§ 143-215.74. Agriculture cost share program. - North Carolina Statutes

Part 9. Nonpoint Source PollutionControl Program.

§ 143‑215.74. Agriculture cost share program.

(a)        There is createdthe Agriculture Cost Share Program for Nonpoint Source Pollution Control. Theprogram shall be created, implemented, and supervised by the Soil and WaterConservation Commission.

(b)        The program shallbe subject to the following requirements and limitations:

(1)        The purpose of theprogram shall be to reduce the input of agricultural nonpoint source pollutioninto the watercourses of the State.

(2)        The program shallinitially include the present 16 nutrient sensitive watershed counties and 17additional counties.

(3)        Subject tosubdivision (7) of this subsection, priority designations for inclusions in theprogram shall be under the authority of the Soil and Water ConservationCommission. The Soil and Water Conservation Commission shall retain theauthority to allocate the cost share funds.

(4)        Areas shall beincluded in the program as the funds are appropriated and the technicalassistance becomes available from the local Soil and Water ConservationDistrict.

(5)        Funding may beprovided to assist practices including conservation tillage, diversions, filterstrips, field borders, critical area plantings, sedimentation controlstructures, sod‑based rotations, grassed waterways, strip‑cropping,terraces, cropland conversion to permanent vegetation, grade controlstructures, water control structures, closure of lagoons, emergency spillways,riparian buffers or equivalent controls, odor control best managementpractices, insect control best management practices, and animal wastemanagement systems and application. Funding for animal waste management shallbe allocated for practices in river basins such that the funds will have thegreatest impact in improving water quality.

(6)        Except as providedin subdivision (8) of this subsection, State funding shall be limited toseventy‑five percent (75%) of the average cost for each practice with theassisted farmer providing twenty‑five percent (25%) of the cost, whichmay include in‑kind support of the practice, with a maximum of seventy‑fivethousand dollars ($75,000) per year to each applicant.

(7)        Priority designationfor inclusion in the program for State funding shall be given to projects thatimprove water quality. To be eligible for cost share funds under thissubdivision, a project shall be evaluated before funding is awarded and afterthe project is completed to determine the impact on water quality.

(8)        For practices thatare eligible for funding from the federal Conservation Reserve EnhancementProgram, State funding from the program shall be limited to seventy‑fivepercent (75%) of the average cost of each practice, with the remainder paidfrom funding from the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, other availablefederal funds, other State funds, or the assisted farmer, whose contributionmay include in‑kind support of the practice. This subdivision is subjectto subdivision (9) of this subsection.

(9)        When the applicantis either (i) a limited‑resource farmer, (ii) a beginning farmer, or(iii) a person farming land that is located in an enhanced voluntaryagricultural district and is subject to a conservation agreement under G.S. 106‑743.2that remains in effect, State funding shall be limited to ninety percent (90%)of the average cost for each practice with the assisted farmer providing tenpercent (10%) of the cost, which may include in‑kind support of thepractice, with a maximum of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) per year toeach applicant. The following definitions apply in this subdivision:

a.         Beginning farmer. – Afarmer who has not operated a farm or who has operated a farm for not more than10 years and who will materially and substantially participate in the operationof the farm.

a1.       Enhanced voluntaryagricultural district. – A district established by a county or a city byordinance under Part 3 of Article 61 of Chapter 106 of the General Statutes.

b.         Limited‑resourcefarmer. – A farmer with direct and indirect annual gross farm sales that do notexceed one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) and with an adjusted householdincome in each of the previous two years that is at or below the greater of thecounty median household income, as determined by the United States Department ofHousing and Urban Development, or two times the national poverty level based onthe federal poverty guidelines established by the United States Department ofHealth and Human Services and revised each April 1.

c.         Materially andsubstantially participate.

1.         In the case of anindividual, for the individual, including members of the immediate family ofthe individual, to provide substantial day‑to‑day labor andmanagement of the farm, consistent with the practices in the county in whichthe farm is located.

2.         In the case of anentity, for all members of the entity, to participate in the operation of thefarm, with some members providing management and some members providing laborand management necessary for day‑to‑day activities such that if themembers did not provide the management and labor, the operation of the farmwould be seriously impaired.

(c)        The program shallbe reviewed, prior to implementation, by the Committee created by G.S. 143‑215.74B.The Technical Review Committee shall meet quarterly to review the progress ofthis program.

(d)        State funds for theprogram shall remain available until expended for the program.

(e)        The Soil and WaterConservation Commission shall report on or before 31 January of each year tothe Environmental Review Commission and the Fiscal Research Division. Thisreport shall include a list of projects that received State funding pursuant tothe program, the results of the evaluations conducted pursuant to subdivision(7) of subsection (b) of this section, findings regarding the effectiveness ofeach of these projects to accomplish its primary purpose, and anyrecommendations to assure that State funding is used in the most cost‑effectivemanner and accomplishes the greatest improvement in water quality. (1985 (Reg. Sess., 1986), c.1014, s. 149(a); 1987, c. 827, s. 154; c. 830, s. 102; 1995 (Reg. Sess., 1996),c. 626, ss. 9, 10; 1996, 2nd Ex. Sess., c. 18, s. 27.22(a), (b); 1997‑496,s. 15; 1998‑221, s. 3.1; 2002‑165, s. 2.18; 2003‑284, s.11.6; 2004‑124, s. 12.6; 2005‑390, s. 8; 2007‑495, s. 18.)