B-307720, Department of Agriculture--Conservation Security Program, September 27, 2007

B-307720 Sep 27, 2007 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights The Department of Agriculture was not authorized to make annual payments to Conservation Security Program participants that exceeded the annual payment limits imposed by 16 U.S.C. sect. 3838c(b)(2). Any payment that exceeded the annual payment limit is improper and should be promptly resolved. View Decision B-307720, Department of Agriculture--Conservation Security Program, September 27, 2007 B-307720 September 27, 2007 The Honorable Robert F. Bennett Ranking Minority Member Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Committee on Appropriations United States Senate Subject: Department of Agriculture—Conservation Security Program Dear Mr. Bennett: In April 2006, at your request, GAO issued a report examining increased cost estimates and cost controls for the Department of Agriculture's Conservation Security Program (CSP). GAO, Conservation Security Program: Despite Cost Controls, Improved USDA Management Is Needed to Ensure Proper Payments and Reduce Duplication with Other Programs, GAO-06-312 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 28, 2006). Among other things, we found that in fiscal year 2004, the department made payments pursuant to CSP contracts that exceeded annual payment limits imposed by statute, 16 U.S.C. sect. 3838c. See GAO-06-312, at 31–32. Subsequently, we agreed to examine whether the department was authorized to make these payments. Letter from Susan A. Poling, Managing Associate General Counsel, GAO, to the Honorable Robert F. Bennett, Chairman, Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, United States Senate, Oct. 17, 2006. As explained below, we conclude that the department was not authorized to make payments that exceed the statutory annual payment limits. Any payment that exceeds the statutory annual payment limit is an improper payment. Our practice when rendering legal opinions is to obtain the views of the relevant federal agency to establish a factual record and to elicit the agency's legal position in the matter. GAO, Procedures and Practices for Legal Decisions and Opinions, GAO'06-1064SP (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 2006), available at www.gao.gov/legal.htm. In this case, we contacted the department's General Counsel to solicit her legal views and obtain factual information. Letter from Thomas H. Armstrong, Assistant General Counsel for Appropriations Law, GAO, to Nancy S. Bryson, General Counsel, Department of Agriculture, Oct. 24, 2006. On July 9, 2007, the department responded to our request providing its legal views and additional factual information. Letter from Stuart L. Shelton, Assistant General Counsel, Conservation and Environmental Division, Department of Agriculture, to Thomas H. Armstrong, Assistant General Counsel, GAO, July 9, 2007 (Shelton Letter). BACKGROUND Congress authorized CSP in Public Law 107-171[1] to provide assistance to agricultural producers who advance the conservation and improvement of the quality of soil, water, air, energy, plant and animal life. 16 U.S.C. sect. 3838a. CSP provides financial assistance to agricultural producers who meet defined standards of conservation and environmental management in their operations. See 16 U.S.C. sections 3838–3838c. Administered by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the program encourages qualifying producers to continue their high level of stewardship that meets the standards to qualify for CSP assistance. GAO-06-312, at 2. Under CSP, the department and an eligible agricultural producer enter into a conservation security contract after agreeing to a conservation security plan. 16 U.S.C. sect. 3838a(e). Under these contracts, the agricultural producers agree to implement the plan in exchange for the department making annual payments to the producers. 16 U.S.C. sect. 3838a(b),(d). Contracts are categorized under a three-tier system under which the length of contract and payment scheme may vary. 16 U.S.C. sect. 3838a(d)(5). Tier I contracts are 5-year contracts and include conservation practices that address at least one significant resource of concern, such as water conservation, for a portion of an agricultural operation at an appropriate nondegradation standard. 16 U.S.C. sect. 3838a(d)(5)(A). Tier II contracts are 5- to 10'year contracts and include conservation practices that address at least one significant resource of concern for an entire agricultural operation at an appropriate nondegradation standard. 16 U.S.C. sect. 3838a(d)(5)(B). Tier III contracts are 5- to 10'year contracts and include conservation practices that address a resource management system at an appropriate nondegradation standard for all resources. 16 U.S.C. sect. 3838a(d)(5)(C).