1 / 29

2018 Kentucky Soil & Water Quality State Cost Share Training

2018 Kentucky Soil & Water Quality State Cost Share Training. Jay Nelson Kentucky Division of Conservation Environmental Scientist IV. Purpose of Redesigning the Program.

smoot
Télécharger la présentation

2018 Kentucky Soil & Water Quality State Cost Share Training

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. 2018 Kentucky Soil & Water Quality State Cost Share Training Jay Nelson Kentucky Division of Conservation Environmental Scientist IV

  2. Purpose of Redesigning the Program • The program has not been significantly changed in the 25+ years since its creation, despite rules, regulations, policies, and other pertinent programs changing around it. • There were two primary objectives when looking at the redesign: 1. We wanted the program to interact, and “speak the same language” as other sister programs around it for ease of use. 2. We wanted to have the ability to manipulate the program from year to year with regards to prioritizing and/or selecting criteria to focus on so as not to “compete” with those sister programs. • We also wanted to have an updated and improved online sign-up/scoring system. Primary goals within this system were simplifying data entry for field staff and more reliability and transparency in scoring criteria.

  3. New Application and Required Information • On the follow page is the final draft of the new hard copy of the state cost share application. • You will notice that overall, less information will be needed to be input. • We have tried to simplify the application process as much as possible. • We have been able to integrate GIS into the system this year, thus eliminating the need of answering some of the spatially based questions (i.e. watershed info, etc.). • We will also discuss scoring criteria with regards to the practices, questions, etc. later in the presentation.

  4. Basic Program OrganizationNew Practice Structure • One of the primary challenges that we had was correlating how we defined a “practice”, while also considering our state regulation governing the program and with what our sister programs (EQIP) call practices. • Based on those definitions/criteria, we have come up with a program that will now have 6 primary best management practices as defined by the 416 KAR 1:010 definition of a “practice”. • In addition to the six primary BMP categories, we will also have a dedicated Environmental Grant practice and may have additional program-specific practices (for example KRCPP1).

  5. 416 KAR 1:010 ConsiderationsPractice Purpose & Limitations

  6. 416 KAR 1:010 ConsiderationsScoring Section Only

  7. The New Practices Will Be: • Livestock: Animal Feeding Operation BMP • Livestock: Pastureland BMP • Cropland BMP • Forestland BMP • Streambank BMP • Farmstead BMP • Kentucky Environmental Grant

  8. Basic Program OrganizationNew Practice Structure • Under each of these broad practice headings, we will have the traditional EQIP practice codes (with regards to KSCS, these will be referred to as “practice components”). So, what this is designed to do is for the planner to be able to tailor a practice for the specific needs of an operation without the traditional limits of our previous “cookie cutter” practices. • Even though this looks more like EQIP, we will retain our unique state cost share practices under this model with specs included for non-EQIP component practices such as the Winter Heavy Use Feeding Area. Other unique practices may be added in the future.

  9. Basic Program OrganizationNew Practice StructurePractice Component Worksheet

  10. Basic Program OrganizationNew Practice Structure • With this new model and practice categories, this program will more closely fit within the within the framework of both EQIP and the language found in Ag Water Quality Plans. • In addition, this new model, although it looks more like EQIP, will allow us to concentrate on different criteria from year to year, thus allowing us to have a complimentary program to EQIP without directly competing with it. • Now we will move to describe the practice structure and scoring criteria in more detail.

  11. Previous Manual Practice Layout

  12. New Manual Practice Layout

  13. New Manual Practice Layout

  14. New Program ProcessSupporting Documents • The documents utilized within the program will also be organized differently than in the past. These documents include: • The State Cost Share Manual • The State Cost Share Manual Supplement • The State Cost Share Application (with instructions) • The State Cost Share Practice Worksheet • The State Cost Share Payment Form (with instructions) • Technical Guidance Sheets (e.g. Winter HUA)

  15. New Policy for 2018 Kentucky Soil &Water Quality State Cost Share Training

  16. There are a few notable policy changes for program year 2018. • Applicant screening questions • New financial limitations • Number of applications per applicant Notable New Policy in 2018

  17. Notable New Policy in 2018Applicant Screening Questions

  18. After a review of 416 KAR 1:010 Section 10(6) Limitations On Awards, it was determined that some existing practice limitations were not following the requirements of this regulation. • For that reason, the following adjustments were made to the funding limitations on the specific documented practices: • Streambank Stabilization was reduced from $20,000 to $7,500. • Winter Heavy Use Feeding Area was reduced from $15,000 to $7,500. Notable New Policy in 2018New Financial Limitations

  19. What these limits do is essentially make all practices have a limit of $7,500/year/applicant, except for the animal waste storage practices, which continue to have a limit of $20,000/year/applicant. • Those animal waste storage practices with the higher limit are: Animal Mortality Facility (316), Composting Facility (317), Waste Facility Closure (360), Waste Storage Facility (313), Waste Transfer (634), Waste Treatment Lagoon (359) Notable New Policy in 2018New Financial Limitations

  20. For the previously referenced interpretation on limitations on award, this program year there will also be a limit to one application per producer/operation. There will no longer be partial payments allowed under this program. • Keep in mind, with the reorganization and definition of practices, this will only limit a landowner to the practice category in which is being applied for. • For example, an applicant may apply for the Livestock: Pastureland BMP and select any combination of practice components within that practice category until the maximum $7,500 is reached. • However, that same producer may not apply for the Livestock: Pastureland BMP and also apply for the Cropland BMP. Notable New Policy in 2018New Financial Limitations

  21. We will likely be announcing a cut-off for this round of applications in the coming weeks. Nothing is set at present, but it will likely be by the end of June. • As we begin work on this process, please keep in mind that we have less and less technical personnel working these applications all of the time. Be patient, and utilize local resources as much as possible. Notable New Policy in 2018Technical Support and Timing

  22. One thing that we are discussing within the Division is to have the ability to have more than one cut-off during the program year. This new program is going to be truly continuous, as applications may be entered at any time during the year, and will be ready for the next scoring round. If you are concerned about the upcoming cut-off date and having technical assistance by then, we will be having more during the year so it is not as crucial to attempt to get everything squeezed into the next month. Notable New Policy in 2018Technical Support and Timing

  23. Environmental Grants

  24. Historically, Environmental Grants were handled separately from traditional State Cost Share. This occurred to the point that it almost seemed to be a different program. • In reality, Environmental Grants fall under the State Cost Share Program and are governed by the same regulation 416 KAR 1:010. Essentially, Environmental Grants are simply a stand alone practice within the State Cost Share Program. EnvironmentalGrants

  25. For this reason, the Environmental Grant shall be treated the same as any other practice applied for under State Cost Share. • The only difference is that they will not be entered into the online system, but submitted to KDOC electronically (email). • There will be scoring criteria developed from regulatory requirements. The applications will be reviewed based on this criteria. • In addition, the $7,500/year/applicant also applies to Environmental Grants. Therefore, there will be a limit of one application per program year per county. Environmental Grants

  26. Environmental Grants

  27. Environmental GrantsDRAFT Scoring Criteria

  28. Questions?

More Related