |                |        | full and silghtly  |
|     |               |                |        | overflowing.       |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 2   | Fluvanna      | Mechunk Creek  | N      | W:                 |
| 065 | Correctional  |                |        |                    |
| 250 | Center        |                |        | The Fluvanna       |
|     |               |                |        | Correctional       |
|     |               |                |        | Center is still    |
|     |               |                |        | unable to withdraw |
|     |               |                |        | raw water from     |
|     |               |                |        | Mechunk Creek on   |
|     |               |                |        | most days.         |
|     |               |                |        | Following the      |
|     |               |                |        | rainfall event of  |
|     |               |                |        | March 2 they did   |
|     |               |                |        | begin to pump raw  |
|     |               |                |        | water but the      |
|     |               |                |        | river flow is      |
|     |               |                |        | dropping. Their    |
|     |               |                |        | raw water storage  |
|     |               |                |        | impoundment has    |
|     |               |                |        | approximately 20   |
|     |               |                |        | days of available  |
|     |               |                |        | water remaining.   |
|     |               |                |        | The DOC requested  |
|     |               |                |        | amendment to their |
|     |               |                |        | water withdrawal   |
|     |               |                |        | permit from DEQ    |
|     |               |                |        | was finalized on   |
|     |               |                |        | March 2. This will |
|     |               |                |        | allow additional   |
|     |               |                |        | pumping from       |
|     |               |                |        | Mechunk Creek and  |
|     |               |                |        | should result in   |
|     |               |                |        | improvements to    |
|     |               |                |        | the raw water      |
|     |               |                |        | impoundment        |
|     |               |                |        | levels.            |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 2   | Schulyer      | Johnson\'s     | N      | S:                 |
| 125 |               | Branch         |        |                    |
| 650 |               |                |        | The Johnson\'s     |
|     |               |                |        | Branch flow is     |
|     |               |                |        | stable since our   |
|     |               |                |        | last report. While |
|     |               |                |        | not back to normal |
|     |               |                |        | flows there is     |
|     |               |                |        | ample water to     |
|     |               |                |        | meet daily         |
|     |               |                |        | demands.           |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+

  ----------- ---------------- ---------------- ------------------ ---------------------
              East Central                      N-No               B-Better
              Field Office                                         
              3/01/02                                              

                                                M-Mandatory        S-Stable/Same

                                                V-Voluntary        W-Worse

                                                                   

  **PWSID**   **Waterworks**   **Source Name**  **Restrictions**   **Situation**

  4041845     Swift Creek WTP  Swift Creek      N                  W - The reservoir
                               Reservoir                           level is currently
                                                                   3.6 feet below the
                                                                   top of the dam.

  4041035     Appomattox River Lake Chesdin     N                  B -The reservoir
              Water Authority                                      level is currently
                                                                   flowing over the top
                                                                   of the dam. There are
                                                                   no drought related
                                                                   restrictions on the
                                                                   production of the
                                                                   WTP.

  4075735     James River      Beaverdam Creek  V                  S - the water level
              Correctional     and the James                       in Beaverdam Creek is
              Center           River                               currently 2 inches
                                                                   above the dam. Water
                                                                   conservation is still
                                                                   being practiced to
                                                                   some degree. The
                                                                   average WTP
                                                                   production was 0.761
                                                                   mgd for February
                                                                   2002.

  4075630     Pagebrook                         N                  B - Sydnor is no
              (Goochland)                                          longer hauling water.

  4073311     Gloucester       Beaverdam        N                  B -The Beaverdam
                               Reservoir                           Reservoir water
                                                                   overflow elevation is
                                                                   40.5. The reservoir
                                                                   is full and
                                                                   overflowing. The
                                                                   current water level
                                                                   is 40.65. Note that
                                                                   about a million
                                                                   gallons of water is
                                                                   allowed to flow
                                                                   through the reservoir
                                                                   every day.

  4760100     City of Richmond James River      N                  S - The James River
                                                                   is still very low for
                                                                   this time of year,
                                                                   but Richmond is
                                                                   having no problems
                                                                   with water
                                                                   withdrawals. We are
                                                                   not aware of any use
                                                                   restrictions in place
                                                                   in the Richmond area.
  ----------- ---------------- ---------------- ------------------ ---------------------

  ----------- ---------------- ---------------- ------------------ ---------------------
              **Culpeper Field                  N-No               B-Better
              Office**                                             

              **March 7,                        M-Mandatory        S-Stable/Same
              2002**                                               

                                                V-Voluntary        W-Worse

                                                                   

  **PWSID**   **Waterworks**   **Source Name**  **Restrictions**   **Situation**

  6033425     Lake Caroline    Lake Caroline    N                  Lake Caroline is 2
                                                                   feet below normal. No
                                                                   conservation measures
                                                                   in place. (B)

  6177280,    Spotsylvania     Ni River Res.,   V                  Spotsylvania County
  6177300     County           Motts Run                           declared a water
                                                                   emergency in mid
                                                                   November and
                                                                   instituted voluntary
                                                                   conservation. Ni
                                                                   River Reservoir is
                                                                   over 6.5 feet below
                                                                   normal. Motts Run
                                                                   Reservoir is 10 feet
                                                                   below normal and is
                                                                   releasing water
                                                                   occasionally to
                                                                   Rappahannock River
                                                                   for withdrawal by
                                                                   Motts Run WTP. (W)

  6630050     City of          Mott\'s Run      V                  City of
              Fredericksburg                                       Fredericksburg
                                                                   (consecutive system
                                                                   to Spotsylvania
                                                                   County) has asked for
                                                                   voluntary
                                                                   conservation based on
                                                                   Spotsylvania
                                                                   County\'s action.(S)

  6179100,    Stafford County  Smith Lake, Abel V                  Stafford County has
  6179775                      Lake                                asked residents to
                                                                   voluntarily conserve
                                                                   water. Smith Lake is
                                                                   12 feet below normal
                                                                   and Abel Lake is over
                                                                   5 feet below normal.
                                                                   Dept. of Utilities is
                                                                   scheduled to ask
                                                                   Board of Supervisors
                                                                   (on 3/5/02) to
                                                                   consider \"limiting
                                                                   non-essential water
                                                                   usage\"..They will
                                                                   put out a press
                                                                   release
                                                                   accordingly\...(W)

  6061200     Fauquier County  Marshall         N                  Low water levels in
                               Waterworks                          existing wells
                                                                   resulted in water
                                                                   hauling to system in
                                                                   January 2002. New
                                                                   well brought on-line
                                                                   in late January has
                                                                   alleviated shortage
                                                                   problem.

                                                                   

              Notes:                                               

              1\. PD 8 - No                                        
              surface water or                                     
              groundwater                                          
              supply problems                                      
              or conservation                                      
              plans in effect                                      
              at this time.                                        

              3\. PD 9 - No                                        
              surface water                                        
              problems known                                       
              at this time.                                        

              4\. PD 16 - No                                       
              groundwater                                          
              problems known                                       
              at this time.                                        
  ----------- ---------------- ---------------- ------------------ ---------------------

+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
|     | **Danville    |                | N-No   | B-Better           |
|     | Field Office  |                |        |                    |
|     | 3/6/2002**    |                | M-Man  | S-Stable/Same      |
|     |               |                | datory |                    |
|     |               |                |        | W-Worse            |
|     |               |                | V-Vol  |                    |
|     |               |                | untary |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| **P | *             | **Source       | **Re   | **Situation**      |
| WSI | *Waterworks** | Name**         | strict |                    |
| D** |               |                | ions** |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Amelia        | Well           | N      | B-No reported      |
| 007 | Academy       | No.1(bored)    |        | problems since     |
| 030 |               |                |        | October            |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of       | Buffalo River  | N      | B - River has      |
| 009 | Amherst       |                |        | overflow, level up |
| 050 |               |                |        | slightly with      |
|     |               |                |        | 1.2\" weekend rain |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Amherst       | Graham Creek   | N      | S - Drawing        |
| 009 | County        | Res., Harris   |        | completely from    |
| 250 | Service       | Creek          |        | creek - reservoir  |
|     | Authority     |                |        | 3\" low - received |
|     |               |                |        | over 1\" of rain   |
|     |               |                |        | on weekend         |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Eagle Eyrie   | Unnamed        | N      | W - 4\'2\" below   |
| 019 |               | Reservoir      |        | overflow - level   |
| 250 |               |                |        | still dropping,    |
|     |               |                |        | even with rain on  |
|     |               |                |        | weekend, but still |
|     |               |                |        | drawing from       |
|     |               |                |        | uppermost intake   |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | High Point    | Smith Mountain | N      | B - Lake level up  |
| 019 | Subdivision   | Lake           |        | slightly with      |
| 400 |               |                |        | weekend rain, but  |
|     |               |                |        | still 4-5\' down   |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of       | Great Creek    | N      | S-Great Creek      |
| 025 | Lawrenceville |                |        | Reservoir full     |
| 450 |               |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Buckingham    | Troublesome    | N      | B-Reservoir full   |
| 029 | County        | Creek          |        |                    |
| 085 | Waterworks    | Reservoir      |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of       | Staunton       | N      | S - River level    |
| 031 | Altavista     | River, Reed    |        | OK, Creek still a  |
| 050 |               | Creek          |        | little low         |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | CCUSA         | Otter River    | N      | B - River is full  |
| 031 |               |                |        |                    |
| 150 |               |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of       | Phelps Creek   | N      | S - Reservoir has  |
| 031 | Brookneal     | Reservoir      |        | 1/2\" overflow     |
| 175 |               |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Dan River,    | Falling River  | N      | B - River up       |
| 031 | Inc. -        |                |        | slightly with      |
| 200 | Brookneal     |                |        | weekend rain       |
|     | Plant         |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of Rocky | Blackwater     | N      | W - dropped from   |
| 067 | Mount         | Creek          |        | 1\" overflow at    |
| 840 |               |                |        | check dam          |
|     |               |                |        | beginning Feb. to  |
|     |               |                |        | 1/4\" now          |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of       | Banister River | N      | S                  |
| 083 | Halifax       |                |        |                    |
| 550 |               |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Fieldcrest    | Smith River    | N      | S - flow subject   |
| 089 | Cannon WTP    |                |        | to release from    |
| 376 |               |                |        | Philpott           |
|     |               |                |        | Dam-understood     |
|     |               |                |        | release has been   |
|     |               |                |        | reduced recently   |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Marrowbone    | Marrowbone     | N      | S- flow over check |
| 089 | Cr. WTP       | Creek          |        | dam \~2\" which is |
| 487 |               |                |        | lower than last    |
|     |               |                |        | report and         |
|     |               |                |        | reflects rain      |
|     |               |                |        | received over      |
|     |               |                |        | 3/1-3/3            |
|     |               |                |        | weekend-still      |
|     |               |                |        | pretty good for    |
|     |               |                |        | this source        |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Upper Smith   | Smith River    | N      | S - flow subject   |
| 089 | River WTP     |                |        | to release from    |
| 852 |               |                |        | Philpott Dam-      |
|     |               |                |        | understood release |
|     |               |                |        | has been reduced   |
|     |               |                |        | recently           |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of       | Flat Rock      | N      | B-Reservoir full   |
| 111 | Kenbridge     | Creek &        |        |                    |
| 450 |               | reservoir      |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of       | Nottoway Falls | N      | B-Reservoir full   |
| 111 | Victoria      | & Lunenburg    |        |                    |
| 800 |               | Lake           |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of       | Kerr Lake      | N      | B                  |
| 117 | Clarksville   |                |        |                    |
| 310 |               |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of South | Meherrin River | N      | S                  |
| 117 | Hill          |                |        |                    |
| 800 |               |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of Crewe | Lazerretto     | N      | B-Reservoir full   |
| 135 |               | Creek/Crystal  |        |                    |
| 160 |               | Lake           |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of       | South Mayo     | N      | S- improved some   |
| 141 | Stuart        | River          |        | with recent        |
| 640 |               |                |        | rainfall over      |
|     |               |                |        | 3/1-3/3 weekend    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of       | Cherrystone    | N      | S - reservoir and  |
| 143 | Chatham       | Creek          |        | stream levels are  |
| 114 |               |                |        | steady             |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of       | Georges Creek  | N      | S - Reservoir is   |
| 143 | Gretna        |                |        | full               |
| 210 |               |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | City of       | Stoney Creek   | N      | S - Reservoir has  |
| 515 | Bedford       | Reservoir      |        | 1 - 1.5\" overflow |
| 050 |               |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | City of       | Dan River,     | N      | *S -*              |
| 590 | Danville      | Schofield Dam  |        |                    |
| 100 |               |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | City of       | Pedlar         | N      | B - Pedlar         |
| 680 | Lynchburg     | Reservoir      |        | Reservoir is about |
| 200 |               |                |        | 140\" down. City   |
|     |               |                |        | is drawing         |
|     |               |                |        | entirely from      |
|     |               |                |        | reservoir.         |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | City of       | Beaver Creek   | N      | S- reservoir level |
| 690 | Martinsville  | Reservoir      |        | down 6.3 feet as   |
| 400 |               |                |        | of 2/25 (is 0.2    |
|     |               |                |        | feet lower than    |
|     |               |                |        | previous report    |
|     |               |                |        | period) - however, |
|     |               |                |        | area received      |
|     |               |                |        | 1.18\" rain over   |
|     |               |                |        | 3/1 - 3/3 weekend  |
|     |               |                |        | and level does not |
|     |               |                |        | reflect this       |
|     |               |                |        | additional rain    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
| 5   | Town of South | Dan River      | N      | S - using both     |
| 780 | Boston        |                |        | intakes            |
| 600 |               |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
|     |               |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+
|     | Notes:        |                |        |                    |
+-----+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------+

##### APPENDIX K

The following is educational information provided by Agriculture &
Natural Resource Extension Agents to agricultural producers relative to
coping with drought:

Livestock producers are encouraged to use the Standardized Performance
Analysis that measures the production and financial performance of their
enterprise. This tool is especially helpful during a drought year.

Agents stress the importance of good management of cropping systems
(field selection, Integrated Pest Management Practices, etc.) to reduce
the affects of drought.

Agents have helped beef and dairy producers develop rations using
alternative feeds such as corn gluten, hominy, crop residues, soybean
hay and grass hays. Another recommendation is the use of soybean and
peanut hulls mixed with grains and fed with low quality fiber sources
i.e. corn fodder to provide appropriate nutrition.

The Virginia Tech Forage Testing Lab has been used for diagnostic work
to determine if drought stressed crops can be fed to animals or if they
are too high in nitrates/nitrites.

Drought and irrigation management has been included in field days.

Recommendations have been made on reseeding pastures and hayfields.
Fewer nutrients are required as a result of drought; they are retained
in the soil. Pasture renovation programs have been conducted (fall
fertilization to maintain sod). Also, summer perennial grasses are
recommended in the mix of pasture systems to enhance summer performance.

Agents are recommending rotational grazing to maintain pastures.

Agents have recommended that farmers take inventory of feed and
recommended purchasing the amounts needed for the winter months. Agents
have run rations to help farmers predict feed needs.

Recommendations have been made to cull low producing cattle. Grouping
and feeding cattle according to their nutrient requirements is
recommended.

Agents have recommended selecting grazing varieties of rye that are more
suitable for late fall and winter grazing. Also, over seeding pastures
and hay fields with winter grains enhances early spring grazing and hay
production.

Agents recommend no-till planting to reduce loss of moisture in soil.