EFFECTIVE 01/29/97 / 6509.11g, 0-Code Page 1 of 19
FOREST SERVICE HANDBOOK
Portland, Oregon
TITLE 6509.11g - SERVICE-WIDE APPROPRIATION USE HANDBOOK
R6 Supplement No. 6509.11g-97-1
Effective January 29, 1997
POSTING NOTICE. Supplements are numbered consecutively by title and calendar year. Post by document name. Remove entire document, if one exists, and replace with this supplement. The last R6 supplement to this handbook was 6509.11g-93-4.
This supplement supersedes R6 Supplement 6509.11g-93-3.
Superseded New
Document Name (Number of Sheets)
6509.11g,0 Code 20 18
Digest:
This supplement revises charge-as-worked guidance in response to approved budget restructuring implemented in FY95.
/s/ Robert W. Williams
ROBERT W. WILLIAMS
Regional Forester
FSH 6509.11g - SERVICE-WIDE APPROPRIATION USE HANDBOOK
R6 SUPPLEMENT 6509.11g-97-1
EFFECTIVE 01/29/97
ZERO CODE
04 - RESPONSIBILITY
04.3 - National Forests.
4. Forest Financial Manager. An integral step in the work planning and budget execution process is the assignment of the financial/accounting coding to the appropriate work planning documents. The Forest Service has a complex appropriation structure and mix of funds. This is compounded further by the multitude of fund and work activity codes to identify congressional and agency needs. An additional complication is the need to track and identify, through additional coding schemes, items such as real property investments, individual cooperator accounts, and so forth. To meet responsibilities in this critical area, the Forest Financial Manager/Budget and Accounting Officer, (or delegated Budget and Finance personnel) must review all work planning documents for the forest to insure adherence to charge-as-worked guidelines and congressional intent. This responsibility may also be delegated to district Administrative Officers (AO) at the discretion of the Forest AO based on individual knowledge and skills of the District AO. Any such delegation should be documented to clearly explain the responsibility and accountability.
08 - FISCAL CONTROLS.
4. Charge-as-Worked Controls. Funding for special programs must comply with normal charge-as-worked guidelines, Congressional intent, fund usage rules, as well as existing procurement regulations, cooperative authorities, and so forth.
General financing guidance on items such as ecosystem management, forest planning, watershed analysis, resource coordination, monitoring, and mitigation is provided in the following direction. In practice, the process may vary from forest to forest. The essential points related to the financial aspects and charge-as-worked direction revolve around when to code the planning tasks to a project work activity or to an ecosystem management fund code and work activity.
a. Forest Plan Financing. Financing should follow the benefitting fund principle, giving recognition to the fact that the line item for ecosytem planning, inventory, and monitoring (NFEM) would be used to finance all forest planning costs for the National Forest System (NFS) mainhead. Charges to these fund codes should be based on the estimated benefit these programs share in the overall forest planning process.
This direction is applicable for Regional Guides and Forest Plans:
Fund CodeWork Activity
WFPR - Fire Presuppression EM112
NFEM - Ecosystem, Planning, Inventory EM112
and Monitoring
CNXX - Forest Road Construction EM112
b. Spatial Disaggregation. It is the initial step in implementation of the forest plans. This is a way of distributing scheduled activities to subunits of the forest.
This is a forest-wide land management planning activity which is an integral "first step" of the forest planning process. Funding for this activity should follow the forest land management planning criteria discussed in item a above.
c. Ecosystem Analysis at the Watershed level. This activity looks at the integrated resource options, cumulative effects, and connected activities that could logically occur in the analysis area over a foreseeable period of time.
This intermediate level of analysis will normally be needed to move from the Spatially Adapted Activity schedule (spatial disaggregation) to those activities which are to be specifically carried forward to National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) disclosure and decision making. This assessment process is an area-specific refinement and focus from the forest plan level of analysis, and is aimed at developing management options regarding activities that could occur in the analysis area (watershed). These identified activities may serve as a basis for formulating various NEPA alternatives or additional management mixtures. This intermediate level of analysis involves an interdisciplinary team of resource specialists and is the basis for future project selections. The analysis itself is not in support of any one project, as decisions are yet to be made on which activities will be selected.
Watershed assessment activities should be multi-financed based on the anticipated issues and or concerns in the watershed with the NFS portion all being financed from the NFEM expanded budget line item (EBLI). Fire (WFPR) and Construction (CNXX) should be used as appropriate, in addition to the NFEM EBLI to multi-finance a watershed assessment based on the benefitting fund principle.
The exception to NFEM only funding for NFS activities would be in relation to planning, inventory and monitoring efforts conducted for dual-purposes of providing information for forest/landscape scales and project-level scales which should be multi-funded through coordination of NFEM and benefitting funds. For example, inventory and assessment associated with an allotment management plan (AMP) may provide information for a site specific (such as a fence or water) project, ordinarily funded from NFRG. When the inventory and assessment associated with an AMP serves more than one level of planning, and is designed to meet multi-level needs it may be funded in part by NFEM also. Another example is soils information gathered to assist in project design, funded by the benefitting function. When the information is designed to meet the needs for both a site-specific project and a forest plan or assessment, then EPIM funds along with the benefitting function may be used. This strategy facilitates accommodating more than one outcome or result.
Generally, it would be inappropriate to use KV, BD, and or SSF to finance watershed assessment activities when the objective is to determine by the assessment, what the management direction will be for an area. The one exception to this would be in the use of SSF as explained in the exception above and the following. If it is known going into a watershed assessment that timber salvage operations will be one of the outcomes of the assessment and in fact is one of the prime objectives driving the watershed assessment, then it would be proper to use SSF, based on the dual-purpose of gathering information for the landscape scale as well as the project-level scale. The information is designed to meet the needs for both the SSF site-specific project and a forest plan or assessment and thus SSF and EPIM funds are appropriate. The assessment is in essence an expanded cumulative effects analysis that has historically be done for NEPA purposes. The key is that going into the watershed assessment where it is known salvage operations are a given outcome, as opposed to a watershed assessment, where the objective is to determine future management direction, with no "given" going in.
The above use of SSF is to be used ONLY when there has been a major catostrophic event (such as fire, insect, blowdown, and so forth) driving the need for the salvage operation. It is NOT to be used where salvage may merely be a component of potential timber sales within the watershed.
It should also be noted, that for those watersheds where there is currently some KV and or BD work planned and financed, there is a need to determine if what is planned fits or is compatible with the standards and guidelines in the Presidents Plan. Some planned projects will continue to be appropriate, some may not, and some may require modification. The work associated with determining whether these projects are still appropriate (as is or as modified) is an appropriate KV and or BD charge. If KV and or BD funding levels are inadequate to support this need, KV's share would be covered by the appropriate NFS fund code and BD's by WFPR. The use of KV and or BD for this work is based on the fact that identified planned projects must be validated for adherence to current standards prior to performing the work.
d. Schedule and Budget. It is the step in which projects are ranked and scheduled in response to the direction in the forest plan, the desired future condition, the project pool of the area analysis, and the management needs and opportunities. The result is an implementation schedule outlining how much of each activity will be done, and the estimated cost of doing it. Managers, with resource specialists' advice, shall determine priorities and select projects through an annual process.
Resource specialist input (time involvement) to the schedule and budget process should be funded using the same principles reflected in item c above.
e. Planned Projects from the Schedule and Budget Phase. At this point a decision has been made regarding the activities and projects that go on in the specific area which leads into the process of initial project preparation activities, scoping and or position statement development. This ultimately leads into a project specific environmental analysis (EA) which produces a NEPA document. This process, along with the NEPA process requires the interdisciplinary approach (ID team) to analysis for any proposed actions (projects) with the potential of significant environmental effects. This ID team approach, again involves resource specialists in the EA process. At this stage of the process, the resource specialist (resource coordination) input is in relation to specific proposed projects and as such costs need to be charged in accordance with the benefitting funds concept regarding the particular ground disturbing project.
An example of funding as it relates to a timber sale would be as shown in Exhibit 01.
08 - Exhibit 01
Timber Sale Summary
The essential relationships are highlighted as follows for a Timber Sale project:
Sample
Associated Resource Coordination 1/
Tmbr Fire Minr Rnge Rec S&WWldf Roads
ID Proposed Action,
Purpose and Need
FUND CODE NFTM
WORK ACTIVITY ET114
Scoping, Inventory,
and Issues
FUND CODE NFTM
WORK ACTIVITY ET114
Environmental Analysis
and Documentation
FUND CODE NFTM NFTM NFTM NFTM NFTM NFTM NFTM CNTM
WORK ACTIVITY ET114 ET114 ET114 ET114 ET114 ET114 ET114 LT214
2/
1/ Resource Coordination: Resource coordination is required in the design of projects/programs, such as timber sales, mineral development, water improvements, and livestock grazing, to help minimize any negative effects on the other resources. Coordination is "the technical services received from another program area in support of preparing and planning program and project objectives." Resource Coordination is funded by the project requiring the coordination support. For example, Wildlife resource coordination in support of the timber program would be charged to Fund Code NFTM (Timber) and Work Activity ET114 (Sale Prep).
2/ LT214 code is shown only to highlight correlation with transportation planning and the fact that road construction support is charged to CNTM instead of NFTM.
If the decision documents and project analyses indicate that there is one primary purpose for the project to produce a target (cost objective), then the following applies:
Example: A recreation project located in an active domesticlivestock allotment requires support from range. Range provides technical support in the preparation and planning of the recreation objective (range coordination to recreation). However, range will not benefit from increased forage production or additional improvements. The proper charge is fund code NFRM and work activity AN22.
In situations where there are multiple objectives (two or more clear objectives), the previous example does not apply. For projects to have multiple objectives, the objectives (along with targets) must be specified in the decision document (the purpose and need of the project) and planning analyses. In situations where multiple objectives occur, the following applies:
Example: A project has been implemented to improve wildlife habitat and provide wood fiber. As a result of the project, 100 acres of wildlife habitat will be provided along with 1 million board feet of timber (both wildlife habitat and timber are targets and cost objectives). However, the project occurs in an active domestic livestock allotment and there is a high probability that range forage will be damaged by the logging operations. For this project, timber and wildlife related costs would be charged to their own function and not charged as coordination. Range coordination costs should be splitproportionally to timber and wildlife funds based on the benefit to each.
A key to this approach is that the objectives and targets leading to cost allocation are identified prior to project implementation in planning and decision documentation. As the project is implemented, the program receiving the benefit based on the objective or target incurs the cost of production as shown in Exhibit 02.
08 - Exhibit 02
1. Line Officer Approval of Environmental Analysis and Prescription
General Administration
2. Project Execution
Timber Sale Project - Execution
Alternate
Work Fund Code
Unit ofActivity (if inadequate
Work Activity MeasureCodeFund CodeKV Collection)
Sale Administration MBF ET12+ NFTM N/A
Sale Boundary Loc. Miles ET114NFTM N/A
Road Surveys (Preconstr.) LT21T CNTM N/A
Road Constr. (Constr.) MilesLT22TCNTM N/A
Establish Dispersed
Camping Site 2/PAOT AN22CWKV NFRM
Range, Resource
Mitigation 1/ PropertyDN221CWKV NFTM
w/activity ET12+ 3/
Range Resource
Enhancement 2/ DN221CWKV NFRV
Seeding & Planting 2/AcresCW222CWKVNFWL
(Non-struc. Wildlife Hab. Imp.)
Struct. Hab. Improv. 2/StructureCW221CWKVNFWL
Watershed Resource Improvement
(Mitigation) 1/ Acres FW22CWKVNFTM
w/activity ET12+ 3/
1/ Specific activities that were identified in the EA (NEPA) process and are required in order to carry out the parent project. These are required mitigation activities.
08 - Exhibit 02--Continued
2/ Specific activities identified in the EA (NEPA) process as enhancement projects to be accomplished if funding is available.
3/ Any mitigation required prior to award of timber sale should be charged to NFTM ET114.
NOTE: Enhancement activities may be funded from CWKV (if collections made) or from appropriated funds of the benefitting activity should KV collections be inadequate. Mitigation funding is different. KV may be used to fund required mitigation work to protect/improve renewable resources. However, if KV collections are not adequate to accomplish the required mitigation work, the cost of the mitigation is properlychargeable to the same funds the ground disturbing project is financed from. Thus in a timber sale example, timber sale funds would finance the cost of the mitigation work. This is true whether for range, soil, wildlife, or any other mitigation that may be necessary. Mitigation required as a result of a timber road construction project would be funded from CNTM funds.
3. Monitoring and Evaluation
(Timber Sale Project - Project Monitoring and Evaluation)
Work
Unit of Activity
Work ActivityMeasure CodeFund Code
Water Quality ET12TC NFTM
(Water Res. Monitoring)
Post Treatment Exam.ET12TC NFTM
and Analysis
Natural Regen. Cert.ET24NFFV
CWKV
Wildlife MonitoringET12TC NFTM
and Review
Cult. Res. MonitorET12TCNFTM
and Review
Final Inspection
of Road Miles LT22T CNTM
NOTE: Monitoring With Permanent and Trust Funds (KV). The only monitoring that can be accomplished with KV is the monitoring or evaluation of KV completed projects. For example, a water improvement or range fence built with KV funds could be monitored to determine if the KV project met the objective. It is inappropriate to use KV funds to monitor or determine the effects of the timber sale on any resource during or after the sale; this is the responsibility of appropriated funds from the ground disturbing activity which generated the need for the monitoring work. This principle applies to BD and CWFS as well.
With the change in support implemented in FY95, the resource coordination / support needs are now to be financed by the ground disturbing project causing the need for the support (which constitutes "benefitting function"). That concept is as applicable in the "project" monitoring & evaluation stage as it is in the "project" (EA) NEPA work at the beginning.
f. Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation. While the monitoring and evaluation process seems to come at the end of the implementation process, the fact is that it pervades the whole implementation process. Many linkages exist between monitoring and evaluation and all the other foregoing processes. For simplicity's sake, it is discussed at this point because this is where the working impacts start to be felt; when the project is completed on the ground.
The essence of monitoring and evaluation is to assess the effectiveness of the forest plan and the need to change the plan through amendment or revision or to continue with the forest plan.
NFMA Regulation 36 CFR 219.12(k) requires that forest plan implementation be evaluated to determine the effects of management practices, how well objectives have been met, and how closely management standards and guidelines have been applied. This requirement is the basis for the regional monitoring strategy.
Project and program level monitoring should be funded by the benefitting program areas. Examples are as reflected in the monitoring and evaluations sections of the previous timber sale project example. Forest level overall forest plan monitoring and evaluation should be financed in accordance with the same financing principle as forest planning as described in item 4a of this direction with the exception that work activity code EM121 should be used.
5. Accuracy of Charges
a. Payroll Accuracy. Follow the national direction in the parent text, unless by so doing a significant amount of the annual work plan and actually completed work would not get recorded. It may be necessary to record time in segments of less than 4 hours in these cases. Examples of this might be where a person spends 1 to 2 hours a day (less than 4 hours) on a certain activity which would not get recorded using the strict 4-hour rule application. Good judgment and common sense are a must in applying the 4-hour rule principle. Refer to item "e." for policy on international assignments.
c. Equipment Use and Fixed Ownership Rate (FOR) Accuracy. Equipment use costs may be managed in a number of ways, such as a separate management code for each vehicle or a district-wide management code (multi-line), which accounts for equipment use costs for the entire district. If the district-wide management code is utilized, the key is that a sound basis be used and documented for multi-line distribution of costs (such as individual work plans reflecting estimated mileage).