U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Ensuring Full Access to Federal Cost Shared Conservation Practices W. Dean Hively, Ph.D. U.S. Geological.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Send an to departmental managers. Present the PIF process at a Division Managers meeting. Reach out to the IT Department managers. Post the forms,
Advertisements

MSCG Training for Project Officers and Consultants: Project Officer and Consultant Roles in Supporting Successful Onsite Technical Assistance Visits.
Status Update on Future Water Quality Strategies for the Refuge Kenneth G. Ammon, P.E., Deputy Executive Director, Everglades Restoration and Capital Projects.
Carin Bisland, Associate Director Chesapeake Bay Program Office Environmental Protection Agency December 4, 2014 The Bay’s Health & Future: How it’s doing.
Indicators to measure the effectiveness of the implementation of the Strategy State of the art Karin Sollart Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.
CBP Partnership Proposal for Ensuring Full Accountability of Best Practices and Technologies Implemented CBP WQGIT Wastewater Treatment Workgroup Briefing.
Mark Dubin Agricultural Technical Coordinator University of Maryland Extension - College Park.
Current Planning for 2017 Mid-Point Assessment Gary Shenk COG 10/4/2012 presentation credit to Katherine Antos and the WQGIT ad hoc planning team.
U.S. Department of Agriculture eGovernment Program February 2004 eAuthentication Integration Status eGovernment Program.
Recently Issued OHRP Documents: Guidance on Subject Withdrawal and Draft Revised FWA Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections October.
Minnesota Agricultural Water Quality Certification Program Senate Environment, Economic Development And Agriculture Finance Committee March 11, 2013.
XML Regional Data Exchange for Best Management Practices for the Chesapeake Bay States Utilizing the National Environmental Information Exchange Network.
Rick Koelsch University of Nebraska – Lincoln Bob Broz University of Missouri - Columbia.
Training for Implementation of CEC§ Creating AA-T and AS-T (SB 1440 Transfer Degrees) Spring 2011 February 1, 2011.
Responding to Inspection Findings
Preliminary Assessment Tribal Emergency Response Preparedness Dean S. Seneca, MPH, MCURP Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Centers for Disease.
April 2, 2013 Longitudinal Data system Governance: Status Report Alan Phillips Deputy Director, Fiscal Affairs, Budgeting and IT Illinois Board of Higher.
NGAC Interagency Data Sharing and Collaboration Spotlight Session: Best Practices and Lessons Learned Robert F. Austin, PhD, GISP Washington, DC March.
 Planning provides the foundation for conservation district programs and operations.  The planning process broadly defines the vision of the future.
Agenda 1. Definition and Purpose of Data Governance
BMP Verification Process Progress to Date Frank Coale, AgWG Chair Mark Dubin, AgWG Coordinator 06/19/12.
Update on Chesapeake Bay Issues Presentation to the Chesapeake Bay and Water Resources Policy Committee July 17, 2009 Ted Graham & Steve Bieber COG Department.
2006 Network Users’ Meeting Chesapeake Bay Program Regional Exchange for Non Point Source Best Management Practices April 18, 2006 Nancie L. Imler PA DEP.
GIT 6 Role in Advising Management Board on Alignment Issues Carin Bisland, GIT6 Vice-chair.
Update on Forest Goals and Progress in the Chesapeake Bay Partnership Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting, 8/23/13 Sally Claggett & Julie Mawhorter, US.
Atlanta Public Schools Project Management Framework Proposed to the Atlanta Board of Education to Complete AdvancED/SACS “Required Actions” January 24,
1 Conservation Transaction Plug-In (CTP) Tool Overview March 23 & 25, 2010 Tim Pilkowski State Conservation Agronomist Annapolis, MD USDA is an equal opportunity.
CBP Partnership’s BMP Verification Review Panel’s Findings and Recommendations to Date CBP Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee December 3, 2013.
Forest harvesting practices are a suite of BMPs that minimize the environmental impacts of road building, log removal, site preparation and forest management.
Region III Activities to Implement National Vision to Improve Water Quality Monitoring National Water Quality Monitoring Council August 20, 2003.
Forestry BMP Review Process Mark Sievers, Tetra Tech Forestry Workgroup (FWG) Conference Call—February 1, 2012.
Presentation to Contra Costa County Climate Leaders October 3, 2013.
Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Basinwide BMP Verification Framework Briefing CBP Partnership’s Communications Workgroup July 10, 2014.
CBP Partnership Approach for Ensuring Full Accountability of Best Practices and Technologies Implemented Jim Edward, CBPO Deputy Director CBP Citizen Advisory.
The Chesapeake Bay Program’s Scenario Builder Gary Shenk CCMP workshop 5/11/2010.
1 Environmental Information Exchange Network - Principles and Components Molly O’Neill, State Director, Network Steering Board Pat Garvey, EPA Director,
Martin Hurd Tetra Tech, Inc. May 11, Why an Exchange Network? Many environmental problems cross jurisdictions and involve a web of natural systems.
Source Water Collaborative Online Partnership Tool 1 Collaboration Toolkit: Protecting Drinking Water Sources through Agricultural Conservation Practices.
Jim Edward, Deputy Director Chesapeake Bay Program, EPA 1 CBP Program Update on Bay Agreement Comments, Final Draft, and 2-Year Milestone Status Citizens.
Robert M. Summers, Ph.D. September 16, 2015 How can we make sure the Chesapeake Bay Restoration really works?
Meet Weekly or bi-monthly to discuss all aspects of Stewardship: Dave BrowerDan Wickwire Natural Resources Conservation Service Bureau of Land Management.
Chesapeake Bay Program’s Baywide and Basinwide Monitoring Networks: Options for Adapting Monitoring Networks and Realigning Resources to Address Partner.
1 Phase 5.3 Calibration Gary Shenk 3/31/ Calibration Method Calibration method largely unchanged for several years –P5.1 – 8/ first automated.
Cooperating Agency Status Presented by Horst Greczmiel Associate Director, NEPA Oversight Council on Environmental Quality Washington, DC September 14,
Chesapeake Bay TMDL 2017 Midpoint Assessment: A Critical Path Forward Lucinda Power EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting.
Multistate Research Program Roles & Responsibilities Eric Young SAAESD Meeting Corpus Christi, TX April 3-6, 2005.
Section 4.9 Work Group Members Kris Hafner, Chair, Board Member Rob Kondziolka, MAC Chair Maury Galbraith, WIRAB Shelley Longmuir, Governance Committee.
Verification Requests Citizen Advisory Committee –Repeated requests for BMP verification Chesapeake Executive Order Strategy –USDA and EPA commitment to.
JULIE MAWHORTER MID-ATLANTIC URBAN & COMMUNITY FORESTRY COORDINATOR CHESAPEAKE TREE CANOPY STRATEGY & WORKPLAN UPDATE CITIZEN’S ADVISORY.
Land Use Metrics & Methods Outcome Management Strategy Peter Claggett U.S. Geological Survey December 4, 2014.
NSDI Strategic Plan Update FGDC Coordination Group Meeting November 19, 2013.
1 Sahtu Land Use Planning Board Public Hearing on the Draft 3 Sahtu Land Use Plan May 2011 INAC Presentation.
Data Coordinating Center University of Washington Department of Biostatistics Elizabeth Brown, ScD Siiri Bennett, MD.
Leading Your District To Be All That It Can Be David Williams, Deputy Director Div. of Soil & Water Conservation 2016 Spring Area Meetings.
1 Chesapeake Bay TMDL Watershed Implementation Plan – Phase II James Davis-Martin, Chesapeake Bay TMDL Coordinator Citizens Advisory Committee to the Chesapeake.
Improved socio-economic services for a more social microfinance.
Environmental Literacy
Preliminary Assessment Tribal Emergency Response Preparedness
Local Government Engagement and Communication Strategy
Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Citizens Advisory Committee
Chesapeake Bay Program
Farm/Ranch Conservation Issues: Conservation Compliance
Quantification of BMP Impacts on CBP Management Strategies
Communicating Credit Where Credit is Due
Chesapeake Bay TMDL Milestones, Progress, Mid-point Assessment
Jim Edward Acting Director Chesapeake Bay Program Office May 23,2018 EPA’s Draft Final Phase III WIP Expectations.
Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement Architecture
Citizen Advisory Committee November 30, 2018
Citizens Advisory Committee Discussion & Program Update Dana Aunkst Director USEPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office May 22,2019 Baltimore, MD.
2018 BMP Verification Assessment
Presentation transcript:

U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Ensuring Full Access to Federal Cost Shared Conservation Practices W. Dean Hively, Ph.D. U.S. Geological Survey Eastern Geographic Science Center CBP WQGIT BMP Verification Committee meeting June 19 th, 2012, Fish Shack, Annapolis MD

 Draft protocols to assist the process of summarizing USDA conservation practice records and making them public  Support states in NEIEN submission to Chesapeake Bay Model  Help to resolve issues related to State-Federal double counting  Oversee data aggregation protocols to meet 1619 requirements  Improve the accuracy and consistency of Federal data reporting across States  Streamline the process to make everyone’s job a bit easier Our objective is to facilitate the process, *not* to take over responsibility from the States for the submission of USDA data Our objectives

USGS and Chesapeake Bay conservation data Transfer of site-specific conservation data for Chesapeake Bay farm land from the USDA-NRCS and USDA-FSA to the USGS is now allowed under 1619 Conservation Cooperator Agreements  Includes individual records for each agricultural conservation practice that is Federally financed (~300,000 total)  Data are currently in hand for 2006 – 2011, and 2012 data will be requested in October  The data set is similar to what States with a 1619 agreement in place already receive from State-level NRCS collaborators

Current status of 1619 Conservation Cooperator data sharing agreements  A few States have signed 1619 agreements that allow them to handle site-specific USDA conservation data records  States without a 1619 agreement must rely upon aggregated county totals to report USDA data

Steps in the process Obtain USDA data from Federal or State NRCS and FSA officials Address double counting, select reportable records Aggregate records to maintain 1619 privacy requirements Crosswalk USDA practice codes to NEIEN practice categories Submit records to NEIEN/Scenario Builder

Obtaining the data Soil conservation district Combined tracking system State NEIEN Responsible State records NRCS Toolkit, FSA database Soil conservation district USDA State offices USDA Federal database USGS MD NY, VA Farmers Federal programs State programs Federal site specific data Federal aggregated data State site specific data Key: WV, DE PA all States 1619

Obtaining the data  Solutions vary among States USGS role:  Will request 2012 Federal implementation data in October  Can provide aggregated or site specific records to States, as appropriate  May not be necessary if similar data are already easily obtained from State USDA offices

Strategies to avoid double counting  Existing solutions are generally adequate, and vary by State  1. Identify practice codes that are impossible to double count, report them  2. Identify practices that might be double counted and:  delete Federal records, report State records, or vice-versa according to practice code and cost share information (PA, WV, DE – no 1619 agreement in place)  examine site specific records and eliminate identical records (VA – 1619 agreements allow comparison of specific records)  track with sufficient accuracy that a full separation is easy (MD – 1619 agreements allow tracking of USDA practices outside of USDA record keeping system)

Strategies to avoid double counting  All of these strategies are adequate, but more detailed information is likely to lead to more through crediting in Scenario Builder USGS role:  Work with States to document and clarify their methods  Work with States to list practices that can or cannot be double counted  Support the establishment of successful 1619 data sharing agreements

Data privacy and data aggregation  To fulfill Sec privacy requirements, practices can be publicly reported for any area with >=5 farms participating in a particular USDA conservation practice  For 2012, focus on reporting county totals  Non-reportable data can be combined and reported at the state level  States without a 1619 agreement will require data aggregation to occur before they receive USDA data

Data privacy and data aggregation  Reported totals must meet 1619 requirements (>5 farms/unit) USGS role:  Document acceptable aggregation protocols  Oversee aggregation of records to meet 1619 guidelines  Provide data aggregation work flow as needed

Example aggregated NRCS data

 Slide of column headings Example aggregated FSA data

Crosswalk to NEIEN  A simple crosswalk between USDA practice codes and NEIEN practice categories is highly desirable  Best to develop a consistent interpretation of USDA practices in the context of Scenario Builder model input requirements  This is a moving target, but could be established for 2012  It would save the States a lot of time and confusion  If several USDA codes can be combined into one NEIEN category, then the level of spatial aggregation can be reduced (aim for HUC12 in 2013)

Crosswalk to NEIEN  The fundamentals of the crosswalk are understood, but the interpretation varies among States and is a source of frustration USGS Role:  USGS and EPA will work with States to create a documented crosswalk to translate USDA practice codes into appropriate 2012 NEIEN/Scenario Builder practice categories  The crosswalk will be submitted to the watershed technical workgroup, to be approved by the Goal Implementation Team and updated in future years as needed

 Final data submission best left to the States so that they can maintain credit and responsibility for NRCS and FSA practices applied in their territory, and use these practices to attain implementation targets  While a consistent interpretation of USDA practices is desirable, NRCS records often do not contain as much detail as is requested by Scenario Builder, and average effects will have to be assumed for standard USDA practices. States could possibly increase credit for USDA practices through further documentation of practice details  1619 agreements will likely lead to increased crediting of USDA practices due to more accurate elimination of double counting, and provide the possibility to track increased detail for more accurate crediting Submit recordsn to NEIEN/Scenario Builder

Steps in the process Obtain USDA data from Federal or State NRCS and FSA officials Address double counting, select reportable records Aggregate records to maintain 1619 privacy requirements Crosswalk USDA practice codes to NEIEN practice categories Submit records to NEIEN/Scenario Builder

2012 USGS activity timeline  Work with NRCS and States to identify exactly what practices are included in NRCS and FSA records and to what extent they might be duplicated in state records  Explain and document State-specific protocols for resolving double counting problems  Document data aggregation protocol, prepare to provide aggregated data records to States as needed  Help to develop a standard crosswalk between USDA and NEIN/Scenario Builder.xml format  Draft final recommendations for 2012 NEIEN submission Jul Aug Sep

2012 Data Submission – possible strategy  Obtain 2012 USDA dataset in October and make it available to the States  Work with States to remove double counting and identify reportable data  Prepare aggregated data product to protect 1619 privacy  Work with States to apply crosswalk to NEIEN xml format  States make NEIEN submission of State and USDA data  Identify next round of improvements for 2013 Oct Nov Dec Jan

Considerations  It would be helpful to develop a common language for 1619 agreements between USDA and Chesapeake Bay States  It may be helpful to engage NRCS in discussion about expanding their record keeping to support the level of detail desired in tracking conservation practice implementation in the Chesapeake Bay region  Further discussion should occur regarding lifespan, and regarding matching records to model land use parameters  Thank you very much to many hard working people for sharing their time and knowledge

Thank you - questions? Dean Hively USGS Eastern Geographic Science Center Stationed at USDA-ARS, Beltsville Peter Claggett USGS Eastern Geographic Science Center Stationed at CBP, Annapolis