Section NR 166.25 - Project ranking system(1) The department shall maintain a project priority list for each state fiscal year, based on the priority evaluation and ranking information submitted by municipalities under s. NR 166.08 (1), and shall rank the projects for which the department has determined priority scores. The projects shall be ranked in the order of descending priority score, with the project with the highest priority score ranked first. The department shall develop an annual funding list consisting of all projects for which applications are submitted under s. NR 166.08 (3) to (5).(2) If 2 or more projects have the same priority score, the project serving the larger population shall have the higher priority.(3) Funds shall be allocated to projects in the order in which they appear on the funding list, except that projects may be given priority or removed from the list, upon written notice by the department, if any of the following situations occur: (a) Ranking the projects in descending order does not result in at least 15 percent of the funds allocated to small systems serving less than 10,000 persons. In this case, systems serving less than 10,000 persons shall be given priority until the 15 percent funding allocation requirement is met.(b) The requirements of s. NR 166.08 (3) to (5) are not met.(c) A project is canceled, or the funding request is withdrawn by an applicant.(d) The applicant is unable to provide bidding documentation to the department by a date that allows enough time for a loan closing to occur by the loan closing deadline for the project. Note: The amount of time needed between submittal of bidding documentation and loan closing can vary by project. Typically, though, several weeks are needed to accomplish all of the steps that must be taken by various players in the process prior to loan closing - review the bidding documents, prepare a financial assistance agreement, have bond documents drafted, review invoices for the first disbursement of funds, conduct final reviews of the applicant's revenues and expenses, pass a bond resolution and sign the financial assistance agreement, mail signed documents to appropriate agencies, and arrange for the wiring of funds to the municipality's account.
(e) The project fails to meet the engineering review requirements under s. NR 166.10 (2) (b) to (c) or does not have department approval of the project.(f) The applicant has reached the 25 percent biennial funding cap, as established under s. 281.61 (8) (bL), Stats. Note: In any biennium, no municipality may receive more than 25 percent of the SDWLP funds projected by DOA to be available for that biennium.
(g) DOA is not satisfied that the municipality has the financial capacity as described in ch. Adm 35 to assure sufficient revenues to operate and maintain the project for its useful life and to pay the debt service on the obligations it issues for the project.(h) Federal or state refinancing or reimbursement restrictions prevent funding of the project with SDWLP monies.Wis. Admin. Code Department of Natural Resources NR 166.25
CR 06-023: cr. Register May 2007 No. 617, eff. 6-1-07.Amended by, CR 14-044: cr. Register June 2015 No. 714, eff.7/1/2015.Amended by, correction in (3) (f) made under s. 13.92(4) (b) 7, Stats., Register June 2017 No. 738, eff. 7/1/2017.Adopted by, CR 22-068: cr. Register October 2023 No. 814, eff. 11/1/2023