1. NRCS Update Interagency Nutrient Management Conference 2015

2. NRCS Update  Client Gateway  National CNMP Policy  Gypsum Bedding

3. NRCS Client Gateway What is Client Gateway?  The Client Gateway is the new map-based NRCS public web application for agricultural producers.  CG will allow clients to:  request technical and financial assistance,  obtain easy, secure, and intuitive access to their plans, schedules, applications, and contracts,  review and electronically sign plans, applications, and contracts,  document completed practices, and  request and track payments due them.

4. Client Gateway

5. National CNMP Policy October 19, 2015

6. So why are we changing CNMPs? What are the issues?  Last CNMP Revision 2009  Conducted CNMP state trainings and attended CNMP conferences  Listened to Landowners, TSPs and NRCS  Length of plan  Complexity of the plan  Usability by the landowner/operator

7. So why are we changing CNMPs? What are the issues? Developed a white paper Concerns from Dr. Wayne Honeycutt  Quality of CNMPs  Training provided to NRCS and TSPs  AFO/CAFO Permitting - NPDES  Potential number of CNMPs

9. So why are we changing CNMPs? What are the issues? White paper summary (continued)  Format  Farmstead/Production Area  Crop and Pasture Land/Land Treatment Area  Nutrient Management  Communication  Landowner  NRCS  TSP

10. Why are we changing CNMPs? What are the issues? White paper summary (continued)  Training  Farmstead – Production Area  Crop and Pasture Land – Land Treatment Area  Nutrient Management  Assessment and Technology Development Tools

11. Why are we changing CNMPs? What are the issues? White paper summary (continued)  Certification  Competencies  NRCS  TSPs

12. Why are we changing CNMPs? What are the issues? Conservation Planning  CNMP is a Component Conservation Plan  National Planning Procedures Handbook  Return to the basics

13. What are the changes, exactly? Format:  CNMP is a Component Conservation Plan: use normal planning process in the National Planning Procedures Handbook Client is given the conservation plan  Supporting documentation (behind the scenes information) goes in the case file  “The format for the CNMP will generally follow the same content and format used for normal conservation plan per the NPPH (Title 180, Part 600.31).”  Streamline our format, procedures and policy

14. Why are we changing CNMPs? What are the issues? CNMP Resource Concerns  Soil Erosion  Water Quality  Air Quality Components

15. Return to the basics  A CNMP is a component conservation plan  The NRCS CNMP isn’t intended to suffice for an NPDES permit.

16. What are the changes, exactly? Format: The client copy will now look like: 4 Sections vs. 10  Section 1, Signature Page  Section 2, Farmstead/Production Area  Section 3, Crop and Pasture Lands/Land Treatment Area  Section 4, Nutrient Management (590)

17. What are the changes, exactly? Policy: When is a CNMP required?  EQIP Manual (M_440_515_I, Amend. 92, February 2015)“If an EQIP schedule of operations includes animal waste storage or treatment facility on an animal feeding operation (AFO), the participant must develop and provide a copy of a NRCS approved CNMP prior to implementation of any waste storage and handling facility or nutrient management activities.”  CNMP Policy (GM_190_405_B, Amend. 31, October 19, 2015)“Prepare a CNMP when NRCS or NRCS-designated agents are providing technical or financial assistance to an AFO/CAFO to address manure or wastewater handling and storage, treatment and nutrient management that involves the application of manure and wastewater associated with the AFO/CAFO.”

18. Technical Service Provider (TSP) CNMP Policy  The TSP certification categories related to CNMP will be updated based on the newly developed CNMP policy.  TSP -CNMP categories changes  TSP -CNMP categories proposed certification requirements  TSP -CNMP archived categories  QUESTIONS?

19. Gypsum Bedding: The Story Continues! Presented by NRCS

20. Two children, ages 2 and 4 passed out while watching a waste storage facility being agitated in Montour County, PA. The bikes show where they passed out within 1 minute of the agitation start-up. Both taken to hospital and made a full recovery. Upon a follow-up investigation it was found that owner was using gypsum bedding. One week later, Extension Agents from Penn State tested the air during a new start-up of the agitation process. Hydrogen Sulfide levels exceeded the allowable levels by ten-fold. That same day, at a similar operation, but with no gypsum bedding and being agitated for the first time, no readings exceeded OSHA allowable levels. Lancaster County father, 2 sons die in Md. manure pit Submerged bodies of Peach Bottom residents found on farm where they all worked Intelligencer Journal Lancaster New Era Updated May 24, 2012 20:58 Kennedyville Background

21. Outcomes  Agitation Sign  Various article published about concerns  NRCS working with PSU funded a study  Resulted in report outlining the safety hazards associated with the use of gypsum as a bedding additive

23. Where are we now?  Continue to educate landowners about the concerns related to using gypsum with bedding  Part of the Engineering I&E to discuss gypsum issues anytime the farmer mentions they are using gypsum or thinking about it.  Closing story