The COC, where considered necessary in order to provide a sound county program, may continue for the 1973 program any 1970 county program practice not specifically included in the 1973 national program. Cost-sharing for such practices may not exceed 30 percent of the cost, except for low-income farmers, and must be in conformance with 1973 program provisions. (Option practices shall be identified as F-2 practices (e.g., F-2(C-9)) and included in Section 2 of Part 4 of the State handbook.)

A COC Determination. Make sure that the measure cannot be provided by a National REAP practice before electing to exercise the option for 1973.

B

с

State Office Review. Review carefully all option practices
selected by COC's to determine whether any or all components
of any option practice might be included under a regular
national practice. If it appears that a 1973 National
REAP practice provides the measure desired, consult with
the COC before approving the county program.

Alternative. For the sake of simplifying program adminis-
tration, record keeping and reporting, consider developing
the practice under the regular F-2 authority rather than
exercising the option.

STATE AND COUNTY INVESTMENT PLANS

Develop as soor as possible.

A

B

State lans shall be submitted in quadruplicate to CLU Division for review with the proposed 1973 State program. CLU Division will review and appraise the plan. (If the plan is acceptable as submitted no formal notice of approval will be given. If changes are needed, STC's will be so notified.)

County plans shall be submitted in duplicate to the STC with the proposed 1973 county program. STC's shall review and appraise county plans for acceptability. COC's shall be notified in writing by the STC, or its designee, that the courty plan is approved or, if changes are needed, the nature of the changes.

5

A

B

COC's must keep in mind that the prime objective of cost-
sharing under REAP is to solve, in the public interest,
conservation and environmental problems related to farming
operations. The objective is not to divide the funds
among as many farmers as possible. Therefore, requests are
to be approved on the basis of the incentive needed to solve
critical conservation and pollution problems rather than on
the basis of apportioning the funds to many farmers.

1 Consider the overall conservation and environmental
problems and concentrate funds toward solving the
more critical problems in the county. The county
investment plan should reflect these problems and should
provide the basis for overall direction for processing
requests.

2

Sufficient funds, within program limitations, should be approved for each high priority request to provide the necessary incentive for the successful completion of the practice, special project or pooling agreement. Sedimentation and animal wastes are major sources of agricultural related pollution. Give highest priority to practices which will prevent or reduce the movement of sediment or animal wastes to lakes, ponds, or streams, and special consideration to such practices as:

1

2

3

Permanent vegetative cove:: on cropland under practice
A-2.

Stripcropping under pract:.ce A-5.

Vegetative filter strips or sod waterways under practice
J-2.

4 Sediment detention or retention structures under
practice J-1.

8

Similar measures which have strong pollution prevention and abatement benefits.

NOTICE RE-42

7 ISSUING 1973 PRACTICE APPROVALS

8

9

STC's will be notified of their 1973 allocations by separate notice. COC's shall not issue 1973:

A

B

Practice approvals on RE-245 (or tentatively commit program funds pending technical referrals) until they have been officially given an allocation by the STC.

CMS purchase orders until a 1973 allocation is received.

EARLY APPROVALS UNDER 1973 PROGRAM

STC's may authorize COC's to issue cost-share approvals under the 1973 program for any of the 1972 high priority practices (paragraph 5 B, Notice RE-21) where needed to permit performance to be started before State and county programs are completely developed.

A Approvals for such practices may be made using the 1972
cost-share rates, provisions, and specifications.
EXCEPTION: A lifespan of at least five years following
the year of establishment shall be included for practice A-2.

B

C

At least a partial allocation of funds nust be made to
the county before any 1973 early approvals may be made.

COC's should confine cost-sharing for early approvals
to a level consistent with the goal, ob; ectives and
priorities of the national program and he State and county
investment plans.

CONCURRENT OPERATIONS

A

B

C

D

The period of concurrent operations for the 1972 and 1973 programs shall begin July 1, 1972, and end December 31, 1972.

Use 1972 practices and cost-share rates in issuing approvals under the 1972 program.

Use 1973 practices and cost-share rates in issuing approvals under the 1973 program. EXCEPTION: See paragraph 8 for

early approvals.

See paragraphs 212 through 218 of 2-RE for procedure on the transfer of practices between concurrent programs.

NOTICE RE-42

1973 PROGRAM PAYMENTS

Upon receipt of sight draft limitations, payments may be made to CMS vendors, claims for technical services under "5 percent" and "1 percent" transfer agreements, and for program services. Payments to producers shall not be made until receipt of a sight draft limitation specifically for that purpose.

ADDITIONAL STATE OFFICE ACTION

Notify counties of the contents of this notice.

Feist

(202) 447-3134

McDavid (202) 447-4026

NEWS

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

USDA ANNOUNCES 1973 RURAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (REAP):

WASHINGTON, Sept. 29--The U.S. Department of. Agriculture today announced

a 1973 Rural Environmental Assistance Program (REAP) that will strengthen conservation and diminish air and water pollution.

Through REAP the Federal Government shares with farmers the cost (usually on a 50-50 basis) of carrying out needed conservation and environmental protection measures on their farms. Practices emphasized are those which helo to provide long-range preservation of the environment and return greater

benefits to the public.

The initial funding level for 1973 will be $140.0 million, the same as the initial funding for last year's program. The $140 million level reflects the effort of the Administration to hold down federal spending to help control inflation and reduce the need for a tax increase. A final decision regarding the program level will not be made until determinations are made on overall spending targets.

Farmers will receive Federal cost-sharing for these new practices:

(1) Installation of excess water management systems where they are essential to combat adverse environmental conditions such as water pollution from contaminated water runoff caused by high water table, or incomplete recycling of animal or huma waste, sedimentation, and salinity or alkalinity; and (2) use of conservation tillage on a demonstration basis to reduce soil loss from land devoted to intertilled (row) crops.

Also, the 1973 REAP expands he authority to cost-share for practices

to solve agriculture-related air pollution problems. in the past, cost-sharing

for pollution abatement was limited to those practices with soil and water

conservation benefits.