2005 EQIP Application Evaluation Criteria Sorting Order

Within each resource concern category additional factors are used to sort applications.  Applications will be sorted in the following order within the resource concern categories.

Air Quality - Objectionable Odors (Livestock Management)

1. Distance to nearest population center (< 10 miles)
2. Cost effectiveness - $/Animal Unit (AU) (using total project cost)

Forestland Health (Plant Condition - Productivity, Health, Vigor)

1. Percent of At-Risk species habitat acres
2. Percent of Class I or II soils
3. Distance to receiving water body
4. Cost effectiveness - $/application acres (using total project cost)

Grazing Lands Health (Plant Condition - Productivity, Health, Vigor; Plant Condition - Noxious, Invasive Weeds)

1. Percent of At-Risk species habitat acres
2. Percent rest provided
3. Cost effectiveness - $/application acres  (using total project cost)

Sedimentation of Federal Reservoirs

1. Percent of At-Risk species habitat acres
2. Distance/Proximity to reservoir
3. Cost effectiveness - $/application acres (using total project cost)

Soil Quality - Organic Matter Depletion

1. Percent of At-Risk species habitat acres
2. Weighted erosion index
3. Percent of application acres (> or = 33%) converted to permanent vegetative cover
4. Soil Conditioning Index (SCI) - higher index improves ranking
5. Soil Tillage Index Rating (STIR) - lower index improves ranking
6. Cost effectiveness - $/application acres  (using total project cost)

Water Quality - Excessive Organics in Ground and Surface Water (Concentrated, Non-confined Animal Waste)

1. Percent of At-Risk species habitat acres
2. Distance to receiving water body
3. Cost effectiveness - $/AU (using total project cost)

Water Quality - Excessive Organics in Ground and Surface Water (Confined Animal Waste)

1. Percent of At-Risk species habitat acres
2. Cost effectiveness - $/AU  (using total project cost)

Water Quality - Nutrients/Pesticides/Suspended Sediment

1. Percent of At-Risk species habitat acres
2. Percent of acres of HIGH leaching potential soils and HIGH soil loss soils.
3. Percent of application acres (> or = 33%) converted to permanent vegetative cover
4. Percent of application acres converted to improved tillage system
5. Cost effectiveness - $/application acres  (using total project cost)

Water Quantity - Inefficient Water Use on Irrigated Land; Aquifer Overdraft

1. Applications with > or = 33% acres converted to dryland
(High Category, Priority #1)
1. Percent application acres converted to dryland (permanent vegetation takes precedence over dryland cropland in tie-breaking situation)
2. Water Rights Conservation Program Contract (10-year length)
3. Arkansas River Shiner Habitat area with decommissioned well
4. Arkansas River Shiner Habitat area with well conversion to domestic use
5. Percent of Prairie Chicken habitat acres
6. Percent acres located in Kansas Water Plan Groundwater Depletion Area
7. Percent located in Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and/or Sensitive Groundwater Area and/or Source Water Assessment Area
8. Percent change in irrigation efficiency
9. Cost effectiveness - $/application acres  (using total project cost)
2. All other applications
1. Planned inches/Current three year average
2. Percent change in irrigation efficiency
3. Percent application acres converted to dryland (permanent vegetation takes precedence over dryland cropland in tie-breaking situation)
4. Percent of Prairie Chicken habitat acres
5. Percent acres located in Kansas Water Plan Groundwater Depletion Area
6. Percent located in Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and/or Sensitive Groundwater Area and/or Source Water Assessment Area
7. Cost effectiveness - $/application acres  (using total project cost)

< Back to 2005 Application Evaluation Criteria