# Practice List

Practice:
102 - Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan - Written


Practice:
104 - Nutrient Management Plan - Written


Practice:
114 - Integrated Pest Management Plan - Written


Practice:
118 - Irrigation Water Management Plan - Written


Practice:
122 - Agricultural Energy Management Plan – Headquarters


Practice:
124 - Agricultural Energy Management Plan – Landscape - Written


Practice:
126 - Comprehensive Air Quality Management Plan - Written


Practice:
130 - Drainage Water Management Plan - Written


Practice:
134 - Conservation Plan Supporting Transition from Irrigation to Dryland Plan - Written


Practice:
138 - Conservation Plan Supporting Organic Transition - Written


Practice:
142 - Fish and Wildlife Habitat Plan - Written


Practice:
154 - IPM Herbicide Resistance Weed Conservation Plan - Written


Practice:
201 - Edge-of-Field Water Quality Monitoring-Data Collection and Evaluation


Practice:
202 - Edge-of-Field Water Quality Monitoring-System Installation


Practice:
297 - Feral Swine Management Conservation Activity - Interim


Practice:
318 - Short Term Storage of Animal Waste and By Products


Practice:
319 - On-Farm Secondary Containment Facility


Practice:
329 - Residue and Tillage Management, No-Till


Practice:
331 - Contour Orchard and Other Perennial Crops


Practice:
333 - Amending Soil Properties with Gypsum Products


Practice:
345 - Residue and Tillage Management, Reduced Till


Practice:
368 - Emergency Animal Mortality Management


Practice:
373 - Dust Control on Unpaved Roads and Surfaces


Practice:
375 - Dust Control from Animal Activity on Open Lot Surfaces


Practice:
376 - Field Operations Emissions Reduction


Practice:
395 - Stream Habitat Improvement and Management


Practice:
400 - Bivalve Aquaculture Gear and Biofouling Control


Practice:
441 - Irrigation System, Microirrigation


Practice:
443 - Irrigation System, Surface and Subsurface


Practice:
447 - Irrigation System, Tailwater Recovery


Practice:
450 - Anionic Polyacrylamide (PAM) Application


Practice:
453 - Land Reclamation, Landslide Treatment


Practice:
455 - Land Reclamation, Toxic Discharge Control


Practice:
520 - Pond Sealing or Lining, Compacted Soil Treatment


Practice:
521A - Pond Sealing or Lining, Flexible Membrane


Practice:
521B - Pond Sealing or Lining, Soil Dispersant


Practice:
521C - Pond Sealing or Lining, Bentonite Sealant


Practice:
521D - Pond Sealing or Lining, Compacted Clay Treatment


Practice:
543 - Land Reclamation, Abandoned Mined Land


Practice:
544 - Land Reclamation, Currently Mined Land


Practice:
566 - Recreation Land Grading and Shaping


Practice:
580 - Streambank and Shoreline Protection


Practice:
591 - Amendments for the Treatment of Agricultural Waste


Practice:
610 - Salinity and Sodic Soil Management


Practice:
643 - Restoration of Rare or Declining Natural Communities


Practice:
644 - Wetland Wildlife Habitat Management


Practice:
645 - Upland Wildlife Habitat Management


Practice:
646 - Shallow Water Development and Management


Practice:
647 - Early Successional Habitat Development/Management


Practice:
654 - Road/Trail/Landing Closure and Treatment


Practice:
713 - Fueliing Facility, Above Ground Storage


Practice:
730 - Controlled Stream Access for Livestock Watering


Practice:
737 - Reduced Water and Energy Coffee Conveyance System


Practice:
740 - Pond Sealing and Lining, Soil Cement


Practice:
752 - Orchard and Vinyard Air Qualtiy Management


Practice:
772 - Organic Sorbents for the remediation of Oil-Contaminated Soils


Practice:
780 - Irrigation Water Conveyance, Corrugated Metal Pipeline


Practice:
790 - Grade Stabilization Structure - Tire Bales


Practice:
796 - Milking Center Wastewater Treatment


Practice:
800 - Controlling Existing Flowing Wells


Practice:
802 - Storage Facililty - Nursery Substrate


Practice:
B000CPL1 - Crop Bundle#1 - Precision Ag, No till


Practice:
B000CPL2 - Crop Bundle#2 - Precision Ag, Reduced till


Practice:
B000CPL3 - Crop Bundle#3 - Soil health rotation, No till


Practice:
B000CPL4 - Crop Bundle#4 - Soil health rotation, Reduced till


Practice:
B000CPL5 - Crop Bundle#5 - Soil Health Assessment, No till


Practice:
B000CPL6 - Crop Bundle#6 - Soil Health Assessment, Reduced till


Practice:
B000CPL7 - Crop Bundle#7 - Soil Health -"Organic"


Practice:
B000CPL8 - Crop Bundle#8 - "Organic", Water erosion


Practice:
B000CPL9 - Crop Bundle#9 - "Organic", Wind erosion


Practice:
B000MRB1 - MRBI Bundle#1 - Irrigated Cropland


Practice:
B000MRB2 - MRBI Bundle#2 - Non-Irrigated Cropland #1


Practice:
B000MRB3 - MRBI Bundle#3 - Non-Irrigated Cropland #2


Practice:
B000MRB4 - MRBI Bundle#4 - Cropland with Water Bodies, No till


Practice:
B000MRB5 - MRBI Bundle#5 - Cropland with Water Bodies, Reduced till


Practice:
B000PST3 - Pasture Bundle#3 -- Soil Health


Practice:
B000PST4 - Pasture Bundle#4 - Monarch butterfly


Practice:
B000WLW - Working Lands for Wildlife Bundle


Practice:
E314133Z - Brush management for improved structure and composition


Practice:
E314134Z - Brush management that maintains or enhances wildlife or fish habitat


Practice:
E315132Z - Herbaceous weed control for desired plant communities/habitats consistent with the ecological site


Practice:
E315133Z - Herbaceous weed control (inadequate structure and comp) for desired plant communities/habitats


Practice:
E315134Z - Herbaceous weed control (plant pest pressures) for desired plant communities/habitats


Practice:
E327136Z1 - Conservation cover to provide food habitat for pollinators and beneficial insects


Practice:
E327136Z2 - Establish Monarch butterfly habitat


Practice:
E327137Z - Conservation cover to provide cover and shelter habitat for pollinators and beneficial insects


Practice:
E327139Z - Conservation cover to provide habitat continuity for pollinators and beneficial insects


Practice:
E328101I - Improved resource conserving crop rotation to reduce water erosion


Practice:
E328101R - Resource conserving crop rotation to reduce water erosion


Practice:
E328101Z - Conservation crop rotation on recently converted CRP grass/legume cover for water erosion


Practice:
E328102I - Improved resource conserving crop rotation to reduce wind erosion


Practice:
E328102R - Resource conserving crop rotation to reduce wind erosion


Practice:
E328102Z - Conservation crop rotation on recently converted CRP grass/legume cover for wind erosion


Practice:
E328106I - Improved resource conserving crop rotation for soil organic matter improvement


Practice:
E328106R - Resource conserving crop rotation for soil organic matter improvement


Practice:
E328106Z2 - Modifications to improve soil health and increase soil organic matter


Practice:
E328106Z3 - Conservation crop rotation on recently converted CRP grass/legume cover for SOM improvement


Practice:
E328107I - Improved resource conserving crop rotation to improve soil compaction


Practice:
E328107R - Resource conserving crop rotation to improve soil compaction


Practice:
E328109Z - Conservation crop rotation to reduce the concentration of salts


Practice:
E328134I - Improved resource conserving crop rotation to relieve plant pest pressure


Practice:
E328134R - Resource conserving crop rotation to relieve plant pest pressure


Practice:
E328136Z - Leave standing grain crops unharvested to benefit wildlife food sources


Practice:
E328137Z - Leave standing grain crops unharvested to benefit wildlife cover and shelter


Practice:
E329101Z - No till to reduce water erosion


Practice:
E329102Z - No till system to reduce wind erosion


Practice:
E329106Z - No till system to increase soil health and soil organic matter content


Practice:
E329114Z - No till to increase plant-available moisture: irrigation water


Practice:
E329115Z - No till to increase plant-available moisture: moisture management


Practice:
E329128Z - No till to reduce tillage induced particulate matter


Practice:
E333118Z - Apply gypsum products to improve surface WQ quality by reducing dissolved P conc in surface runoff


Practice:
E333119Z - Apply gypsum products to improve surface WQ by reducing dissolved P conc in subsurface drainage


Practice:
E333122Z - Apply gypsum to improve WQ, contaminants transported from manure/biosolid application-surface water


Practice:
E333123Z - Apply gypsum to improve WQ, contaminants transported from manure/biosolid application-ground water


Practice:
E334107Z - Controlled traffic farming to reduce compaction


Practice:
E338134Z - Strategic patch burning for grazing distribution/wildlife habitat (undesirable plant pressure)


Practice:
E338135Z - Strategically planned, patch burning for grazing distribution and wildlife habitat (fuel loading)


Practice:
E338140Z - Short-interval prescribed burning to promote a healthy herbaceous plant community


Practice:
E340101Z - Cover crop to reduce water erosion


Practice:
E340102Z - Cover crop to reduce wind erosion


Practice:
E340106Z1 - Intensive cover cropping to increase soil health and soil organic matter content


Practice:
E340106Z2 - Use of multi-species cover crops to improve soil health and increase soil organic matter


Practice:
E340106Z3 - Intensive cover cropping (orchard/vineyard floor) to increase soil health and SOM content


Practice:
E340106Z4 - Use of SHA to assist with development of cover crop mix to improve soil health and increase SOM


Practice:
E340107Z - Cover crop to minimize soil compaction


Practice:
E340118Z - Cover crop to reduce water quality degradation by utilizing excess soil nutrients-surface water


Practice:
E340119Z - Cover crop to reduce water quality degradation by utilizing excess soil nutrients-ground water


Practice:
E340134Z - Cover crop to suppress excessive weed pressures and break pest cycles


Practice:
E345101Z - Reduced tillage to reduce water erosion


Practice:
E345102Z - Reduced tillage to reduce wind erosion


Practice:
E345106Z - Reduced tillage to increase soil health and soil organic matter content


Practice:
E345114Z - Reduced tillage to increase plant-available moisture: irrigation water


Practice:
E345115Z - Reduced tillage to increase plant-available moisture: moisture management


Practice:
E345128Z - Reduced tillage to reduce tillage induced particulate matter


Practice:
E345144Z - Reduced tillage to reduce energy use


Practice:
E374144Z1 - Install variable frequency drive(s) on pump(s)


Practice:
E374144Z2 - Switch fuel source for pump motor(s)


Practice:
E376128Z - Modify field operations to reduce particulate matter


Practice:
E381133Z - Silvopasture for wildlife habitat (structure and composition)


Practice:
E381137Z - Silvopasture for wildlife habitat (cover and shelter)


Practice:
E382136Z - Incorporating "wildlife friendly" fencing for connectivity of wildlife food resources


Practice:
E383135Z - Grazing-maintained fuel break to reduce the risk of fire


Practice:
E384135Z - Biochar production from woody residue


Practice:
E386101Z - Enhanced field borders to reduce water induced erosion along the edge(s) of a field


Practice:
E386102Z - Enhanced field borders to reduce wind induced erosion along the windward side(s) of a field


Practice:
E386106Z - Enhanced field borders to increase carbon storage along the edge(s) of the field


Practice:
E386128Z - Enhanced field borders to decrease particulate emissions along the edge(s) of the field


Practice:
E386136Z - Enhanced field border to provide wildlife food for pollinators along the edge(s) of a field


Practice:
E386137Z - Enhanced field border to provide wildlife cover or shelter along the edge(s) of a field


Practice:
E386139Z - Enhanced field border to provide wildlife habitat continuity along the edge(s) of a field


Practice:
E390118Z - Increase riparian herbaceous cover width for nutrient reduction


Practice:
E390126Z - Increase riparian herbaceous cover width to reduce sediment loading


Practice:
E390136Z - Increase riparian herbaceous cover width to enhance wildlife habitat


Practice:
E391118Z - Increase riparian forest buffer width for nutrient reduction


Practice:
E391126Z - Increase riparian forest buffer width to reduce sediment loading


Practice:
E391127Z - Increase stream shading for stream temperature reduction


Practice:
E391136Z - Increase riparian forest buffer width to enhance wildlife habitat


Practice:
E393118Z - Extend existing filter strip to reduce excess nutrients in surface water


Practice:
E393122Z - Extend existing filter strip to reduce excess pathogens and chemicals in surface water


Practice:
E393126Z - Extend existing filter strip to reduce excess sediment in surface water


Practice:
E395137X - Stream habitat improvement through placement of woody biomass


Practice:
E399137X - Fishpond management for native aquatic and terrestrial species


Practice:
E449114Z1 - Advanced IWM--Soil moisture is monitored, recorded, and used in decision making


Practice:
E449114Z2 - Advanced IWM--Weather is monitored, recorded and used in decision making


Practice:
E449114Z3 - Complete pumping plant eval for all pumps on a farm to determine the VFD potential


Practice:
E449114Z4 - Intermittent flooding of rice fields


Practice:
E449144Z - Complete pumping plant evaluation for all pumps on a farm.


Practice:
E472118Z - Manage livestock access to streams/ditches/other waterbodies to reduce nutrients in surface water


Practice:
E472122Z - Manage livestock access to streams/ditches/other waterbodies to reduce pathogens in surface water


Practice:
E484106Z - Mulching to improve soil health


Practice:
E511137Z1 - Harvest of crops (hay or small grains) using measures that allow desired species to flush or escape


Practice:
E511137Z2 - Forage harvest management that helps maintain or improve wildlife habitat (cover and shelter)


Practice:
E511139Z1 - Enhanced wildlife habitat on expired grass/legume covered CRP acres


Practice:
E511139Z2 - Forage harvest management that helps maintain wildlife habitat continuity (space)


Practice:
E512101Z1 - Cropland conversion to grass-based agriculture to reduce water erosion


Practice:
E512101Z2 - Forage and biomass planting for water erosion to improve soil health


Practice:
E512102Z - Cropland conversion to grass-based agriculture to reduce wind erosion


Practice:
E512106Z1 - Cropland conversion to grass-based agriculture for soil organic matter improvement


Practice:
E512106Z2 - Forage plantings that can help increase organic matter in depleted soils


Practice:
E512126Z - Cropland conversion to grass-based agriculture to reduce sediment loading


Practice:
E512132Z1 - Forage and biomass planting that produces feedstock for biofuels or energy production


Practice:
E512132Z2 - Native grasses or legumes in forage base to improve plant productivity and health


Practice:
E512133Z1 - Native grasses or legumes in forage base to improve plant community structure and composition


Practice:
E512133Z2 - Forage plantings that enhance bird habitat (structure and composition)


Practice:
E512136Z1 - Establish pollinator and/or beneficial insect food habitat


Practice:
E512136Z2 - Native grass or legumes in forage base to provide wildlife food


Practice:
E512137Z - Forage plantings that enhance bird habitat (cover and shelter)


Practice:
E512138Z - Establish wildlife corridors to enhance access to water


Practice:
E512139Z1 - Establish wildlife corridors to provide habitat continuity


Practice:
E512139Z2 - Establish pollinator and/or beneficial insect habitat continuity (space)


Practice:
E512139Z3 - Establish Monarch butterfly habitat in pastures


Practice:
E512140Z - Native grasses or legumes in forage base


Practice:
E528101Z - Improved grazing management for water erosion through monitoring activities


Practice:
E528104Z - Grazing management that protects sensitive areas from gully erosion


Practice:
E528105Z - Prescribed grazing that improves or maintains riparian and watershed function-erosion


Practice:
E528107Z1 - Improved grazing management for soil compaction through monitoring activities


Practice:
E528107Z2 - Improved grazing management for soil compaction on rangeland through monitoring activities


Practice:
E528118Z1 - Prescribed grazing that maintains/improves riparian/watershed function impairment from nutrients


Practice:
E528118Z2 - Grazing management that protects sensitive areas-surface water from nutrients


Practice:
E528119Z - Grazing management that protects sensitive areas-ground water from nutrients


Practice:
E528122Z - Prescribed grazing that maintains/improves riparian/watershed function-pathogens/chemicals


Practice:
E528126Z - Prescribed grazing that maintains/improves riparian/watershed function-min sediment in surface water


Practice:
E528127Z - Prescribed grazing-water temp


Practice:
E528132Z1 - Improved grazing mgmt for plant productivity/health through monitoring


Practice:
E528132Z2 - Stockpiling cool season forage to improve plant productivity and health


Practice:
E528132Z3 - Improved grazing management for plant productivity/health through monitoring


Practice:
E528133Z1 - Stockpiling cool season forage to improve structure and composition.


Practice:
E528133Z2 - Grazing management for improving quantity/quality of plant structure/composition for wildlife


Practice:
E528133Z3 - Improved grazing management for plant structure and composition through monitoring activities


Practice:
E528134Z - Improved grazing management that reduces undesirable plant pest pressure through monitoring


Practice:
E528136Z1 - Grazing management for improving quantity and quality of food for wildlife


Practice:
E528136Z2 - Incorporating wildlife refuge areas in contingency plans for wildlife food


Practice:
E528136Z3 - Grazing management that improves Monarch butterfly habitat


Practice:
E528137Z1 - Grazing management for improving quantity and quality of cover and shelter for wildlife


Practice:
E528137Z2 - Incorporating wildlife refuge areas in contingency plans for prescribed grazing-cover/shelter


Practice:
E528138Z - Incorporating wildlife refuge areas in contingency plans for prescribed grazing-water access


Practice:
E528140Z1 - Maintaining quantity and quality of forage for animal health and productivity


Practice:
E528140Z2 - Incorporating wildlife refuge areas in contingency plans for livestock feed and forage


Practice:
E550106Z - Range planting for increasing/maintaining organic matter


Practice:
E550136Z - Range planting for improving forage, browse, or cover for wildlife


Practice:
E554118Z1 - Installation of end of pipe or ditch treatment for phosphorus


Practice:
E554118Z2 - Installation of a saturated buffer drain outlet


Practice:
E554118Z3 - Installation of end of pipe or ditch treatment for nitrogen


Practice:
E554138X - Extend the periods of soil saturation or shallow ponding for wildlife


Practice:
E580105Z - Stream corridor bank stability improvement


Practice:
E580137Z - Stream corridor bank vegetation improvement


Practice:
E590118X - Reduce risks of nutrient losses to surface water by utilizing precision ag technologies


Practice:
E590118Z - Improving nutrient uptake efficiency and reducing risk of nutrient losses to surface water


Practice:
E590119Z - Improving nutrient uptake efficiency and reducing risk of nutrient losses to groundwater


Practice:
E590130Z - Improving nutrient uptake efficiency and reducing risks to air quality - emissions of GHGs


Practice:
E595116X - Reduce risk of pesticides in surface water by utilizing precision pesticide application techniques


Practice:
E595116Z - Reduce risk of pesticides in surface water by utilizing IPM PAMS techniques


Practice:
E595129Z - Reduce ozone precursor emissions related to pesticides by utilizing IPM PAMS techniques


Practice:
E612101Z - Cropland conversion to trees or shrubs for long term water erosion control


Practice:
E612102Z - Cropland conversion to trees or shrubs for long term wind erosion control


Practice:
E612126Z - Cropland conversion to trees or shrubs for long term improvement of water quality


Practice:
E612130Z - Planting for high carbon sequestration rate


Practice:
E612132Z - Establishing tree/shrub species to restore native plant communities


Practice:
E612133X1 - Adding food-producing trees and shrubs to existing plantings


Practice:
E612136Z - Tree/shrub planting for wildlife food


Practice:
E612137Z - Tree/shrub planting for wildlife cover


Practice:
E643132X - Restoration of sensitive coastal vegetative communities


Practice:
E643139X - Creating native plant refugia


Practice:
E645137Z - Reduction of attractants to human-subsidized predators in sensitive wildlife species habitat


Practice:
E646136Z1 - Close structures to capture/retain rainfall to improve food for waterfowl/wading birds during winter


Practice:
E646136Z2 - Extend retention of rainfall to provide food for late winter habitat


Practice:
E646136Z3 - Shorebird habitat, late season shallow water with manipulation to improve food sources


Practice:
E646136Z4 - Shorebird habitat, extended late season shallow water with manipulation to improve food sources


Practice:
E646137X - Renovate small, shallow pothole and playa sites which may seasonally hold water


Practice:
E646137Z1 - Close structures to capture and retain rainfall to improve cover and shelter for birds during winter


Practice:
E646137Z2 - Extend retention of captured rainfall to provide enhanced cover and shelter for late winter habitat


Practice:
E646137Z3 - Shorebird habitat, late season shallow water with manipulation to improve cover and shelter


Practice:
E646137Z4 - Extended late season shallow water with manipulation to improve cover and shelter


Practice:
E646138Z1 - Close structures to capture and retain rainfall to provide water for birds during winter


Practice:
E646138Z2 - Extend retention of captured rainfall to provide late winter water habitat


Practice:
E646138Z3 - Shorebird habitat, late season shallow water with manipulation


Practice:
E646138Z4 - Shorebird habitat, extended late season shallow water with manipulation


Practice:
E646139Z1 - Close structures to capture and retain rainfall for birds to improve habitat continuity


Practice:
E646139Z2 - Extend retention of captured rainfall to provide habitat continuity during late winter


Practice:
E646139Z3 - Shorebird habitat, late season shallow water with manipulation to enhance habitat continuity


Practice:
E646139Z4 - Shorebird habitat, extended late season shallow water with manipulation - habitat continuity


Practice:
E647136Z1 - Manipulate vegetation on fields where rainfall is to be captured and retained-food


Practice:
E647136Z2 - Provide early successional habitat between first rice crop and ratoon crop-food


Practice:
E647136Z3 - Establish and maintenance of moist soil vegetation on cropland edges to increase wildlife food


Practice:
E647137Z1 - Manipulate vegetation on fields where rainfall is to be captured and retained-cover/shelter


Practice:
E647137Z2 - Establish and maintenance of moist soil vegetation on cropland edges to increase cover/shelter


Practice:
E647139Z1 - Establish/maintain habitat continuity, naturally occurring vegetation in ditches/ditch bank borders


Practice:
E647139Z2 - Provide early successional habitat between first rice crop and ratoon crop-continuity


Practice:
E666106Z1 - Implementing sustainable practices for pine straw raking


Practice:
E666106Z2 - Maintaining and improving forest soil quality


Practice:
E666107Z - Maintaining and improving forest soil quality by limiting compaction


Practice:
E666115Z1 - Converting loblolly and slash pine plantations to longleaf pine to retain soil moisture


Practice:
E666115Z2 - Enhance development of the forest understory to improve site moisture


Practice:
E666118Z - Enhance development of the forest understory to capture nutrients in surface water


Practice:
E666119Z - Enhance development of the forest understory to capture nutrients -ground water


Practice:
E666130Z - Increase on-site carbon storage


Practice:
E666132Z1 - Crop tree management for mast production


Practice:
E666132Z2 - Reduce forest stand density to improve a degraded plant community


Practice:
E666133X - Forest Stand Improvement to rehabilitate degraded hardwood stands


Practice:
E666133Z1 - Creating structural diversity with patch openings


Practice:
E666133Z2 - Converting loblolly and slash pine plantations to longleaf pine with FSI and prescribed burning


Practice:
E666134Z - Enhance development of the forest understory to create conditions resistant to pests


Practice:
E666135Z1 - Reduce height of the forest understory to limit wildfire risk


Practice:
E666135Z2 - Reduce forest density and manage understory along roads to limit wildfire risk


Practice:
E666136Z1 - Reduce forest density and manage understory along roads to improve wildlife food sources


Practice:
E666136Z2 - Reduce forest stand density to improve wildlife food sources


Practice:
E666136Z3 - Create patch openings to enhance wildlife food sources and availability


Practice:
E666137Z1 - Snags, den trees, and coarse woody debris for wildlife habitat


Practice:
E666137Z2 - Summer roosting habitat for native forest-dwelling bat species


Practice:
E666137Z3 - Increase diversity in pine plantation monocultures


Practice:
E666137Z4 - Converting loblolly and slash pine plantations to longleaf pine to enhance wildlife habitat


Practice:
E666137Z5 - Implementing sustainable practices for pine straw raking to enhance wildlife habitat


Practice:
E666137Z6 - Create patch openings to enhance wildlife cover and shelter


Practice:
E666137Z7 - Enhance development of the forest understory to provide wildlife cover and shelter


Practice:
128 - Agricultural Energy Management Plan - Written


Practice:
E449114Z5 - Complete pumping plant evaluation for all existing pumps on a farm.


Practice:
E449114Z6 - Automated Intermittent flood irrigation of rice fields, Year 2-5


Practice:
E449114Z7 - Advanced Automated IWM – Year 2-5, Soil moisture is monitored, recorded and used in decision making


Practice:
E449114Z8 - Advanced Automated IWM – Year 1 – Equipment and soil moisture is monitored, recorded and used in decision making


Practice:
E338136Z - Short-interval burns to promote a healthy herbaceous plant community for wildlife food


Practice:
E528102Z - Improved grazing management for wind erosion through monitoring activities


Practice:
E590119X - Reduce risks of nutrient losses to ground water by utilizing precision agriculture technologies to p


Practice:
E595116Z2 - Reducing routine neonicotinoid seed treatments on corn and soybean crops.


Practice:
E644136Z - Managing Flood-Irrigated Landscapes for Wildlife


# Regional Scenario List

Practice:
102 - Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan - Written

Scenario_Name:
Non-Dairy Operation Greater Than or Equal to 300 AU and Less Than 700 AU with Land Application

Scenario_Description:
A Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) will be developed to address resource concerns on a medium non-dairy Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) of greater than or equal to 300 and less than 700 animal units (AU).--primarily swine, poultry, and beef AFOs. The producer may export (material transferred to another owner with written documentation of the transfer) modest amounts of the manure or organic products from the farm. For operations where manure is both applied to land the AFO owner/operator controls and exported offsite, guidance to determine appropriate CNMP CAP scenario selection shall be provided by NRCS at the state level. The producer has an animal production area, farms cropland and applies most nutrients. The CNMP is a conservation plan that addresses resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas. Production area components of the plan must include animal confinement facilities, feeding and lounging lots, animal mortality facilities, and manure containment and storage facilities. Land application components of the plan must include all lands under the control of the AFO owner or operator where waste materials are being applied. Planned practices on the production area and land application areas must result in meeting NRCS quality criteria for water quality and soil erosion. Any applicable air emission and negative air quality impacts occurring as a result of planned CNMP activities, or existing on-farm activities must be mitigated in the CNMP if feasible. The CNMP meets the AFO owner/operator's production objectives.

Before:
The owner/operator of a medium sized non-dairy AFO has not received a written Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) that addresses all resource concerns present on the facility production area and land waste application areas. Various levels of management and conservation implementation has occurred on the farm. Little documentation of the systems used and practices installed exists. The producer may or may not have a conservation plan or a nutrient management plan. Partial implementation of CNMP-related practices for the AFO has potentially occurred. Resource concerns on the AFO production area and land waste application areas remain to be addressed through the development of a complete CNMP including management and conservation practices for proper manure/wastewater storage and handling, proper disposal of animal mortality, treatment of land application areas to reduce soil erosion to sustainable levels, and application of waste nutrients at an agronomic rate that meets application crop needs and does not exceed site risk analysis assessment condition. Negative air quality impacts and farmstead safety and security issues may remain on the AFO, and recordkeeping methods for crop yields, inspection and monitoring of the existing CNMP-related practices, and manure application and imports/exports may need further improvement.

After:
A certified Technical Services Provider (TSP) has delivered, to the AFO owner/operator, a comprehensive nutrient management plan meeting CNMP CAP criteria (GM - Part 405 - Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans) and to NRCS with the CNMP Case File data that describes management and conservation practice solutions to all identified resource concerns on the non-dairy AFO production area and land application areas. Collection, transfer, and storage of manure and wastewater systems, mortality management facilities, as well as any rainfall or runoff diversion systems will be inventories-evaluated and planned for adequacy according to applicable NRCS conservation practice standard technical criteria by a Professional Engineer. Management and conservation practices in the CNMP document delivered to the client ensure that, if implemented, the AFO will properly, within applicable NRCS standards and specifications, store, handle, and contain manure and wastewater materials generated by the AFO; dispose of AFO mortality; implement conservation practices to reduce soil erosion on land application areas to sustainable levels; land apply waste material nutrients in a manner than meets NRCS 590 Nutrient Management standard technical criteria. Decisions presented within the CNMP have been made to mitigate, if feasible, negative air quality impacts and improve farmland safety and security. Practices selected in the Record of Decision will provide estimated quantities for conservation practices to be installed in units of measure that align with the practice standards. Accurate recordkeeping documents for crop yields, operation and maintenance of existing and new CNMP-related practices, manure application, AFO manure imports and exports, and other information relevant to the management and compliance of the AFO with state and/or local rules and regulations are included in the CNMP. If the CNMP is not implemented all identified resource concerns will still exist.


Scenario_Name:
Non-Dairy Operation Less Than 300 AU with Land Application

Scenario_Description:
A Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) will be developed to address resource concerns on a small non-dairy Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) of less than 300 animal units (AU)--primarily swine, poultry, and beef AFOs. The producer may export (material transferred to another owner with written documentation of the transfer) modest amounts of the manure or organic products from the farm. For operations where manure is both applied to land the AFO owner/operator controls and exported offsite, guidance to determine appropriate CNMP CAP scenario selection shall be provided by NRCS at the state level. The producer has an animal production area, farms cropland and applies most nutrients. The CNMP is a conservation plan that addresses resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas. Production area components of the plan must include animal confinement facilities, feeding and lounging lots, animal mortality facilities, and manure containment and storage facilities. Land application components of the plan must include all lands under the control of the AFO owner or operator where waste materials are being applied. Planned practices on the production area and land application areas must result in meeting NRCS quality criteria for water quality and soil erosion. Any applicable air emission and negative air quality impacts occurring as a result of planned CNMP activities, or existing on-farm activities must be mitigated in the CNMP if feasible. The CNMP meets the AFO owner/operator's production objectives.

Before:
The owner/operator of a small sized non-dairy AFO has not received a written Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) that addresses all resource concerns present on the facility production area and land waste application areas. Various levels of management and conservation implementation has occurred on the farm. Little documentation of the systems used and practices installed exists. The producer may or may not have a conservation plan or a nutrient management plan. Partial implementation of CNMP-related practices for the AFO has potentially occurred. Resource concerns on the AFO production area and land waste application areas remain to be addressed through the development of a complete CNMP including management and conservation practices for proper manure/wastewater storage and handling, proper disposal of animal mortality, treatment of land application areas to reduce soil erosion to sustainable levels, and application of waste nutrients at an agronomic rate that meets application crop needs and does not exceed site risk analysis assessment condition. Negative air quality impacts and farmstead safety and security issues may remain on the AFO, and recordkeeping methods for crop yields, inspection and monitoring of the existing CNMP-related practices, and manure application and imports/exports may need further improvement.

After:
A certified Technical Services Provider (TSP) has delivered, to the AFO owner/operator, a comprehensive nutrient management plan meeting CNMP CAP criteria (GM - Part 405 - Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans) and to NRCS with the CNMP Case File data that describes management and conservation practice solutions to all identified resource concerns on the small-sized non-dairy AFO production area and land application areas. Collection, transfer, and storage of manure and wastewater systems, mortality management facilities, as well as any rainfall or runoff diversion systems will be inventories-evaluated and planned for adequacy according to applicable NRCS conservation practice standard technical criteria by a Professional Engineer. Management and conservation practices in the CNMP document delivered to the client ensure that, if implemented, the AFO will properly, within applicable NRCS standards and specifications, store, handle, and contain manure and wastewater materials generated by the AFO; dispose of AFO mortality; implement conservation practices to reduce soil erosion on land application areas to sustainable levels; land apply waste material nutrients in a manner than meets NRCS 590 Nutrient Management standard technical criteria. Decisions presented within the CNMP have been made to mitigate, if feasible, negative air quality impacts and improve farmland safety and security. Practices selected in the Record of Decision will provide estimated quantities for conservation practices to be installed in units of measure that align with the practice standards. Accurate recordkeeping documents for crop yields, operation and maintenance of existing and new CNMP-related practices, manure application, AFO manure imports and exports, and other information relevant to the management and compliance of the AFO with state and/or local rules and regulations are included in the CNMP. If the CNMP is not implemented all identified resource concerns will still exist.


Scenario_Name:
Dairy Operation Greater Than or Equal to 300 AU and Less Than 700 AU with Land Application

Scenario_Description:
A Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) will be developed to address resource concerns on a medium Dairy Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) of greater than or equal to 300 and less than 700 animal units (AU). The producer may export (material transferred to another owner with written documentation of the transfer) modest amounts of the manure or organic products from the farm. For operations where manure is both applied to land the AFO owner/operator controls and exported offsite, guidance to determine appropriate CNMP CAP scenario selection shall be provided by NRCS at the state level. The producer has an animal production area, farms cropland and applies most nutrients. The CNMP is a conservation plan that addresses resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas. Production area components of the plan must include animal confinement facilities, feeding and lounging lots, animal mortality facilities, and manure containment and storage facilities. Land application components of the plan must include all lands under the control of the AFO owner or operator where waste materials are being applied. Planned practices on the production area and land application areas must result in meeting NRCS quality criteria for water quality and soil erosion. Any applicable air emission and negative air quality impacts occurring as a result of planned CNMP activities, or existing on-farm activities must be mitigated in the CNMP if feasible. The CNMP meets the AFO owner/operator's production objectives.

Before:
The owner/operator of a medium sized Dairy AFO has not received a written Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) that addresses all resource concerns present on the facility production area and land waste application areas. Various levels of management and conservation implementation has occurred on the farm. Little documentation of the systems used and practices installed exists. The producer may or may not have a conservation plan or a nutrient management plan. Partial implementation of CNMP-related practices for the AFO has potentially occurred. Resource concerns on the AFO production area and land waste application areas remain to be addressed through the development of a complete CNMP including management and conservation practices for proper manure/wastewater storage and handling, proper disposal of animal mortality, treatment of land application areas to reduce soil erosion to sustainable levels, and application of waste nutrients at an agronomic rate that meets application crop needs and does not exceed site risk analysis assessment condition. Negative air quality impacts and farmstead safety and security issues may remain on the AFO, and recordkeeping methods for crop yields, inspection and monitoring of the existing CNMP-related practices, and manure application and imports/exports may need further improvement.

After:
A certified Technical Services Provider (TSP) has delivered, to the AFO owner/operator, a comprehensive nutrient management plan meeting CNMP CAP criteria (GM - Part 405 - Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans) and to NRCS the CNMP with Case File data that describes management and conservation practice solutions to all identified resource concerns on the dairy AFO production area and land application areas. Collection, transfer, and storage of manure and wastewater systems, mortality management facilities, as well as any rainfall or runoff diversion systems will be inventories-evaluated and planned for adequacy according to applicable NRCS conservation practice standard technical criteria by a Professional Engineer. Management and conservation practices in the CNMP document delivered to the client ensure that, if implemented, the AFO will properly, within applicable NRCS standards and specifications, store, handle, and contain manure and wastewater materials generated by the AFO; dispose of AFO mortality; implement conservation practices to reduce soil erosion on land application areas to sustainable levels; land apply waste material nutrients in a manner than meets NRCS 590 Nutrient Management standard technical criteria. Decisions presented within the CNMP have been made to mitigate, if feasible, negative air quality impacts and improve farmland safety and security. Practices selected in the Record of Decision will provide estimated quantities for conservation practices to be installed in units of measure that align with the practice standards. Accurate recordkeeping documents for crop yields, operation and maintenance of existing and new CNMP-related practices, manure application, AFO manure imports and exports, and other information relevant to the management and compliance of the AFO with state and/or local rules and regulations are included in the CNMP. If the CNMP is not implemented all identified resource concerns will still exist.


Scenario_Name:
Non-Dairy Operation Greater Than or Equal to 700 AU with Land Application

Scenario_Description:
A Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) will be developed to address resource concerns on a large non-dairy Animal Feeding Operation ((AFO) of greater than or equal to 700 animal units (AU)--primarily swine, poultry, and beef AFOs. The producer may export (material transferred to another owner with written documentation of the transfer) modest amounts of the manure or organic products from the farm. For operations where manure is both applied to land the AFO owner/operator controls and exported offsite, guidance to determine appropriate CNMP CAP scenario selection shall be provided by NRCS at the state level. The producer has an animal production area, farms cropland and applies most nutrients. The CNMP is a conservation plan that addresses resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas. Production area components of the plan must include animal confinement facilities, feeding and lounging lots, animal mortality facilities, and manure containment and storage facilities. Land application components of the plan must include all lands under the control of the AFO owner or operator where waste materials are being applied. Planned practices on the production area and land application areas must result in meeting NRCS quality criteria for water quality and soil erosion. Any applicable air emission and negative air quality impacts occurring as a result of planned CNMP activities, or existing on-farm activities must be mitigated in the CNMP if feasible. The CNMP meets the AFO owner/operator's production objectives.

Before:
The owner/operator of a large sized non-dairy AFO has not received a written Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) that addresses all resource concerns present on the facility production area and land waste application areas. Various levels of management and conservation implementation has occurred on the farm. Little documentation of the systems used and practices installed exists. The producer may or may not have a conservation plan or a nutrient management plan. Partial implementation of CNMP-related practices for the AFO has potentially occurred. Resource concerns on the AFO production area and land waste application areas remain to be addressed through the development of a complete CNMP including management and conservation practices for proper manure/wastewater storage and handling, proper disposal of animal mortality, treatment of land application areas to reduce soil erosion to sustainable levels, and application of waste nutrients at an agronomic rate that meets application crop needs and does not exceed site risk analysis assessment condition. Negative air quality impacts and farmstead safety and security issues may remain on the AFO, and recordkeeping methods for crop yields, inspection and monitoring of the existing CNMP-related practices, and manure application and imports/exports may need further improvement.


Scenario_Name:
Dairy Operation Greater Than or Equal to 700 AU with Land Application

Scenario_Description:
A Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) will be developed to address resource concerns on a large Dairy Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) of greater than or equal to 700 animal units (AU). The producer may export (material transferred to another owner with written documentation of the transfer) modest amounts of the manure or organic products from the farm. For operations where manure is both applied to land the AFO owner/operator controls and exported offsite, guidance to determine appropriate CNMP CAP scenario selection shall be provided by NRCS at the state level. The producer has an animal production area, farms cropland and applies most nutrients. The CNMP is a conservation plan that addresses resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas. Production area components of the plan must include animal confinement facilities, feeding and lounging lots, animal mortality facilities, and manure containment and storage facilities. Land application components of the plan must include all lands under the control of the AFO owner or operator where waste materials are being applied. Planned practices on the production area and land application areas must result in meeting NRCS quality criteria for water quality and soil erosion. Any applicable air emission and negative air quality impacts occurring as a result of planned CNMP activities, or existing on-farm activities must be mitigated in the CNMP if feasible. The CNMP meets the AFO owner/operator's production objectives.

Before:
The owner/operator of a large sized Dairy AFO has not received a written Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) that addresses all resource concerns present on the facility production area and land waste application areas. Various levels of management and conservation implementation has occurred on the farm. Little documentation of the systems used and practices installed exists. The producer may or may not have a conservation plan or a nutrient management plan. Partial implementation of CNMP-related practices for the AFO has potentially occurred. Resource concerns on the AFO production area and land waste application areas remain to be addressed through the development of a complete CNMP including management and conservation practices for proper manure/wastewater storage and handling, proper disposal of animal mortality, treatment of land application areas to reduce soil erosion to sustainable levels, and application of waste nutrients at an agronomic rate that meets application crop needs and does not exceed site risk analysis assessment condition. Negative air quality impacts and farmstead safety and security issues may remain on the AFO, and recordkeeping methods for crop yields, inspection and monitoring of the existing CNMP-related practices, and manure application and imports/exports may need further improvement.


Scenario_Name:
Livestock Operation Less Than 300 AU without Land Application

Scenario_Description:
A Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) will be developed to address resource concerns on a small Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) of less than 300 animal units (AU). The producer exports (material transferred to another owner with written documentation of the transfer) nearly all of the manure or organic products from the farm. For operations where manure is both applied to land the AFO owner/operator controls and exported offsite, guidance to determine appropriate CNMP CAP scenario selection shall be provided by NRCS at the state level. The CNMP is a conservation plan that addresses resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas owned or controlled by the AFO owner/operator. In this scenario, the primary focus will be addressing resource concerns present on the production area, including manure/wastewater handling and storage, and documentation of manure generation by the AFO, and its export. Production area components of the plan must include animal confinement facilities, feeding and lounging areas, animal mortality facilities, and manure containment and storage facilities. Planned practices on the production area must result in meeting NRCS quality criteria for water quality and soil erosion. Any applicable air emission and negative air quality impacts occurring as a result of planned CNMP activities, or existing on-farm activities must be mitigated in the CNMP if feasible. The CNMP meets the AFO owner’s/operator's production objectives.

Before:
The owner/operator of a small AFO has not received a written comprehensive nutrient management plan (CNMP) that addresses all resource concerns present on the facility production areas and any applicable land application areas. Partial implementation of CNMP- related practices for the AFO has potentially occurred. Various levels of management and conservation implementation has occurred on the farm. Little documentation of the systems used and practices installed exists. The producer may or may not have a conservation plan or a nutrient management plan. Resource concerns on the AFO production area remain to be addressed through the development of a complete CNMP including management and conservation practices for proper manure/wastewater storage and handling, proper disposal of animal mortality, erosion and runoff issues from feeding and lounging areas, and recordkeeping documentation of manure generation and exports. Negative air quality impacts and farmstead safety and security issues may remain on the AFO, and recordkeeping methods for inspection and monitoring of the existing CNMP-related practices, manure imports/exports may need further improvement.

After:
A certified Technical Services Provider (TSP) has delivered, to the AFO owner/operator, a comprehensive conservation plan meeting CNMP CAP criteria (GM - Part 405 - Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans) and to NRCS a the CNMP Case File that describes management and conservation practice solutions to all identified resource concerns on the small sized AFO production area and any applicable land application areas. Collection, transfer, and storage of manure and wastewater systems, mortality management facilities, as well as any rainfall or runoff diversion systems will be inventories/evaluated and planned for adequacy according to applicable NRCS conservation practice standard technical criteria by a Professional Engineer. Conservation practices in the CNMP document delivered to the client ensure that, if implemented, the AFO will properly, within applicable NRCS standards and specifications, store, handle, and contain manure and wastewater materials generated by the AFO; dispose of AFO mortality; minimize erosion and runoff from feeding and lounging areas, keep accurate AFO animal inventory information, and document AFO manure generation and exports. Decisions presented within the CNMP have been made to mitigate, if feasible, negative air quality impacts and improve farmland safety and security. Decisions selected in the Record of Decision will provide estimated quantities for conservation practices to be installed in units of measure that align with those in the conservation practice. Accurate recordkeeping documents for operation and maintenance of existing and new CNMP-related practices, AFO manure imports and exports, and other information relevant to the management and compliance of the AFO with state and/or local rules and regulations are included in the CNMP. If the CNMP is not implemented all identified resource concerns will still exist..


Scenario_Name:
Livestock Operation Greater Than 300 AU without Land Application

Scenario_Description:
A Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) will be developed to address resource concerns on a medium-large Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) of greater than or equal to 300 animal units (AU). The producer exports (material transferred to another owner with written documentation of the transfer) nearly all of the manure or organic products from the farm. For operations where manure is both applied to land the AFO owner/operator controls and exported offsite, guidance to determine appropriate CNMP CAP scenario selection shall be provided by NRCS at the state level. The CNMP is a conservation plan that addresses resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas owned or controlled by the AFO owner/operator. In this scenario, the primary focus will be addressing resource concerns present on the production area, including manure/wastewater handling and storage, and documentation of manure generation by the AFO, and its export. Production area components of the plan must include animal confinement facilities, feeding and lounging lots, animal mortality facilities, and manure containment and storage facilities. Planned practices on the production area must result in meeting NRCS quality criteria for water quality and soil erosion. Any applicable air emission and negative air quality impacts occurring as a result of planned CNMP activities, or existing on-farm activities must be mitigated in the CNMP if feasible. The CNMP meets the AFO owner’s/operator's production objectives.

Before:
The owner/operator of a medium-large sized AFO has not received a written comprehensive nutrient management plan (CNMP) that addresses all resource concerns present on the facility production areas and any applicable land application areas. Partial implementation of CNMP-related practices for the AFO has potentially occurred. Various levels of management and conservation implementation has occurred on the farm. Little documentation of the systems used and practices installed exists. The producer may or may not have a conservation plan or a nutrient management plan. Resource concerns on the AFO production area remain to be addressed through the development of a complete CNMP including management and conservation practices for proper manure/wastewater storage and handling, proper disposal of animal mortality, erosion and runoff issues from feeding and lounging areas, and recordkeeping documentation of manure generation and exports. Negative air quality impacts and farmstead safety and security issues may remain on the AFO, and recordkeeping methods for inspection and monitoring of the existing CNMP-related practices, manure imports/exports may need further improvement.

After:
A certified Technical Services Provider (TSP) has delivered, to the AFO owner/operator, a comprehensive conservation plan meeting CNMP CAP criteria (GM - Part 405 - Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans) and to NRCS a the CNMP Case File that describes management and conservation practice solutions to all identified resource concerns on the small sized AFO production area and any applicable land application areas. Collection, transfer, and storage of manure and wastewater systems, mortality management facilities, as well as any rainfall or runoff diversion systems will be inventories/evaluated and planned for adequacy according to applicable NRCS conservation practice standard technical criteria by a Professional Engineer. Conservation practices in the CNMP document delivered to the client ensure that, if implemented, the AFO will properly, within applicable NRCS standards and specifications, store, handle, and contain manure and wastewater materials generated by the AFO; dispose of AFO mortality; minimize erosion and runoff from feeding and lounging areas, keep accurate AFO animal inventory information, and document AFO manure generation and exports. Decisions presented within the CNMP have been made to mitigate, if feasible, negative air quality impacts and improve farmland safety and security. Decisions selected in the Record of Decision will provide estimated quantities for conservation practices to be installed in units of measure that align with those in the conservation practice. Accurate recordkeeping documents for operation and maintenance of existing and new CNMP-related practices, AFO manure imports and exports, and other information relevant to the management and compliance of the AFO with state and/or local rules and regulations are included in the CNMP. If the CNMP is not implemented all identified resource concerns will still exist.


Scenario_Name:
Dairy Operation Less Than 300 AU with Land Application

Scenario_Description:
A Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) and CNMP Case File will be developed to address resource concerns on a small Dairy Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) of less than 300 animal units (AU). The producer may export (material transferred to another owner with written documentation of the transfer) modest amounts of the manure or organic products from the farm. For operations where manure is both applied to land the AFO owner/operator controls and exported offsite, guidance to determine appropriate CNMP CAP scenario selection shall be provided by NRCS at the state level. The producer has an animal production area, farms cropland and applies most nutrients. The CNMP is a conservation plan that addresses resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas. Production area components of the plan must include animal confinement facilities, feeding and lounging lots, animal mortality facilities, and manure containment and storage facilities. Land application components of the plan must include all lands under the control of the AFO owner or operator where waste materials are being applied. Planned practices on the production area and land application areas must result in meeting NRCS quality criteria for water quality and soil erosion. Any applicable air emission and negative air quality impacts occurring as a result of planned CNMP activities, or existing on-farm activities must be mitigated in the CNMP if feasible. The CNMP meets the AFO owner/operator's production objectives.

Before:
The owner/operator of a small sized dairy AFO has not received a written Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) that addresses all resource concerns present on the facility production area and land waste application areas. Various levels of management and conservation implementation has occurred on the farm. Little documentation of the systems used and practices installed exists. The producer may or may not have a conservation plan or a nutrient management plan. Partial implementation of CNMP-related practices for the AFO has potentially occurred. Resource concerns on the AFO production area and land waste application areas remain to be addressed through the development of a complete CNMP including management and conservation practices for proper manure/wastewater storage and handling, proper disposal of animal mortality, treatment of land application areas to reduce soil erosion to sustainable levels, and application of waste nutrients at an agronomic rate that meets application crop needs and does not exceed site risk analysis assessment condition. Negative air quality impacts and farmstead safety and security issues may remain on the AFO, and recordkeeping methods for crop yields, inspection and monitoring of the existing CNMP-related practices, and manure application and imports/exports may need further improvement.

After:
A certified Technical Services Provider (TSP) has delivered, to the AFO owner/operator, a comprehensive nutrient management plan meeting CNMP CAP criteria (GM - Part 405 - Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans) and to NRCS the CNMP with Case File data that describes management and conservation practice solutions to all identified resource concerns on the small-sized dairy AFO production area and land application areas. Collection, transfer, and storage of manure and wastewater systems, mortality management facilities, as well as any rainfall or runoff diversion systems will be inventories-evaluated and planned for adequacy according to applicable NRCS conservation practice standard technical criteria by a Professional Engineer. Management and conservation practices in the CNMP document delivered to the client ensure that, if implemented, the AFO will properly, within applicable NRCS standards and specifications, store, handle, and contain manure and wastewater materials generated by the AFO; dispose of AFO mortality; implement conservation practices to reduce soil erosion on land application areas to sustainable levels; land apply waste material nutrients in a manner than meets NRCS 590 Nutrient Management standard technical criteria. Decisions presented within the CNMP have been made to mitigate, if feasible, negative air quality impacts and improve farmland safety and security. Practices selected in the Record of Decision will provide estimated quantities for conservation practices to be installed in units of measure that align with the practice standards. Accurate recordkeeping documents for crop yields, operation and maintenance of existing and new CNMP-related practices, manure application, AFO manure imports and exports, and other information relevant to the management and compliance of the AFO with state and/or local rules and regulations are included in the CNMP. If the CNMP is not implemented all identified resource concerns will still exist.


Scenario_Name:
CNMP Less Than or Equal to 300 AU with Land Application (Minimal Engineer Assistance)

Scenario_Description:
A Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) will be developed to address resource concerns on a small non-dairy Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) of less than 300 animal units (AU)--primarily swine, poultry, and beef AFOs. This scenario is for sites or states where the services of a professional engineer are minimal. The producer may export modest amounts of the manure or organic products from the farm. For operations where manure is both applied to land the AFO owner/operator controls and exported offsite, guidance to determine appropriate CNMP CAP scenario selection shall be provided by NRCS at the state level. The producer has an animal production area, farms cropland and applies most nutrients. The CNMP is a conservation plan that addresses resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas. Production area components of the plan must include animal confinement facilities, feeding and lounging lots, animal mortality facilities, and manure containment and storage facilities. Land application components of the plan includes all lands under the control of the AFO owner or operator where waste materials are being applied. Planned practices on the production area and land application areas result in meeting NRCS planning criteria for water quality, soil erosion, and air quality concerns. Any applicable air emission and negative air quality impacts occurring as a result of planned CNMP activities, or existing on-farm activities must be mitigated in the CNMP if feasible. The CNMP meets the AFO owner/operator's production objectives.

Before:
The owner/operator of an AFO has not received a written Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) that addresses all resource concerns present on the facility production area and land waste application areas. Various levels of management and conservation implementation has occurred on the farm. Little documentation of the systems used and practices installed exists. Partial implementation of conservation practices for the AFO has potentially occurred. Resource concerns on the AFO production area and land waste application areas remain to be addressed through the development of a complete CNMP including management and conservation practices for proper manure/wastewater storage and handling, proper disposal of animal mortality, treatment of land application areas to reduce soil erosion to sustainable levels, and application of waste nutrients at an agronomic rate that meets application crop needs and does not exceed site risk analysis assessment condition. Negative air quality impacts issues may remain on the AFO, and recordkeeping methods for crop yields, inspection and monitoring of the existing CNMP-related practices, and manure application and imports/exports may need further improvement.

After:
A certified Technical Services Provider (TSP) has delivered, to the AFO owner/operator, a comprehensive nutrient management plan meeting CNMP CAP criteria (GM - Part 405 - Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans) and to NRCS with the CNMP Case File data that describes management and conservation practice systems to address all identified resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas. Collection, transfer, and storage of manure and wastewater systems, mortality management facilities, as well as any rainfall or runoff diversion systems will be inventories-evaluated and planned for adequacy according to applicable NRCS conservation practice standard technical criteria. Management and conservation practices in the CNMP document delivered to the client ensure that, if implemented, the AFO will properly, within applicable NRCS standards and specifications, store, handle, and contain manure and wastewater materials generated by the AFO; dispose of AFO mortality; implement conservation practices to address soil erosion, water quality, and air quality within the NRCS planning criteria. Accurate record keeping documents for crop yields, operation and maintenance of existing and new CNMP-related practices, manure application, AFO manure imports and exports, and other information relevant to the management and compliance of the AFO with state and/or local rules and regulations are included in the CNMP.


Scenario_Name:
CNMP Less Than or Equal to 300 AU without Land Application (Minimal Engineer Assistance)

Scenario_Description:
A Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) will be developed to address resource concerns on the Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) of less than 300 or equal animal units (AU). This scenario is for sites or states where the services of a professional engineer are minimal. The producer exports nearly all of the manure or organic products from the farm. The CNMP is a conservation plan that addresses soil erosion, water quality, and air quality resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas owned or controlled by the AFO owner/operator. In this scenario, the primary focus will be addressing soil erosion, water quality, and air quality resource concerns present on the production area, including manure/wastewater handling and storage, and documentation of manure generation by the AFO, and its export. Production area components of the plan must include animal confinement facilities, feeding and lounging areas, animal mortality facilities, and manure containment and storage facilities. Planned practices on the production area must result in meeting NRCS planning criteria for water quality and soil erosion. Any applicable air emission and negative air quality impacts occurring as a result of planned CNMP activities, or existing on-farm activities must be mitigated in the CNMP if feasible. The CNMP meets the AFO owner€™s/operator's production objectives.

Before:
The owner/operator of the AFO has not received a written comprehensive nutrient management plan (CNMP) that addresses all resource concerns present on the facility production areas and any applicable land application areas. Various levels of management and conservation implementation has occurred on the farm. Little documentation of the systems used and practices installed exists. The producer may or may not have a conservation plan or a nutrient management plan. Resource concerns on the AFO production area remain to be addressed through the development of a complete CNMP including management and conservation practices for proper manure/wastewater storage and handling, proper disposal of animal mortality, erosion and runoff issues from feeding and lounging areas, and record keeping documentation of manure generation and exports. Negative air quality impacts and farmstead safety and security issues may remain on the AFO, and record keeping methods for inspection and monitoring of the existing CNMP-related practices, manure imports/exports may need further improvement.

After:
A certified Technical Services Provider (TSP) has delivered, to the AFO owner/operator, a comprehensive conservation plan meeting CNMP CAP criteria (GM - Part 405 - Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans) and to NRCS a the CNMP Case File that describes management and conservation practice practices to address all identified soil erosion, water quality, and air quality resource concerns on the AFO production area and any applicable land application areas. Collection, transfer, and storage of manure and wastewater systems, mortality management facilities, as well as any rainfall or runoff diversion systems will be inventories/evaluated and planned for adequacy according to applicable NRCS conservation practice standard technical criteria. Conservation practices in the CNMP document delivered to the client ensure that, if implemented, the AFO will properly, within applicable NRCS standards and specifications, store, handle, and contain manure and wastewater materials generated by the AFO; dispose of AFO mortality; minimize erosion and runoff from feeding and lounging areas, keep accurate AFO animal inventory information, and document AFO manure generation and exports. Decisions presented within the CNMP have been made to mitigate, if feasible, negative air quality impacts and improve farmland safety and security. Decisions selected in the Record of Decision will provide estimated quantities for conservation practices to be installed in units of measure that align with those in the conservation practice. Accurate record keeping documents for operation and maintenance of existing and new CNMP-related practices, AFO manure imports and exports, and other information relevant to the management and compliance of the AFO with state and/or local rules and regulations are included in the CNMP.


Scenario_Name:
CNMP Greater Than 300 AU with Land Application (Minimal Engineer Assistance)

Scenario_Description:
A Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) will be developed to address resource concerns on an Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) of greater than or equal to 300 animal units (AU). This scenario is for sites or states where the services of a professional engineer are minimal. The producer may export modest amounts of the manure or organic products from the farm. For operations where manure is both applied to land the AFO owner/operator controls and exported offsite, guidance to determine appropriate CNMP CAP scenario selection shall be provided by NRCS at the state level. The producer has an animal production area, farms cropland and applies most manure nutrients. The CNMP is a conservation plan that addresses resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas. Production area components of the plan must include animal confinement facilities, feeding and lounging lots, animal mortality facilities, and manure containment and storage facilities. Land application components of the plan must include all lands under the control of the AFO owner or operator where waste materials are being applied. Planned practices on the production area and land application areas must result in meeting NRCS planning criteria for water quality and soil erosion. Any applicable air emission and negative air quality impacts occurring as a result of planned CNMP activities, or existing on-farm activities must be mitigated in the CNMP if feasible. The CNMP meets the AFO owner/operator's production objectives.

Before:
The owner/operator of an AFO has not received a written Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) that addresses all resource concerns present on the facility production area and land waste application areas. Various levels of management and conservation implementation has occurred on the farm. Little documentation of the systems used and practices installed exists. Partial implementation of CNMP-related practices for the AFO has potentially occurred. Resource concerns on the AFO production area and land waste application areas remain to be addressed through the development of a complete CNMP including management and conservation practices for proper manure/wastewater storage and handling, proper disposal of animal mortality, treatment of land application areas to reduce soil erosion to sustainable levels, and application of waste nutrients at an agronomic rate that meets application crop needs and does not exceed site risk analysis assessment condition. Negative air quality impacts and farmstead safety and security issues may remain on the AFO, and record keeping methods for crop yields, inspection and monitoring of the existing CNMP-related practices, and manure application and imports/exports may need further improvement.

After:
A certified Technical Services Provider (TSP) has delivered, to the AFO owner/operator, a comprehensive nutrient management plan meeting CNMP CAP criteria (GM - Part 405 - Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans) and to NRCS with the CNMP Case File data that describes management and conservation practices to address all identified soil erosion, water quality, and air quality resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas. Collection, transfer, and storage of manure and wastewater systems, mortality management facilities, as well as any rainfall or runoff diversion systems will be inventories-evaluated and planned for adequacy according to applicable NRCS conservation practice standard technical criteria. Management and conservation practices in the CNMP document delivered to the client ensure that, if implemented, the AFO will properly, within applicable NRCS standards and specifications, store, handle, and contain manure and wastewater materials generated by the AFO; dispose of AFO mortality; implement conservation practices to reduce soil erosion on land application areas to sustainable levels; land apply waste material nutrients in a manner than meets NRCS 590 Nutrient Management standard technical criteria. Decisions presented within the CNMP have been made to mitigate, if feasible, negative air quality impacts. Practices selected in the Record of Decision will provide estimated quantities for conservation practices to be installed in units of measure that align with the practice standards. Accurate record keeping documents for crop yields, operation and maintenance of existing and new CNMP-related practices, manure application, AFO manure imports and exports, and other information relevant to the management and compliance of the AFO with state and/or local rules and regulations are included in the CNMP.


Scenario_Name:
CNMP Greater Than 300 AU without Land Application (Minimal Engineer Assistance)

Scenario_Description:
A Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) will be developed to address resource concerns on an Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) of greater than 300 animal units (AU). This scenario is for sites or states where the services of a professional engineer are minimal. The producer exports nearly all of the manure or organic products from the farm. For operations where manure is both applied to land the AFO owner/operator controls and exported offsite, guidance to determine appropriate CNMP CAP scenario selection shall be provided by NRCS at the state level. The CNMP is a conservation plan that addresses the soil erosion, water quality, and air quality resource concerns on the AFO production area and land application areas owned or controlled by the AFO owner/operator. In this scenario, the primary focus will be addressing resource concerns present on the production area, including manure/wastewater handling and storage, and documentation of manure generation by the AFO, and its export. Production area components of the plan must include animal confinement facilities, feeding and lounging lots, animal mortality facilities, and manure containment and storage facilities. Planned practices on the production area must result in meeting NRCS planning criteria for water quality and soil erosion. Any applicable air emission and negative air quality impacts occurring as a result of planned CNMP activities, or existing on-farm activities must be mitigated in the CNMP if feasible. The CNMP meets the AFO owners/operator's production objectives.

Before:
The owner/operator of an AFO has not received a written comprehensive nutrient management plan (CNMP) that addresses the soil erosion, water quality, and air quality resource concerns present on the facility production areas and any applicable land application areas. Various levels of management and conservation implementation has occurred on the farm. Little documentation of the systems used and practices installed exists. The producer may or may not have a conservation plan or a nutrient management plan. Resource concerns on the AFO production area remain to be addressed through the development of a complete CNMP including management and conservation practices for proper manure/wastewater storage and handling, proper disposal of animal mortality, soil erosion, water quality, and air quality concerns from feeding and lounging areas, and record keeping documentation of manure generation and exports. Negative air quality impacts issues may remain on the AFO, and record keeping methods for inspection and monitoring of the existing CNMP-related practices, manure imports/exports may need further improvement.

After:
A certified Technical Services Provider (TSP) has delivered to the AFO owner/operator, a comprehensive conservation plan meeting CNMP CAP criteria (GM - Part 405 - Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans) and to NRCS a the CNMP Case File that describes management and conservation practice solutions to all identified resource concerns on the small sized AFO production area and any applicable land application areas. Collection, transfer, and storage of manure and wastewater systems, mortality management facilities, as well as any rainfall or runoff diversion systems are inventoried/evaluated and planned for adequacy according to applicable NRCS conservation practice standard technical criteria. Conservation practices in the CNMP document delivered to the client ensure that, if implemented, the AFO will properly, within applicable NRCS standards and specifications, store, handle, and contain manure and wastewater materials generated by the AFO; dispose of AFO mortality; minimize soil erosion, water quality, and air quality concerns from feeding and lounging areas, keep accurate AFO animal inventory information, and document AFO manure generation and exports. Decisions presented within the CNMP have been made to mitigate, if feasible, negative air quality impacts. Decisions selected in the Record of Decisions will provide estimated quantities for conservation practices to be installed in units of measure that align with those in the conservation practice. Accurate record keeping documents for operation and maintenance of existing and new CNMP-related practices, AFO manure imports and exports, and other information relevant to the management and compliance of the AFO with state and/or local rules and regulations are included in the CNMP.


Practice:
104 - Nutrient Management Plan - Written

Scenario_Name:
Nutrient Management CAP Less Than or Equal to 100 Acres (Not part of a CNMP)

Scenario_Description:
Various on-farm land uses where natural or artificial amendments are applied. Natural Resource Concern: Water Quality, Soil Erosion, Water Quantity, and other associated resource concerns.

Before:
Agricultural producer has no plan or minimal knowledge for application and management of nutrients. The producer currently manages nutrient application based upon personal knowledge, or other local criteria. Producer is interested in management of nutrients to maximize yields, profits margin, reduce costs, and for environmental benefit. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for develop of the "Nutrient Management" conservation activity plan consistent with the criteria in CAP 104 and 590 Nutrient Management. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for the primary Water Quality resource concern and other applicable resource concerns and provides for opportunities to manage nutrients for plant production and address offsite movement of nutrients. The CAP plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address other related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 104 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide and CPS 590 Nutrient Management.


Scenario_Name:
Nutrient Management CAP 104- 101-300 Acres (Not part of a CNMP)

Scenario_Description:
Various on-farm land uses where organic or inorganic amendments are applied. Natural Resource Concern: Water Quality, Soil Erosion, Water Quantity, and other associated resource concerns.

Before:
Agricultural producer has no plan or minimal knowledge for applicant and management of land applied nutrients. The producer currently manages nutrient application based upon label instructions, personal knowledge, or other local criteria. Producer is interested in management of nutrients to maximize yields, profits margin, reduce costs, nutrient use efficiency and for environmental benefit. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for develop of the "Nutrient Management" conservation activity plan. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet Nutrient Management criteria for the primary Water Quality resource concern and other applicable resource concerns and provides for opportunities to manage nutrients for plant production and address offsite movement of nutrients. The CAP plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address other related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic criteria for the 104 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Name:
Nutrient Management CAP 104 Greater Than 300 Acres (Not part of a CNMP)

Before:
Agricultural producer has no plan or minimal knowledge for applicant and management of land applied nutrients. The producer currently manages nutrient application based upon label instructions, personal knowledge, or other local criteria. Producer is interested in management of nutrients to maximize yields, profits margin, reduce costs, nutrient use efficiency, and for environmental benefit. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for development of the "Nutrient Management" conservation activity plan. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for the primary Water Quality resource concern and other applicable resource concerns and provides for opportunities to manage nutrients for plant production and address offsite movement of nutrients. The CAP plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address other related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic criteria for the 104 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Name:
Nutrient Management CAP 104 Less Than or Equal to 100 Acres (Element of a CNMP)

Scenario_Description:
Various on-farm land uses where natural or artificial nutrient amendments are applied. Natural Resource Concern: Water Quality, Soil Erosion, Water Quantity, and other associated resource concerns.

Before:
Agricultural producer has no plan or minimal knowledge for applicant and management of nutrient applied to the land. The producer currently manages nutrient application based upon label instructions, personal knowledge, or other local criteria. Producer is interested in management of nutrients to maximize yields, profits margin, reduce costs, and for environmental benefit. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for develop of the "Nutrient Management" conservation activity plan. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet nutrient criteria for the primary Water Quality resource concern in 590 and other applicable resource concerns and provides for opportunities to manage nutrients for plant production and address offsite movement of nutrients. The CAP plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address other related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic criteria for the 104 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Name:
Nutrient Management CAP 104 - 101-300 Acres (Element of a CNMP)

Before:
Agricultural producer has no plan or minimal knowledge for applicant and management of applied nutrients to the land. The producer currently manages nutrient application based upon label instructions, personal knowledge, or other local criteria. Producer is interested in management of nutrients to maximize yields, profits margin, reduce costs, and for environmental benefit. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for develop of the "Nutrient Management" conservation activity plan. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet 590 criteria for the primary Water Quality resource concern and other applicable resource concerns and provides for opportunities to manage nutrients for plant production and address offsite movement of nutrients. The CAP plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address other related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 104 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Name:
Nutrient Management CAP 104 Greater Than 300 Acres (Element of a CNMP)

Before:
Agricultural producer has no plan or minimal knowledge for applicant and management of nutrient s applied to the land. The producer currently manages nutrient application based upon label instructions, personal knowledge, or other local criteria. Producer is interested in management of nutrients to maximize yields, profits margin, reduce costs, and for environmental benefit. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for develop of the "Nutrient Management" conservation activity plan. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet 590 criteria for the primary Water Quality resource concern and other applicable resource concerns and provides for opportunities to manage nutrients for plant production and address offsite movement of nutrients. The CAP plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address other related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic criteria for the 104 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Description:
Non Industrial Private Forest Land typically unmanaged or limited management activities. Typical site is approximately 1 to 20 acres in size and consists of existing uneven-aged mixed species stands of harvestable trees. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife; Soil Erosion; Soil Condition; Water Quality; Plant Condition; on Forest Land.

Before:
The producer currently manages forested lands without an existing forest management plan, or with an outdated plan. Resource concern(s) exist which are not addressed by a management plan. A Forest Management Plan or Conservation Activity Plan, as defined by EQIP regulation is needed to allow the producer to apply for financial assistance through EQIP or other programs to help implement needed conservation practices. Associated Practices: 472, 666, 654, 655,384, 394, 383, 379, 338, 391, 791, 490, 612, 660, 311, 380.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for development of the "Forest Management Plan" Conservation Activity Plan (CAP). The CAP criteria requires the plan to identify approved Field Office Technical Guide conservation practices where needed to address identified resource concerns. The Forest Management CAP is not considered a Forest Harvest Plan, but should complement the needs for harvest if desired by the land user. Additional CAP plan criteria is detailed in the Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Description:
Non Industrial Private Forest Land typically unmanaged or limited management activities. Typical site is approximately 21 to 100 acres in size and consists of existing uneven-aged mixed species stands of harvestable trees. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife; Soil Erosion; Soil Condition; Water Quality; Plant Condition; on Forest Land.


Scenario_Description:
Non Industrial Private Forest Land typically unmanaged or limited management activities. Typical site is approximately 101 to 250 acres in size and consists of existing uneven-aged mixed species stands of harvestable trees. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife; Soil Erosion; Soil Condition; Water Quality; Plant Condition; on Forest Land.


Scenario_Description:
Non Industrial Private Forest Land typically unmanaged or limited management activities. Typical site is approximately 1001 acres or greater in size and consists of existing uneven-aged mixed species stands of harvestable trees. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife; Soil Erosion; Soil Condition; Water Quality; Plant Condition; on Forest Land.


Scenario_Description:
Non Industrial Private Forest Land typically unmanaged or limited management activities. Typical site is approximately 251 to 500 acres in size and consists of existing uneven-aged mixed species stands of harvestable trees. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife; Soil Erosion; Soil Condition; Water Quality; Plant Condition; on Forest Land.


Scenario_Description:
Non Industrial Private Forest Land typically unmanaged or limited management activities. Typical site is approximately 501 to 1000 acres in size and consists of existing uneven-aged mixed species stands of harvestable trees. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife; Soil Erosion; Soil Condition; Water Quality; Plant Condition; on Forest Land.


Scenario_Description:
The owner/operator of an Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) has not received a written Feed Management Plan (FeedMP) that addresses all resource concerns present on the facility. Various levels of management and conservation implementation has occurred in the operation. Little documentation of the methods of feed management used and practices installed exists, and the producer is not likely to developed a complete forage inventory or nutrient analysis. The producer may or may not have a conservation plan or a nutrient management plan. Nutrient management related resource concerns on the operation remain to be addressed through the development of a complete FeedMP including management and conservation practices for proper quantity and quality of available nutrients, feedstuffs, and/or additives fed to livestock or poultry that may be present on the operation. Present operation and feed methodology poses risk of feeding excessive amounts of nutrients in animal manure which result in negative impacts to water quality and odor resource concerns. Negative water and air quality impacts as well as farmstead safety and security issues may remain on the AFO, and inadequate recordkeeping nutrient, inspection and monitoring of the existing operation may need further improvement.

Before:
Producer has no plan or limited knowledge of management of feed, nutrients, feedstuffs, or nutritional additives provided to domestic livestock and poultry. The producer currently manages feed without a plan which would address livestock production limitations and water and air quality resource concern impacts. Producer currently lacks plan to provide proper balance of forage, grains or other feeds and supplements to assure domestic animal nutritional needs are met without negatively impacting water and air quality. Producer is interested in management of feed for domestic animals to maximize profit margin, reduce costs, improve or address livestock production opportunities, and for other environmental benefits. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified Technical Service Provider (TSP) to develop a plan, and to collect/coordinate data and records to determine current nutritional needs. Associated Practice(s): 590-Nutrient Management

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for development of the “Feed Management” (FM) conservation activity plan (CAP). The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for applicable natural resource concerns and provides for opportunities to identify and implement conservation practices related to management of feed, forages, or delivery of supplements to maximize efficient feeding operations and livestock growth. The CAP plan may serve as the basis for implementation of the primary conservation practice 592-Feed Management. If applicable, the FM CAP may also be developed to complement Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans (CNMP) or to help meet requirements of NRCS practice standard 590 - Nutrient Management. As addressed in the CAP planning criteria, the plan may include recommendations for addressing associated natural resource concerns with other conservation practices. The FM CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 108 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Name:
Grazing Management Plan Less Than or Equal to 100 acres

Scenario_Description:
Small agricultural operation with less than 100 acres grazed land. Natural Resource Concern: Soil erosion, water quality, fish and wildlife, plant condition, and all other appropriate resource concerns.

Before:
Producer has no plan or limited knowledge of management of livestock or other animals on grazed land resources. The producer currently manages animals without plan to address identified natural resource concerns. Producer is interested in management of animals to maximize profit margin, reduce costs, improve or address wildlife opportunities, and for other environmental benefit. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan and collect/coordinate data recording to monitor per requirements of plan. Associated Practices: In addition to the essential practices listed previously, addition practices to consider include: Channel Bank Vegetation, Prescribed Burning, Critical Area Planting, Pond, Windbreak/Shelterbelt Establishment, Silvopasture Establishment, Riparian Herbaceous Cover, Stream Habitat Improvement and Management, Pipeline, Heavy Use Area Protection, Spring Development, and Animal Trails and Walkways.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for develop of the "Grazing Management" conservation activity plan. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for applicable resource concerns and provides for opportunities to implement essential conservation practices: Brush Management, Fencing, Firebreak, Forage Harvest Management, Grazing Land Mechanical Treatment, Herbaceous Weed Control, Nutrient Management, Forage and Biomass Planting, Prescribed Grazing, Range Planting, Access Control, and Watering Facilities. As addressed in the CAP criteria, the plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address other related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 110 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Name:
Grazing Management Plan 101 to 500 acres

Scenario_Description:
Small agricultural operation with 101 to 500 acres grazed land. Natural Resource Concern: Soil erosion, water quality, fish and wildlife, plant condition, and all other appropriate resource concerns.


Scenario_Name:
Grazing Management Plan 1501 to 5000 acres

Scenario_Description:
Small agricultural operation with 1501 to 5000 acres grazed land. Natural Resource Concern: Soil erosion, water quality, fish and wildlife, plant condition, and all other appropriate resource concerns.


Scenario_Name:
Grazing Management Plan Greater Than 5000 acres

Scenario_Description:
Small agricultural operation with more than 5000 acres grazed land. Natural Resource Concern: Soil erosion, water quality, fish and wildlife, plant condition, and all other appropriate resource concerns.


Scenario_Name:
Grazing Management Plan 501 to 1500 acres

Scenario_Description:
Small agricultural operation with 501 to 1500 acres grazed land. Natural Resource Concern: Soil erosion, water quality, fish and wildlife, plant condition, and all other appropriate resource concerns.


Scenario_Name:
Prescribed Burning Plan Less Than or Equal to 20 Acres

Scenario_Description:
Non Industrial Private Forest Land, Pasture or Range Land typically less than or equal to 20 acres in size and is dominated by fire tolerant species that are competing with undesirable vegetation and accumulating fuel load. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife; Soil Erosion; Soil Condition; Water Quality; Plant Condition.

Before:
Producer has no existing plan or an obsolete plan that is insufficient for current stand condition. Due to the size, landscape position, low to moderate fuel loads and presence of both natural firebreaks (i.e. – streams, lakes, etc.) and man-made firebreaks (i.e. – roads, farm paths, agricultural fields, etc.), few newly constructed firebreaks are needed to implement the prescribed burn. A Prescribed Burning Plan or Conservation Activity Plan is needed to enable the producer to apply for financial assistance through EQIP or other financial assistance programs in order to implement needed conservation practices. Associated Practices: 394, 383, 384, 528, 314, 315, 550, 644, 645, 659, 342, 647, 460, 643, 666, 595

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified Technical Service Provider (TSP) for development of the “Prescribed Burning Plan” Conservation Activity Plan (CAP). The CAP criteria require the plan to identify approved Field Office Technical Guide conservation practices where needed to address identified resource concerns. The Prescribed Burning Plan CAP is not considered a Forest Management Plan, a Reforestation Plan, a Forest Harvest Plan, or a Prescribed Grazing Plan, but should complement the needs of those plans if they exist and if desired by the decision maker. The CAP plan will fully describe all aspects of the prescribed burn including, but not limited to objectives of the burn (i.e. - site preparation, wildlife habitat, etc.), site conditions (i.e. - fuel load, fuel type, etc.), implementation strategies (i.e. - method of ignition, number of persons required, equipment needs, etc.), tolerable weather parameters (i.e. - wind direction, relative humidity, mixing height, etc.) and identification of Smoke Sensitive Areas. Additional CAP plan criteria are detailed in the Field Office Technical Guide and potentially state developed technical criteria.


Scenario_Description:
Non Industrial Private Forest Land, Pasture or Range Land typically 21 to 100 acres in size and is dominated by fire tolerant species that are competing with undesirable vegetation and accumulating fuel load. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife; Soil Erosion; Soil Condition; Water Quality; Plant Condition.


Scenario_Description:
Non Industrial Private Forest Land, Pasture or Range Land typically 101 to 250 acres in size and is dominated by fire tolerant species that are competing with undesirable vegetation and accumulating fuel load. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife; Soil Erosion; Soil Condition; Water Quality; Plant Condition.


Scenario_Description:
Non Industrial Private Forest Land, Pasture or Range Land typically 251 to 500 acres in size and is dominated by fire tolerant species that are competing with undesirable vegetation and accumulating fuel load. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife; Soil Erosion; Soil Condition; Water Quality; Plant Condition.


Scenario_Description:
Non Industrial Private Forest Land, Pasture or Range Land typically 501 to 1000 acres in size and is dominated by fire tolerant species that are competing with undesirable vegetation and accumulating fuel load. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife; Soil Erosion; Soil Condition; Water Quality; Plant Condition.


Scenario_Name:
Prescribed Burning Plan Greater Than 1000 Acres

Scenario_Description:
Non Industrial Private Forest Land, Pasture or Range Land typically greater than 1000 acres in size and is dominated by fire tolerant species that are competing with undesirable vegetation and accumulating fuel load. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife; Soil Erosion; Soil Condition; Water Quality; Plant Condition.


Practice:
114 - Integrated Pest Management Plan - Written

Scenario_Name:
IPM Management CAP Small-Specialty Less Than 50 Acres

Scenario_Description:
Various on-farm land uses where pests are managed on smaller operations, including organic and specialty crop operations where more complicated pest management evaluations and solutions may be necessary. Current pest control activities cause environmental concerns with water quality and/or erosion. Natural Resource Concern: Water quality and all other appropriate resource concerns.

Before:
Agricultural currently producer has no plan or limited knowledge of development or management of agricultural pests. The producer currently manages pests based upon pesticide label instructions, personal knowledge, or other local criteria. Producer is interested in management of pests and reduce the environmental impacts for environmental benefit. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan and collect/coordinate data recording to monitor per requirements of plan. Associated Practices: Integrated Pest Management, Crop Rotation, Cover Crop, Field Boarder, Filter Strip, Stripcropping, and Residue and Tillage management practices, or other application conservation practices cited tin the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for development of the "Integrated Pest Management" conservation activity plan. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for applicable resource concerns and provides for opportunities to utilize the following strategies: Prevention, Avoidance, Monitoring, and Suppression, which will be implemented through use of "Integrated Pest Management and may use one or more conservation practices and/or risk reduction strategies. The CAP plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address other related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 114 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Name:
IPM Management CAP Medium 51 - 250 Acres

Scenario_Description:
Various on-farm land uses where pests are managed on a moderately-sized farm where IPM is to be applied. Current pest control activities cause environmental concerns with water quality and/or erosion. Natural Resource Concern: Water quality and all other appropriate resource concerns.


Scenario_Name:
IPM Management CAP Large - Greater Than 250 Acres

Scenario_Description:
Various on-farm land uses where pests are managed on a larger farm where IPM strategies are to be applied. Current pest control activities cause environmental concerns with water quality and/or erosion. Natural Resource Concern: Water quality and all other appropriate resource concerns.


Practice:
118 - Irrigation Water Management Plan - Written

Scenario_Name:
Irrigation Water Management Conservation Activity Plan CAP

Scenario_Description:
Agricultural operations supported with existing irrigation systems. Natural Resource Concern: Water quantity and all other appropriate resource concerns.

Before:
Currently producer has no plan or limited knowledge for management of water application to meet crop needs and address identified resource concerns. The producer currently manages water application based upon personal knowledge, or other local criteria. Producer is interested in management of irrigation water to maximize yields, profit margin, reduce costs, and for environmental benefit. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan and collect/coordinate data recording to monitor per requirements of plan. Associated Practices: Irrigation Water Management (449); Irrigation System (442); Irrigation System, Surface & Subsurface (443); Irrigation Pipeline (430); Irrigation Ditch Lining (428); Irrigation Field Ditch (388); Irrigation Canal or Lateral (320); Structure for Water Control (587); Irrigation Reservoir (436); Irrigation System, Tailwater Recovery (447); Pumping Plant (533); Irrigation Land Leveling (464); Anionic Polyacrylamide (PM) Application (450); Salinity and Sodic Soil Management (590); Nutrient Management (590); Waste Utilization (633); or other applicable conservation practices in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for development of the "Irrigation Water Management" conservation activity plan to control the volume, frequency, and rate of water for efficient irrigation and to address other resource concerns. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for applicable resource concerns. The CAP plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address other related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 118 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Name:
Irrigation Water Management CAP with pump test

Before:
Currently producer has no plan or limited knowledge for management of water application to meet crop needs and address identified resource concerns. The producer currently manages water application based upon personal knowledge, or other local criteria. The pump for the irrigation system is of unknown performance. Producer is interested in management of irrigation water to maximize yields, profit margin, reduce costs, and for environmental benefit. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan and collect/coordinate data recording to monitor per requirements of plan. Associated Practices: Irrigation Water Management (449); Irrigation System (442); Irrigation System, Surface & Subsurface (443); Irrigation Pipeline (430); Irrigation Ditch Lining (428); Irrigation Field Ditch (388); Irrigation Canal or Lateral (320); Structure for Water Control (587); Irrigation Reservoir (436); Irrigation System, Tailwater Recovery (447); Pumping Plant (533); Irrigation Land Leveling (464); Anionic Polyacrylamide (PM) Application (450); Salinity and Sodic Soil Management (590); Nutrient Management (590); Waste Utilization (633); or other applicable conservation practices in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for development of the "Irrigation Water Management" conservation activity plan to control the volume, frequency, and rate of water for efficient irrigation and to address other resource concerns. Because a pump test was performed, a new pump that operates more efficiently and matches the irrigation system has been analyzed and could possibly be installed such that less water and energy are consumed. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for applicable resource concerns. The CAP plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address other related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 118 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Practice:
128 - Agricultural Energy Management Plan - Written

Scenario_Description:
Typical operation has either < 300 Acres < 300 AU Up to 2 irrigation pumps <20,000 sq ft of heater greenhouse, or A maple syrup enterprise One enterprise as defined in the ASABE S612 Standard on-farm energy audit standard. A small operation is as described above. Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Natural Resource: Energy Conservation

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer currently manages a small operation as described above. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Associated Practices: 374 Farmstead Energy Improvement, 670 Lighting System Improvement, 672 Building Envelope Improvement, or other applicable practices approved in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for development of the "Agricultural Energy Management Plan". The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for energy conservation and efficiency. The CAP plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address energy conservation. The CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 128 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Description:
Typical operation has either > 2,500 Ac > 1000 AU More than 7 irrigation pumps or > 40,001 sq ft of heater greenhouse One enterprise as defined in the ASABE S612 Standard on-farm energy audit standard in combination with a large operation with one enterprise, one of which is described above. Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Natural Resource: Energy Conservation.

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer currently manages a large operation with enterprise described above. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Associated Practices: 374 Farmstead Energy Improvement, 670 Lighting System Improvement, 672 Building Envelope Improvement or other applicable practices approved in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Description:
Typical operation has either > 2,500 Ac > 1000 AU More than 7 irrigation pumps or > 40,001 sq ft of heater greenhouse Four enterprises as defined in the ASABE S612 Standard on-farm energy audit standard in combination with an large livestock operation, one of which is described above. . Multiple irrigation systems or a mixture of irrigation types may be counted as one of extra enterprises. Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Natural Resource Concern: Energy Conservation.

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. An Agricultural Energy Mgmt CAP for any type of livestock operation with two non-livestock enterprises (complex or multiple irrigation systems can count as one of the extra enterprises) will be planned according to the ASABE S612 Standard (e.g., broiler and greenhouse). Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Associated Practices: 449 Irrigation Water Management, 374 Farmstead Energy Improvement, 670 Lighting System Improvement, 672 Building Envelope Improvement, or other applicable practices approved in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Description:
Typical operation has either 301 to 2500 Ac 301 to 1000 AU 3 to 6 Irrigation Pumps, or 20,001 to 40,000 sq ft heated greenhouse Three enterprises as defined in the ASABE S612 Standard on-farm energy audit standard in combination with a medium operation, one of which is described above. Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Natural Resource Concern: Energy Conservation.

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. An Agricultural Energy Mgmt CAP for any type of operation with three enterprises will be planned according to the ASABE S612 Standard (e.g., broiler and greenhouse). Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Associated Practices: 374 Farmstead Energy Improvement, 670 Lighting System Improvement, 672 Building Envelope Improvement, or other applicable practices approved in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Description:
Typical operation has either 301 to 2500 Ac 301 to 1000 AU 3 to 6 Irrigation Pumps, or 20,001 to 40,000 sq ft heated greenhouse One enterprise as defined in the ASABE S612 Standard on-farm energy audit standard. A medium operation as described above. Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Natural Resource: Energy Conservation

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer currently manages a medium small operation with enterprise described above. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Associated Practices: 374 Farmstead Energy Improvement, 670 Lighting System Improvement, 672 Building Envelope Improvement or other applicable practices approved in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Description:
Typical operation has either <300 Ac <300 AU Up to 2 irrigation pumps, or <20,000 sq ft heated greenhouse Two enterprises as defined in the ASABE S612 Standard on-farm energy audit standard. A small operation as described above. Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Natural Resource: Energy Conservation

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. An Agricultural Energy Mgmt CAP for any type small sized operation with two enterprises will be planned according to the ASABE S612 Standard (e.g., broiler and greenhouse). Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Associated Practices: 374 Farmstead Energy Improvement, 670 Lighting System Improvement, 672 Building Envelope Improvement, or other applicable practices approved in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Description:
Typical operation has either 301 to 2500 Ac 301 to 1000 AU 3 to 6 Irrigation Pumps, or 20,001 to 40,000 sq ft heated greenhouse Two enterprises as defined in the ASABE S612 Standard on-farm energy audit standard in combination with a medium operation, one of which is described above. Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Natural Resource: Energy Conservation

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. An Agricultural Energy Mgmt CAP for any operation with two enterprises will be planned according to the ASABE S612 Standard (e.g., broiler and greenhouse). Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Associated Practices: 374 Farmstead Energy Improvement, 670 Lighting System Improvement, 672 Building Envelope Improvement, or other applicable practices approved in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Description:
Typical operation has either > 2,500 Ac > 1000 AU More than 7 irrigation pumps or > 40,001 sq ft of heater greenhouse Two enterprises as defined in the ASABE S612 Standard on-farm energy audit standard in combination with a large operation, one of which is described above . Multiple irrigation systems or a mixture of irrigation types may be counted as one of extra enterprises. Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Natural Resource: Energy Conservation

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. An Agricultural Energy Mgmt CAP for any operation with two enterprises (complex or multiple irrigation systems can count as one of the extra enterprises) will be planned according to the ASABE S612 Standard (e.g., broiler and greenhouse). Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. An EMP is developed to assist an owner/operator in meeting all applicable local, tribal, State, and Federal water quality goals or regulations. Associated Practices: 449 Irrigation Water Management, 374 Farmstead Energy Improvement, 670 Lighting System Improvement, 672 Building Envelope Improvement, or other applicable practices approved in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Description:
Typical operation has either < 300 Acres < 300 AU Up to 2 irrigation pumps <20,000 sq ft of heater greenhouse, or Three enterprises as defined in the ASABE S612 Standard on-farm energy audit standard in combination with a small operation, one of which is described above. Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Natural Resource Concern: Energy Conservation

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. An Agricultural Energy Mgmt CAP for any type of operation with three enterprises will be planned according to the ASABE S612 Standard (e.g., broiler and greenhouse). Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 122 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Associated Practices: 374 Farmstead Energy Improvement, 670 Lighting System Improvement, 672 Building Envelope Improvement, or other applicable practices approved in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Description:
Typical operation has either > 2,500 Ac > 1000 AU More than 7 irrigation pumps or > 40,001 sq ft of heater greenhouse Three enterprise as defined in the ASABE S612 Standard on-farm energy audit standard in combination with a large operation, one of which is described above. Multiple irrigation systems or a mixture of irrigation types may be counted as one of extra enterprises. Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Natural Resource Concern: Energy Conservation.

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. An Agricultural Energy Mgmt CAP for any type operation with three enterprises (complex or multiple irrigation systems can count as one of the extra enterprises) will be planned according to the ASABE S612 Standard (e.g., broiler and greenhouse). Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Associated Practices: 449 Irrigation Water Management, 374 Farmstead Energy Improvement, 670 Lighting System Improvement, 672 Building Envelope Improvement, or other applicable practices approved in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Description:
Typical operation has either < 300 Acres < 300 AU Up to 2 irrigation pumps, or <20,000 sq ft of heater greenhouse Four enterprises as defined in the ASABE S612 Standard on-farm energy audit standard in combination with an small operation, one of which is described above. Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Natural Resource Concern: Energy Conservation.

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. An Agricultural Energy Mgmt CAP for any operation with four enterprises will be planned according to the ASABE S612 Standard (e.g., broiler and greenhouse). Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Associated Practices: 374 Farmstead Energy Improvement, 670Lighting System Improvement, 672 Building Envelope Improvement, or other applicable practices approved in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Description:
Typical operation has either 301 to 2500 Ac 301 to 1000 AU 3 to 6 Irrigation Pumps, or 20,001 to 40,000 sq ft heated greenhouse Four enterprise as defined in the ASABE S612 Standard on-farm energy audit standard in combination with an medium operation, one of which is described above. Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 128 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Natural Resource Concern: Energy Conservation.

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has minimal knowledge of and no plan for energy conservation. An Agricultural Energy Mgmt CAP for any type of operation with four or more enterprises will be planned according to the ASABE S612 Standard (e.g., broiler and greenhouse). Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop an AgEMP 122 CAP. The AgEMP is a grouping of conservation measures and management activities which, when implemented as part of a conservation system, will help to ensure that both production and natural resource protection goals are achieved. An AgEMP incorporates recommended measures to maximize energy conservation and efficiency. Associated Practices: 374 Farmstead Energy Improvement, 670 Lighting System Improvement, 672 Building Envelope Improvement, or other applicable practices approved in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Practice:
130 - Drainage Water Management Plan - Written

Scenario_Description:
A Drainage Water Management Plan (DWMP) will be developed on a relatively flat crop field with a patterned drainage system, where a map of the tile system is available. The DWMP will document soil, topographic, and drainage system maps of the site, and identify the number and location of water control structures that are needed to implement drainage water management according to Field Office Technical Guide standards. The DWMP will also provide guidelines for management of the water control structures to achieve desired resource outcomes.

Before:
Producer has no plan for or knowledge of managing drainage water. The producer does not manage the field for the purpose of controlling water retention during the crop season and therefore crop yields are reduced. Existing ditches and/or tile drains on the cropland field currently conduct flow off field to waterways resulting in potential water quality resource concerns related to excessive nitrogen.

After:
A certified Technical Service Provider (TSP) develops the "Drainage Water Management" conservation activity plan (CAP). The DWMP documents soil, topographic, and drainage system maps of the site, and identifies the number and location of water control structures that are needed to implement drainage water management according to Field Office Technical Guide standards. The DWMP also provides guidelines for management of the water control structures to achieve desired resource outcomes. The plan is ready for implementation with structural measures and management once the structures are installed. No actual benefits to resource concerns are achieved until the practices in the DWMP are implemented.


Scenario_Description:
A Drainage Water Management Plan (DWMP) will be developed on a relatively flat crop field with a patterned drainage system, where no map of the tile system is available. The DWMP will document soil, topographic, and drainage system maps of the site, and identify the number and location of water control structures that are needed to implement drainage water management according to Field Office Technical Guide standards. The DWMP will also provide guidelines for management of the water control structures to achieve desired resource outcomes.


Scenario_Description:
Component of a conservation plan that identifies soil concerns, as well as potential economic considerations, at a sub-field level. CAP 132 identifies and documents sheet and rill erosion, wind erosion, and soil organic matter depletion resource problems, opportunities, and concerns on an agricultural operation where the producer grows annually planted crops. Natural Resource Concern: Soil Erosion (Wind and Sheet and Rill) and Soil Organic Matter Depletion.

Before:
Agricultural operation currently managed using traditional, conventional methods for farming with only crops. The producer currently manages operation based upon personal knowledge, or other local criteria. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan and collect/coordinate data recording to monitor per requirements of plan. Producer is interested in controlling soil erosion and maintaining or improving soil organic matter to maximize yields, profits margin, reduce costs, and for environmental benefit.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP to develop the "Soil Resources Planning" conservation activity plan. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for applicable resource concerns (Soil Erosion (Wind and Sheet and Rill) and Soil Organic Matter Depletion) and provides for opportunities to implement a system of conservation practices. The CAP provide sub-field planning land units, which must are large enough to encompass the area that influences and the area that is impacted by the conservation practice alternatives developed. The CAP plan will include conservation practices which address related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 132 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Practice:
138 - Conservation Plan Supporting Organic Transition - Written

Scenario_Name:
Conservation Plan Supporting Organic Transition CAP Crops and Livestock

Scenario_Description:
Agricultural operation where producer will transition from conventional to organic to meet USDA National Organic Program (NOP) requirements. Natural Resource Concern: Soil Erosion, Water Quality, Plant Condition, and other identified natural resource concerns.

Before:
Agricultural operation currently managed using traditional and conventional methods for farming and/or ranching mixed operation of crops and livestock. The producer currently manages operation based upon personal knowledge, or other local criteria. Producer is interested in transitioning part or all of the management unit to meet national USDA requirements for certified operation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan and collect/coordinate data recording to monitor per requirements of plan. Associated Practices: Refer to the NRCS Plan Criteria for conservation practices associated with operations transitioning to organic certification and typically needed to address identified natural resource concerns.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP to develop the "Conservation Plan Supporting Organic Transition" conservation activity plan. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for applicable resource concerns and provides for opportunities to implement a system of conservation practices which assist the producer to transition from conventional farming or ranching to an organic production system with crops and livestock. The CAP plan will include conservation practices which address related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 138 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Name:
Conservation Plan Supporting Organic Transition CAP Crops or Livestock

Before:
Agricultural operation currently managed using traditional and conventional methods for farming with only crops. The producer currently manages operation based upon personal knowledge, or other local criteria. Producer is interested in transitioning part or all of the management unit to meet national USDA requirements for certified operation. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan and collect/coordinate data recording to monitor per requirements of plan. Associated Practices: Refer to the NRCS Plan Criteria for conservation practices associated with operations transitioning to organic certification and typically needed to address identified natural resource concerns.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP to develop the "Conservation Plan Supporting Organic Transition" conservation activity plan. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for applicable resource concerns and provides for opportunities to implement a system of conservation practices which assist the producer to transition from conventional farming or ranching to an organic production system with crops only. The CAP plan will include conservation practices which address related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 138 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Practice:
142 - Fish and Wildlife Habitat Plan - Written

Scenario_Name:
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management CAP

Scenario_Description:
Various on-farm land uses. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife, and other applicable resource concerns on an agricultural operation.

Before:
Agricultural currently producer has no plan or knowledge of development or management of fish and/or wildlife habitat. The producer does not currently manage or enhance habitat to promote opportunities for fish and/or habitat. Within existing land uses, producer is interested in management of land or for establishment of new habitat for benefit of appropriate fish or wildlife species. Associated Practices: Applicable conservation practices cited in the CAP criteria and NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for develop of the "Fish and Wildlife Management" conservation activity plan. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for the primary fish/wildlife habitat resource concern and other applicable resource concerns and provides for opportunities to improve, restore, or enhance habitat that supports native and/or managed species. The CAP plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address other related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 142 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Name:
Fish & Wildlife Habitat Management CAP (2 Land Uses)

Scenario_Description:
Various on-farm land uses. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife, and other applicable resource concerns on an agricultural operation. CAP addresses fish and wildlife habitat management relative to two land uses on the agricultural operation of which each land use is at least 20 acres in size.


Scenario_Name:
Fish & Wildlife Habitat Management CAP (Three Land Uses)

Scenario_Description:
Various on-farm land uses. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife, and other applicable resource concerns on an agricultural operation. CAP addresses fish and wildlife habitat management relative to two or more land uses on the agricultural operation of which at least three of the land uses are at least 20 acres in size


Scenario_Name:
Fish & Wildlife Habitat Management CAP (1 Land Use)

Scenario_Description:
Various on-farm land uses. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife, and other applicable resource concerns on an agricultural operation. CAP addresses fish and wildlife habitat management relative to only one land use on the agricultural operation.


Scenario_Description:
Various on-farm land uses. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife, Plant Condition, Soil Erosion, Water Quality on an agricultural operation.

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has no plan or knowledge of development or management of pollinator habitat. The producer does not currently manage or enhance habitat to promote opportunities for pollinator habitat. Within existing land uses, producer may be interested in management of land or for establishment of new habitat for benefit of appropriate pollinator species. Associated Practices: 311, 322, 327, 328, 656, 332, 340, 342, 647, 386, 393, 412, 422, 603, 379, 512, 595, 338, 528, 550, 329, 643, 391, 390, 381, 395, 580, 585, 612, 645, 601, 659, 657, 644, 380, 650.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for develop of the "Pollinator Habitat Enhancement" conservation activity plan. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for applicable resource concerns and provides for opportunities to improve, restore, or enhance flower-rich habitat that supports native and/or managed pollinator species. The CAP plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address other related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 146 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Name:
Pollinator Habitat Enhancement Plan CAP - No Local TSP

Scenario_Description:
Various on-farm land uses, No qualified TSP within 300 miles. Natural Resource Concern: Fish and Wildlife, Plant Condition, Soil Erosion, Water Quality on an agricultural operation.


Practice:
154 - IPM Herbicide Resistance Weed Conservation Plan - Written

Scenario_Name:
IPM Herbicide Resistance Weed Management CAP Large - Greater Than 250 Acres

Scenario_Description:
On-farm cropland where weeds are resistant to herbicides, including organic and specialty crop operations. Natural Resource Concerns: Water quality, soil erosion, soil condition, and plant condition are the appropriate resource concerns.

Before:
Agricultural producer currently has no plan or limited knowledge for management of cropland weeds or for adaptive techniques to address herbicide resistant weeds. The producer currently manages cropland weeds based upon herbicide label instructions, personal knowledge, or other local criteria, and has not implemented strategies to diversity crop rotations and rotate herbicide modes of action for purpose of managing resistant weed spread and protecting soil quality and plant condition. Producer is interested in management of weeds to maximize yields, profit margin, reduce costs, address challenges in herbicide resistant weeds, and for environmental benefit. Producer is willing to collaborate with a certified TSP to develop a plan and collect/coordinate data recording to monitor per requirements of plan. Associated Practices: Integrated Pest Management, Crop Rotation, Cover Crop, Field Boarder, Filter Strip, Stripcropping, and Residue and Tillage management practices, or other application conservation practices cited tin the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.

After:
After EQIP contract approval, participant has obtained services from a certified TSP for develop of the "Herbicide Resistance Weed" conservation activity plan. The CAP criteria requires the plan to meet quality criteria for applicable resource concerns and provides for opportunities to utilize the following strategies: Prevention, Avoidance, Monitoring, and Suppression, which will be implemented through use of Integrated Pest Management and may use one or more of the following conservation practices: Crop Rotation, Cover Crop, and Residue Management. Recommendations on crop system diversification and integration of herbicide mode of action rotation effective for weed control on recommended crop rotation are integral to the CAP. CAP plan may include recommendations for associated conservation practices which address other related resource concerns. CAP meets the basic quality criteria for the 154 plan as cited in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.


Scenario_Name:
IPM Herbicide Resistance Weed Management CAP Small-Specialty Less Than or Equal to 50 Acres


Scenario_Name:
IPM Herbicide Resistance Weed Management CAP Medium 51 - 250 Acres


Scenario_Name:
Enclosed building for storage and handling

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario is an agrichemical handling facility for storage and mixing and loading operations. This practice addresses water quality degradation and due to mis-handling, storing and mixing of agrichemicals where nutrients and/or chemicals are running off into surface waters or leaching into ground water. Associated practices: Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Diversion (362), Access Road (560), Pipeline (516), Roof Runoff Management (558), Pumping Plant for Water Control (533), Nutrient Management (590), Pest Management (595)

Before:
Agrichemicals are improperly stored on the ground or next to a well. Operator mixes the agrichemicals and fills the sprayer tank next to a hydrant. Spills or overflows of agrichemicals contaminate the soil, runoff to surface waters and leaching to ground water.

After:
An agrichemical storage and handling facility is constructed inside an enclosed building. The average size of the agrichemical handling facility for storage and mixing and loading is 35' x 40' with an application equipment length of 36 ft. The handling pad for mixing and loading operations is sized to contain the length of the agrichemical spray tank and its volume. Install a curbed reinforced concrete handling pad for mixing and loading with proper storage of associated dry and/or liquid agrichemicals. The concrete is sealed and sloped to a collection sump, facility containment is surrounded by square and ramped curbs. This practice will contain agrichemicals and prevent contamination of surface and ground water resources.


Scenario_Name:
Earthen Liquid Storage With A Concrete Handling Pad

Scenario_Description:
An earthen lined agrichemical handling facility is constructed for storage of liquid agrichemicals along with a concrete handling pad for mixing and loading operations. This practice addresses water quality degradation and due to mis-handling, storing, and mixing of agrichemicals where nutrients and/or chemicals are running off into surface waters or leaching into ground water. Associated practices: Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Diversion (362), Access Road (560), Pipeline (516), Pumping Plant for Water Control (533), Nutrient Management (590), Pest Management (595), Pond Sealing or Lining Flexible Membrane (521A)

After:
An agrichemical handling facility is constructed for storage of liquid agrichemicals along with a handling pad for mixing and loading operations. The average size of the agrichemical handling facility for proper storage of liquid agrichemicals is in an earthen lined containment with bottom dimensions of 30 ft x 40 ft. A handling pad for mixing and loading is located next to the liquid containment and is 20' x 40' with an application equipment length of 36 ft. The handling pad for mixing and loading operations is sized to contain the length of the agrichemical spray tank and its volume. Install a curbed (6") reinforced concrete handling pad for mixing and loading. The concrete is sealed and sloped to a collection sump. This practice will contain agrichemicals and prevent contamination of surface and ground water resources.

Feature_Measure:
Floor surface area of Liquid Containment Area + Handling pad


Scenario_Name:
Fabricated Liquid Storage With Adjacent Concrete Handling Pad

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario is a fabricated agrichemical handling facility for storage of liquid agrichemicals along with an adjacent concrete mixing and loading pad. Due to topography, limited site space and/or geological conditions a fabricated structure is needed. This practice addresses water quality degradation and due to mis-handling, storing, and mixing of agrichemicals where nutrients and/or chemicals are running off into surface waters or leaching into ground water. Associated practices: Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Diversion (362), Access Road (560), Pipeline (516), Pumping Plant for Water Control (533), Nutrient Management (590), Pest Management (595), Pond Sealing or Lining Flexible Membrane (521A)

After:
An agrichemical handling facility is constructed for storage of liquid agrichemicals along with an adjacent handling pad for mixing and loading operations. The average size of the fabricated containment is 30 ft x 40 ft with flexible membrane lined walls. The walls are of modular blocks stacked two high for a 4ft wall height on four sides. A handling pad for mixing and loading is located adjacent to the liquid containment and is 16' x 32' with an application equipment length of 28 ft. The handling pad for mixing and loading operations is sized to contain the length of the agrichemical spray tank and its volume. Install a curbed (6") reinforced concrete handling pad for mixing and loading. The concrete is sealed and sloped to a collection sump. This practice will contain agrichemicals and prevent contamination of surface and ground water resources.


Scenario_Name:
Outdoor Liquid Agrichemical Storage with a Roofed Building for Dry Chemical Storage and Handling Pad

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario is an outdoor, earthen lined agrichemical handling facility for storage of liquid agrichemicals along with a roofed mixing and loading pad that is also sized to store dry chemicals. This practice addresses water quality degradation and due to mis-handling, storing, and mixing of agrichemicals where nutrients and/or chemicals are running off into surface waters or leaching into ground water. Associated practices: Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Diversion (362), Access Road (560), Pipeline (516), Pumping Plant for Water Control (533), Nutrient Management (590), Pest Management (595), Pond Sealing or Lining Flexible Membrane (521A), Roof Runoff Management (558)

After:
An agrichemical handling facility is constructed for storage of liquid agrichemicals along with a roofed building to store dry agrichemicals with a handling pad for mixing and loading operations. The average size of the agrichemical handling facility for proper storage of liquid agrichemicals is in an earthen lined containment with bottom dimensions of 60 ft x 40 ft. A roofed building for dry agrichemicals and handling pad for mixing and loading is located next to the liquid containment and is 30' x 40' with an application equipment length of 36 ft. The handling pad for mixing and loading operations is roofed and sized to contain the length of the agrichemical spray tank and its volume. Install a curbed (6") reinforced concrete handling pad for mixing and loading. The concrete is sealed and sloped to a collection sump, facility containment has at least two sides constructed of 5 ft post and plant walls. This practice will contain agrichemicals and prevent contamination of surface and ground water resources.


Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario is an agrichemical handling facility for mixing and loading operations. This practice addresses water quality degradation and due to mis-handling, and mixing of agrichemicals where nutrients and/or chemicals are running off into surface waters or leaching into ground water. Associated practices: Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Diversion (362), Access Road (560), Pipeline (516), Pumping Plant for Water Control (533), Nutrient Management (590), Pest Management (595)

After:
This scenario is an agrichemical handling facility pad for mixing and loading operations. The average size of the agrichemical handling pad for mixing and loading is 16' x 40' with an application equipment length of 36 ft. The handling pad for mixing and loading operations is sized to contain the length of the agrichemical spray tank and its volume. Install a curbed reinforced concrete handling pad for mixing and loading. The concrete is sealed and sloped to a collection sump, containment of the pad is surrounded by sloped and ramped reinforced concrete. This practice will contain agrichemicals and prevent contamination of surface and ground water resources.


Scenario_Name:
For Greenhouse, Pallet Drum Storage And Poly Pad For Handling

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario is an agrichemical storage and handling facility for mixing and loading operations within a greenhouse. This practice addresses water quality degradation and due to mis-handling, storing, and mixing of agrichemicals where nutrients and/or chemicals are running off into surface waters or leaching into ground water. Associated practices: Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Diversion (362), Pipeline (516), Pumping Plant for Water Control (533), Nutrient Management (590), Pest Management (595)

After:
This scenario is an agrichemical handling facility storage an impermeable barrier poly pad for mixing and loading operations. The average size of the agrichemical handling storage is for a pallet drum on a 5 ft x 5 ft containment pallet with sump capacity included. A poly pad is used for mixing and loading that is 8ft x 8ft with an application equipment length of 4 ft. The handling pad for mixing and loading operations is sized to contain the length of the agrichemical spray tank and its volume. This practice will contain agrichemicals and prevent contamination of surface and ground water resources.


Scenario_Name:
Existing Building, Addition of Storage With Handling Pad

After:
An agrichemical storage and handling facility is constructed inside an existing building. The average size of the agrichemical handling facility for storage and mixing and loading is 24 ft x 36 ft with an application equipment length of 30 ft. The handling pad for mixing and loading operations is sized to contain the length of the agrichemical spray tank and its volume. Install a curbed reinforced concrete handling pad for mixing and loading with proper storage of associated dry and/or liquid agrichemicals. The concrete is sealed and sloped to a collection sump, facility containment is surrounded by square and ramped curbs and independent of the existing building. This practice will contain agrichemicals and prevent contamination of surface and ground water resources.


Scenario_Description:
The crop or grass land is planted with rows of trees to increase crop diversity. Final row width, and spacing of trees within the row, is based on farm equipment size, growth form of trees, light needs of annual crop or grass, and intent of the landowner. The resource concerns are plant condition - inadequate structure and composition.

Before:
The landscape has been cropped or in perennial grass for many years. It is void of any perennial tree vegetation. On cropland site preparation needs may need deep ripping to eliminate any plow pan and on grass land competing vegetation control is accomplished prior to tree planting.

After:
Trees have been established to diversify the crop production of the field. Typically the area planted is 10 acres on approximately 12 x 40 foot spacing.


Scenario_Name:
Earthen Storage Facility, less than 50K ft3 Storage

Scenario_Description:
An earthen waste impoundment constructed to store wastes such as manure, wastewater, and contaminated runoff as part of an agricultural waste management system. This scenario has a design storage volume of less than 50,000 ft3. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential for surface water and groundwater quality degradation. Earthen storage liners are addressed with another standard. Vehicular and equipment access is addressed in Heavy Use Area Protection (561) to adequately protect liner at agitation and access points. Potential Associated Practices: Pond Sealing or Lining, Bentonite Sealant (521C), Pond Sealing or Lining, Compacted Clay Treatment (521D), Pond Sealing or Lining, Flexible Membrane (521A), Pond Sealing or Lining, Soil Dispersant (521B), Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roofs and Covers (367), and Waste Separation Facility (632), Waste Treatment (629) .

Before:
Operator presently has a confined animal feeding operation without a waste management system adequate to handle the waste stream leaving the animal production facilities. Manure and other agricultural waste by-products are not being utilized or controlled in an environmentally safe manner. The wastes are either accumulating at the source, or are being transported but not properly utilized or disposed. This situation poses an environmental threat of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources.

After:
An earthen storage structure constructed from on-site material provides an environmentally safe facility for storing manure and other agricultural waste by-products. This facility provides the landowner a means of storing waste until it can be utilized in a proper manner in accordance with a nutrient management plan. Typical design size : design storage volume 25,000 ft3; 87'X87' (top); 3:1 inside and outside side slopes; cut/fill ratio = 1.25; total depth = 9.5' (design depth = 8'); (not include in volume - 1' freeboard and 0.5' sludge accumulation).


Scenario_Name:
Earthen Storage Facility, greater than 50K ft3 Storage

Scenario_Description:
An earthen waste impoundment constructed to store wastes such as manure, wastewater, and contaminated runoff as part of an agricultural waste management system. This scenario has a design storage volume of more than 50,000 ft3. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential for surface water and groundwater quality degradation. Earthen storage liners are addressed with another standard. Vehicular and equipment access is addressed in Heavy Use Area Protection (561) to adequately protect liner at agitation and access points. Potential Associated Practices: Pond Sealing or Lining, Bentonite Sealant (521C), Pond Sealing or Lining, Compacted Clay Treatment (521D), Pond Sealing or Lining, Flexible Membrane (521A), Pond Sealing or Lining, Soil Dispersant (521B), Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roofs and Covers (367), and Waste Separation Facility (632), Waste Treatment (629).

After:
An earthen storage structure constructed from on-site material provides an environmentally safe facility for storing manure and other agricultural waste by-products. This facility provides the landowner a means of storing waste until it can be utilized in a proper manner in accordance with a nutrient management plan. Typical design size: design storage volume 168,000 ft3; 157'X162' (top); 3:1 inside and outside side slopes; cut/fill ratio = 1.25; total depth = 13' 8" (design depth = 12'); (not include in volume - 1' freeboard and 8" sludge accumulation).


Scenario_Name:
Earthen Storage Facility, High Water Table

Scenario_Description:
An earthen waste impoundment constructed to store wastes such as manure, wastewater, and contaminated runoff as part of an agricultural waste management system. Due to high water table conditions, the earthen embankment is constructed on the soil surface. Earthfill is obtained within five miles off-site. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential for surface water and groundwater quality degradation. Earthen storage liners are addressed with another standard. Vehicular and equipment access is addressed in Heavy Use Area Protection (561) to adequately protect liner at agitation and access points. Potential Associated Practices: Pond Sealing or Lining, Bentonite Sealant (521C), Pond Sealing or Lining, Compacted Clay Treatment (521D), Pond Sealing or Lining, Flexible Membrane (521A), Pond Sealing or Lining, Soil Dispersant (521B), Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roof and Covers (367), Waste Separation Facility (632), Waste Treatment (629), Subsurface Drain (606), and Underground Outlet (620).

After:
An earthen storage structure constructed from on-site material provides an environmentally safe facility for storing manure and other agricultural waste by-products. This facility provides the landowner a means of storing waste until it can be utilized in a proper manner in accordance with a nutrient management plan. Typical design size: design storage volume 121,200 ft3; 150'X150' (top); 3:1 inside and outside side slopes; embankment topwidth = 10'; compaction ratio = 1.1; total depth = 10' (design depth = 8.5'); (not include in volume - 1' freeboard and 0.5' sludge accumulation); embankment volume = 4*160*((10+70)/2)*10*1.1


Scenario_Name:
Above Ground Steel or Concrete, less than 25K ft3 storage

Scenario_Description:
An above ground circular glass lined steel or concrete structure constructed to store wastes such as manure, wastewater, and contaminated runoff as part of an agricultural waste management system. This scenario has a design storage volume of less than 25,000 ft3. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential for surface water and groundwater quality degradation. Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Waste Separation Facility (632), Waste Treatment (629), and Pumping Plant (533).

After:
An above ground storage structure provides an environmentally safe facility for storing manure and other agricultural waste by-products. This facility provides the landowner a means of storing waste until it can be utilized in a proper manner in accordance with a nutrient management plan. Typical design size : design storage volume 14,000 ft3, (not included - 1' freeboard); based on 31' X 19' glass lined steel tank.


Scenario_Name:
Above Ground Steel or Concrete, between 25 and100K ft3 storage

Scenario_Description:
An above ground circular glass lined steel or concrete structure constructed to store wastes such as manure, wastewater, and contaminated runoff as part of an agricultural waste management system. This scenario has a design storage volume of between 25,000 and 100,000 ft3. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential for surface water and groundwater quality degradation. Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Waste Separation Facility (632), Waste Treatment (629), and Pumping Plant (533).

After:
An above ground storage structure provides an environmentally safe facility for storing manure and other agricultural waste by-products. This facility provides the landowner a means of storing waste until it can be utilized in a proper manner in accordance with a nutrient management plan. Typical design size : design storage volume 75,000 ft3, (not included - 1' freeboard); based on 73' X 19' glass lined steel tank.


Scenario_Name:
Above Ground Steel or Concrete, between 100 and 200K ft3 storage

Scenario_Description:
An above ground circular glass lined steel or concrete structure constructed to store wastes such as manure, wastewater, and contaminated runoff as part of an agricultural waste management system. This scenario has a design storage volume of between 100,000 and 200,000 ft3. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential for surface water and groundwater quality degradation. Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Waste Separation Facility (632), Waste Treatment (629), and Pumping Plant (533).

After:
An above ground storage structure provides an environmentally safe facility for storing manure and other agricultural waste by-products. This facility provides the landowner a means of storing waste until it can be utilized in a proper manner in accordance with a nutrient management plan. Typical design size : design storage volume 177,000 ft3, (not included - 1' freeboard); based on 112' X 19' glass lined steel tank.


Scenario_Name:
Above Ground Steel or Concrete, greater than 200K ft3 storage

Scenario_Description:
An above ground circular glass lined steel or concrete structure constructed to store wastes such as manure, wastewater, and contaminated runoff as part of an agricultural waste management system. This scenario has a design storage volume of greater than 200,000 ft3. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential for surface water and groundwater quality degradation. Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Waste Separation Facility (632), Waste Treatment (629), and Pumping Plant (533).

After:
An above ground storage structure provides an environmentally safe facility for storing manure and other agricultural waste by-products. This facility provides the landowner a means of storing waste until it can be utilized in a proper manner in accordance with a nutrient management plan. Typical design size : design storage volume 235,000 ft3, (not included - 1' freeboard); based on 129' X 19' glass lined steel tank.


Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of a dry stack facility with compacted earthen floor without side walls. This scenario is intended for dryer material such as poultry litter. The purpose of this practice is to properly store manure and other agricultural by-products until they can be hauled away from the site for proper disposal or utilization on land at agronomical rates. This scenario is applicable when geological, soil, and climate conditions are appropriate for earth floors and are allowed by state and local regulations. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Potential Associated practices: 342-Critical Area Planting, 362-Diversion, 561-Heavy Use Area Protection, 367-Roofs and Covers, 558-Roof Runoff Structure, 317-Composting Facility, 633-Waste Recycling, 634-Waste Transfer, 635-Vegetated Treatment Area

Before:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are not being utilized or controlled in an environmentally safe manner. The wastes are either accumulating at the source, or other location, or are being transported but not properly utilized or disposed. This situation poses an environmental threat of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater, in addition to the use of excessive amounts of fertilizers.

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored temporarily, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. The typical is 4,000 SqFt (40' x 100'). The earthen floor will be prepared by stripping the top 1' of soil and roller compacting it back into floor.


Scenario_Name:
Dry stack, earthen floor, wood or concrete wall

Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of a dry stack facility with compacted earthen floor with wooden walls, posts and a concrete curb. This scenario is intended for dryer material such as poultry litter. The purpose of this practice is to properly store manure and other agricultural by-products until they can be hauled away from the site for proper disposal or utilization on land at agronomical rates. This scenario is applicable when geological, soil, and climate conditions are appropriate for earth floors and are allowed by state and local regulations. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Potential Associated practices: 342-Critical Area Planting, 362-Diversion, 561-Heavy Use Area Protection, 367-Roofs and Covers, 558-Roof Runoff Structure, 317-Composting Facility, 633-Waste Recycling, 634-Waste Transfer, 635-Vegetated Treatment Area

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored temporarily, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. The typical is 4,000 SqFt (40' x 100'). The earthen floor will be prepared by stripping the top 1' of soil and roller compacting it back into floor. Walls are 5' pressure treated wood (2" x 8" boards), 6" x 6" x 8' posts set 4' c-c with 6" concrete curbing. Walls allow for greater storage volume. (Wood walls are 4.5' with 0.5' high concrete curbing.) Walls are along three sides of the facility (both short dimensions and one long dimension). Site preparation includes excavation and compaction of top 1' of material, setting posts, and installing curbing and wooden walls.


Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of a dry stack facility with reinforced concrete floor without side walls. This scenario is applicable when geological, soil, climate conditions or state and local regulations prohibit the use of an earthen surface, and requires a hard working surface such as concrete. The purpose of this practice is to properly store manure and other agricultural by-products until they can be hauled away from the site for proper disposal or utilization on land at agronomical rates. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Potential Associated practices: 342-Critical Area Planting, 362-Diversion, 561-Heavy Use Area Protection, 367-Roofs and Covers, 558-Roof Runoff Structure, 317-Composting Facility, 633-Waste Recycling, 634-Waste Transfer, 635-Vegetated Treatment Area

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored temporarily, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. The typical is 4,000 SqFt (40' x 100'). The facility floor is 5" reinforced concrete without side walls. Site preparation includes topsoil removal (0.5'), placement of compacted gravel (4"), and installing 5" of reinforced concrete.


Scenario_Name:
Dry Stack, concrete floor, wood or concrete wall

Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of a dry stack facility with reinforced concrete Floor with pressure treated wood or concrete walls. This scenario is applicable when geological, soil, climate conditions or state and local regulations prohibit the use of an earthen surface, and requires a hard working surface such as concrete. The purpose of this practice is to temporarily, properly store manure and other agricultural by-products until they can be hauled away from the site for proper disposal or utilization on land at agronomical rates. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Potential Associated practices: 342-Critical Area Planting, 362-Diversion, 561-Heavy Use Area Protection, 367-Roofs and Covers, 558-Roof Runoff Structure, 317-Composting Facility, 633-Waste Recycling, 634-Waste Transfer, 635-Vegetated Treatment Area

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored temporarily, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. The typical is 4,000 SqFt (40' x 100') with wood walls. The facility floor is 5" reinforced concrete with 5' pressure treated wood (2" x 8" boards) walls, 6" x 6" x 8' posts set 4' c-c with 6" concrete curbing. Walls allow for greater storage volume. (Wood walls are 4.5' with 0.5' high concrete curbing.) Walls are along three sides of the facility (both short dimensions and one long dimension). Site preparation includes topsoil removal (0.5'), placement of compacted gravel (4"), installing 5" of reinforced concrete floor, setting posts, and installing curbing and wooden walls.


Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of installing a small concrete tank with a design storage volume of less than 5,000 CF that is totally or partially buried and has a solid lid with several openings for direct loading from a heavy use area, gutter cleaner or gravity pipe. Manure is held for 3 to 14 days on smaller operations or transferred to larger storage facility or direct land applied. Design volume does not include freeboard. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roof and Covers (367), Waste Separation Facility (632), Diversion (362), Subsurface Drain (606), Pumping Plant (533),and Underground Outlet (620).

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored temporarily, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Tank typically 8' deep x 12' wide x 40' long, with a design storage volume of 3,600 cubic feet plus 6" freeboard and concrete top. Sizing based on manure, other wastes, rainfall, lot runoff, etc. Volume does not include 6" of freeboard. Tanks associated with open lots sized to handle design storm in tank or in combination with lot as per state regulations. Site preparation includes excavation of tank footprint, placement of compacted gravel (5"), pouring concrete floor, walls and top, and backfilling around the tank.


Scenario_Name:
Concrete Tank, Buried, between 5K and 15K

Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of installing a concrete tank that has a design storage volume from 5,000 to 14,999 CF that is totally or partially buried and has an open top. The tank can also be under an animal facility with the top cover of either slats or solid concrete lid/floor. Design volume does not include freeboard. Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roof and Covers (367), Waste Separation Facility (632), Diversion (362), Subsurface Drain (606), and Underground Outlet (620).

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored temporarily, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Tank typically 8' deep, with a bottom area of 1256 SF, and a design storage volume of 9,420 cubic feet plus 6" freeboard (40' diameter). (6.5' excavation depth with 8" wall thickness.) Sizing based on manure, other wastes, rainfall, lot runoff, etc. as appropriate. Volume does not include 6" of freeboard. Site preparation includes excavation of tank footprint, placement of compacted gravel (5"), pouring concrete floor and wall, and backfilling around the tank.


Scenario_Name:
Concrete Tank, Buried, between 15K and 25K

Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of installing a concrete tank that has a design storage volume from 15,000 to 24,999 CF. The tank is totally or partially buried and has an open top. It can be under an animal facility with the top cover being slats or concrete lid/floor. The design volume does not include freeboard. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roof and Covers (367), Waste Separation Facility (632), Diversion (362), Subsurface Drain (606), Pumping Plant (533) and Underground Outlet (620).

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored temporarily, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Tank is typically 8 ft deep, with a bottom area of 2,667 sq.ft., and a design storage volume of 20,000 cubic feet plus 6” freeboard (58.5' diameter). (6.5' excavation depth with 8" wall thickness.) Size based on design volume of manure, other wastes, rainfall, lot runoff, etc. as appropriate and does not include the 6” of freeboard. Site preparation includes excavation of tank footprint, placement of compacted gravel (5"), pouring concrete floor and wall, and backfilling around the tank.


Scenario_Name:
Concrete Tank, Buried, between 25K and 50K

Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of installing a concrete tank that has a design storage volume from 25,000 to 49,999 CF. Tank is totally or partially buried and has an open top. Tank can be under a animal facility with the top cover being slats or concrete lid/floor. The design volume does not include freeboard. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roof and Covers (367), Waste Separation Facility (632), Diversion (362), Subsurface Drain (606), and Underground Outlet (620).

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored temporarily, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Tank installed is 10' deep, with a bottom area of 2,947 SF, and a design storage volume of 28,000 cubic feet plus 6" freeboard (61.3' diameter). (8' excavation depth with 8" wall thickness.) Size based on manure, other wastes, rainfall, lot runoff, etc. as appropriate. Calculated volume for scenario does not include the 6” of freeboard. Site preparation includes excavation of tank footprint, placement of compacted gravel (5"), pouring concrete floor and wall, and backfilling around the tank.


Scenario_Name:
Concrete Tank, Buried, between 50K and 75K

Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of installing a concrete tank that has a design storage volume from 50,000 to 74,999 CF. Tank is totally or partially buried and has an open top, however it can be under a animal facility with the top cover with slats or concrete lid/floor. The design volume does not include freeboard. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roof and Covers (367), Waste Separation Facility (632), Diversion (362), Subsurface Drain (606), and Underground Outlet (620).

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored temporarily, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Tank typically 12' deep, with a bottom area of 5,391 SF, and a design storage volume of 62,000 cubic feet plus 6" freeboard (82.9' diameter). (10' excavation depth with 10" wall thickness.) Sizing based on manure, other wastes, rainfall, lot runoff, etc. as appropriate. Volume does not include 6" of freeboard. Site preparation includes excavation of tank footprint, placement of compacted gravel (5"), pouring concrete floor and wall, and backfilling around the tank.


Scenario_Name:
Concrete Tank, Buried, between 75K and 110K

Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of installing a concrete tank that has a design storage volume from 75,000 to 109,999 CF. Tank is totally or partially buried and has an open top. Tank can also be under an animal facility with the top cover using slats or concrete lid/floor. The design volume does not include freeboard. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roof and Covers (367), Waste Separation Facility (632), Diversion (362), Pipeline (516), Subsurface Drain (606), and Underground Outlet (620).

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored temporarily, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Tank typically 12' deep, with a bottom area of 8,044 SF, and a design storage capacity of 92,500 cubic feet plus 6" freeboard (101.2' diameter). (10' excavation depth with 10" wall thickness.) Sizing based on manure, other wastes, rainfall, lot runoff, etc. as appropriate. Volume does not include 6" of freeboard. Site preparation includes excavation of tank footprint, placement of compacted gravel (5"), pouring concrete floor and wall, and backfilling around the tank.


Scenario_Name:
Concrete Tank, Buried, greater than 110K

Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of installing a concrete tank that has a design storage volume of 110, 000 or more CF. Tank is totally or partially buried and has an open top. Tank can also be under a animal facility with the top cover using slats or concrete lid/floor. The design volume does not include freeboard. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roof and Covers (367), Waste Separation Facility (632), Diversion (362), Pipeline (516), Subsurface Drain (606), and Underground Outlet (620).

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored temporarily, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Tank typically 14' deep with a bottom area of 11,304 SF and a design storage volume of 152,600 CF plus 6" freeboard (120' diameter). (12' excavation depth with 10" wall thickness.) Sizing based on manure, other wastes, rainfall, lot runoff, etc. as appropriate. Volume does not include 6" of freeboard. Site preparation includes excavation of tank footprint, placement of compacted gravel (5"), pouring concrete floor and wall, and backfilling around the tank.


Scenario_Name:
Composted Bedded Pack, Earthen Floor, Concrete Wall

Scenario_Description:
A composted bedded pack facility is constructed to store wastes as part of an agricultural waste management system. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential for surface water and groundwater quality degradation. Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Nutrient Management (590), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), and Roofs and Covers (367).

After:
Using a bedded pack provides an environmentally safe facility for storing manure and other agricultural waste by-products. This facility provides the landowner a means of storing waste until it can be utilized in a proper manner in accordance with a nutrient management plan. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Typical design: floor area 4,000 ft2 , (40' X 100'); 4' concrete wall height, 3' footing depth with an earthen floor; 20' openings on each end of structure. Site preparation includes excavation of bedded pack area and concrete wall trench, recompaction of earthen floor, pouring concrete wall, and backfilling around the wall.


Scenario_Name:
Composted Bedded Pack, Concrete Floor, Concrete Wall

Scenario_Description:
A composted bedded pack facility is constructed to store wastes such as manure, wastewater, and contaminated runoff as part of an agricultural waste management system. This scenario is intended for situations where consistency of manure or geological conditions prohibit the use of earthen floors. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential for surface water and groundwater quality degradation. Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Nutrient Management (590), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561) and Roofs and Covers (367).

After:
Using a bedded pack provides an environmentally safe facility for storing manure and other agricultural waste by-products. This facility provides the landowner a means of storing waste until it can be utilized in a proper manner in accordance with a nutrient management plan. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Typical design: floor area 4,000 ft2, (40' X 100'); 4' concrete wall height, 3' footing depth with a 6" concrete floor; 20' openings on each end of structure. Site preparation includes excavation of bedded pack area and concrete wall trench, gravel placement for concrete floor (4"), pouring concrete floor and wall, and backfilling around the wall.


Scenario_Description:
Using hand tools, such as axes, shovels, hoes, nippers, brush pullers, and including chainsaws to remove or cut off woody plants at of below the root collar. Typical area is moderate rolling to gentle sloping, moderately deep to deep soils that have stands of woody and non herbaceous species that are in the early phases of invasions. Typical unit is 80 acres.

Before:
Area is in the very early phases of woody non herbaceous species encroachment that degrades habitat for desired wildlife species. Future degradation of key forage species and ecological site condition promoting noxious and invasive species and increased soil erosion if woody species are allowed to expand.

After:
Woody species are removed to achieve the desirable plant community based on species composition, structure, density, and canopy cover or height. Ecological site condition continues to progressing in an upward trend, hydrology and plant health and vigor are sustained.


Scenario_Name:
Mechanical, Small Shrubs, Light Infestation

Scenario_Description:
Removal of small woody vegetation of light infestations on gentle sloping to moderately deep to deep soils. The practice entails the removal of brush by the use of mechanical cutter, chopper or other light equipment in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition. Brush density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential. It has been determined that the brush is at a light infestation. Typical unit is 120 acres.

Before:
Area consist of excessive stands of shrub species degrading health and vigor of native herbaceous species promoting noxious and invasive species and degrading wildlife habitat.

After:
Woody species are removed to achieve the desirable plant community based on species composition, structure, density, and canopy cover or height. Ecological site condition is progressing in an upward trend, hydrology and plant health and vigor is returning to near normal levels, and improved wildlife habitat.


Scenario_Name:
Mechanical, Small Shrubs, Medium Infestation

Scenario_Description:
Removal of small woody vegetation of medium infestations on gentle sloping to moderately deep to deep soils. The practice entails the removal of brush by the use of mechanical cutter, chopper or other light equipment in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition. Brush density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential. It has been determined that the brush is at the medium infestation. Typical unit is 120 acres.


Scenario_Name:
Mechanical, Small Shrubs, Heavy Infestation

Scenario_Description:
Removal of small woody vegetation of heavy infestations on gentle sloping to moderately deep to deep soils. The practice entails the removal of brush by the use of mechanical cutter, chopper or other light equipment in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition. Brush density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential. It has been determined that the brush is at the heavy infestation. Typical unit is 120 acres.


Scenario_Name:
Mechanical, Large Shrubs, Light Infestation

Scenario_Description:
Removal of large woody vegetation of light infestations on gentle sloping to moderately deep to deep soils. The practice entails the removal of brush by pushing, grubbing, masticating, chaining and then raking or piling in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition. Brush density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential. It has been determined that the brush is at the light infestation. Typical unit is 120 acres.


Scenario_Name:
Mechanical, Large Shrubs, Medium Infestation

Scenario_Description:
Removal of large woody vegetation of medium infestations on gentle sloping to moderately deep to deep soils. The practice entails the removal of brush by pushing, grubbing, masticating, chaining and then raking or piling in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition. Brush density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential. It has been determined that the brush is at the medium infestation. Typical unit is 120 acres.


Scenario_Name:
Mechanical, Large Shrubs, Heavy Infestation

Scenario_Description:
Removal of large woody vegetation of heavy infestations on gentle sloping to moderately deep to deep soils. The practice entails the removal of brush by pushing, grubbing, masticating, chaining then raking or piling in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition. Brush density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential. It has been determined that the brush is at the heavy infestation. This scenario can also be used for fields that need different mechanical treatments to treat different species and each species has less than heavy infestation. Typical unit is 120 acres.


Scenario_Name:
Mechanical & Chemical, Small Shrubs, Light Infestation

Scenario_Description:
Removal of small woody vegetation of light infestations on gentle sloping to moderately deep to deep soils. The practice entails the removal of brush by the use of mechanical cutter, chopper or other light equipment followed by an application of low cost chemicals in low volumes of material in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition. Brush density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential. It has been determined that the brush is at the light infestation rate. Typical unit is 120 acres.


Scenario_Name:
Mechanical & Chemical, Small Shrubs, Medium Infestation

Scenario_Description:
Removal of small woody vegetation of medium infestations on gentle sloping to moderately deep to deep soils. The practice entails the removal of brush by the use of mechanical cutter, chopper or other light equipment followed by an application of low cost chemicals in low volumes of material in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition. Brush density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential. It has been determined that the brush is at the medium infestation rate. Typical unit is 120 acres.


Scenario_Name:
Mechanical & Chemical, Small Shrubs, Heavy Infestation

Scenario_Description:
Removal of small woody vegetation of heavy infestations on gentle sloping to moderately deep to deep soils. The practice entails the removal of brush by the use of mechanical cutter, chopper or other light equipment t followed by an application of low cost chemicals in low volumes of material in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition. Brush density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential. It has been determined that the brush is at the heavy infestation. Typical unit is 120 acres.


Scenario_Description:
This Practice is for the implementation of brush management on range, pasture or native pasture using Individual Plant Treatment (IPT). The typical method of control is application of herbicides (basal or foliar location) on selected individual plants.

Before:
Brush species exceed desired levels resulting in degraded plant condition, loss of forage production, or degraded wildlife habitat. Densities of brush exceed levels indicated in the ecological site descriptions.

After:
Brush has been treated to a level which results in improved plant condition, forage production, or wildlife habitat. The typical method of control is application of herbicides (basal or foliar location) on selected individual plants.


Scenario_Description:
Apply brush management on 160 acres of rangeland, grazed forest, or pasture thru the use of broadcast application of material using low cost chemical(s) to reduce or remove undesirable woody species (brush) in uplands and other areas not in or directly adjacent to streams, ponds, or wetlands.

Before:
Plant, animal, or wildlife resource concerns associated with uplands and other areas not in or adjacent to stream, ponds, or wetland on grazed range, grazed forest, or pasture which are adversely affected by brush.

After:
A 160 acre unit of pasture, grazed range, or grazed forest where reduction or removal of undesirable woody deciduous species have been accomplished by broadcast or spot treatment chemical application to address plant, animal, and wildlife resource concerns.


Scenario_Description:
Apply brush management on 500 acres of rangeland, grazed forest, or pasture thru the use of broadcast aerial application of material with low cost chemical(s) to reduce or remove undesirable woody species (brush) in uplands and other areas not in or directly adjacent to streams, ponds, or wetlands.

After:
A 500 acre unit of pasture, grazed range, or grazed forest where reduction or removal of undesirable woody species have been accomplished by broadcast or spot treatment chemical application to address plant, animal, and wildlife resource concerns.


Scenario_Description:
Apply brush management on 500 acres of rangeland, grazed forest, or pasture thru the use of broadcast aerial application of material with low cost chemical(s) to reduce or remove undesirable woody species (such as mesquite and or shinnery oak brush) in uplands and other areas not in or directly adjacent to streams, ponds, or wetlands.

After:
A 500 acre unit of pasture, grazed range, or grazed forest where reduction or removal of undesirable woody species (brush) have been accomplished by broadcast or spot treatment chemical application to address plant, animal, and wildlife resource concerns.


Scenario_Name:
Chemical, Aerial Applied (Resprouting Species)

Scenario_Description:
Apply brush management on 30 acres of rangeland, grazed forest, or pasture thru the use of broadcast aerial application of chemical(s) to reduce or remove undesirable woody species (resprouting species) in uplands and other areas.

Before:
Plant, animal, or wildlife resource concerns associated with uplands and other areas on grazed range, grazed forest, or pasture which are adversely affected by brush or trees.

After:
A 30 acre unit of pasture, grazed range, or grazed forest where reduction or removal of undesirable woody species have been accomplished by aerial chemical application to address plant, animal, and wildlife resource concerns.


Scenario_Description:
The practice entails the control of woody vegetation by treating it up to three times during the multi-year treatment period in order to improve ecological site condition. The brush can be treated with the same method or by a combination of methods. Woody vegetation needs to be treated at least twice in order to fully control it. Generally, herbicide volumes are reduced as the last treatment will kill resprouting stems or those which survived the first treatment or newly sprouted seedlings. Brush density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential.

Before:
Area has excessive stands of woody species degrading health and vigor of desirable species promoting noxious and invasive species and degrading wildlife habitat.


Scenario_Description:
Removal of pinyon/juniper trees in areas with low density encroachment of less than 100 trees per acre. The practice entails the removal of trees by mechanical means, either chainsaw or heavy equipment or a combination as appropriate in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition. Tree density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential and data collected as per state specifications to determine actual density. Typical unit is 500 acres in fairly remote areas.

Before:
Area consists of excessive stands of pinyon juniper degrading health and vigor of native herbaceous species promoting noxious and invasive species and degrading wildlife habitat, especially for sage grouse areas.

After:
Pinyon/Juniper trees are removed to achieve the desirable plant community based on species composition, structure, density, and canopy cover or height. Ecological site condition is progressing in an upward trend, hydrology and plant health and vigor is returning to near normal levels, and improved wildlife habitat.


Scenario_Name:
PJ Mechanical Removal - Moderate Density

Scenario_Description:
Removal of pinyon/juniper trees in areas with moderate density encroachment between 101 - 250 trees per acre. The practice entails the removal of trees by mechanical means, either chainsaw or heavy equipment or a combination as appropriate in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition. Tree density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential and data collected as per state specifications to determine actual density. Typical unit is 500 acres in fairly remote areas.


Scenario_Description:
Removal of pinyon/juniper trees in areas with high density encroachment of over 251 trees per acre. The practice entails the removal of trees by mechanical means, either chainsaw or heavy equipment or a combination as appropriate in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition. Tree density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential and data collected as per state specifications to determine actual density. Typical unit is 500 acres in fairly remote areas.


Scenario_Description:
Site preparation of a field with 2 dozers and an anchor chain to uproot pinyon and juniper trees to achieve a conservation objective. Typical scenario is approximately 500 acres of trees to be cleared. The resource concern is determined by the conservation objective met with the final practice applied to the field, typically sage grouse habitat and/or forage improvement.

Before:
Wooded juniper area of approximately 500 acres, with variable density tree canopy.

After:
Crew uses 2 dozers and an anchor chain to clear trees and prepare field for conservation objective. Associated practices, like plantings, woody debris removal, other structures, or irrigation/drainage water management practices, would be contracted separately as needed.


Scenario_Description:
The practice entails the removal or thinning of brush in riparian or other sensitive areas by the use of mechanical cutter, chopper or chainsaw followed by herbicide application through stump painting and piling the resulting woody debris in order to improve ecological site or riparian condition. The brush species and/or level of infestation impairs plant community health, wildlife habitat, streambank functions and/or agricultural operations. Brush is at heavy infestation levels.

Before:
Riparian or sensitive area consists of excessive stands of brush degrading health and vigor of native species and degrading wildlife habitat. The brush cannot be cleared with heavy equipment and widespread chemical use due to the sensitive nature of the area.


Scenario_Description:
Using hand tools, such as axes, shovels, hoes, nippers, to remove or cut off herbaceous plants at of below the root collar. Typical area is moderate rolling to gentle sloping, moderately deep to deep soils that have herbaceous weed species that are in the early phases of invasions. Typical unit is 20 acres.

Before:
Area is in the very early phases of herbaceous weed encroachment that degrades habitat for desired wildlife species. Future degradation of key forage species and ecological site condition promoting noxious and invasive species and increased soil erosion if woody species are allowed to expand.

After:
Herbaceous weeds are removed to achieve the desirable plant community based on species composition, structure, density, and canopy cover or height. Ecological site condition continues to progressing in an upward trend, hydrology and plant health and vigor are sustained.


Scenario_Description:
Removal of herbaceous weeds of light infestations on gentle sloping to moderately deep to deep soils. The practice entails the removal of herbaceous weeds by the use of mower, brush hog, disc or other light equipment in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition. Weed has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential. Typical unit is 40 acres.

Before:
Area consist of excessive stands of herbaceous weeds degrading health and vigor of native herbaceous species promoting noxious and invasive species and degrading wildlife habitat.

After:
Herbaceous weeds are removed to achieve the desirable plant community based on species composition, structure, density, and canopy cover or height. Ecological site condition is progressing in an upward trend, hydrology and plant health and vigor is returning to near normal levels, and improved wildlife habitat.


Scenario_Description:
Land unit on which weed control would be beneficial in order to set back the plant community succession, improve the ecological condition, and improve forage conditions for domestic livestock or wildlife. The practice entails the eradication of vegetation by use of weed treatment, either initial or retreatment using hand-carried equipment (such as a backpack and hand-sprayer) to apply chemicals, in order to eliminate noxious weeds, promote forage productivity, and improve ecological condition.


Scenario_Description:
Land unit on which weed control would be beneficial in order to set back the plant community succession, improve the ecological condition, and improve forage conditions for domestic livestock or wildlife. The practice entails the eradication of vegetation by use of weed treatment using ground equipment to apply chemicals, in order to eliminate noxious weeds, promote forage productivity, and improve ecological condition.


Scenario_Description:
Land unit on which weed control would be beneficial in order to set back the plant community succession, improve the ecological condition, and improve forage conditions for domestic livestock or wildlife. The practice entails the eradication of vegetation by use of weed treatment using airplane or helicopter to apply chemicals, in order to eliminate noxious weeds, promote forage productivity, and improve ecological condition.


Scenario_Description:
Using hand tools, such as axes, shovels, hoes, nippers, to remove or cut off herbaceous plants at or below the root collar. Herbicide is applied to control re-growth of target weeds. Typical area is moderate rolling to gentle sloping, moderately deep to deep soils that have herbaceous weed species that are in the early phases of invasions. Typical unit is 10 acres.


Scenario_Description:
Removal of herbaceous weeds of light infestations on gentle sloping to moderately deep to deep soils. The practice entails the removal of herbaceous weeds by the use of mower, brush hog, disc or other light equipment in order to reduce fuel loading and improve ecological site condition, then applying herbicide to control re-growth of target weeds. Weed has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential. Typical unit is 40 acres.


Scenario_Description:
The practice entails the control of herbaceous vegetation by treating it up to three times during the multi-year treatment period in order to improve ecological site condition. The herbs can be treated with the same method or by a combination of methods. Vegetation needs to be treated at least twice in order to fully control it. Generally, herbicide volumes are reduced as the last treatment will kill resprouting stems or those which survived the first treatment or newly sprouted seedlings. Density has exceeded desired levels based on ecological site potential.


Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of installing a manufactured Type IV incinerator designed to handle 350 lbs of average daily mortality for the species and size of the operation. System shall use high temperature (>1,300 degrees F) incineration with a secondary combustion or afterburner chamber prior to flue discharge. After determining average daily mortality in lbs, select smallest incinerator that meets capacity. Payment made per unit of actual chamber size obtained from manufacturers' product literature. This option is not typically least-cost. In most states a roofed static compost pile with concrete floor and bins would be considered least cost. Therefore consider reducing payment rate as per State Conservationist discretion. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Air quality impacts due to odors will also be addressed, however, in non-attainment areas, certain states may require a higher level of processing such as gasification or other approved methods. Potential Associated Practices: Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Access Road (560), Waste Storage Facility (313), Nutrient Management (590), Roofs and Covers (367), Critical Area Planting (342).

Before:
Animal mortality is done in a manner that results in non-point source pollution of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Improper operation results in odors and spread of pathogens from incomplete composting, incineration, or interaction with predators. No plan was formulated for both normal and catastrophic mortality events.

After:
Animal mortality is being done in a manner that prevents non-point source pollution of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Proper operation results in little to no odors, complete incineration, and protection from predators to minimize pathogen survival or spreading. An overall plan covers normal and catastrophic mortality events. Selected method for carcass treatment and disposal meet or are permitted by federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulation. Typical incinerator installed to handle 150 lbs per day average mortality for a small poultry operation and has an incinerator chamber volume of 44 cubic feet. Included is a concrete slab to set the incinerator on and a fuel tank. Ash materials to be stored in suitable containers until land disposal as per the nutrient management plan or landfilled.


Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of installing a manufactured Type IV incinerator designed to handle 350 to 850 lbs of average daily mortality for the species and size of the operation. Typically very large poultry or medium sized swine operations. System shall use high temperature (>1,300 degrees F) incineration with a secondary combustion or afterburner chamber prior to flue discharge. After determining average daily mortality in lbs, select smallest incinerator that meets capacity. Payment made per unit of actual chamber size obtained from manufacturers' product literature. This option is not typically least-cost. In most states a roofed static pile with concrete floor and bins would be considered least cost. Therefore consider reducing payment rate as per State Conservationist discretion. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Air quality impacts due to odors are reduced, however, in non-attainment areas, certain states may require a higher level of processing such as gasification or other approved methods. Potential Associated Practices: Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Access Road (560), Waste Storage Facility (313), Nutrient Management (590), Roofs and Covers (367), Critical Area Planting (342).

After:
Animal mortality is being done in a manner that prevents non-point source pollution of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Proper operation results in little to no odors, complete incineration, and protection from predators to minimize pathogen survival or spreading. In non-attainment areas, certain states may require a higher level of processing such as gasification or different methods. An overall plan covers normal and catastrophic mortality events. Selected method for carcass treatment and disposal meet or are permitted by federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulation. Typical incinerator installed to handle 700 lbs per day average mortality for a medium poultry or swine operation and has an incinerator chamber volume of 55.8 cubic feet. Included is a concrete slab to set the incinerator on and a diesel fuel tank. Ash materials to be stored in suitable containers until land disposal as per the nutrient management plan or landfilled.


Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of installing a manufactured Type IV incinerator designed to handle a single 1,200 to 1,500 mortality. Typically a single dairy cow or multiple heifers or swine. System shall use high temperature (>1,300 degrees F) incineration with a secondary combustion or afterburner chamber prior to flue discharge. Select smallest incinerator that has a bin capacity to handle largest individual mortality. Payment made per unit of actual chamber size obtained from manufacturers' product literature. This option uses a very small footprint, however, it costs 15-20 gallons of diesel fuel per fill. The usage needs to be significant. At 500 cows with replacements, this option would offset a 4,000 SF concrete pad with another 8,000 to 12,000 SF of grassed area. This option for small dairy operations would not typically be least-cost. In most states either a roofed or unroofed static pile with concrete floor and walls would be considered least cost. Unless regulations require this or severe site limitations exist, consider reducing payment rate as per State Conservationist discretion. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Air quality impacts due to odors will also be addressed, however, in non-attainment areas, certain states may require a higher level of processing such as gasification or other approved methods. Potential Associated Practices: Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Access Road (560), Waste Storage Facility (313), Nutrient Management (590), Roofs and Covers (367), Critical Area Planting (342).

After:
Animal mortality is being done in a manner that prevents non-point source pollution of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Proper operation results in little to no odors, complete incineration, and protection from predators to minimize pathogen survival or spreading. An overall plan covers normal and catastrophic mortality events. In non-attainment areas, certain states may require a higher level of processing such as gasification or other approved method. Selected method for carcass treatment and disposal meet or are permitted by federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulations. Typical incinerator installed to handle a whole 1350 lb dairy cow on a 1,000 cow operation and has an incinerator chamber volume of 119.6 cubic feet. Included is a concrete slab to set the incinerator on and a fuel tank. Ash materials to be stored in suitable containers, a waste storage pit until land disposal as per the nutrient management plan or landfilled. Proper incineration will require between 15 and 25 gallons of diesel fuel per usage.


Scenario_Description:
This scenario will address animal mortalities for small animal types (less than 10 pound average weight -i.e. broilers and birth to weaning swine). It was developed for various types of animal mortality facilities as listed below (which is not an exhaustive list): − Static Bin: Consisting of a group of small bins (concrete or wood walls) on a concrete pad to compost mortality in static pile(s) that have sufficient bulking material to allow natural aeration. Piles are turned to go through a second heat cycle prior to final land application. − Invessel Rotary Drum. A commercially manufactured horizontal rotary drum to compost animal mortalities mixed with a carbon material (i.e. sawdust or wood chips). A secondary composting storage area is required to finish materials. − Invessel Grinding Batch. A commercially manufactured grinding batch composter with a minimum capacity of 1,000 lbs per batch. A secondary composting storage area is required to finish materials. - Forced Air Composting Bins: Consisting of a group of small bins with an aeration and leachate collection system. (This scenario does not address incinerators.) The least cost scenario is based on a static bin system with wood walls. The roofed portion of the facility is addressed with Roofs and Covers (367). Approach apron is addressed with Heavy Use Area Protection (561). Size of facility is based on daily mortality and sizing procedures accepted in particular state. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Air quality impacts due to odors will also be addressed. Organic sites will require more frequent replacement of lumber (if used). Potential Associated Practices: Roofs and Cover ( 367 ), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Structure for Water Control (587), Roof Runoff Structure (558), Diversion (362), Subsurface Drain (606), and Underground Outlet (620).

After:
Animal mortality is being done in a manner that prevents non-point source pollution of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Proper operation results in little to no odors and protection from predators to minimize pathogen survival or spreading. An overall plan covers normal and catastrophic mortality events. Selected method for carcass treatment and disposal meet or are permitted by federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulation. The typical mortality facility is based on a wood wall static bin composting facility with the primary bins on one side and secondary bins along the backside. A typical livestock operation consists of a 88,000 broiler operation with 6 flocks per year. Average bird weight is 4 pounds with an average mortality rate of 5%. The average daily mortality is 289 lb/day which requires a minimum primary bin volume of 646 ft3. The secondary bin volume is the same as the primary bin. The facility will be installed on a 12' X 24' concrete pad with 6 bins (3 primary and 3 secondary bins) with a total bin capacity of 1,440 cubic feet. Bin dimensions are 5' Height x 8' Width x 6' Length. Bin wall consists of a 1' concrete curb and 4' of treated lumber. Site preparation includes topsoil removal, installing 4" of gravel, setting posts , installing concrete slab (5"), installing wooden walls and retaining planks. Piles turned to go through a second heat cycle prior to final land application.


Scenario_Description:
This scenario will address animal mortalities for small animal types (which generally range in size from 10 to 50 pounds average weight -i.e. turkeys and nursery pigs). It was developed for various types of animal mortality facilities as listed below (which is not an exhaustive list): − Static Bin:  Consisting of a group of small bins (concrete or wood walls) on a concrete pad to compost mortality in static pile(s) that have sufficient bulking material to allow natural aeration. Piles are turned to go through a second heat cycle prior to final land application. − Invessel Rotary Drum. A commercially manufactured horizontal rotary drum to compost animal mortalities mixed with a carbon material (i.e. sawdust or wood chips). A secondary composting storage area is required to finish materials. − Invessel Grinding Batch. A commercially manufactured grinding batch composter with a minimum capacity of 1,000 lbs per batch. A secondary composting storage area is required to finish materials. - Forced Air Composting Bins: Consisting of a group of small bins with an aeration and leachate collection system. (This scenario does not address incinerators.) The least cost scenario is based on a static bin system with wood walls. The roofed portion of the facility is addressed with Roofs and Covers (367). Approach apron is addressed with Heavy Use Area Protection (561). Size of facility is based on daily mortality and sizing procedures accepted in particular state. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Air quality impacts due to odors will also be addressed. Organic sites will require more frequent replacement of lumber (if used). Potential Associated Practices: Roofs and Cover ( 367 ), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Structure for Water Control (587), Roof Runoff Structure (558), Diversion (362), Subsurface Drain (606), and Underground Outlet (620).

After:
Animal mortality is being done in a manner that prevents non-point source pollution of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Proper operation results in little to no odors, complete composting, and protection from predators to minimize pathogen survival or spreading. An overall plan covers normal and catastrophic mortality events. Selected method for carcass treatment and disposal meet or are permitted by federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulation. The typical mortality facility is based on a wood wall static bin composting facility with the primary bins on one side and secondary bins along the backside. A typical livestock operation consists of a 28,000 hen turkey operation with 3 flocks per year. Average bird weight is 20 pounds with an average mortality rate of 7%. The average daily mortality is 322 lb/day which requires a minimum primary bin volume of 1,611 ft3. The secondary bin volume is the same as the primary bin. The facility will be installed on a 20' X 36' concrete pad with 6 bins (3 primary and 3 secondary bins) for a total bin capacity of 3,600 cubic feet. Bin dimensions are 5' Height x 12' Width x 10' Length. Bin wall consists of a 1' concrete curb and 4' of treated lumber. Site preparation includes topsoil removal, installing 4" of gravel, setting posts , installing concrete slab (5"), installing wooden walls and retaining planks. Piles turned to go through a second heat cycle prior to final land application.


Scenario_Description:
This scenario will address animal mortalities for large animal types (which generally range in size from 50 to 300 average weight -i.e. grower/finishing pigs sheep and goats). It was developed for various types of animal mortality facilities as listed below (which is not an exhaustive list): − Static Bin:  Consisting of a group of small bins (concrete or wood walls) on a concrete pad to compost mortality in static pile(s) that have sufficient bulking material to allow natural aeration. Piles are turned to go through a second heat cycle prior to final land application. − Invessel Rotary Drum. A commercially manufactured horizontal rotary drum to compost animal mortalities mixed with a carbon material (i.e. sawdust or wood chips). A secondary composting storage area is required to finish materials. − Invessel Grinding Batch. A commercially manufactured grinding batch composter with a minimum capacity of 1,000 lbs per batch. A secondary composting storage area is required to finish materials. - Forced Air Composting Bins: Consisting of a group of small bins with an aeration and leachate collection system. (This scenario does not address incinerators.) The least cost scenario is based on a static bin system with wood walls. The roofed portion of the facility is addressed with Roofs and Covers (367). Approach apron is addressed with Heavy Use Area Protection (561). Size of facility is based on daily mortality and sizing procedures accepted in particular state. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Air quality impacts due to odors will also be addressed. Organic sites will require more frequent replacement of lumber (if used). Potential Associated Practices: Roofs and Cover ( 367 ), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Structure for Water Control (587), Roof Runoff Structure (558), Diversion (362), Subsurface Drain (606), and Underground Outlet (620).

After:
Animal mortality is being done in a manner that prevents non-point source pollution of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Proper operation results in little to no odors, complete composting, and protection from predators to minimize pathogen survival or spreading. An overall plan covers normal and catastrophic mortality events. Selected method for carcass treatment and disposal meet or are permitted by federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulation. The typical mortality facility is based on a wood wall static bin composting facility with the primary bins on one side and secondary bins along the backside. A typical livestock operation consists of a 6,400 finishing pigs with 2.5 litters per year (all in all out system). Average pig weight is 160 pounds with an average mortality rate of 3%. The average daily mortality is 210 lb/day which requires a minimum primary bin volume of 3,320 ft3. The secondary bin volume is the same as the primary bin. The facility will be installed on a 20' X 72' concrete pad with 12 bins (6 primary and 6 secondary bins) for a total bin capacity of 7,200 cubic feet. Bin dimensions are 5' Height x 12' Width x 10' Length. Bin wall consists of a 1' concrete curb and 4' of treated lumber. Site preparation includes topsoil removal, installing 4" of gravel, setting posts , installing concrete slab (5"), installing wooden walls and retaining planks. Piles turned to go through a second heat cycle prior to final land application.


Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of installing an impervious earthen pad to compost large animal mortalities, typically dairy cow, beef, sow or boar, in a static windrow or single pile. Additional carbon based bulking material is added to facilitate aeration and provide a proper C:N ratio. Piles turned at least once to go into another heat cycle prior to land application. Access is infrequent. This option requires at least 2 more times the area in vegetation for runoff treatment. This may not be an option for sites will limited areas, karst topography, and not isolated from of public view. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Air quality impacts due to odors will also be addressed. Any roofed portion of the facility will be addressed with Roofs and Covers (367). Any approach areas will be addressed with Heavy Use Area Protection (561). Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Diversion (362), Subsurface Drain (606), and Underground Outlet (620)). Vegetative Treatment Area (635), Composting (317), Roofs and Covers (367), Heavy Use Area Protection (561)

Before:
Animal mortality is done in a manner that results in non-point source pollution of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Improper operation results in odors and spread of pathogens from incomplete composting or interaction with predators. No plan was formulated for both normal and catastrophic mortality events.

After:
Animal mortality is being done in a manner that prevents non-point source pollution of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Proper operation results in little to no odors, complete composting, and protection from predators to minimize pathogen survival or spreading. An overall plan covers normal and catastrophic mortality events. Typical system consists of a 50' x 50' compacted earth surface. Site can handle mortality for a 100 cow dairy with associated heifers and calves. On site soils can be recompacted to meet required imperviousness. Include sufficient area for processing equipment access. Use single piles or windrows to minimize runoff. Site to be located out of drainage areas, off-site water diverted and any runoff to spread out into a grassed area or vegetated treatment area as per regulations. Site preparation includes removal of top 1.5' and recompacting.


Scenario_Name:
Extra Large Animal, Static Pile, Geologic Limitations

Scenario_Description:
This scenario consists of installing a concrete pad over permeable soils, karst topography, frequently accessed sites or sites with regulatory requirements. Typically associated with large dairy (1,000 cows plus heifers ), beef, boar or sow animal mortality. Area sized to compost animal mortality as a static pile or windrow with equipment around materials. Sufficient carbon based bulking material added to allow natural aeration and a proper C:N ratio. Piles typically turned at least once to go into another heat cycle prior to final disposal, typically land application. Site to be located out of drainage areas, off-site water diverted and any runoff to spread out into a grassed area or vegetated treatment area as per regulations. Any roofed portion of the facility will be addressed with Roofs and Covers (367). Any approach areas will be addressed with Heavy Use Area Protection (561). Potential Associated Practices: Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Diversion (362), Subsurface Drain (606), and Underground Outlet (620).

After:
Animal mortality is being done in a manner that prevents non-point source pollution of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources. Proper operation results in little to no odors, complete composting, and protection from predators to minimize pathogen survival or spreading. An overall plan covers normal and catastrophic mortality events. Typical system consists of a 60'x95' concrete surface to process an average mortality of 175 lb/day. Concrete 5" thick with light reinforcement. Typical layout is 18' wide piles with 8' wide access area is around each pile or windrow. Site preparation includes topsoil removal, minimal regrading and compaction, installing gravel or sand subbase and then concrete.


Scenario_Name:
Composter, with concrete under bins (wood or concrete) only

Scenario_Description:
The composting facility, with concrete under bins only, is installed to address water quality concerns and disease vectors resulting from improper waste disposal by providing a dedicated facility for storage and treatment, and by creating a compost product that can be used in multiple ways including land application for enrichment of crop ground. All animal mortality composting shall be done using Practice Standard 316 - Animal Mortality Facility. Potential Associated Practices: Pond Sealing or Lining, Bentonite Sealant (521C), Pond Sealing or Lining, Compacted Clay Treatment (521D), Pond Sealing or Lining, Flexible Membrane (521A), Pond Sealing or Lining, Soil Dispersant (521B), Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Structure for water control (587), Diversion (362), Pipeline (516), Subsurface Drain (606), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roofs and Covers (367), Roof Runoff Structure (558), Waste Storage Facility (313), Waste Recycling (633), Waste Transfer (634), Underground Outlet (620) and Vegetative Treatment Area (635).

Before:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are not being utilized or controlled in an environmentally safe manner. The wastes are either accumulating at the source, or other location, or are being transported but not properly utilized or disposed of. This situation poses an environmentally threat of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater, in addition to the use of excessive amounts of fertilizers.

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored properly, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. The typical composter is designed to handle organic material from a 4 house poultry operation containing 20,000 4 lbs birds in each house. The typical bin is 40' x 32' with 5' high bins, 4-primary bins and 1 secondary bin. Strip top 1' of soil and roll compact same back into sub-floor. The entire structure is constructed on a 5" concrete slab used to store and stabilize organic material from a four house complex on any farm.


Scenario_Name:
Composter, whole concrete floor, wood or concrete bins

Scenario_Description:
The composting facility, with complete concrete floor, equipment lane and under bins, is installed to address water quality concerns and disease vectors resulting from improper waste disposal by providing a dedicated facility for storage and treatment, and by creating a compost product that can be used in multiple ways including land application for enrichment of crop ground. This scenario is applicable when geological, soil or climate conditions prohibit the use of only partial concrete surfaces (bins only). All animal mortality composting shall be done using Practice Standard 316 - Animal Mortality Facility. Potential Associated Practices: Pond Sealing or Lining, Bentonite Sealant (521C), Pond Sealing or Lining, Compacted Clay Treatment (521D), Pond Sealing or Lining, Flexible Membrane (521A), Pond Sealing or Lining, Soil Dispersant (521B), Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Structure for water control (587), Diversion (362), Pipeline (516), Subsurface Drain (606), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roofs and Covers (367), Roof Runoff Structure (558), Waste Storage Facility (313), Waste Recycling (633), Waste Transfer (634), Underground Outlet (620) and Vegetative Treatment Area (635).


Scenario_Description:
The composting facility is installed to address water quality concerns and disease vectors resulting from improper waste disposal by providing a dedicated facility for storage and treatment, and by creating a compost product that can be used in multiple ways including land application for enrichment of crop ground. This scenario is applicable when geological, soil, climate conditions or state and local regulations prohibit the use of an earthen surface. All animal mortality composting shall be done using Practice Standard 316 - Animal Mortality Facility. Potential Associated Practices: Pond Sealing or Lining, Bentonite Sealant (521C), Pond Sealing or Lining, Compacted Clay Treatment (521D), Pond Sealing or Lining, Flexible Membrane (521A), Pond Sealing or Lining, Soil Dispersant (521B), Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Structure for water control (587), Diversion (362), Pipeline (516), Subsurface Drain (606), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roofs and Covers (367), Roof Runoff Structure (558), Waste Storage Facility (313), Waste Recycling (633), Waste Transfer (634), Underground Outlet (620) and Vegetative Treatment Area (635).

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored properly, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. This is incorporated as part of the overall waste management system meeting the National Engineering Handbook (NEH), Part 651, Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook (AWMFH) that has been developed to also account for end use of the product from the composting facility. This scenario consists of installing a gravel pad over impervious soil to act as a working area to compost organic material in a static pile, windrow, that has sufficient carbon based bulking material to allow natural aeration. Piles typically turned at least once to go into another heat cycle prior to final deposal, typically land application. Typical pad 90' x 363' (3/4 acre) on an improved gravel surface. Sub base material sufficiently compacted or improved. Include sufficient area for processing equipment access. Single piles or windrows to minimize runoff. Site to be located out of drainage areas, off-site water diverted and any runoff to spread out into a grassed area or vegetated treatment area as per regulations. Site preparation includes topsoil removal, compaction of subsoil, and installing 6" of compacted gravel.


Scenario_Name:
Composter, with compacted earth floor, windrow

Scenario_Description:
The composting facility is installed to address water quality concerns and disease vectors resulting from improper waste disposal by providing a dedicated facility for storage and treatment, and by creating a compost product that can be used in multiple ways including land application for enrichment of crop ground. This scenario is applicable when geological, soil, and climate conditions are appropriate for earth floors and are allowed by state and local regulations. All animal mortality composting shall be done using Practice Standard 316 - Animal Mortality Facility. Potential Associated Practices: Pond Sealing or Lining, Bentonite Sealant (521C), Pond Sealing or Lining, Compacted Clay Treatment (521D), Pond Sealing or Lining, Flexible Membrane (521A), Pond Sealing or Lining, Soil Dispersant (521B), Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Access Road (560), Structure for water control (587), Diversion (362), Pipeline (516), Subsurface Drain (606), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), Roofs and Covers (367), Roof Runoff Structure (558), Waste Storage Facility (313), Waste Recycling (633), Waste Transfer (634), Underground Outlet (620) and Vegetative Treatment Area (635).

After:
Manure and other agricultural by-products are being controlled, by the collection at the source, and stored temporarily, at an environmentally suitable location, until such time that they are disposed of or utilized in a proper manner, typically in accordance with a nutrient management plan. This scenario consists of removing and compacting back into place the top 1' of soil to create a compacted, impervious earthen floor to act as a working area to compost organic material in a static pile, windrow, that has sufficient carbon based bulking material to allow natural aeration. Piles typically turned at least once to go into another heat cycle prior to final deposal, typically land application. Typical pad 90' x 363' (3/4 acre) on an improved compacted earthen surface. Include sufficient area for processing equipment access. Single piles or windrows to minimize runoff. Site to be located out of drainage areas, off-site water diverted and any runoff to spread out into a grassed area or vegetated treatment area as per regulations. Site preparation includes topsoil removal, compaction of subsoil, and reinstalling topsoil, compacted.


Practice:
318 - Short Term Storage of Animal Waste and Byproducts

Scenario_Description:
A compacted earthen pad is constructed to store wastes on a short-term basis between collection and utilization as part of an agricultural waste management system. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential for surface water and groundwater quality degradation. Potential Associated Practices: Nutrient Management (590), Waste Recycling (633)

Before:
Operator presently has a confined animal feeding operation and daily manure spreading operations are not possible due to weather. Manure and other agricultural waste by-products are not being managed in an environmentally safe manner. The wastes are either accumulating at the source, or are being stockpiled in environmentally vulnerable areas and not properly managed. This situation poses an environmental threat of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources.

After:
Using a compacted earthen pad with a cover provides an environmentally safe measure for temporarily managing manure and other agricultural waste by-products. This facility provides the landowner a means of storing waste until it can be utilized in a proper manner in accordance with a nutrient management plan. This practice will address soil and water quality by reducing the pollution potential to soil, surface water and ground water. Typical design: volume of material temporarily stored 12,576 ft3, pad area 6,000 ft2 (60' X 100'); 4' width around edge of manure stack to properly anchor and cover the manure; footprint of manure pile: 52' X 92", 6' manure stack height on 4:1 slopes; cover is a 6 mil poly film; 15" x 1/2" dia auger anchors on 2' centers.


Practice:
319 - On-Farm Secondary Containment Facility

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the replacement of an existing single wall fuel storage tank with a new double wall tank. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to the excessive release of organics into ground and surface waters or excessive sediment and turbidity in surface waters. Associated practices: Heavy Use Area Protection (561).

Before:
The agricultural operation has an existing single wall fuel/oil storage tank(s) without any spill prevention protection. The producer has developed an SPCC plan in accordance with EPA requirements, which requires an above ground secondary containment facility for on-farm oil products.

After:
This scenario is based on the replacement of an existing single wall tank(s) with a new double wall tank(s). Installation of "used" double wall tank(s) will not be allowed. A 3000 gallon horizontal or vertical antiroll tank (U/L 142-23 Secondary Containment Vessel) double walled which meets EPA regulations will be installed. Payment Schedule is based on the cost difference between a new single wall tank and new double wall tank of the same size. The double wall tank will provide an environmentally safe facility for handling and storage of oil products stored on the farm. Any accidental spills will be contained.


Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the construction of an earthen containment wall with a flexible membrane liner around an existing storage tank. The containment will not have a roof. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to the excessive release of organics into ground and surface waters or excessive sediment and turbidity in surface waters. Associated practices: Heavy Use Area Protection (561).

Before:
The agricultural operation has a single walled fuel/oil storage tank(s) without any spill prevention protection. The producer has developed an SPCC plan in accordance with EPA requirements, which requires an above ground secondary containment facility for on-farm oil products.

After:
This scenario is based on containment for a 10,000 gallon tank. The containment will be lined with a flexible membrane liner. The containment volume is designed for 125% of the tank volume (10,000 gallons X 125% = 12,500 gallons). The bottom dimensions of the containment are 40 ft x 24 ft. The wall is 2.5 feet high with a 2 ft top width and 2:1 side slopes. The total volume of earthfill = 114 CY. The flexible liner size = 1,872 SF. Tanks will be moved or raised to install base materials. Hauled in earthfill will be used to construct the dike. The flexible liner will be installed in conformance with the design and specifications. The completed structure will provide an environmentally safe facility for handling and storage of oil products stored on the farm. Any accidental spills will be contained.


Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the installation of a corrugated metal ring containment with a flexible membrane liner around an existing storage tank. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to the excessive release of organics into ground and surface waters or excessive sediment and turbidity in surface waters. Associated practices: Heavy Use Area Protection (561)

After:
This scenario is based on containment for a 10,000 gallon tank. The containment will be lined with a flexible membrane liner. The containment volume is designed for 125% of the tank volume (10,000 gallons X 125% = 12,500 gallons). The bottom dimensions of the containment are 26 ft x 24 ft. The corrugated panel wall is 2.75 feet high. The total area of wall = 275 SF. The flexible liner size = 930 SF. Tanks will be moved or raised to install base materials. The corrugated wall and flexible liner will be installed in conformance with the design and specifications. The completed structure will provide an environmentally safe facility for handling and storage of oil products stored on the farm. Any accidental spills will be contained.


Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the installation of a reinforced concrete wall containment with a concrete slab around an existing storage tank. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to the excessive release of organics into ground and surface waters or excessive sediment and turbidity in surface waters. Due to topography, limited site space and/or geological conditions a fabricated structure is needed. Structure will provide an environmentally safe facility for handling and storage of these products. Associated practices may include: Heavy Use Area Protection (561).

Before:
Existing agricultural operation that has single walled fuel/oil storage tank(s) not protected. The producer has developed an SPCC plan in accordance with EPA requirements, that requires an above ground secondary containment facility for on-farm oil products, in order to control the excessive release of organics into ground and surface waters, or to control the excessive sediment and turbidity in surface water.

After:
This scenario is based on containment for a 4,700 gallon tank. The containment volume is designed for 125% of the tank volume (4,700 gallons X 125% = 5,875 gallons). Structure will provide an environmentally safe facility for handling and storage of these products. Typical containment dimensions are 196 sqft bottom x 6" thick slab with 6" thick x 4' tall formed sidewalls. Tanks will be moved or raised to install base materials. The fabricated containment structure will be installed in conformance with the design and specifications. The on-farm oil products stored on the farm have secondary containment of accidental release that controls the excessive release of organics, suspended sediments, and turbidity. Structure will provide an environmentally safe facility for handling and storage of these products.


Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the installation of a modular block concrete wall containment with a flexible membrane liner over a 6" concrete floor. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to the excessive release of organics into ground and surface waters or excessive sediment and turbidity in surface waters. Due to topography, limited site space and/or geological conditions a fabricated structure is needed. Structure will provide an environmentally safe facility for handling and storage of these products. Associated practices may include: Heavy Use Area Protection (561),

Before:
Existing agricultural operation that has single walled fuel/oil storage tank(s) without any spill prevention protection. The producer has developed an SPCC plan in accordance with EPA requirements, that requires an above ground secondary containment facility for on-farm oil products.

After:
This scenario is based on containment for a 6,000 gallon tank. The containment volume is designed for 125% of the tank volume (6,000 gallons X 125% = 7,500 gallons). Structure will provide an environmentally safe facility for handling and storage of these products. The bottom dimensions of the containment are 26ft x 24ft. The 2ft x 2ft x 6ft modular blocks are stacked 2 high for a wall height of 4ft. The containment area is 624 sq.ft. The flexible liner size with a 2ft overlap and anchored at the top of the modular block is 1224 sf. Tanks will be moved or raised to install base materials. The fabricated containment structure will be installed in conformance with the design and specifications. The on-farm oil products stored on the farm have secondary containment of accidental release that controls the excessive release of organics, suspended sediments, and turbidity. Structure will provide an environmentally safe facility for handling and storage of these products.


Scenario_Description:
This scenario is the construction of an Irrigation Canal or Lateral. Typical construction dimensions are 4' wide bottom x 3' deep x 1320' length with a side slope of 2:1. Resource concerns: Excess/Insufficient Water - Inefficient Use of Irrigation Water. Associated Conservation Practices: 388-Irrigation Field Ditch; 443-Irrigation System, Surface or Subsurface; 533-Pumping Plant; 430-Irrigation Pipeline; 587 - Structure for Water Control; 449 - Irrigation Water Management

Before:
Water supply for an area is inadequate for crop production and irrigation water application is inefficient.

After:
An earthen canal that has adequate capacity to convey sufficient irrigation water to meet the demands of the system and make irrigation practical for the crops being grown.


Scenario_Description:
Fields (80 acres) with adverse soils conditions that restrict plant growth such as compacted layers caused by tillage operations or restrictive layers such as hardpans (duripans) in the root zone. This practice does not apply to normal tillage practices to prepare a seedbed but is meant to fracture the restrictive soil layer.

Before:
In this geographic area, crop plants are observed as having reduced yield, water is not infiltrating into the soil. Soil layers have been compacted by shallow tillage operations, or soils have a hardpan (duripan) layer that is restricting root growth. Typical field size is 80 acres with crop rotations consisting of annual row crops or small grains with conventional tillage or when the harvesting of row crops (onions, sugar beets, potato, and corn silage) use heavy trucks to assist with the harvest. Compaction has been caused when soil moisture is too wet for normal field operations or by excessive shallow tillage or field harvest haul traffic throughout the entire field. Soil structure has been reduced, aggregate strength is weak and soil biological activity is low. Soil organic matter is not adequate and the water holding capacity of the soil is limited for the desired root zone.

After:
Soil compaction is measured with a penetrometer and visual observation of limiting root growth. Deep tillage operations such as subsoiling, paratilling or ripping are performed not as a part of the normal tillage operation for seedbed preparation, but used to relieve compaction at depths less than 20 inches. Soil moisture is less than 30 percent when deep tillage is used. The fractured zone will be sufficient to permit root penetration below the restrictive soil layer. Penetrometers are used to identify the severity (psi) of the compaction and the depth of the restrictive layer. Deep tillage is generally performed in the fall after crop harvest when soil conditions are dry. After deep tillage, harvest operations should be avoided when soil moisture is greater than 50% of field capacity. Field harvest haul traffic should be limited to end rows or haul roads. Using dual tires or tracks beneath tractors or grain wagons can help spread the weight load.


Before:
In this geographic area, crop plants are observed as having reduced yield, water is not infiltrating into the soil. Soil layers have been compacted by shallow tillage operations, or soils have a hardpan (duripan) layer that is restricting root growth. Typical field size is 80 acres with crop rotations consisting of annual row crops, orchard /vineyards or small grains with conventional tillage or when the harvesting of row crops (onions, sugar beets, potato, and corn silage) use heavy trucks to assist with the harvest. Orchards and vineyards may be deep ripped prior to establishment of perennial crop. Compaction has been caused when soil moisture is too wet for normal field operations or by excessive shallow tillage or field harvest haul traffic throughout the entire field. Soil structure has been reduced, aggregate strength is weak and soil biological activity is low. Soil organic matter is not adequate and the water holding capacity of the soil is limited for the desired root zone.

After:
Soil compaction is measured with a penetrometer and visual observation of limiting root growth. Deep tillage operations such as subsoiling, paratilling or ripping are performed not as a part of the normal tillage operation for seedbed preparation, but used to relieve compaction at depths more than 20 inches. Soil moisture is less than 30 percent when deep tillage is used. The fractured zone will be sufficient to permit root penetration below the restrictive soil layer. Penetrometers are used to identify the severity (psi) of the compaction and the depth of the restrictive layer. Deep tillage is generally performed in the fall after crop harvest when soil conditions are dry. When possible, harvest operations should be avoided when soil moisture is greater than 50% of field capacity. Field harvest haul traffic should be limited to end rows or haul roads. Using dual tires or tracks beneath tractors or grain wagons can help spread the weight load.


Scenario_Description:
Use in areas with low expected snow and wind loads. Quonset-style (round) manufactured frame of tubular steel (30 x 72 ft.) covered with 4-year 6 mil plastic. Costs are based on purchase of manufactured kit and landowner installation of structure. Structure must be installed to manufacturer's specifications. Associated practices might include CPS Roof Runoff Structure (588), Underground Outlet (620), Critical Area Planting (342), Mulching (484).

Before:
Cropland where extension of the growing season is needed. Primary resource concern addressed will be plant health and vigor.

After:
High Tunnel structure has been installed and the growing season has been extended for 1-4 months on average. Plant health and vigor is improved.


Scenario_Description:
Used for contiguous US states in areas with high snowfall. A gothic style (peaked) manufactured frame of tubular steel (30 x 70 ft.) covered with 4-year 6 mil plastic. Costs are based on purchase of manufactured kit and landowner installing the structure. Structure must be installed to manufacturer's specifications.

Before:
Cropland where extension of the growing season is needed. Additional resource concerns that may need to be addressed include soil erosion, soil condition, water quality, water quantity, and plant condition.

After:
A high tunnel structure has been installed and he growing season has been extended for 1-4 months on average. Plant health and vigor has been improved.


Scenario_Description:
Used for contiguous US states in areas with low snowfall. A Quonset style (rounded) manufactured frame of tubular steel (30 x 72 ft.) covered with 4-year 6 mil plastic. Costs are based on purchase of manufactured kit and landowner installing the structure. Structure must be installed to manufacturer's specifications.

After:
A Quonset style high tunnel structure has been installed and the growing season has been extended for 1-4 months on average. Plant health and vigor has been improved.


Scenario_Name:
High Tunnel, Low Wind or Snow Load, Intensive Sun

Scenario_Description:
Use in areas with low expected snow and wind loads. Quonset-style (round) manufactured frame of tubular steel (30 x 72 ft.) covered with 4-year 6 mil plastic. Because of extensive sun intensity, shade cloth is provided. Costs are based on purchase of manufactured kit and landowner installation of structure. Structure must be installed to manufacturer's specifications. Associated practices might include CPS Roof Runoff Structure (588), Underground Outlet (620), Critical Area Planting (342), Mulching (484)

Before:
Cropland where extension of the growing season is needed. Primary resource concern addressed will be plant health and vigor. High sun intensity shortens growing season, or decreases crop quality.

After:
High Tunnel structure has been installed and the growing season has been extended for 1-4 months on average. Shade cloth protects crops from high intensity of sun, allowing crop production and quality to continue into summer months. Plant health and vigor is improved.


Scenario_Description:
Removal of vegetation, logs, or other material that impedes the proper functioning on up to 200 linear feet of a stream channel or water course to restore flow capacity; prevent bank erosion by eddies; reduce the formation of sediment bars; and/or minimize blockages by debris. Addresses resource concerns such as water quantity and soil erosion-streambanks.

Before:
Vegetation, logs, or other material provide a flow restriction or divert flowing water against the streambank causing excess erosion. Approximately one-third of the channel flow capacity is obstructed. The flow blockage may encourage deposition in the main channel and may alter the established flow channel.

After:
Vegetation, logs, or other material have been removed to allow unrestricted flow in the channel and appurtenant structures. Material that poses no blockage threat is left in place to enhance aquatic habitat. Channel bed and banks are in equilibrium with the flow.


Scenario_Description:
Removal of vegetation, logs, or other material that impedes the proper functioning on 200 to 400 linear feet of a stream channel or water course to restore flow capacity; prevent bank erosion by eddies; reduce the formation of sediment bars; and/or minimize blockages by debris. Addresses resource concerns such as water quantity and soil erosion-streambanks.

Before:
Vegetation, logs, or other material provide a flow restriction or divert flowing water against the streambank causing excess erosion. Approximately one-half of the channel flow capacity is obstructed. The flow blockage may encourage deposition in the main channel and may alter the established flow channel.


Scenario_Description:
Removal of vegetation, logs, or other material that impedes the proper functioning on over 400 linear feet of a stream channel or water course to restore flow capacity; prevent bank erosion by eddies; reduce the formation of sediment bars; and/or minimize blockages by debris. Addresses resource concerns such as water quantity and soil erosion-streambanks.

Before:
Vegetation, logs, or other material provide a flow restriction or divert flowing water against the streambank causing excess erosion. Approximately two-thirds of the channel flow capacity is obstructed. The flow blockage may encourage deposition in the main channel and may alter the established flow channel.


Scenario_Description:
The land is covered with permanent non-native grass vegetation resulting in reduced soil erosion and water/sediment runoff, and the elimination of dust emissions which improves air quality significantly. Plants sown for conservation cover may provide cover for beneficial insects and wildlife. This scenario does not apply to plantings for forage production or to critical area plantings. Applies to conventional or organic systems.

Before:
Crops such as corn, soybeans, or cotton may be conventionally or organically grown and harvested. Full width tillage is utilized, weeds controlled by cultivation and/or chemical application. Soil surface residue amounts average 10% or less. Soil erosion exceed allowable tolerance, sediment may be moving offsite into surface water degrading water quality. Soil quality (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue, and long periods of bare soil. Air quality may be impacted during field operations by the creation of particulates. The system provides little to no wildlife habitat.

After:
The 327 Implementation Requirements have been developed for the site and applied. The land is covered with permanent non-native grass vegetation resulting in reduced soil erosion and water/sediment runoff, and the elimination of significant dust emissions which improves air quality. Plants sown for conservation cover may provide cover for beneficial insects and wildlife. This scenario does not apply to plantings for forage production or to critical area plantings.


Scenario_Description:
This practice applies on land to be retired from agricultural production and on other lands needing permanent protective cover. This practice typically involves conversion from a clean-tilled (conventional tilled) intensive cropping system to permanent native vegetation (scenario includes native grass). The typical size of the practice is 50 acres. This practice scenario is typically used to reduce soil erosion, reduce soil quality degradation, improve water quality, develop wildlife habitat, and reduce air quality impacts. Applies to conventional or organic systems

Before:
Crops such as corn, soybeans, or cotton may be conventionally or organically grown and harvested. Full width tillage is utilized, weeds controlled by cultivation and/or chemical application. Soil surface residue amounts average 10% or less. Soil erosion exceeds allowable tolerance, and sediment may be moving offsite into surface water degrading water quality. Soil quality (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue, and long periods of bare soil. Air quality may be impacted during field operations by the creation of particulates. The system provides little to no wildlife habitat.

After:
The 327 Implementation Requirements have been developed for the site and applied. The land is covered with permanent native grass vegetation which reduces soil erosion and water/sediment runoff, and eliminates dust emissions which improves air quality. Plants sown for conservation cover may provide cover for beneficial insects and wildlife. This scenario does not apply to plantings for forage production or to critical area plantings.


Scenario_Description:
This practice applies on orchards and vineyards needing permanent protective cover in the alleyways between tree and vine rows. The typical size of this practice is 20 acres. This practice typically involves conversion from a clean-tilled (conventional tilled) intensive cropping system to permanent vegetation (scenario includes non-native grass and legume mix). This practice scenario is typically used to reduce soil erosion, reduce soil quality degradation, improve water quality, enhance wildlife and/or pollinator habitat, manage plant pests, and reduce air quality impacts. Typically 60% of the surface area is conservation cover per acre.

Before:
Orchard or vineyard with bare soil between vine/tree rows. Bare soil is exposed to wind erosion and/or intense rainfall during the fall, winter, and early spring. Over the winter sediment/nutrient runoff from orchards/vineyards increases. Soil erosion exceeds tolerable levels. Runoff from the fields flows into streams, water courses or other water bodies causing degradation to the receiving waters. Soil health (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of long periods of bare soil. Little to no wildlife/pollinator habitat is present.

After:
The 327 Implementation Requirements have been developed for the site and has been applied. Orchard or Vineyard area between vine/tree rows are planted with permanent introduced grass/legume mix. Area covered has reduced soil erosion, reduced water/sediment runoff, and improved air quality as a result of the elimination of significant amounts of dust emissions.. Plants sown for conservation cover may provide cover for beneficial insects, pollinators, and wildlife.


Scenario_Description:
Permanent vegetation, including a mix of native grasses, legumes, and forbs (mix may also include non-native species), established on any land needing permanent vegetative cover that provides habitat for pollinators. Typical practice size is variable depending on site; this scenario uses 1 ac as the typical size. In addition to providing pollinator habitat, this practice scenario may also reduce sheet, rill, and wind erosion, improve soil quality, improve water quality, and improve air quality. The practice may also provide wildlife habitat. Practice applicable on cropland, odd areas, corners, etc. Applies to conventional or organic systems.

Before:
Crops such as corn, soybeans, or cotton may be conventionally or organically grown and harvested. Full width tillage is utilized, weeds controlled by cultivation and/or chemical application. Soil surface residue amounts average 10% or less. Erosion exceeds tolerable rates and sediment may be moving offsite into surface water degrading water quality. Soil quality (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue, and long periods of bare soil. Air quality may be impacted during field operations by the creation of particulates. The system provides little to no wildlife or pollinator habitat.

After:
The 327 Implementation Requirements have been developed for the site and applied. Land is covered with permanent pollinator habitat including a mix of native grasses, legumes, forbs (mix may also include non-native species). This practice may also have reduced soil erosion, reduced water/sediment runoff, and improved air quality as a result of the elimination of dust emissions. Plants sown for pollinator habitat may also provide cover for beneficial insects and wildlife. This scenario does not apply to critical area plantings.


Scenario_Description:
Establish permanent vegetative cover for pollinator habitat according to state specifications. Typically used for high quality nectar and pollen species. Assumes seed/plugs, equipment and labor for seed bed prep/planting, and weed management during establishment. Used for conventional or organic land on small, intensive areas that are central to specialty crop production. Not typically used for large-scale plantings. This is applicable to both organic and non-organic conditions.

Before:
Old hayfields that are mowed typically in the fall lack milkweed needed for monarchs. Other crops such as corn, soybeans, or cotton are conventionally grown and harvested. The system provides little to no wildlife or pollinator habitat.

After:
The 327 Implementation Requirements have been developed and applied for the site. Land covered with permanent monarch habitat including a mix of milkweed species, native grasses, legumes, and forbs. Plants sown for monarch habitat may also provide cover for beneficial insects and wildlife.


Scenario_Description:
This practice applies on land to be retired from agricultural production and on other lands needing permanent protective cover. This practice typically involves conversion from a clean-tilled (conventional tilled) intensive cropping system to permanent native vegetation species on both organic and non-organic operations. The typical size of the practice is 1 acre. This practice scenario is typically used to reduce soil erosion, reduce soil quality degradation, improve water quality, develop wildlife habitat, and reduce air quality impacts.

Before:
Crops such as corn, soybeans, or vegetables are conventionally grown and harvested. Full width tillage is utilized, weeds controlled by cultivation and/or chemical application. Soil surface residue amounts average 10% or less. Soil erosion exceed allowable tolerance, sediment may be moving offsite into surface water degrading water quality. Soil quality (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue, and long periods of bare soil. Air quality may be impacted during field operations by the creation of particulates. The system provides little to no wildlife habitat.

After:
The 327 Implementation Requirements have been developed for the site and has been applied. The land is covered with permanent native grass vegetation and has reduced soil erosion, reduced water/sediment runoff, and significant dust emissions are eliminated therefore, air quality is improved. Plants sown for conservation cover may provide cover for beneficial insects and wildlife. This scenario does not apply to plantings for forage production or to critical area plantings.


Scenario_Name:
Caribbean Area Conservation Cover Introduced Species

Scenario_Description:
After applying the practice the land is covered with permanent non-native grass vegetation and has reduced soil erosion, reduced water/sediment runoff, improved wildlife habitat (including pollinator habitat), improved water quality, and improved soil health.

Before:
The land is eroding above the soil loss tolerance, water quality is impaired due to sediment and nutrients, habitat for wildlife is unsuitable, and there is limited pollinator habitat.

After:
The practices is applied per the specification in the 327 Implementation Requirements. Permanent non-native vegetation is established that is suitable to address the planned resource concern(s).


Scenario_Description:
This practice applies on orchards and vineyards needing permanent protective cover in the alleyways between tree and vine rows. The typical size of this practice is 20 acres. This practice typically involves conversion from a clean-tilled (conventional tilled) intensive cropping system to permanent vegetation (scenario includes non-native grass and legume mix). This practice scenario is typically used to reduce soil erosion, reduce soil quality degradation, improve water quality, enhance wildlife and/or pollinator habitat, manage plant pests, and reduce air quality impacts.

Before:
Orchard or vineyard with bare soil between vine/tree rows. Bare soil is exposed to wind erosion and/or intense rainfall during the fall, winter, and early spring. Over the winter sediment/nutrient runoff from orchards/vineyards increases.

After:
The 327 Implementation Requirements have been developed for the site and has been applied. Orchard or Vineyard area between vine/tree rows are planted with permanent introduced grass/legume mix. Area covered has reduced soil erosion, improved soil quality, improved water quality, and enhanced wildlife and/or pollinator habitat.


Scenario_Description:
This practice applies on land to be retired from agricultural production and on other lands needing permanent protective cover. This practice typically involves conversion from a clean-tilled (conventional tilled) intensive cropping system to permanent native vegetation species on both organic and non-organic operations. The typical size of the practice is 40 acres. This practice scenario is typically used to reduce soil erosion, reduce soil quality degradation, improve water quality, develop wildlife habitat, and reduce air quality impacts.

Before:
Crops such as corn, soybeans, vegetables, or cotton are conventionally grown and harvested. Full width tillage is utilized, weeds controlled by cultivation and/or chemical application. Soil surface residue amounts average 10% or less. Soil erosion exceed allowable tolerance, sediment may be moving offsite into surface water degrading water quality. Soil quality (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue, and long periods of bare soil. Air quality may be impacted during field operations by the creation of particulates. The system provides little to no wildlife habitat.


Scenario_Name:
Native Species, Foregone income, Irrigated Crop

Scenario_Description:
This practice applies on conventional or organically managed, IRRIGATED, land needing permanent protective cover. This practice typically involves conversion from an intensive cropping system to permanent native vegetation (scenario includes native grass/legume mix). The typical size of the practice is 50 acres. This practice scenario is typically used to reduce soil erosion, reduce soil quality degradation, improve water quality, develop wildlife habitat, and reduce air quality impacts. Applies to conventional or organic systems.

Before:
A monoculture crop, grown conventionally or organically, is irrigated and harvested. Full width tillage is utilized, weeds controlled mainly by cultivation. Soil surface residue amounts average 10% or less. Soil erosion exceeds tolerable rates and sediment may be moving offsite into surface water degrading water quality. Soil quality (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue, and long periods of bare soil. Air quality may be impacted during field operations by the creation of particulates. The system provides little to no wildlife habitat.

After:
The 327 Implementation Requirements have been developed for the site and applied. Managed land covered with permanent native grass/legume mix vegetation has reduced soil erosion, reduced water/sediment runoff, and improved air quality due to the elimination of dust emissions. Plants sown for conservation cover may provide cover for beneficial insects and wildlife. This scenario does not apply to plantings for forage production or to critical area plantings.


Scenario_Description:
In this region this practice may be part of a conservation management system on both organic and non-organic operations to: 1) Reduce sheet, rill and wind erosion, 2) Maintain or increase soil health and organic matter content, 3) Reduce water quality degradation due to excess nutrients, 4) Improve soil moisture efficiency, 5) Reduce the concentration of salts and other chemicals from saline seeps, 6) Reduce plant pest pressures, 7) Provide feed and forage for domestic livestock, and 8) Provide food and cover habitat for wildlife, including pollinator forage, and nesting. This practice payment is provided to the producer for the time needed to plan and implement the logistics of changing the rotation to effectively implement a conservation crop rotation on a typical 200 acre cropland farm. No foregone income. Cost represents typical situations for conventional and organic producers.

Before:
The rotation consists primarily of low residue producing row crops. Fields range from nearly flat to C and D slopes. Erosion, soil quality, and pest management are the primary concerns.

After:
A rotation is established that provides additional high residue and/or perennial crops that may treat one or more of the following purposes: reduce sheet, rill and wind erosion, maintain or increase soil health and organic matter content, reduce water quality degradation due to excess nutrients, improve soil moisture efficiency, reduce the concentration of salts and other chemicals from saline seeps, reduce plant pest pressures, provide feed and forage for domestic livestock, or provide food and cover habitat for wildlife, including pollinator forage, and nesting.


Scenario_Description:
In this region a rotation of organic or non-organic specialty crops (fruits and vegetable) are produced as part of a conservation management system to treat one or more of the following resource concerns: 1) Reduce sheet, rill and wind erosion, 2) Maintain or increase soil health and organic matter content, 3) Reduce water quality degradation due to excess nutrients, 4) Improve soil moisture efficiency, 5) Reduce the concentration of salts and other chemicals from saline seeps, 6) Reduce plant pest pressures, 7) Provide feed and forage for domestic livestock, and 8) Provide food and cover habitat for wildlife, including pollinator forage, and nesting. This practice payment is provided to acquire the technical knowledge and skills necessary to effectively implement a conservation crop rotation on a typical 50 acre specialty crop farm. No foregone income. Cost represents typical situations for organic and non-organic producers.

Before:
This rotation consisted of growing specialty crops. Fields range from nearly flat to B and C slopes. Erosion, soil quality, and pest management are the primary concerns.

After:
The rotation established adds higher residue crop(s) to the rotation that will treat one or more of the following resource concerns on organic and non- organic farms: 1) Reduce sheet, rill and wind erosion, 2) Maintain or increase soil health and organic matter content, 3) Reduce water quality degradation due to excess nutrients, 4) Improve soil moisture efficiency, 5) Reduce the concentration of salts and other chemicals from saline seeps, 6) Reduce plant pest pressures, 7) Provide feed and forage for domestic livestock, and 8) Provide food and cover habitat for wildlife, including pollinator forage, and nesting.


Scenario_Description:
The resource concern is food and cover for waterfowl where rice is grown in the waterfowl flyway zones. This scenario manages the rice residue after rice harvest to enhance the food and cover for waterfowl. The payment for the practice scenario is based on the cost to roll alternate strips of rice residue flat while leaving the alternate strips of rice residue left undisturbed after rice harvest.

Before:
The typical situation after rice harvest is tilling the soil to bury or mix the rice residue remaining after harvest into the soil. This results in virtually no food or cover for the waterfowl that traverse the waterfowl flyways.

After:
The rice residue after rice harvest will remain standing except for the alternate strip of the rice residue rolled almost flat to provide alternate strip of both cover and food. The rice residue will be left in this condition until the following spring.


Scenario_Name:
Irrigated to Dryland Rotation Organic and Non-Organic

Scenario_Description:
In this region this practice may be part of a conservation management system to primarily convert from an irrigated cropping system to dryland farming. In addition to improving water use efficiency the rotation may: 1) Reduce sheet, rill and wind erosion, 2) Maintain or increase soil health and organic matter content, 3) Reduce water quality degradation due to excess nutrients, 4) Improve soil moisture efficiency, 5) Reduce the concentration of salts and other chemicals from saline seeps, 6) Reduce plant pest pressures, 7) Provide feed and forage for domestic livestock, and 8) Provide food and cover habitat for wildlife, including pollinator forage, and nesting. This practice payment is provided to acquire the technical knowledge and skills necessary to effectively implement a conservation crop rotation on a typical 200 acre cropland farm. There is foregone income involved with this conversion from irrigated to dryland farming due to lower yields and net return. Cost represents typical situations for conventional (non-organic) producers converting from irrigated cropping to dryland farming.

Before:
This rotation consisted of growing row crop grains that received a significant (more than half) of the required water via irrigation. The water demands are impacting the area's water availability. Erosion, soil condition, and future water availability are the major concerns.

After:
The dryland rotation, using the same crops or a rotation that grows crops over different periods, will be part of a management system capable of utilizing available rainfall and soil moisture more efficiently and controlling wind and water erosion. Corn yields will be expected to be reduced from 150 to 80 bu/acre.


Practice:
329 - Residue and Tillage Management, No-Till

Scenario_Description:
This practice typically involves conversion from a clean-tilled (conventional tilled) system to no-till or strip-till system on 100 acres of cropland. This involves managing the amount, orientation and distribution of crop and other plant residue on the soil surface year round while limiting soil-disturbing activities used to establish and harvest crops. The practice is used to reduce sheet and rill erosion, reduce wind erosion, improve soil quality, reduce CO2 losses from the soil, reduce energy use, increase plant available moisture and provide food and escape cover for wildlife. The no-till/strip-till system includes non-tillage types of weed control and may also include a period of no till fallow. System is applicable in both irrigated and non-irrigated fields of organic and non-organic operations.

Before:
Row crops or small grains are grown and harvested. Full width tillage is performed prior to planting and weed control during crop production is typically cultivation and chemical application. Fields are disked immediately following harvest, with additional operations in some fields to facilitate drainage, seedbed preparation or additional weed control. Residue amounts after tillage operations average 10% or less, resulting in bare soil being exposed to wind erosion and/or intense rainfall. Any crop residue that is present degrades and sediment/nutrient runoff from fields increases during rainfall events. Sheet and rill erosion occurs with visible rills by spring. Soil health (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue, and long periods of bare soil. This system will typically have a negative Soil Conditioning Index (SCI) and a high Soil Tillage Intensity Rating (STIR).

After:
The Implementation Requirements for 329 Residue Management, No Till is prepared and installed. Managing crop residue on the surface of a field (typical 100 acre) year around according to the 329 practice plan while limiting soil disturbing activities to those which place nutrients, and plant crops that meet the minimum criteria in the 329 practice standard. All crops are seeded/planted with a no-till drill or no-till/strip-till planter, which minimizes soil disturbance while establishing good seed-soil contact. All residues are to be maintained on the soil surface in a uniform distribution over the entire field and not burned or removed. Crop residues provide soil surface cover throughout the year. Runoff and erosion are reduced and no rills are visible on the soil surface. Wind erosion is reduced by standing residues and surface cover. Over time, soil health is improved due to the additional biomass (crop residues), ground cover, and soil infiltration. Crop residues and/or cover crop residues left on the soil surface may maximize weed control by increasing allelopathic and mulching effect, and provides cover for wildlife. The practice would require reducing soil disturbance and erosion and increasing biomass returned to the soil in sufficient amounts to achieve increased SCI and decreased STIR.


Scenario_Description:
The practice scenario is for the implementation of no till in small replicated plots to allow the producer to learn how to manage no till on their operation. Scenario includes implementing replicated strip trials on a field plot to evaluate, identify and implement a particular no till management strategy (e.g., no till vs conventional till, drill vs planter, strip till vs no till, residue row cleaners, vs no row cleaners, etc.) This will be done by following the Agronomy Technical Note 10 - Adaptive Management.

Before:
Row crops or small grains are grown and harvested. Full width tillage is performed prior to planting and weed control during crop production is typically cultivation and chemical application. Fields are disked immediately following harvest, with additional operations in some fields to facilitate drainage or additional weed control. Residue amounts after tillage operations average 10% or less, resulting in bare soil being exposed to wind erosion and/or intense rainfall. Any crop residue that is present degrades and sediment/nutrient runoff from fields increases during rainfall events. Sheet and rill erosion exceeds soil loss tolerances. Soil health (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue, and long periods of bare soil. This system will typically have a negative Soil Conditioning Index (SCI) and a high Soil Tillage Intensity Rating (STIR). The producer is considering using no till technology, but is unsure how to manage on their operation or needs to improve the management of no till to be successful.

After:
Implementation Requirements are prepared and an Adaptive Management Plan for the plots is developed and implemented. Installation of this scenario will result in establishment of no till replicated plots to compare to different management strategies for no till and other residue management strategies following the guidance in the Agronomy Technical Note 10 - Adaptive Management Process. Implementation involves establishing the replicated plots to evaluate one or more no till management strategies. The plot will consist of at least 4 replicated plots designed, laid out, managed and evaluated with the assistance of a consultant knowledgeable in no till management. Results are used to make no till management decisions to address erosion, soil health, and water quality issues. Yields will be measured and statistically summarized following the procedures in Agronomy Technical Note 10 - Adaptive Management. The yields for each plot will be adjusted to the appropriate moisture content. This would be repeated for 3 years.


Scenario_Description:
This scenario meets the specifications of the NRCS Contour Farming Standard. This scenario applies to fields greater than 5 acres. Payment reflects the extra labor and initial supervision costs in laying out and implementing contour farming. Annual erosion rates for the rotation exceeds tolerance levels. Excessive runoff leads to sedimentation of waterways

Before:
The typical field size in this geographical region for this scenario is 30 acres. The field slope averages 6% while the slope length averages 160 feet. All farming operations on this cropland field including disking, bedding, planting, and cultivation are performed generally up and down the slope. Annual erosion rates for the rotation exceeds tolerance levels. Excessive runoff leads to sedimentation of waterways.

After:
Implementation Requirements are prepared and implemented according to 330 Contour Farming. This practice is installed on the entire field. A survey is completed by trained and certified Federal, State, local personnel or consultant to determine and "stake" contour row arrangement. Permanent row markers are established to ensure that this practice is maintained for the life of this practice. All field operations including disking, bedding, planting, and cultivation are performed on the contour which is near perpendicular to the field slope. The farm manager is initially on site to ensure that equipment operators are properly following contour methods. Soil erosion rates are reduced by nearly half and may be below tolerance depending on the rotation. Likewise, sedimentation has been significantly reduced.


Practice:
331 - Contour Orchard and Other Perennial Crops

Scenario_Description:
This scenario meets the specifications of the NRCS 331 Contour Orchards and Perennial Crops Standard. This scenario applies to fields greater than 5 acres. Payment reflects the extra labor and initial supervision costs in implementing and following contour operations compared to other methods. More time is usually needed when following contour operations due to more equipment time in shorter rows and more equipment turning. Annual erosion rates for the rotation exceeds tolerance levels. Excessive runoff leads to sedimentation of waterways.

Before:
The typical field size in this geographical region for this scenario is 10 acres. The field slope averages 6% while the slope length averages 160 feet. All farming operations are performed up and down the slope. Annual erosion rates for the rotation exceeds tolerance levels. Excessive runoff leads to sedimentation of waterways.

After:
Implementation Requirements are prepared and implemented according to the Contour Orchards and Perennial Crops Standard (331). This practice is installed on the entire field. All field operations including: harvesting, disking, bedding, and planting are performed on the contour which is near perpendicular to the field slope. The farm manager is initially on site to ensure that equipment operators are properly following contour methods. Soil erosion rates are reduced to tolerable soil loss levels. Likewise, sedimentation has be significantly reduced.


Scenario_Name:
Wildlife/Pollinator, Foregone Income (Organic and Non-Organic)

Scenario_Description:
Narrow strips of permanent, herbaceous vegetative cover established around the hill slope and alternated down the slope with wider cropped strips in between that are farmed on the contour. This practice applies to all cropland. Practice includes seedbed prep and planting of mainly pollinator friendly species. The area of the field border is taken out of production. This applies to organic and no-organic.

Before:
Water Erosion Calculator (e.g. RUSLE2) indicates that there is a significant amount of sheet and rill erosion and/or a significant amount of sediment potentially delivered to the downslope edge of the field. A secondary concern is that there may not be enough wildlife/pollinator habitat, food source or refugia in the field or farm.

After:
Plant species will be established in strips in the field to meet the Contour buffer Strips (332) criteria, resource needs, producer objectives, and the targeted wildlife/pollinators necessary food and/or cover. Minimum widths shall be based on NRCS local design criteria specific to the purpose for installing the practice. Species selected shall meet the wildlife/pollinator habitat requirements of the state and be adapted to site; not function as a host for diseases of a field crop and; have physical characteristics necessary to control sheet and rill erosion to tolerable levels on the cropped area of the field.


Scenario_Name:
Native Species, Foregone Income (Organic and Non-organic)

Scenario_Description:
Narrow strips of permanent, herbaceous vegetative cover established around the hill slope and alternated down the slope with wider cropped strips in between that are organically or non-organically farmed on the contour. This practice applies to all cropland. Practice includes seedbed prep and planting of native species. The area of the contour grass strip is taken out of production.

Before:
The NRCS water erosion prediction software indicates that there is a significant amount of sheet and rill erosion and/or a significant amount of sediment potentially delivered to the downslope edge of the field. A secondary concern is that there may not be enough wildlife/pollinator habitat, food source or refugia in the field or farm.

After:
Native grasses, legumes and forbs will be established in strips in the field to meet the Contour buffer Strips (332) criteria, resource needs, and producer objectives. Minimum widths shall be based on NRCS local design criteria specific to the purpose for installing the practice. Native species shall be selected that do not function as a host for diseases of a field crop and have physical characteristics necessary to control water erosion to tolerable levels in the cropped area of the field.


Scenario_Name:
Introduced Species, Foregone Income (Organic and Non-Organic)

Scenario_Description:
Narrow strips of permanent, herbaceous vegetative cover established around the hill slope and alternated down the slope with wider cropped strips in between that are farmed on the contour. This practice applies to all cropland. Practice includes seedbed prep and planting of native species. The area of the contour grass strip is taken out of production. This applies to both organic and non-organic.

After:
Introduced grasses and legumes will be established in strips in the field to meet the Contour buffer Strips (332) criteria, resource needs, and producer objectives. Minimum widths shall be based on NRCS local design criteria specific to the purpose for installing the practice. Introduced species shall be selected that do not function as a host for diseases of a field crop and have physical characteristics necessary to control water erosion to tolerable levels in the cropped area of the field.


Scenario_Name:
Native, Foregone Income-High Value Cropland

Scenario_Description:
Narrow strips of permanent, herbaceous vegetative cover established around the hill slope and alternated down the slope with wider cropped strips in between that are farmed on the contour. This practice applies to all cropland. Practice includes seedbed prep and planting of native species. The area of the contour buffer strips is taken out of production.

Before:
The NRCS water erosion prediction software indicates that there is a significant amount of sheet and rill erosion and/or a significant amount of sediment potentially delivered to the downslope edge of the field. Specialty crops for market are produced on this acreage. A secondary concern is that there may not be enough wildlife/pollinator habitat, food source or refugia in the field or farm.


Scenario_Description:
Narrow strips of permanent, herbaceous vegetative cover established around the hill slope and alternated down the slope with wider cropped strips in between that are farmed on the contour. This practice applies to all cropland. Practice includes seedbed prep and planting of mainly introduced species. The area of the field border is taken out of production.

Before:
The NRCS water erosion prediction software indicates that there is a significant amount of sheet and rill erosion and/or a significant amount of sediment potentially delivered to the downslope edge of the field. Specialty crops for market are grown in this field. A secondary concern is that there may not be enough wildlife/pollinator habitat, food source or refugia in the field or farm.


Scenario_Description:
Narrow strips of permanent, herbaceous vegetative cover established around the hill slope and alternated down the slope with wider cropped strips in between that are farmed on the contour. This practice applies to all cropland. Practice includes seedbed prep and planting of mainly pollinator friendly species. The area of the field border is taken out of production.

After:
Introduced grasses and legumes will be established in strips in the field to meet the Contour buffer Strips (332) criteria, resource needs, and producer objectives. Minimum widths shall be based on NRCS local design criteria specific to the purpose for installing the practice. Species selected shall meet the wildlife/pollinator habitat requirements of the state and be adapted to the site; not function as a host for diseases of a field crop and; have physical characteristics necessary to control sheet and rill erosion to tolerable levels on the cropped area of the field.


Practice:
333 - Amending Soil Properties with Gypsum Products

Scenario_Description:
Gypsum application of more than one ton/acre rate (typical average 1.5 tons/acre) to improve surface water quality due to phosphorus, pathogens, and soil health (Ca/Mg ratio). Scenario to be used in combination with an implemented nutrient management plan. The producer will use gypsum to improve soil surface structure and reduce concentration of dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP) in runoff. Scenario includes the cost of material, application, and supervisor/management time to establish and manage new application methodology, including rates, timing, and sequence of application with other nutrient materials (i.e., manures, bio-solids, and fertilizers). The addressed resource concern is water quality and soil health. Associated practices are Nutrient Management (590), Conservation Crop Rotation (328), Cover Crop (340), Residue and Tillage Management, No-till (329) and Residue and Tillage Management, Reduced Till (345).

Before:
Cropland in continuous production having relatively low soil organic matter and moderately high clay content with application of manure with a risk of pathogens. Soil in these fields has poor soil structure and a high risk of phosphorus and pathogen runoff. The soils are susceptible to soil crusting and as a result of long term tillage systems have a high concentration of phosphorous near the soil surface. The combination of poor soil structure and high nutrient levels at the soil surface results in runoff events with high concentrations of DRP that may contribute to degraded water quality.

After:
A determination based on existing soil samples used in normal nutrient management has been made. The Implementation Requirements for Amending Soil Properties with Gypsum (333) has been developed for the site. The application of gypsum to the field based on the existing soil samples will result in reduced runoff and improved runoff water quality. This condition over time in combination with an implemented nutrient management plan and supporting practices to improve soil health will improve surface water quality.


Scenario_Description:
Gypsum application of less than or equal to one ton/acre rate (typical average 1 tons/acre) to improve surface water quality due to phosphorus, pathogens, and soil health (Ca/Mg ratio). Scenario to be used in combination with an implemented nutrient management plan. The producer will use gypsum to improve soil surface structure and reduce concentration of dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP) in runoff. Scenario includes the cost of material, application, and management time to establish and manage new application methodology, including rates, timing, and sequence of application with other nutrient materials (i.e., manures, bio-solids, and fertilizers). . The addressed resource concern is water quality and soil health. Associated practices are Nutrient Management (590), Conservation Crop Rotation (328), Cover Crop (340), Residue and Tillage Management, No-till (329) and Residue and Tillage Management, Reduced Till (345).

Before:
Cropland in continuous production having relatively low soil organic matter and moderately high clay content. Soil in these fields have poor soil structure and a high risk of phosphorus and pathogen runoff. The soils are susceptible to soil crusting and as a result of long term tillage systems have high concentration of phosphorous near the soil surface. The combination of poor soil structure and high nutrient levels at the soil surface results in runoff events with high concentrations of DRP that may contribute to degraded water quality.

After:
A determination based on existing soil samples used in normal nutrient management has been made. The Implementation Requirements for Amending Soil Properties with Gypsum (333) has been developed for the site. The application of gypsum to the field is based on the existing soil samples and will result in reduce runoff and improve runoff water quality. This condition over time in combination with the implemented nutrient management plan and supporting practices to improve soil health will improve surface water quality.


Scenario_Description:
This practice must be part of a conservation management system to reduce soil compaction. This scenario considers the time needed to modify equipment, develop the technical skills necessary to effectively implement a controlled traffic farming system on a typical 200 acre cropland farm. The controlled traffic generally utilizes RTK automatic steering technology to locate and maintain high load field traffic. This scenario represents the costs associated with reducing the amount of surface area tracked/compacted to 33% or less. Cost represents typical situations for conventional, organic, and transitioning to organic producers.

Before:
The typical scenario for this practice is a 200 acre row crop operation on high clay, poorly drained soils. Studies show that when high wheel load traffic is not controlled, up to 85% of the field is tracked causing some degree of soil compaction. Before the practice is installed traffic is uncontrolled tracking and 85% of the field has compacted soil which limits soil health.

After:
An Implementation Requirement for Controlled Traffic (334) is developed and the controlled traffic lanes installed per the implementation requirements. After the practice is installed wheel/track traffic is confined to designated traffic lanes/tramlines. Wheel/track soil compaction is confined to the traffic lanes to protect the remaining surface area and subsoil from wheel/track compaction. The wheel/track traffic follows the installed traffic lanes/tramlines each year.


Scenario_Description:
Applying a prescribed burn according to designed burn plan and NRCS Prescribed Burning (338) standard and specifications. An Understory burn can consume debris or leaf litter under controlled conditions that otherwise could burn uncontrollably and devastatingly. Prior to burning unit may need to be treated to reduce slash height and quantities. Burn should be cool enough to not cause mortality to residual stand but also must reduce litter and debris. Burned firebreaks used to achieve total firebreak width are part of these burns. (Constructed firebreak cost is not included in cost of burn. Refer to Firebreak (394) standard and cost scenarios)

Before:
Light slash accumulation in a open forest stand. Leaf litter and debris throughout stand. Small seedlings of various quantities may be present.

After:
Litter, debris and slash are consumed, small seedlings may be killed during active burning. Residual larger trees have little to no scorching. Post treatment fire danger is significantly reduced.


Scenario_Name:
Level Terrain, Herbaceous Fuel Non-Volatile

Scenario_Description:
Applying a prescribed burn according to designed burn plan and NRCS Prescribed Burning (338) standard and specifications in order to control undesirable species, improve wildlife habitat, improve plant productivity and/or quality, facilitate grazing distribution and maintain ecological processes. This scenario is based on a burn area of less than 320 acres and applies under the following conditions: where the terrain of the majority of the area to be burned <15% slopes with herbaceous and/or low volatile woody fuel with no high volatile fuels. Burned firebreaks used to achieve total firebreak width are part of these burns. (Constructed firebreak cost is not included in cost of burn. Refer to Firebreak (394) standard and cost scenarios)

Before:
Desirable plant composition is lacking due to reduced plant vigor, invasive species or improper livestock distribution.

After:
Desirable plant composition is restored, plant vigor improved and invasive species reduced. Forage production and quality for livestock and /or wildlife is improved.


Scenario_Description:
Applying a prescribed burn according to designed burn plan and NRCS Prescribed Burning (338) standard and specifications in order to control undesirable species, improve wildlife habitat, improve plant productivity and/or quality, facilitate grazing distribution and maintain ecological processes. This scenario is based on a burn area of less than 320 acres and applies under the following conditions: where the terrain of the majority of the area to be burned <15% slopes with herbaceous and low volatile woody fuel with high volatile woody fuels less than 4ft tall. Burned firebreaks used to achieve total firebreak width are part of these burns. (Constructed firebreak cost is not included in cost of burn. Refer to Firebreak (394) standard and cost scenarios)


Scenario_Description:
Applying a prescribed burn according to designed burn plan and NRCS Prescribed Burning (338) standard and specifications in order to control undesirable species, improve wildlife habitat, improve plant productivity and/or quality, facilitate grazing distribution and maintain ecological processes. This scenario is based on a burn area 320 acres and applies under the following conditions: where the terrain of the majority of the area to be burned >15% slopes with herbaceous and/or low volatile woody fuel with no high volatile fuels. Burned firebreaks used to achieve total firebreak width are part of these burns. (Constructed firebreak cost is not included in cost of burn. Refer to Firebreak (394) standard and cost scenarios)


Scenario_Description:
Applying a prescribed burn according to designed burn plan and NRCS Prescribed Burning (338) standard and specifications in order to control undesirable species, improve wildlife habitat, improve plant productivity and/or quality, facilitate grazing distribution and maintain ecological processes. This scenario is based on a burn area of 320 acres and applies under the following conditions: where the terrain of the majority of the area to be burned >15% slopes with herbaceous and low volatile woody fuel with high volatile woody fuels greater than 4ft tall, but fire is still a ground fire carried by fine fuel. Burned firebreaks used to achieve total firebreak width are part of these burns. (Constructed firebreak cost is not included in cost of burn. Refer to Firebreak (394) standard and cost scenarios)


Scenario_Description:
Applying a prescribed burn according to designed burn plan and NRCS Prescribed Burning (338) standard and specifications in order to control undesirable species, improve wildlife habitat, improve plant productivity and/or quality, facilitate grazing distribution and maintain ecological processes. This scenario is based on a burn area of less than 320 acres and applies under the following conditions: where the target species (typically pinyon and juniper) is spaced widely, understory fuel is lacking, or conditions for broadcast burning are outside of safe ranges. Individual trees are ignited and burned, as an alternative to a lop and scatter treatment in Brush Management (314).


Scenario_Name:
Cover Crop - Basic (Organic and Non-organic)

Scenario_Description:
Typically a small grain or legume (may also use forage sorghum, radishes, turnips, buckwheat, etc.) will be planted as a cover crop immediately after harvest of a row crop, and will be followed by a row crop that will utilize the residue as a mulch. This scenario assumes that seed will be planted with a drill. The cover crop should be allowed to generate as much biomass as possible, without delaying planting of the following crop. The cover crop will be terminated using an approved herbicide prior to planting the subsequent crop.

Before:
Row crops such as corn, soybeans, or cotton are grown and harvested in mid-late fall. Fields are disked immediately following harvest, with rows in some fields being hipped for drainage. Residue amounts after harvest average 30% or less, resulting in bare soil being exposed to wind erosion and/or intense rainfall during the fall, winter, and early spring. Over the winter residue degrades and sediment/nutrient runoff from fields increases. Erosion exceeds soil loss tolerances. Runoff from the fields flows into streams, water courses or other water bodies causing degradation to the receiving waters. Soil health (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue crops, and long periods of bare soil.

After:
Implementation Requirements according to Cover Crop (340) are prepared and implemented. Within 30 days after harvest of the row crop, fields are planted with a small grain or legume cover crop (may also use forage sorghum, radishes, turnips, buckwheat, etc.), typically rye or clover. The average field size is 40 acres. The cover crop is seeded with a drill. No additional fertilizer is applied with the cover crop. The cover crop provides soil cover by late fall, throughout the winter, and into the early spring. Runoff and erosion are reduced. Wind erosion is reduced by standing residues. The cover crop is terminated with an approved herbicide prior to spring planting as late as feasible to maximize plant biomass production. Over time, soil health is improved due to the additional biomass, ground cover, soil infiltration, and plant diversity introduced to the cropping system. Cover crop residues left on the surface may maximize weed control by increasing allelopathic and mulching effect.


Scenario_Description:
The practice scenario is for the implementation of cover crops in small replicated plots to allow the producer to learn how to manage cover crops on their operation. Scenario includes implementing replicated strip trials on a field plot to evaluate, identify and implement a particular cover crop management strategy (e.g., cover crop vs no cover crop, multiple species vs, single species, evaluate different termination methods or timings, using a legume vs no legume for nitrogen credits). This will be done following the guidance in the NRCS Technical Note 10 - Adaptive Management.

Before:
Row crops such as corn, soybeans, or cotton are grown and harvested in mid-late fall. Fields are disked immediately following harvest, with rows in some fields being hipped for drainage. Residue amounts after harvest average 30% or less, resulting in bare soil being exposed to wind erosion and/or intense rainfall. Over the winter residue degrades and sediment/nutrient runoff from fields increases. Sheet and rill erosion occurs with visible rills by spring. Runoff from the fields flows into streams, water courses or other water bodies causing degradation to the receiving waters. Soil health (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue crops, and long periods of bare soil. The producer is considering the use of cover crops but is unsure how to manage on their unique operation or is seeking a way to better manage cover crops in the operation.

After:
Implementation Requirements for Cover Crop (340) will be prepared along with the Adaptive Management plan for the replicated cover crop plots and implemented. Installation of this scenario will result in establishment of a cover crop replicated plots to compare to different management strategies for cover crop management following the guidance in the Agronomy Technical Note 10 - Adaptive Management. Implementation involves establishing the replicated plots to evaluate one or more cover crop management strategies. The plot will consist of at least 4 replicated plots designed, laid out, managed and evaluated with the assistance of a consultant knowledgeable in cover crop management. Results are used to make cover crop management decisions to address erosion and water quality issues. Yields will be measured and statistically summarized following the procedures in Agronomy Technical Note 10 - Adaptive Management. The yields for each plot will be adjusted to the appropriate moisture content. This would be repeated for 3 years.


Scenario_Name:
Cover Crop - Multiple Species (Organic and Non-organic)

Scenario_Description:
Typically the multi-species cover crop (two or more species) mix includes a small grain, a legume, and may include other species such as forage sorghum, radishes, turnips, buckwheat, etc.). This mix will address all the purposes of the Cover Crop (340) standard. Typically the cover crop is seeded immediately after harvest of a row crop, but may be inter-seeded into a row crop using a broadcast seeder, drill, or similar device. The cover crop will be followed by another row crop and will utilize the residue as a mulch. The cover crop should be allowed to generate as much biomass as possible without delaying planting of the following crop. The cover crop will be terminated using an approved herbicide or tillage prior to planting the subsequent crop and terminated per the NRCS Cover Crop Termination Guidelines.

Before:
Row crops such as corn, soybeans, or cotton are grown and harvested in mid-late fall. Fields are disked immediately following harvest with rows in some fields being hipped for drainage. Residue amounts after harvest average 30% or less resulting in bare soil being exposed to wind erosion and/or intense rainfall during the fall, winter, and early spring. Over the winter residue degrades and sediment/nutrient runoff from fields increases. Erosion exceeds soil loss tolerances. Runoff from the fields flows into streams, water courses or other water bodies causing degradation to the receiving waters. Soil health (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue crops, and long periods of bare soil.

After:
Implementation Requirements according to Cover Crop (340) are prepared and implemented. Within 30 days after the harvest of row crop, fields are planted with a multi-species (2 or more species) cover crop mix that generally includes a small grain, a legume, and may include other species such as forage sorghum, radishes, turnips, buckwheat, etc. The average field size is 40 acres. The cover crop is seeded with a drill, broadcast seeder, aerial broadcast, or other method. No additional fertilizer is applied with the cover crop. The cover crop provides soil cover by late fall, throughout the winter, and into the early spring. Runoff and erosion are reduced. Wind erosion is reduced by standing residues. The cover crop is terminated with an approved herbicide prior to spring planting as late as feasible to maximize plant biomass production. Over time, soil health is improved due to the additional biomass, ground cover, soil infiltration, and plant diversity introduced to the cropping system. Cover crop residues left on the surface may maximize weed control by increasing allelopathic and mulching effect.


Scenario_Description:
A one or more species cover crop mix is planted soon after harvest for either and organic or inorganic operation. Seed is planted using a drill or broadcast seeder. The cover crop should be allowed to generate as much biomass as possible without delaying planting of the following crop as permitted by the NRCS Cover Crop Termination Guidelines. The cover crop will be terminated using an approved herbicide and/or by mechanical operations prior to planting the subsequent crop. The cover crop will treat erosion, improve soil quality, reduce water quality degradation by utilizing excessive soil nutrients, suppress excessive weed pressures and break pest cycles, improve soil moisture use efficiency, or minimize soil compaction.

Before:
Row crops such as corn, soybeans, or vegetables are grown and harvested. Fields are disked immediately following harvest, with rows in some fields being hipped for drainage. Residue amounts after harvest average 30% or less, resulting in bare soil being exposed to wind erosion and/or intense rainfall. After harvest residue degrades and sediment/nutrient runoff from fields increases. Sheet and rill erosion occurs with visible rills. Runoff from the fields flows into streams, water courses or other water bodies causing degradation to the receiving waters. Soil health (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue crops, and long periods of bare soil.

After:
Implementation Requirements are prepared for the site specific conditions and desired purpose(s). After harvest of row crop, fields are planted with a one or more species cover crop to address erosion, improve soil quality, reduce water quality degradation by utilizing excessive soil nutrients, suppress excessive weed pressures and break pest cycles, improve soil moisture use efficiency, or minimize soil compaction. The cover crop provides soil cover until the following crop. Runoff and erosion are reduced and no rills are visible on the soil surface in the spring. Wind erosion is reduced by standing residues. The cover crop is terminated with an approved herbicide or tillage or crimper rolling prior to establishing the next crop. Over time, soil health is improved due to the additional biomass, ground cover, soil infiltration, and plant diversity introduced to the cropping system. Cover crop residues left on the surface may maximize weed control by increasing allelopathic and mulching effect.


Scenario_Description:
A legume will be planted as a cover crop immediately after harvest of a row crop, and will be followed by a row crop that will utilize fixed nitrogen and cover crop biomass as a mulch, provide erosion reduction, improve water quality, and soil health. This scenario assumes that seed will be planted with a drill. Legume seeds must be inoculated with the proper inoculant prior to planting. The cover crop should be allowed to reach early to mid-bloom before it is terminated, using an approved herbicide, in order to maximize nitrogen fixation.

Before:
Fields are disked immediately following harvest, with some fields being hipped for drainage. Residue amounts after harvest average 30% or less, resulting in high erosion, impaired water quality, and degraded soil health.

After:
The 340 Implementation Requirements is completed per the needed specifications for the field site. Harvest fields are planted immediately with a legume cover crop. The average field size is 5 acres. The cover crop is seeded with a drill. No fertilizer is applied with the cover crop. The cover crop provides soil cover to reduce erosion, improve water quality, and improve soil health.


Scenario_Name:
Cover Crop- Basic, Organic/Non-Organic, Winter Kill

Scenario_Description:
Typically a small grain or legume (may also use forage sorghum, radishes, turnips, buckwheat, etc.) will be planted as a cover crop immediately after harvest of a row crop, and will be followed by a row crop that will utilize the residue as a mulch. This scenario assumes that seed will be planted with a drill. The cover crop should be allowed to generate as much biomass as possible, without delaying planting of the following crop. The cover crop will be killed over the winter without the use of herbicide or mechanically killed.

After:
Implementation Requirements according to Cover Crop (340) are prepared and implemented. Within 30 days after harvest of the row crop, fields are planted with a small grain or legume cover crop (may also use forage sorghum, radishes, turnips, buckwheat, etc.), typically rye or clover. The average field size is 40 acres. The cover crop is seeded with a drill. No additional fertilizer is applied with the cover crop. The cover crop provides soil cover by late fall, throughout the winter, and into the early spring. Runoff and erosion are reduced. Wind erosion is reduced by standing residues. The cover crop is terminated over the winter and is planted early enough to maximize plant biomass production before the winter kill. Over time, soil health is improved due to the additional biomass, ground cover, soil infiltration, and plant diversity introduced to the cropping system. Cover crop residues left on the surface may maximize weed control by increasing allelopathic and mulching effect.


Scenario_Description:
"Typically a small grain or small grain-legume mix (may also use forage sorghum, radishes, turnips, buckwheat, etc.) will be planted as a cover crop immediately after harvest of an organically grown crop, and will be followed by an organically grown crop that will utilize the residue as a mulch. This scenario assumes that seed will be planted with a no-till drill. The cover crop should be allowed to generate as much biomass as possible, without delaying planting of the following crop. The cover crop will be terminated using a mechanical kill method (mowing, rolling, undercutting, etc.), within weeks prior to planting the subsequent crop. This scenario REQUIRES use of Certified Organic Seed. Associated practices: Conservation Cover (327), Conservation Crop Rotation (328), Residue and Tillage Management, No-Till/Strip Till/Direct Seed (329), Critical Area Planting (342), Residue Management, Seasonal (344), Residue and Tillage Management, Mulch Till (345), Residue and Tillage Management, Ridge Till (346), Nutrient Management (590), Integrated Pest Management (595)."

Before:
Organically grown crops such as various vegetable and fruit crops (along with organically produced row crops) are grown and harvested in mid-late fall. Fields are disked immediately following harvest. Residue amounts after harvest average 30% or less, resulting in bare soil being exposed to wind erosion and/or intense rainfall during the fall, winter, and early spring. Over the winter residue degrades and sediment/nutrient runoff from fields increases. Sheet and rill erosion occurs with visible rills by spring. Runoff from the fields flows into streams, water courses or other water bodies causing degradation to the receiving waters. Soil health (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue crops, and long periods of bare soil.

After:
Within 30 days after harvest of organic crop, fields are planted with a small grain-legume mix cover crop, typically rye and clover. The average field size is 25 acres. The cover crop is seeded with a no-till drill. No additional fertilizer is applied with the cover crop. The cover crop provides soil cover by late fall, throughout the winter, and into the early spring. Runoff and erosion are reduced and no rills are visible on the soil surface in the spring. The cover crop is terminated with using a mechanical kill method (mowing, rolling, undercutting, etc.), prior to spring planting as late as feasible to maximize plant biomass production. Over time, soil health is improved due to the additional biomass, ground cover, and plant diversity introduced to the cropping system. Wind erosion is reduced by standing resides. Cover crop residues left on the surface may maximize weed control by increasing allelopathic and mulching effect.


Scenario_Name:
Native or Introduced Vegetation - Normal Tillage (Organic and Non-Organic)

Scenario_Description:
Establishment of permanent vegetation (Native and Introduced) on a site (both organic and non-organic) that is void or nearly void of vegetation due to a natural occurrence or a newly constructed conservation practice. Costs include seedbed preparation with typical tillage implements, grass/legume seed, companion crop, and fertilizer and lime with application.

Before:
Areas that are void or nearly void of vegetation, resulting in bare soil being exposed to erosive processes. The exposed areas may be caused from recent natural occurrences (fire, flood, wind, etc.) or due to newly constructed conservation practices such as waterways, terraces, water and sediment basins or dams. The exposed areas will be subject to wind and water erosion that exceed soil loss tolerances. Runoff from the area flows into streams, water courses or other water bodies causing degradation to the receiving waters. The soil typically has a pH imbalance and low fertility.

After:
Implementation Requirements are prepared and implemented according to the Critical Area Planting (342) standard. This typical 1.0 acre critical area is stabilized by applying fertilizer, lime and seed. Soil amendments will be incorporated at a depth of four to six inches to improve fertility and ensure establishment of permanent vegetative cover. The site will be stabilized, erosion reduced, and offsite damages reduced/eliminated.


Scenario_Name:
Native or Introduced Vegetation - Moderate Grading (Organic and Non-Organic)

Scenario_Description:
Establishment of permanent vegetation (native and introduced) on a site that is void or nearly void of vegetation due to a natural or human disturbance. Costs include a dozer for grading and shaping of small gullies, seedbed preparation with typical tillage implements, grass/legume seed, companion crop, and fertilizer and lime with application.

Before:
Areas that are void or nearly void of vegetation, resulting in bare soil being exposed to erosive processes. The exposed areas may be caused from natural occurrences (fire, flood, etc.) or human disturbance. The exposed areas have visible rills and small gullies averaging 1 foot in depth and 1 foot in width that requires some moderate grading to prepare a seedbed. Runoff from the area flows into streams, water courses or other water bodies causing degradation to the receiving waters. The soil typically has a pH imbalance and low fertility.

After:
Implementation Requirements are prepared and implemented according to the Critical Area Planting (342) standard.. This typical 1.0 acre critical area is stabilized by grading and shaping the small gullies with a dozer and then applying fertilizer, lime and seed. The site will be stabilized, erosion reduced, and offsite damages reduced/eliminated.


Scenario_Name:
Native or Introduced Vegetation - Heavy Grading (Organic and Non-Organic)

Scenario_Description:
Establishment of permanent vegetation on a site that is void or nearly void of vegetation due to a natural or human disturbance. Costs include a dozer for grading and shaping of moderate to severe gullies, seedbed preparation with typical tillage implements, grass/legume seed, companion crop, and fertilizer and lime with application.

Before:
Areas that are void or nearly void of vegetation, resulting in bare soil being exposed to erosive processes. The exposed areas may be caused from natural occurrences (fire, flood, etc.) or human disturbance. The exposed areas have visible rills and moderate to severe gullies averaging 3 feet in depth and 3 feet in width. Runoff from the area flows into streams, water courses or other water bodies causing degradation to the receiving waters. The soil typically has a pH imbalance and low fertility.

After:
Implementation Requirements are prepared and implemented according to the Critical Area Planting (342) standard. This typical 1.0 acre critical area is stabilized by grading and shaping the moderate to severe gullies with a dozer and then applying fertilizer, lime and seed. The site will be stabilized, erosion reduced, and offsite damages reduced/eliminated.


Scenario_Name:
Caribbean Critical Area Planting Heavy Grading

Scenario_Description:
Establishment of permanent vegetation on a site that is void or nearly void of vegetation due to a natural or human disturbance. Costs include a dozer for grading and shaping of moderate to severe gullies, seedbed preparation with typical tillage implements, seeding, and mulching as needed by the unique site.

Before:
Areas that are void or nearly void of vegetation, resulting in bare soil being exposed to erosive processes. The exposed areas may be caused from natural occurrences (fire, flood, etc.) or human disturbance. The exposed areas have visible rills and moderate gullies.

After:
Implementation Requirements for 342 Critical Area Planting is prepared for the unique site conditions. This typical 1.0 acre critical area is stabilized by grading and shaping the moderate to severe gullies with a dozer, seedbed preparation, applying fertilizer, lime and seed. The site is stabilized by permanent vegetation which controls soil erosion and mitigates offsite sedimentation.


Scenario_Name:
Caribbean Critical Area Planting - Normal Tillage

Scenario_Description:
Establishment of permanent vegetation on a site that is void or nearly void of vegetation due to a natural occurrence or a newly constructed conservation practice. Costs include seedbed preparation with typical tillage implements, grass/legume seed, fertilizer, and mulch.

Before:
Areas that are void or nearly void of vegetation, resulting in bare soil being exposed to erosive processes. The exposed areas may be caused from recent natural occurrences (fire, flood, wind, etc.) or due to newly constructed conservation practices such dams.

After:
The Implementation Requirements with site specific specifications is prepared for each site. This typical 1.0 acre critical area is stabilized by applying fertilizer, lime, seed, and mulch. Vegetation is established, the soil is stabilized.


Scenario_Name:
US Virgin Island Critical Area Planting - Normal Tillage

Scenario_Description:
Establishment of permanent vegetation on a site that is void or nearly void of vegetation due to a natural or human disturbance. Costs include tillage for seedbed preparation with typical tillage implements, grass/legume seed, companion crop, and fertilizer and lime with application, and mulch.

Before:
Areas that are void or nearly void of vegetation, resulting in bare soil being exposed to erosive processes. The exposed areas may be caused from natural occurrences (fire, flood, etc.) or human disturbance. Runoff from the area flows into streams, water courses or other water bodies causing degradation to the receiving waters. The soil typically has a pH imbalance and low fertility.

After:
Implementation Requirements are prepared according to the 342 Critical Area Planting standard and implemented. This typical 1.0 acre critical area is stabilized by applying fertilizer, lime, seed, and mulch. The site will be stabilized, erosion reduced, and offsite damages reduced/eliminated.


Scenario_Name:
US Virgin Islands Critical Area Planting - Heavy Grading

Scenario_Description:
Establishment of permanent vegetation on a site that is void or nearly void of vegetation due to a natural or human disturbance. Costs include a dozer for grading and shaping of moderate to severe gullies, seedbed preparation with typical tillage implements, grass/legume seed, companion crop, fertilizer and lime with application, and mulch.

After:
Implementation Requirements are prepared according to the 342 Critical Area Planting standard for the unique site requirements and implemented. This typical 1.0 acre critical area is stabilized by grading and shaping the moderate to severe gullies with a dozer and then applying fertilizer, lime, seed, and mulch. The site will be stabilized, erosion reduced, and offsite damages reduced/eliminated.


Scenario_Description:
Establishment of permanent vegetation (Native or Introduced) on a site that is void or nearly void of vegetation due to a natural or human disturbance. Costs include a dozer for grading and shaping of moderate to severe gullies, seedbed preparation with typical tillage implements, grass/legume seed, companion crop, and fertilizer and lime with application.

After:
Implementation Requirements are prepared according to the 342 Critical Area Planting standard and implemented. This typical 1.0 acre critical area is stabilized by grading and shaping the small gullies with a dozer and then applying fertilizer, lime and seed. The site will be stabilized, erosion reduced, and offsite damages reduced/eliminated.


Scenario_Description:
Establishment of permanent vegetation on a (Organic and Non-Organic) site that is void or nearly void of vegetation due to a natural occurrence or a newly constructed conservation practice. Costs include seedbed preparation with typical tillage implements, native grass seed, and trees/shrubs.

After:
Implementation Requirements are prepared according to the 342 Critical Area Planting Standard and implemented. This typical 1.0 acre critical area is stabilized by applying seed and some trees and shrubs. The site will be stabilized, erosion reduced, and offsite damages reduced/eliminated.


Scenario_Description:
Establishment of permanent vegetation on disturbed sites that have high erosion rates and or physical, chemical or biological conditions that prevent the establishment of vegetation with normal practices. Costs include organic amendment and application, seedbed preparation, grass/legume seed and labor to seed by hand.

Before:
Slopes that are too steep for safe equipment operation that are void or nearly void of vegetation resulting in bare soil being exposed to excessive erosion. The exposed areas may be caused by mining, construction or reclamation activities. Surface soils are typically mixtures of subsoil materials that are low in organic matter and available nitrogen and phosphorus.

After:
The site is stabilized by application of organic amendments and the establishment of sod forming perennial vegetation. Seed is applied by hand at a rate high enough to adequately establish vegetation on bare soil.


Scenario_Description:
Establishment of permanent vegetation on disturbed sites that have high erosion rates and or physical, chemical or biological conditions that prevent the establishment of vegetation with normal practices. Costs include organic amendment and application, seedbed preparation, grass/legume seed, and drill application.

After:
The site is stabilized by application of organic amendments and the establishment of sod forming perennial vegetation. Seed is applied at a rate high enough to adequately establish vegetation on bare soil. Mulch is contracted separately to conserve soil moisture.


Practice:
345 - Residue and Tillage Management, Reduced Till

Scenario_Name:
Residue and Tillage Management, Reduced Till

Scenario_Description:
Mulch-till is managing the amount, orientation and distribution of crop and other plant residue on the soil surface year round while limiting the soil-disturbing activities used to grow crops in systems where the entire field surface is tilled by the planter/drill or tillage tools prior to planting. This practice includes tillage methods commonly referred to as mulch tillage, vertical tillage, chiseling and disking, or the use of high disturbance drills without additional tillage. It applies to stubble mulching on summer-fallowed land, to tillage for annually planted crops, to tillage for planted crops and to tillage for planting perennial crops. All residue shall be uniformly spread or managed over the surface throughout the critical erosion period(s). All residue shall be uniformly distributed over the entire field and not burned or removed. These periods of intensive tillage have led to excessive soil loss, often above the soil loss tolerance (T), due to the loss of crop residue on the soil surface. The NRCS erosion prediction model(s) will be used to review the farming operations and determine the amount of surface residue to manage throughout the rotation to keep soil loss below T. The producer will adopt a reduced till system to meet one or more of the practice purposes.

Before:
Crops such as corn, soybeans, small grains, or cotton are grown and harvested. Fields are tilled immediately following harvest, with rows in some fields being hipped for drainage. Residue amounts after harvest average 30% or less, resulting in bare soil being exposed to wind erosion and/or intense rainfall during the fall, winter, and early spring. Over the winter residue degrades and sediment/nutrient runoff from fields increase. Sheet, rill and wind erosion occurs. Spring tillage and seedbed preparation activities occur as early as possible in the late winter and early spring. Runoff from the fields flows into streams, water courses or other water bodies causing water quality degradation. Soil health (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue monocultures, and long periods of bare soil.

After:
The Implementation Requirements are prepared following the criteria in the 345 Residue and Tillage Management, Reduced Till conservation practice standard. Reduced till applies to all cropland and other lands where crops are planted. This scenario includes the use of a reduce till systems and high disturbance drills, such as a hoe drill, air seeder, or no-till drill that disturbs a large percentage of soil surface during the planting operation. The residue that remains on the soil surface provides soil cover during late fall, throughout the winter, and into the early spring. Runoff and water/wind erosion are reduced and water quality improves. Over time, soil health is improved due to less tillage, the additional biomass, ground cover, soil infiltration, and plant diversity in the cropping system.


Scenario_Description:
The practice scenario is for the implementation of mulch till in small replicated plots to allow the producer to learn how to manage mulch till on their operation. Scenario includes implementing replicated strip trials on a field plot to evaluate, identify and implement a particular mulch till management strategy (e.g., mulch till vs. conventional till, two different mulch till systems, etc.). This will be done following the guidelines outlined in Agronomy Technical Note 10 - Adaptive Management.

Before:
Row crops such as corn, soybeans, or cotton are grown and harvested in mid-late fall. Fields are disked immediately following harvest, with rows in some fields being hipped for drainage. Residue amounts after harvest average 30% or less, resulting in bare soil being exposed to wind erosion and/or intense rainfall. Over the winter residue degrades and sediment/nutrient runoff from fields increases. Erosion exceeds soil loss tolerances. Spring tillage and seedbed preparation activities occur as early as possible in the late winter and early spring prior to planting. Weed control is accomplished primarily through tillage, requiring multiple operations. Runoff from the fields flows into streams, water courses or other water bodies causing degradation to the receiving waters. Soil health (soil organic matter) declines over time as a result of tillage practices, low residue monocultures, and long periods of bare soil. The producer is considering using mulch till technology, but is unsure how to manage on their operation or needs to improve the management of mulch till to be successful.

After:
Implementation Requirements and the Adaptive Management Plan is prepared for the plots and implemented. Installation of this scenario will result in establishment of mulch till replicated plots to compare to different management strategies for mulch till and other residue management strategies following the guidelines outlined in Agronomy Technical Note 10 - Adaptive Management and the Adaptive Management Guidance 345 for Mulch Till. Implementation involves establishing the replicated plots to evaluate one or more reduced till management strategies. The plot will consist of at least four replicated plots designed, laid out, managed and evaluated with the assistance of a consultant knowledgeable in reduced till management. Results are used to make reduced till management decisions to address erosion, soil health, and water quality issues. Yields will be measured and statistically summarized following the procedures in Agronomy Technical Note 10 - Adaptive Management. The yields for each plot will be adjusted to the appropriate moisture content and residue levels measured as needed. This practice will be repeated for three years.


Scenario_Name:
Reduced Till Sweep for No Burn/Sweep Beds - Sugarcane Production in Louisiana

Scenario_Description:
In this scenario, sugarcane producers will be migrating from a system of burning residue immediately after harvest in the fall and winter to a system that discontinues burning and allows residue to be swept into furrows. No burning will take place during the management period. Adopting this system will improve soil quality, reduce erosion, and improve air quality in sensitive areas.

Before:
Sugarcane residue is typically burned immediately after harvest in the fall and early winter. After burning, beds may be reshaped with tillage. Any crop residue that is present degrades and sediment/nutrient runoff from fields increases during rainfall events. Sheet and rill erosion occurs with visible signs of soil erosion by spring. Sensitive receptors near sugarcane fields will be exposed to increased particulate matter and degraded air quality during burning events.

After:
After harvest in the fall or winter, residue will be swept from the sugarcane row tops into the furrows. Residue will not be burned. In the early spring, row reshaping (off-bar and lay-by tillage) will occur as necessary. Over time, soil health is improved due to the additional crop residues, ground cover, and soil infiltration.


Scenario_Description:
A rock structure with a gravel bedding on geotextile is built to divert all or part of the water from a waterway or a stream to provide water in such a manner that it can be controlled and used beneficially for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, develop renewable energy systems, or recreation, to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows. This structure will address the resource concerns of inefficient water use on Irrigated Land, inadequate water for livestock, and inadequate water supply for other beneficial uses.

Before:
This practice applies where a diversion dam is needed as an integral part of an irrigation system or a water-spreading system designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil and water resources, Diversion of water from an unstable watercourse to a stable watercourse is desirable, The water supply available is adequate for the purpose for which it is to be diverted, Adverse environmental impacts resulting from the installation of the practice can be overcome. This standard applies to structures of a permanent nature, constructed of materials having an expected life span consistent with the purpose for which the structure is designed. It does not apply where conservation practice standard Diversion (362), Floodwater Diversion (400), Dam (402), or Grade Stabilization Structure (410) would be used. This practice will provide beneficial uses for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, renewable energy systems, recreation, or to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows.

After:
A rock structure of approximately 1050 cubic yards with a gravel bedding of approximately 450 cubic yards on approximately 200 square yards of geotextile, built to divert all or part of the water from a waterway or a stream. This standard applies to structures of a permanent nature, constructed of materials having an expected life span consistent with the purpose for which the structure is designed. This structure will be an integral part of an irrigation system or a water-spreading system designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil and water resources, or diversion of water from an unstable watercourse to a stable watercourse as needed. The water supply available is adequate for the purpose for which it is to be diverted. Adverse environmental impacts resulting from the installation of the practice must be overcome. The rock structure provides beneficial uses for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, renewable energy systems, recreation, or to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows. Any needed vegetation of disturbed areas must use Critical Area Planting (342). Other associated practices such as Channel Vegetation (322), Stream Habitat Improvement and Management (395), Channel Stabilization (584) will be as appropriate. Any needed head gates or flap gates to control the quantity of water being diverted must use Structure for Water Control (587).


Scenario_Description:
An earth fill built to divert all or part of the water from a waterway or a stream to provide water in such a manner that it can be controlled and used beneficially for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, develop renewable energy systems, or recreation, to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows. This structure will address the resource concerns of inefficient water use on Irrigated Land, inadequate water for livestock, and inadequate water supply for other beneficial uses.

After:
An earth fill structure of approximately 1500 cubic yards is built to divert all or part of the water from a waterway or a stream. This standard applies to structures of a permanent nature, constructed of materials having an expected life span consistent with the purpose for which the structure is designed. This structure will be an integral part of an irrigation system or a water-spreading system designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil and water resources, or diversion of water from an unstable watercourse to a stable watercourse as needed. The water supply available is adequate for the purpose for which it is to be diverted. Adverse environmental impacts resulting from the installation of the practice must be overcome. The earth fill structure provides beneficial uses for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, renewable energy systems, recreation, or to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows. Any needed vegetation of disturbed areas must use Critical Area Planting (342). Other associated practices such as Channel Vegetation (322), Stream Habitat Improvement and Management (395), Channel Stabilization (584) will be as appropriate. Any needed head gates or flap gates to control the quantity of water being diverted must use Structure for Water Control (587).


Scenario_Description:
An earth fill and grouted rock structure built to divert all or part of the water from a waterway or a stream to provide water in such a manner that it can be controlled and used beneficially for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, develop renewable energy systems, or recreation, to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows. This structure will address the resource concerns of inefficient water use on Irrigated Land, inadequate water for livestock, and inadequate water supply for other beneficial uses.

After:
An earth fill and grouted rock structure of approximately 1050 cubic yards of earth fill with 450 cubic yards of grouted rock is built to divert all or part of the water from a waterway or a stream. This standard applies to structures of a permanent nature, constructed of materials having an expected life span consistent with the purpose for which the structure is designed. This structure will be an integral part of an irrigation system or a water-spreading system designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil and water resources, or diversion of water from an unstable watercourse to a stable watercourse as needed. The water supply available is adequate for the purpose for which it is to be diverted. Adverse environmental impacts resulting from the installation of the practice must be overcome. The earth fill and grouted rock structure provides beneficial uses for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, renewable energy systems, recreation, or to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows. Any needed vegetation of disturbed areas must use Critical Area Planting (342). Other associated practices such as Channel Vegetation (322), Stream Habitat Improvement and Management (395), Channel Stabilization (584) will be as appropriate. Any needed head gates or flap gates to control the quantity of water being diverted must use Structure for Water Control (587).


Scenario_Description:
A sheet pile structure with rock, built to divert all or part of the water from a waterway or a stream to provide water in such a manner that it can be controlled and used beneficially for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, develop renewable energy systems, or recreation, to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows. This structure will address the resource concerns of inefficient water use on Irrigated Land, inadequate water for livestock, and inadequate water supply for other beneficial uses.

After:
A sheet pile structure of approximately 3000 square feet with approximately 660 cubic yards of riprap is built to divert all or part of the water from a waterway or a stream. This standard applies to structures of a permanent nature, constructed of materials having an expected life span consistent with the purpose for which the structure is designed. This structure will be an integral part of an irrigation system or a water-spreading system designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil and water resources, or diversion of water from an unstable watercourse to a stable watercourse as needed. The water supply available is adequate for the purpose for which it is to be diverted. Adverse environmental impacts resulting from the installation of the practice must be overcome. The sheet pile structure provides beneficial uses for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, renewable energy systems, recreation, or to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows. Any needed vegetation of disturbed areas must use Critical Area Planting (342). Other associated practices such as Channel Vegetation (322), Stream Habitat Improvement and Management (395), Channel Stabilization (584) will be as appropriate. Any needed head gates or flap gates to control the quantity of water being diverted must use Structure for Water Control (587).


Scenario_Description:
A reinforced concrete dam diversion structure built to divert all or part of the water from a waterway or a stream to provide water in such a manner that it can be controlled and used beneficially for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, develop renewable energy systems, or recreation, to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows. This structure will address the resource concerns of inefficient water use on Irrigated Land, inadequate water for livestock, and inadequate water supply for other beneficial uses.

After:
A reinforced concrete dam diversion structure of approximately 1500 cubic yards of concrete is built to divert all or part of the water from a waterway or a stream. This standard applies to structures of a permanent nature, constructed of materials having an expected life span consistent with the purpose for which the structure is designed. This structure will be an integral part of an irrigation system or a water-spreading system designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil and water resources, or diversion of water from an unstable watercourse to a stable watercourse as needed. The water supply available is adequate for the purpose for which it is to be diverted. Adverse environmental impacts resulting from the installation of the practice must be overcome. The reinforced concrete structure provides beneficial uses for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, renewable energy systems, recreation, or to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows. Any needed vegetation of disturbed areas must use Critical Area Planting (342). Other associated practices such as Channel Vegetation (322), Stream Habitat Improvement and Management (395), Channel Stabilization (584) will be as appropriate. Any needed head gates or flap gates to control the quantity of water being diverted must use Structure for Water Control (587).


Scenario_Description:
A gabion basket structure with rock fill, built to divert all or part of the water from a water way or stream, to provide water in such a manner that it can be controlled and used beneficially for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, develop renewable energy systems, or recreation, to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows. This structure will address the resource concerns of inefficient water use on Irrigated Land, inadequate water for livestock, and inadequate water supply for other beneficial uses.

Before:
This practice applies where a diversion dam is needed as an integral part of an irrigation system or a water spreading system designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil and water resources, Diversion of water from an unstable watercourse to a stable watercourse is desirable. The water supply available is adequate for the purpose for which it is to be diverted. Adverse environmental impacts resulting from the installation of the practice can be overcome. This standard applies to structures of a permanent nature, constructed of materials having an expected life span consistent with the purpose for which the structure is designed. It does not apply where conservation practice standard Diversion (362), Floodwater Diversion (400), Dam (402), or Grade Stabilization Structure would be used. This practice will provide beneficial uses for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, renewable energy systems, recreation, or to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows.

After:
A gabion basket structure of approximately 300 cubic yards is built to divert all or part of the water from a waterway or stream. This standard applies to structures of a permanent nature, constructed of materials having an expected life span consistent with the purpose for which the structure is designed. This structure will be an integral part of an irrigation system or a water-spreading system designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil and water resources, or diversion of water from an unstable watercourse to a stable watercourse as needed. The water supply available is adequate for the purpose for which it is to be diverted. Adverse environmental impacts resulting from the installation of the practice must be overcome. The gabion structure provides beneficial uses for irrigation, livestock water, fire control, municipal or industrial uses, renewable energy systems, recreation, or to divert periodic damaging flows from one watercourse to another watercourse thereby reducing the damage potential of the flows. Any needed vegetation of disturbed areas must use Critical Area Planting (342). Other associated practices such as Channel Vegetation (322), Stream Habitat Improvement and Management (395), Channel Stabilization (584) will be as appropriate. Any needed head gates or flap gates to control the quantity of water being diverted must use Structure for Water Control (587).


Scenario_Description:
An excavated sediment basin in an existing drainage way on a farm for purpose of trapping sediment and preserving the capacity of reservoirs, ditches, canals, diversions, waterways and streams and to prevent undesirable deposition on bottom lands and other developed lands. The sediment basin is created solely by excavation and impounds less than 3 feet against the embankment or spoil. Excavated material is spoiled, not placed in a designed embankment. Earthen spillway is constructed as needed. Resource concerns addressed include excessive suspended sediment and turbidity in surface water, damage from sediment deposition, and reduced capacity of conveyances by sediment deposition. Surface water causes the sediment (and potentially pesticides and nutrients) to be transported into the riparian areas and water bodies downstream.

Before:
Disturbed areas on all land uses that have excessive erosion lead to deterioration of receiving waters due to excessive sedimentation.

After:
'The typical sediment basin is constructed by excavating 1500 cubic yards and spreading the spoil outside the pool area using a dozer or similar excavation equipment. The sediment storage capacity should be a minimum of 900 cubic feet per acre of disturbed area. The detention storage should be a minimum of 3600 cubic feet per acre of drainage area. Associated practice(s): Other practices that may need to be implemented along with sediment basin to address all of the site specific resource concerns include: Critical Area Planting (342) and Mulching (484) where necessary to prevent erosion following construction activities, Structure for Water Control (587) if using a dewatering device, Pond Sealing or Lining (521A,521B,521C,521D).


Scenario_Description:
An low hazard class embankment earthen sediment basin in an existing drainage way on a farm for purpose of trapping sediment and preserving the capacity of reservoirs, ditches, canals, diversions, waterways and streams and to prevent undesirable deposition on bottom lands and other developed lands. An earthen embankment will be constructed with an earthen auxiliary spillway, as designed. Resource concerns addressed include excessive suspended sediment and turbidity in surface water, damage from sediment deposition, and reduced capacity of conveyances by sediment deposition. Surface water causes the sediment (and potentially pesticides and nutrients) to be transported into the riparian areas and water bodies downstream.

After:
The typical sediment basin is constructed by excavating the pool area, constructing the auxiliary spillway, preparing the foundation as designed, and using 1500 cubic yards to create an embankment. The embankment will be designed and constructed according the pond standard (378). The product of the storage times the effective height of the dam is less than 3,000. The effective height of the dam is 35 feet or less. The sediment storage capacity should be a minimum of 900 cubic feet per acre of disturbed area. The detention storage should be a minimum of 3600 cubic feet per acre of drainage area. The earthen auxiliary spillway will be constructed as designed based on Pond standard (378). No principal spillway will be used. Associated practice(s): Other practices that may need to be implemented along with sediment basin to address all of the site specific resource concerns include: Critical Area Planting (342) and Mulching (484) where necessary to prevent erosion following construction activities, Structure for Water Control (587) if using a dewatering device, Pond Sealing or Lining (521A,521B,521C,521D).


Scenario_Description:
An low hazard class embankment earthen sediment basin in an existing drainage way on a farm for purpose of trapping sediment and preserving the capacity of reservoirs, ditches, canals, diversions, waterways and streams and to prevent undesirable deposition on bottom lands and other developed lands. An earthen embankment will be constructed with a principal spillway conduit and earthen auxiliary spillway, as designed. Resource concerns addressed include excessive suspended sediment and turbidity in surface water, damage from sediment deposition, and reduced capacity of conveyances by sediment deposition. Surface water causes the sediment (and potentially pesticides and nutrients) to be transported into the riparian areas and water bodies downstream.

After:
The typical sediment basin is constructed by excavating the pool area, constructing the auxiliary spillway, preparing the foundation as designed, and using 1500 cubic yards to create an embankment. The embankment will be designed and constructed according the Pond standard (378). The product of the storage times the effective height of the dam is less than 3,000. The effective height of the dam is 35 feet or less. The sediment storage capacity should be a minimum of 900 cubic feet per acre of disturbed area. The detention storage should be a minimum of 3600 cubic feet per acre of drainage area. The principal spillway is created using an approved conduit material and filter diaphragm. The earthen auxiliary spillway will be constructed as designed based on Pond standard (378). Associated practice(s): Other practices that may need to be implemented along with sediment basin to address all of the site specific resource concerns include: Critical Area Planting (342) and Mulching (484) where necessary to prevent erosion following construction activities, Structure for Water Control (587) if using a dewatering device, Pond Sealing or Lining (521A,521B,521C,521D).


Scenario_Description:
A licensed well driller will seal and permanently close an inactive, abandoned, or unusable water well to prevent excess nutrients in surface and groundwater and to eliminate pesticides transported to surface and ground water. Well will be cleared of all equipment and materials. Residual water column must be treated with chlorine concentration of >50 ppm or according to local, State, Tribal, or Federal regulations.

Before:
Shallow well or hand dug well that is less than 20 feet deep. Assume 30" diameter casing. Well will be cleared of all equipment and materials. Residual water column must be treated with chlorine concentration of >50 ppm or according to local, State, Tribal, or Federal regulations.

After:
Procedures and sealing materials shall conform to ASTM D5299 and be compatible with all local, State, Tribal, and Federal requirements. Backfill shall be placed and compacted in a manner that minimizes segregation and bulking to prevent surface subsidence. Associated practices: 342 Critical Area Seeding


Scenario_Description:
A licensed well driller will seal and permanently close an inactive, abandoned, or unusable water well to prevent excess nutrients in surface and groundwater and to eliminate pesticides transported to surface and ground water.

Before:
Shallow or hand dug well that is greater than 30 feet deep. Assume 30" diameter casing.


Before:
Drilled well that is less than 300 feet deep. Assume 6" diameter casing.


Before:
Drilled well that is greater than 300 feet deep. Assume 6" diameter casing.


Scenario_Description:
A vertical borehole designed and installed 200 feet or less in depth to obtain representative groundwater quality samples and hydrogeological information. The well provides controlled access for sampling groundwater near an agricultural waste storage or treatment facility to detect seepage and monitor groundwater quality. Installation methods must be in conformance with ASTM D5092. The resource concerns addressed include groundwater contamination and groundwater quality.

Before:
This practice applies to the design, installation, and development of monitoring wells where contamination of groundwater from an agricultural waste storage or treatment facility is a concern, detection of seepage and monitoring of groundwater quality is needed, and the facility is a component of an agricultural waste management system.

After:
Typical installation of a vertical borehole for a monitoring well 100 feet deep that provides controlled access to obtain water samples for detecting seepage and monitoring of groundwater quality from an agricultural waste storage or treatment facility as a component of an agricultural waste management system. The monitoring well is installed by drilling an 8 inch borehole, installing a protective casing, a 2 inch riser pipe, a well screen, and filter pack. The installation method was in conformance with ASTM D5092. Vegetation of disturbed areas will be completed under critical area planting (342). Erosion control during construction activities will use Stormwater Runoff Control (570). Other associated practices include Access Control (472), Water Well Decommissioning (351), Waste Storage Facility (313), Waste Treatment Lagoon (359), and Pumping Plant (533).


Scenario_Description:
A vertical borehole designed and installed greater than 200 feet deep to obtain representative groundwater quality samples and hydrogeological information. The well provides controlled access for sampling groundwater near an agricultural waste storage or treatment facility to detect seepage and monitor groundwater quality. Installation methods must be in conformance with ASTM D5092. The resource concerns addressed include groundwater contamination and groundwater quality.

After:
Typical installation of a vertical borehole for a monitoring well 300 feet deep that provides controlled access to obtain water samples for detecting seepage and monitoring of groundwater quality from an agricultural waste storage or treatment facility as a component of an agricultural waste management system. The monitoring well is installed by drilling an 8 inch borehole, installing a protective casing, a 2 inch monitoring-riser pipe, a well screen, and filter pack. The installation method was in conformance with ASTM D5092. Vegetation of disturbed areas will be completed under critical area planting (342). Erosion control during construction activities will use Stormwater Runoff Control (570). Other associated practices include Access Control (472), Water Well Decommissioning (351), Waste Storage Facility (313), Waste Treatment Lagoon (359), and Pumping Plant (533).


Scenario_Description:
Typical scenario includes the professional testing for nitrates, nitrites, and coliform to confirm well water meets basic water quality standards for consumption by livestock or use in irrigation. Water samples are sent to an EPA or state certified laboratory for testing. This scenario is recommended when water quality is suspected to be acceptable.

Before:
There are no known contaminants of the well, however, neighboring wells have known issues with nitrates, or coliform, and confirmation of acceptable water quality is desired. Manure is spread near to the well, following a nutrient management plan; well contamination is unlikely but possible.


Scenario_Description:
Typical scenario includes the professional testing for pesticides, heavy metals, VOC's or other less common substances, in addition to the basic water test items. Tests are intended to confirm well water meets water quality standards for consumption by livestock or use in irrigation. Water samples are sent to an EPA or state certified laboratory for testing. This scenario is recommended when water quality is suspected to be degraded due to a specialized substance.

Before:
There are no known contaminants of the well, however, neighboring wells have known issues with water quality, and confirmation of acceptable water quality is desired. Manure, pesticides, or other potential contaminants have been spread near to the well, in an unmanaged manner; well contamination is possible.


Scenario_Description:
Typical scenario includes the professional comprehensive testing for all less common substances, to include: pesticides, heavy metals, VOC's or other less common substances, in addition to the basic water test items. Tests are intended to confirm well water meets water quality standards for consumption by livestock or use in irrigation. Water samples are sent to an EPA or state certified laboratory for testing. This scenario is recommended when water quality is known to be degraded due to a specialized substance but thorough analysis is warranted.

Before:
There are no known contaminants of the well, however, neighboring wells have known issues with water quality, and confirmation of acceptable water quality is desired. Manure, pesticides, sewage sludge, or other potential contaminants have been spread near to the well, in an unmanaged manner; well contamination is likely.


Scenario_Description:
Construction of a earthen embankment barrier to control water flow and level. Associated practices include: PS342 Critical Area Planting, PS382 Fence, PS464 Irrigation Land Levelling, PS587 Structure for Water Control

Before:
Site is subject to flooding or overland flow which poses a potential for damage to land or property. Site may also require control of water level for purposes connected with crop production; fish and wildlife management; or wetland maintenance, improvement, restoration, or construction. An adequate quantity of soil suitable for constructing an earthen dike is available at an economical haul distance. Resource concerns include Soil Erosion, Excessive runoff, flooding or ponding

After:
Water level controlled by a stable earthen structure. Potential hazard to public safety, land or property mitigated; environmental benefit provided.


Scenario_Description:
A waste treatment lagoon is a component of a waste management system that provides biological treatment of manure and other byproducts of animal agricultural operations by reducing the pollution potential. Resource concern addressed is water quality by reducing the pollution potential to surface and groundwater by treating and storing liquid waste. Earthen lagoon liners are addressed with another standard. Potential Associated Practices: Pond Sealing or Lining, Bentonite Sealant (521C), Pond Sealing or Lining, Compacted Clay Treatment (521D), Pond Sealing or Lining, Flexible Membrane (521A), Pond Sealing or Lining, Soil Dispersant (521B), Fence (382), Critical Area Planting (342), Nutrient Management (590), Waste Transfer (634), Heavy Use Area Protection (561), and Waste Separation Facility (632).

Before:
Operator presently has a confined animal feeding operation without a waste management system adequate to handle the waste stream leaving the animal production facilities. Manure and other agricultural waste by-products are not being utilized or controlled in an environmentally safe manner. The wastes are either accumulating at the source, or are being transported but not properly utilized or disposed of. This situation poses an environmental threat of excessive nutrients, organics, and pathogens being transported into surface and groundwater resources.

After:
A waste treatment lagoon constructed from on-site material provides an environmentally safe facility for storing manure and other agricultural waste by-products. This facility provides the landowner a means of storing and treating waste until it can be utilized in a proper manner in accordance with a nutrient management plan. Typical design size : Design Volume 439,440 ft3 (~5500CY); 260' X 208' (top); 3:1 inside and outside side slopes; cut/fill ratio = 1.25; total depth = 13'; 1' freeboard (not included in design volume)


Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the remediation of the soil in an abandoned poultry structures previously used to store poultry waste (litter) on an earthen floor. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excess nutrient and pathogens in ground and/or surface waters and air quality impacts from greenhouse gases, particulate matter and associated precursors, and objectionable odors. Associated practices: Nutrient Management (590), Critical Area Planting (342).

Before:
The abandoned poultry house has a damaged roof exposing the earthen floor of the structure to rainfall. Rainfall and nutrients on the floor of the house pose a risk to surface water from contaminated runoff or to ground water from seepage into the underlying soils.

After:
This scenario is based on a 40' wide x 400' long poultry house with 1 foot depth of nutrient laden soil to remediate (16,000 CF). Payment under this scenario includes only activities associated with the soil remediation. Soil remediation activities in this scenario include removing the nutrient enriched soil found in the first 7 inches of soil beneath the litter floor and mixing wood chips with the remaining 5 inches of soil. Nutrient level testing and field application of the removed soil shall be performed according to nutrient planning in conformance with Nutrient Management, Code 590. The remaining 5 inches of soil will be remediated in-situ by mixing in wood chips, at a rate of 33% of the volume of remaining soil, for the purpose of nitrogen sequestration. Additional soil will be hauled in (estimated at 110% of the soil volume that was removed for field application) to backfill the depression. Shaping and crowning of the soil material on the disturbed area and critical area seeding will be done to provide drainage, complete the site remediation and establish vegetation. Operation and maintenance of the site will include nutrient testing the following year to determine if the nutrients in the mixed soil have been remediated and surface and ground water resource concerns have been addressed. In this scenario, samples at four (4) locations will be taken at 6, 12, 18 and 24 inches at the end of Year 1.


Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the remediation of the soil on an abandoned feedlot previously used to feed animals on a bare earthen lot. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excess nutrient and pathogens in ground and/or surface waters and air quality impacts from greenhouse gases, particulate matter and associated precursors, and objectionable odors. Associated practices: Nutrient Management (590), Critical Area Planting (342).

Before:
The feedlot is abandoned. Vegetation has not been reestablished. The high level of nutrients in the soil is preventing volunteer establishment of native vegetation. Rainfall and nutrients on the bare earth feedlot pose a risk to surface water from contaminated runoff or to ground water from seepage into the underlying soils.

After:
This scenario is based on a 3 acre feedlot. Surveys and testing have determined the manure pack averages 8 inches in depth and the level of nutrients in the 4 inches of soil below the manure pack is too high to treat insituations with vegetation. Payment under this scenario includes only activities associated with the soil remediation. Soil remediation activities in this scenario include removing the nutrient enriched manure pack and soil, an average of 12 inches below the existing surface (130,680 CF). The excavated surface will be vegetated with a mix of salt tolerant plants in conformance with Critical Area Planting, Code 342. Nutrient level testing and field application of the removed soil shall be performed according to nutrient planning in conformance with Nutrient Management, Code 590. Shaping and crowning of the soil material on the disturbed area and critical area seeding will be done to provide drainage, complete the site remediation and establish vegetation. Operation and maintenance of the site will include nutrient testing the following year to determine if the soil has been remediated and surface and ground water resource concerns have been addressed. In this scenario, samples at four (4) locations will be taken at 6, 12, 18 and 24 inches at the end of Year 1. Fence and feedbunk removal is to be performed under Obstruction Removal, Code 500.


Scenario_Name:
Demolition of Concrete Waste Storage Structure

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the demolition of a concrete waste storage structure. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excess nutrient and pathogens in ground and/or surface waters and air quality impacts from greenhouse gases, particulate matter and associated precursors, and objectionable odors. Associated practices: Nutrient Management (590), Critical Area Planting (342)

Before:
An existing concrete waste storage structure is no longer functioning correctly or is not being used for its intended purpose. It poses a safety hazard for humans and livestock and is a threat to environmental sustainability by the potential for impacts to water and air quality.

After:
This scenario assumes a concrete waste storage structure, with top dimensions of 60 ft x 60 ft with 10 ft vertical walls. The walls are 8 inches thick, the concrete floor is 5 inches thick and the footing for the wall is 12 inches wide by 24 inches deep. The total structural storage volume equals 36,000 cubic feet. The total volume of concrete to be demolished is 3,580 cubic feet ([2 X (60 ft + 60 ft) X 10ft X 8in /12 in/ft] + [60 ft X 60 ft X 5in /12 in/ft] + [2 X (60 ft + 60 ft) X 12in /12 in/ft X 24in /12in/ft]). The volume of waste to be removed approximately equals 50% of the structural volume (50% X 36,000 = 18,000 CF). The volume of earthwork (earthfill and/or excavation, final grading) required is approximately 50% of the structural volume. The concrete will be demolished and hauled off-site for recycling or disposal. Structural removal, as necessary, may include the sealing or removal and disposal of waste transfer components and other appurtenances associated with closure of the facility. Demolition of a concrete waste storage structure includes agitating, removing, and spreading the waste remaining in the structure. All waste material shall be land applied in accordance with Nutrient Management (590). Excavated areas will be filled in. The disturbed areas shall be vegetated in accordance with Critical Area Planting (342). Demolition of the concrete waste structure will address water quality degradation, air quality impacts and safety hazards by removing and properly utilizing the waste from the impoundment. The site will also become available for another use.


Scenario_Name:
Liquid Waste Impoundment Closure with 75% Liquids and 25% Solids

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the decommissioning of an earthen liquid waste impoundment (embankment or excavated type) where the estimated volume of waste to be removed is approximately 75% liquid/slurry waste and 25% sludge/solid waste of the structural storage capacity of the structure. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excess nutrient and pathogens in ground and/or surface waters and air quality impacts from greenhouse gases, particulate matter and associated precursors, and objectionable odors. Associated practices: Nutrient Management (590), Critical Area Planting (342)

Before:
An existing lagoon or waste storage pond is no longer functioning correctly or is not being used for its intended purpose. It poses a safety hazard for humans and livestock and is a threat to environmental sustainability by the potential for impacts to water and air quality.

After:
This scenario assumes a waste storage pond, with top dimensions of 110 ft x 110 ft, 8 ft total depth with 2:1 side slopes. The total structural storage volume equals 63,851 cubic feet. The volume of liquid waste to be pumped approximately equals 75% if the structural volume (75% X 63,851 CF = 47,888 CF). The volume of solid waste to be removed approximately equals 25% of the structural volume (25% X 63,851 = 15,963 CF). The volume of earthwork (earthfill and excavation) required to breach the embankment and/or fill in the impoundment and perform final grading of the site is approximately 50% of the structural volume. The volume of earthwork will include 60% as excavation and 40% as compacted earthfill. Structural removal, as necessary, may include the removal and disposal of the synthetic liner, sealing or removal and disposal of waste transfer components and other appurtenances associated with closure of the facility. Decommissioning of a liquid waste storage impoundment includes agitating, removing, and spreading liquid/slurry waste material, removing solid/sludge waste remaining in the bottom. All waste material shall be land applied in accordance with Nutrient Management (590). If present, the synthetic liner will be removed and properly disposed of. All inflow devices and associated appurtenances will be removed and properly disposed of. The embankment will be breached and the excavation filled in with the embankment material or hauled in earthfill. The disturbed areas shall be vegetated in accordance with Critical Area Planting (342). Closure of the waste impoundment will address water quality degradation, air quality impacts and safety hazards by removing and properly utilizing the waste from the impoundment. The site will also become available for another use.


Scenario_Name:
Liquid Waste Impoundment Closure with 50% Liquids and 50% Solids

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the decommissioning of an earthen liquid waste impoundment (embankment or excavated type) where the estimated volume of waste to be removed is approximately 50% liquid/slurry waste and 50% sludge/solid waste of the structural storage capacity of the structure. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excess nutrient and pathogens in ground and/or surface waters and air quality impacts from greenhouse gases, particulate matter and associated precursors, and objectionable odors. Associated practices: Nutrient Management (590), Critical Area Planting (342)

After:
This scenario assumes a waste storage pond, with top dimensions of 110 ft x 110 ft, 8 ft total depth with 2:1 side slopes. The total structural storage volume equals 63,851 cubic feet. The volume of liquid waste to be pumped approximately equals 50% if the structural volume (50% X 63,851 CF = 31,925 CF). The volume of solid waste to be removed approximately equals 50% of the structural volume (50% X 63,851 = 31,925 CF). The volume of earthwork (earthfill and excavation) required to breach the embankment and/or fill in the impoundment and perform final grading of the site is approximately 50% of the structural volume. The volume of earthwork will include 60% as excavation and 40% as compacted earthfill. Structural removal, as necessary, may include the removal and disposal of the synthetic liner, sealing or removal and disposal of waste transfer components and other appurtenances associated with closure of the facility. Decommissioning of a liquid waste storage impoundment includes agitating, removing, and spreading liquid/slurry waste material, removing solid/sludge waste remaining in the bottom. All waste material shall be land applied in accordance with Nutrient Management (590). If present, the synthetic liner will be removed and properly disposed of. All inflow devices and associated appurtenances will be removed and properly disposed of. The embankment will be breached and the excavation filled in with the embankment material or hauled in earthfill. The disturbed areas shall be vegetated in accordance with Critical Area Planting (342). Closure of the waste impoundment will address water quality degradation, air quality impacts and safety hazards by removing and properly utilizing the waste from the impoundment. The site will also become available for another use.


Scenario_Name:
Liquid Waste Impoundment Closure with 25% Liquids and 75% Solids

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the decommissioning of an earthen liquid waste impoundment (embankment or excavated type) where the estimated volume of waste to be removed is approximately 25% liquid/slurry waste and 75% sludge/solid waste of the structural storage capacity of the structure. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excess nutrient and pathogens in ground and/or surface waters and air quality impacts from greenhouse gases, particulate matter and associated precursors, and objectionable odors. Associated practices: Nutrient Management (590), Critical Area Planting (342)

After:
This scenario assumes a waste storage pond, with top dimensions of 110 ft x 110 ft, 8 ft total depth with 2:1 side slopes. The total structural storage volume equals 63,851 cubic feet. The volume of liquid waste to be pumped approximately equals 25% if the structural volume (25% X 63,851 CF = 15,9635 CF). The volume of solid waste to be removed approximately equals 75% of the structural volume (75% X 63,851 = 47,888 CF). The volume of earthwork (earthfill and excavation) required to breach the embankment and/or fill in the impoundment and perform final grading of the site is approximately 50% of the structural volume. The volume of earthwork will include 60% as excavation and 40% as compacted earthfill. Structural removal, as necessary, may include the removal and disposal of the synthetic liner, sealing or removal and disposal of waste transfer components and other appurtenances associated with closure of the facility. Decommissioning of a liquid waste storage impoundment includes agitating, removing, and spreading liquid/slurry waste material, removing solid/sludge waste remaining in the bottom. All waste material shall be land applied in accordance with Nutrient Management (590). If present, the synthetic liner will be removed and properly disposed of. All inflow devices and associated appurtenances will be removed and properly disposed of. The embankment will be breached and the excavation filled in with the embankment material or hauled in earthfill. The disturbed areas shall be vegetated in accordance with Critical Area Planting (342). Closure of the waste impoundment will address water quality degradation, air quality impacts and safety hazards by removing and properly utilizing the waste from the impoundment. The site will also become available for another use.


Scenario_Name:
Liquid Waste Impoundment Closure with 0% Liquids and 100% Solids

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the decommissioning of an earthen liquid waste impoundment (embankment or excavated type) where the estimated volume of waste to be removed is approximately 0% liquid/slurry waste and 100% sludge/solid waste of the structural storage capacity of the structure. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excess nutrient and pathogens in ground and/or surface waters and air quality impacts from greenhouse gases, particulate matter and associated precursors, and objectionable odors. Associated practices: Nutrient Management (590), Critical Area Planting (342)

After:
This scenario assumes a waste storage pond, with top dimensions of 110 ft x 110 ft, 8 ft total depth with 2:1 side slopes. The total structural storage volume equals 63,851 cubic feet. The volume of liquid waste to be pumped approximately equals 0% of the structural volume. The volume of solid waste to be removed approximately equals 100% of the structural volume (63,851 CF). The volume of earthwork (earthfill and excavation) required to breach the embankment and/or fill in the impoundment and perform final grading of the site is approximately 50% of the structural volume. The volume of earthwork will include 60% as excavation and 40% as compacted earthfill. Structural removal, as necessary, may include the removal and disposal of the synthetic liner, sealing or removal and disposal of waste transfer components and other appurtenances associated with closure of the facility. Decommissioning of a liquid waste storage impoundment includes agitating, removing, and spreading liquid/slurry waste material, removing solid/sludge waste remaining in the bottom. All waste material shall be land applied in accordance with Nutrient Management (590). If present, the synthetic liner will be removed and properly disposed of. All inflow devices and associated appurtenances will be removed and properly disposed of. The embankment will be breached and the excavation filled in with the embankment material or hauled in earthfill. The disturbed areas shall be vegetated in accordance with Critical Area Planting (342). Closure of the waste impoundment will address water quality degradation, air quality impacts and safety hazards by removing and properly utilizing the waste from the impoundment. The site will also become available for another use.


Scenario_Name:
Liquid Waste Impoundment Conversion to Fresh Water Storage with 75% Liquids and 25% Solids

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the conversion of an earthen liquid waste impoundment (embankment or excavated type) to fresh water storage where the estimated volume of waste to be removed is approximately 75% liquid/slurry waste and 25% sludge/solid waste of the structural storage capacity of the structure. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excess nutrient and pathogens in ground and/or surface waters and air quality impacts from greenhouse gases, particulate matter and associated precursors, and objectionable odors. Associated practices: Nutrient Management (590), Critical Area Planting (342)

After:
This scenario assumes a waste storage pond, with top dimensions of 110 ft x 110 ft, 8 ft total depth with 2:1 side slopes. The total structural storage volume equals 63,851 cubic feet. The volume of liquid waste to be pumped approximately equals 75% if the structural volume (75% X 63,851 CF = 47,888 CF). The volume of solid waste to be removed approximately equals 25% of the structural volume (25% X 63,851 = 15,963 CF). The volume of earthwork (earthfill and/or excavation) required to meet current NRCS standards and perform final grading and shaping of the site is approximately 5% of the structural volume. Structural removal, as necessary, may include the sealing or removal and disposal of waste transfer components and other appurtenances associated with closure of the facility. Conversion of a liquid waste storage impoundment for fresh water storage includes agitating, removing, and spreading liquid/slurry waste material, removing solid/sludge waste remaining in the bottom. All waste material shall be land applied in accordance with Nutrient Management (590). All inflow devices and associated appurtenances will be removed and properly disposed of. The embankment will be brought up to current NRCS standards for its intended purpose. The disturbed areas shall be vegetated in accordance with Critical Area Planting (342). Conversion to fresh water storage will address water quality degradation, air quality impacts and safety hazards by removing and properly utilizing the waste from the impoundment.


Scenario_Name:
Liquid Waste Impoundment Conversion to Fresh Water Storage with 50% Liquids and 50% Solids

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the conversion of an earthen liquid waste impoundment (embankment or excavated type) to fresh water storage where the estimated volume of waste to be removed is approximately 50% liquid/slurry waste and 50% sludge/solid waste of the structural storage capacity of the structure. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excess nutrient and pathogens in ground and/or surface waters and air quality impacts from greenhouse gases, particulate matter and associated precursors, and objectionable odors. Associated practices: Nutrient Management (590), Critical Area Planting (342)

After:
This scenario assumes a waste storage pond, with top dimensions of 110 ft x 110 ft, 8 ft total depth with 2:1 side slopes. The total structural storage volume equals 63,851 cubic feet. The volume of liquid waste to be pumped approximately equals 50% of the structural volume (50% X 63,851 CF = 31,925 CF). The volume of solid waste to be removed approximately equals 50% of the structural volume (50% X 63,851 = 31,925 CF). The volume of earthwork (earthfill and/or excavation) required to meet current NRCS standards and perform final grading and shaping of the site is approximately 5% of the structural volume. Structural removal, as necessary, may include the sealing or removal and disposal of waste transfer components and other appurtenances associated with closure of the facility. Conversion of a liquid waste storage impoundment for fresh water storage includes agitating, removing, and spreading liquid/slurry waste material, removing solid/sludge waste remaining in the bottom. All waste material shall be land applied in accordance with Nutrient Management (590). All inflow devices and associated appurtenances will be removed and properly disposed of. The embankment will be brought up to current NRCS standards for its intended purpose. The disturbed areas shall be vegetated in accordance with Critical Area Planting (342). Conversion to fresh water storage will address water quality degradation, air quality impacts and safety hazards by removing and properly utilizing the waste from the impoundment.


Scenario_Name:
Liquid Waste Impoundment Conversion to Fresh Water Storage with 25% Liquids and 75% Solids

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the conversion of an earthen liquid waste impoundment (embankment or excavated type) to fresh water storage where the estimated volume of waste to be removed is approximately 25% liquid/slurry waste and 75% sludge/solid waste of the structural storage capacity of the structure. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excess nutrient and pathogens in ground and/or surface waters and air quality impacts from greenhouse gases, particulate matter and associated precursors, and objectionable odors. Associated practices: Nutrient Management (590), Critical Area Planting (342)

After:
This scenario assumes a waste storage pond, with top dimensions of 110 ft x 110 ft, 8 ft total depth with 2:1 side slopes. The total structural storage volume equals 63,851 cubic feet. The volume of liquid waste to be pumped approximately equals 25% of the structural volume (25% X 63,851 CF = 15,963 CF). The volume of solid waste to be removed approximately equals 75% of the structural volume (75% X 63,851 = 47,888 CF). The volume of earthwork (earthfill and/or excavation) required to meet current NRCS standards and perform final grading and shaping of the site is approximately 5% of the structural volume. Structural removal, as necessary, may include the sealing or removal and disposal of waste transfer components and other appurtenances associated with closure of the facility. Conversion of a liquid waste storage impoundment for fresh water storage includes agitating, removing, and spreading liquid/slurry waste material, removing solid/sludge waste remaining in the bottom. All waste material shall be land applied in accordance with Nutrient Management (590). All inflow devices and associated appurtenances will be removed and properly disposed of. The embankment will be brought up to current NRCS standards for its intended purpose. The disturbed areas shall be vegetated in accordance with Critical Area Planting (342). Conversion to fresh water storage will address water quality degradation, air quality impacts and safety hazards by removing and properly utilizing the waste from the impoundment.


Scenario_Name:
Liquid Waste Impoundment Conversion to Fresh Water Storage with 0% Liquids and 100% Solids

Scenario_Description:
This practice scenario includes the conversion of an earthen liquid waste impoundment (embankment or excavated type) to fresh water storage where the estimated volume of waste to be removed is approximately 0% liquid/slurry waste and 100% sludge/solid waste of the structural storage capacity of the structure. The purpose of the practice is to address resource concerns related to water quality degradation due to excess nutrient and pathogens in ground and/or surface waters and air quality impacts from greenhouse gases, particulate matter and associated precursors, and objectionable odors. Associated practices: Nutrient Management (590), Critical Area Planting (342)

After:
This scenario assumes a waste storage pond, with top dimensions of 110 ft x 110 ft, 8 ft total depth with 2:1 side slopes. The total structural storage volume equals 63,851 cubic feet. The volume of liquid waste to be pumped approximately equals 0% of the structural volume. The volume of solid waste to be removed approximately equals 100% of the structural volume (47,888 CF). The volume of earthwork (earthfill and/or excavation) required to meet current NRCS standards and perform final grading and shaping of the site is approximately 5% of the structural volume. Structural removal, as necessary, may include the sealing or removal and disposal of waste transfer components and other appurtenances associated with closure of the facility. Conversion of a liquid waste storage impoundment for fresh water storage includes agitating, removing, and spreading liquid/slurry waste material, removing solid/sludge waste remaining in the bottom. All waste material shall be land applied in accordance with Nutrient Management (590). All inflow devices and associated appurtenances will be removed and properly disposed of. The embankment will be brought up to current NRCS standards for its intended purpose. The disturbed areas shall be vegetated in accordance with Critical Area Planting (342). Conversion to fresh water storage will address water quality degradation, air quality impacts and safety hazards by removing and properly utilizing the waste from the impoundment.


Scenario_Description:
An earthen channel and ridge constructed across long slopes, to divert runoff away from farmsteads, agricultural waste systems, gullies, critical erosion areas, construction areas or other sensitive areas. Outlet may be waterway, underground outlet. or other suitable outlet. Typical diversion is 1000 feet long installed on a field slope of 1-3 percent, requiring 1 CY excavation per LF. Channel may be level or gradient, and the ridge may be vegetated or farmed. The quantity of excavation and fill is balanced.

Before:
Excessive sedimentation and soil erosion as a result of gully, rill or sheet erosion which exceeds "T" from farm fields and other locations. Also may be associated with animal feeding operations, with surface or roof runoff to be diverted from potential contamination sources, or contaminated water needing diverted to storage or treatment structures.

After:
Diversion is installed using a dozer, scraper, or other earth-moving equipment. Field system meets "T", contaminated water or "clean" storm water runoff is diverted away from a contamination source to minimize the volume of runoff that is contaminated by agricultural waste. Associated practices are Critical Area Planting (342), Grassed Waterway (412), Underground Outlet (620), Mulching (484), and Subsurface Drain (606).


