DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL, GREAT LAKES, AND ENERGY QUALITY
 
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSISTANCE FINANCE DIVISION
 
STATE REVOLVING LOAN FUND
 
Filed with the secretary of state on
 
These rules become effective immediately after filing with the secretary of state unless adopted under section 33, 44, or 45a(9) of the administrative procedures act of 1969, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.233, 24.244, or 24.245a.  Rules adopted under these sections become effective 7 days after filing with the secretary of state.
 
(By authority conferred on the director of the department of environment, Great Lakes, and energy natural resources by section 19 5316 of the natural resources and environmental protection act, 1994 PA 451, MCL 324.5316, and Executive Reorganization Order Nos. 1995-16, 2009-31, 2011-1, and 2019-1, MCL 324.99903, 324.99919, 324.99921, and 324.99923 of Act No. 317 of the Public Acts  of  1988,  being S323.469 of the Michigan Compiled Laws)
 

R 323.951, R 323.952, R 323.953, R 323.954, R 323.955, R 323.956, R 323.957, R 323.958, R 323.959, R 323.960, R 323.961, R 323.962, R 323.963, R 323.964, and R 323.965 of the Michigan Administrative Code are rescinded, as follows:

 
      R 323.951  Definitions. Rescinded.
  Rule 1. As used in these rules:
  (a) "Act" means Act No. 317 of the Public Acts of 1988,  being  S323.451 et seq. of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
  (b) "Director" means the director of the department of natural resources or his or her designated representative.
  (c) "Excessive infiltration/inflow" (I/I) means the  quantities  of   clear water  that  can  be  economically  eliminated  from  a   sewer   system   by rehabilitation,  as  determined  by  a   cost-effectiveness   analysis   that compares the costs for correcting the  infiltration/inflow  conditions   with the total costs for transportation and treatment of  the   infiltration   and inflow.
  (d) "Segmented project" means a project that is a portion   of   a   larger project proposed in the final project plan.
 
      R 323.952  Project planning requirements for tier I. Rescinded.
  Rule 2. (1) Pursuant to section 6(3) of the  act,  a completed  project plan for a tier I project shall include all of the   following   as   project background:
  (a) Identification of planning area boundaries and characteristics.
  (b) A description of the existing sewage transport/treatment systems.
  (c) A discussion of the existing sewage  transport/treatment  problems  and needs, including the severity and extent  of  water   quality   problems   or public health problems, and an evaluation  of   opportunities   to   maximize operation and maintenance to improve effluent quality.  For  a   municipality that is required to have an approved industrial  pretreatment  program,   the discussion shall also include an evaluation of the   status   of   compliance with the pretreatment  program  requirements.  If  a   municipality   is   in significant noncompliance with the pretreatment  program  requirements,   the steps the municipality will take to achieve and  maintain  compliance   shall also be discussed.
  (d) An examination of projected needs for  the  next  20   years,   and   a description of the future environment without the proposed project.
  (e) The source and basis for population  projections.  Projections   should correlate with those prepared by the state, or   the   appropriate   regional planning agency, using a nationally recognized  model,  such   as   the   one produced  by  the  federal  census  bureau.  The   projections   should    be compatible with population projections used in  state  implementation   plans developed under the provisions of the federal clean air act   of   1963,   42 U.S.C. S7401 et seq.
  (f) A synopsis of the environmental setting of the project.
  (2) The project plan shall also include  an   analysis   of   alternatives, which shall consist of  a  systematic   identification,   screening,   study, evaluation, and cost-effectiveness comparison   of   feasible   technologies, processes, and techniques. The alternatives shall be   capable   of   meeting the applicable effluent, water quality,  and   public   health   requirements over the design life of the facility, while  recognizing  environmental   and other nonmonetary considerations. The analysis shall include   all   of   the following:
  (a) A planning period for the cost-effectiveness analysis of  20  years  or other such planning period as is justified by the  unique  characteristics of the project.
  (b) Monetary costs that consider the present worth  or  equivalent   annual value of all capital costs and operation and maintenance costs.
  (c) A demonstration  of  the  existence  or   nonexistence   of   excessive infiltration/inflow in the sewer system and a description  of  the   proposed methods to remove any excessive infiltration/inflow.
  (d) Provisions for the ultimate disposal of residuals and sludge.
  (e) An analysis  of  the  potential  direct,   indirect,   and   cumulative environmental  impacts  of  the  various  alternatives,  as   well   as   the identification of any  significant  environmental   benefits   precluded   by rejection of an alternative.
  (f)  A  description  of  the  best   practicable    wastewater    treatment technology.
  (g) Consideration of feasible innovative and  alternative  technologies, as well as  opportunities  to  make   more   efficient   use   of   energy   and resources.
  (h)  An  analysis  of  the  potential  open    space    and    recreational opportunities associated with the project.
  (i) A description  of  the  relationship  between   the   treatment   works capacity of alternatives and the needs to be   served,   including   capacity for future growth expected after the treatment works becomes  operational.
  (j) Other analyses to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and  acceptability of alternatives.
  (3) The project plan shall also include a description   of   the   selected alternative, including all of the following:
  (a) Relevant design parameters.
  (b) Estimated capital  construction  costs,   operation   and   maintenance costs, and a description of the manner in  which  project   costs   will   be financed.
  (c) If collection sewers are included in the  project,   documentation   of both of the following:
  (i) That there is  sufficient  existing  or   planned   sewage   transport/ treatment capacity for new flows being generated.
  (ii) That such new sewers will not result  in   development which would cause environmental impacts contrary to state law.
  (d) A demonstration  that  the  selected   alternative   is   implementable considering the legal, institutional, financial, and managerial  resources of the applicant.
  (e)  Documentation  of  the  project's  consistency   with   the   approved elements of any applicable water quality management plan prepared pursuant to section 208 or section 303(e) of the federal  water  pollution   control  act of 1972, 33 U.S.C. S1288 or S1313(e).
  (f) Cost impacts on wastewater system users.
  (4) The project plan shall also include a discussion of the  full  range of potential direct, indirect,  and  cumulative  environmental  impacts  of  the proposed project, including those which cannot be avoided.
  (5) The project plan shall  evaluate   cumulative   environmental   impacts within the context of the entire treatment system, as well  as  other  public works projects and projected community growth.
  (6)  The  project  plan  shall  include  a   description    of    potential environmental impacts, including consideration of all of the following:
  (a) The relationship between the short-term uses of  the environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity.
  (b) A discussion of the irreversible and  irretrievable commitment of resources to the proposed project.
  (c) Other analyses necessary to assess potential impacts of  the  proposed project.
  (7)  The  project  plan  shall  consider   structural   and   nonstructural measures which could be taken to mitigate or eliminate  adverse  effects   on the environment.
  (8) The project plan shall describe the  public  participation   activities conducted during planning and shall include all of the following:
  (a) Significant issues raised by the  public  and  any   changes   to   the project which were made as a result of the public  participation  process.
  (b) A demonstration that there were adequate   opportunities   for   public consultation, participation, and  input  in   the   decision-making   process during alternative selection.
  (c) A demonstration that before the adoption of the   project   plan,   the applicant held a public hearing on the proposed project not  less   than   30 days after advertising in a local newspaper of general circulation and at a time and place conducive to maximizing public input.
  (d) A demonstration that, concurrent with advertisement of the  hearing,  a notice of public hearing was sent to all local, state, and  federal agencies and to any public or  private  parties  that   have   expressed   an interest in the proposed project.
  (e) A transcript of the hearing, a list of all   attendees, any written testimony received, and the applicant's responses to the issues raised.
  (9) The final project plan shall  include  resolutions adopted  by the participating municipality or municipalitie to implement the  selected alternative.
 
R 323.953  Project planning requirements for tier II. Rescinded.
  Rule 3. (1) A project plan  shall  be  sufficient  to   ensure   that   the provisions of section 6(4) of the  act  are  met.  A   project   plan   shall contain sufficient detail on all of  the  following  to   ensure   that   the project will be successfully completed in an environmentally sound manner:
  (a) The background.
  (b) The analysis of alternatives.
  (c) The basis of design.
  (d) The environmental impacts.
  (e) The public participation.
  (2) The information and level of detail contained in   the   project   plan shall be commensurate with the complexity of the proposed  project  and,   as appropriate, include all of the following:
  (a) Identification of planning area boundaries and characteristics.
  (b) A description of the existing sewage transport/treatment systems.
  (c) A discussion of the existing sewage  transport/treatment  problems  and needs, including the severity and extent  of  water   quality   problems   or public health problems. For a municipality that is  required   to   have   an approved  industrial  pretreatment  program,  the   discussion   shall   also include an evaluation of the status of compliance   with   the   pretreatment program requirements. If a municipality is   in   significant   noncompliance with the pretreatment program requirements,  the   steps   the   municipality will take to achieve and maintain compliance shall also be discussed.
  (d) An examination of projected needs for  the  next  20   years,   and   a description of the future environment without the proposed project.
  (e) The source and basis for population  projections.  Projections   should correlate with those prepared by the state,  or   an   appropriate   regional planning agency.
  (f) A synopsis of the environmental setting of the project.
  (3) The project plan shall also include  an   analysis   of   alternatives, which shall consist of  a  systematic   identification,   screening,   study, evaluation, and cost justification comparison  of   available   technologies, processes, and techniques. The alternatives shall be   capable   of   meeting the applicable effluent, water quality,  and   public   health   requirements over the design life of the facility, while  recognizing  environmental   and other nonmonetary considerations. The analysis shall include   all   of   the following:
  (a) A planning period for the project of  20  years   or   other   planning period as justified by  unique  characteristics  of  the   project   and   as approved by the director.
  (b) Monetary costs that consider the present worth  or  equivalent   annual value of all capital costs and operation and maintenance costs.
  (c) A demonstration  of  the  existence  or   nonexistence   of   excessive infiltration/inflow in the sewer system and a description  of  the   proposed methods to remove any excessive infiltration/inflow.
  (d) Provisions for the ultimate disposal of residuals and sludge.
  (e) An analysis  of  the  potential  direct,   indirect,   and   cumulative environmental impacts of the various alternatives   and   identification   of any significant  environmental  benefits  precluded  by   rejection   of   an alternative.
  (f) Consideration of feasible innovative and  alternative  technologies, as well as  opportunities  to  make   more   efficient   use   of   energy   and resources.
  (4) For the selected alternative, the project plan shall  include  all   of the following:
  (a) Relevant design parameters.
  (b) Estimated capital  construction  costs,   operation   and   maintenance costs, and a description of the manner in  which  project   costs   will   be financed.
  (c) If collection sewers are included in the  project,   documentation   of both of the following:
  (i) That there is  sufficient  existing  or   planned   sewage   transport/ treatment capacity for new flows being generated.
  (ii) That such new sewers will not result  in   development   which   would cause environmental impacts contrary to state law.
  (d) A demonstration  that  the  selected   alternative   is   implementable considering the legal, institutional, financial, and managerial  resources of the applicant.
  (5) The project plan shall include  an  analysis   of   potential   direct, indirect,  and  cumulative  impacts  resulting  from    the    project    and demonstrate consistency with all applicable state   environmental   laws.   A demonstration of consistency shall include the following items:
  (a) A reference to all permits, licenses, or clearances to  be  obtained by the applicant as necessary to undertake  the  project  and  a  provision  for furnishing these permits, licenses, or  clearances  when   they   have   been issued.
  (b) A demonstration of intent to adhere to  all   provisions,   conditions, and mitigative measures specified by any  agency,   permit,   clearance,   or license or, as  appropriate,  depending  on  the   status   of   construction activity,  a  demonstration  of  actual  adherence   to    all    provisions, conditions, and mitigative measures.
  (c) All permits, clearances, and licenses shall be subject  to  review   by the director. All  construction   contracts,   specifications,   construction logs, and other documents shall also be subject to review by the  director to determine compliance with state law.
  (6) The project plan shall describe efforts to   provide   an   opportunity for public consultation, participation, and input  in   the   decision-making process during the selection of alternatives. If a public  hearing  is  held, the description shall include all of the following:
  (a) Significant issues raised by the  public  and  any   changes   to   the project which were made as a result of the public  participation  process.
  (b) A demonstration that before the adoption of the   project   plan,   the applicant held a public hearing on the proposed project not  less   than   30 days after advertising in a local newspaper of general circulation and  at  a time and place conducive to maximizing public input.
  (c) A demonstration that, concurrent with advertisement of the  hearing,  a notice of public hearing was sent  to   all   local,   state,   and   federal agencies and to any public or private parties that may have  an  interest  in the proposed project.
  (d) A transcript or summary of the hearing, a list of  all  attendees,  any written testimony received, and the applicant's responses   to   the   issues raised.
  (7) If a  public  hearing  is  not  held,  the   applicant   shall   submit documentation of adequate opportunities for public  input  or   participation during the development of the project,  which   may   include   informational meetings, official  meetings  of  the  governing   body   and   informational mailings
 
R 323.954  Tier I environmental review requirements. Rescinded.
  Rule 4. (1) The director may either issue a finding   of   no   significant impact (FNSI), which is based upon a formal environmental review supported by the project plan, or make  a  determination  that  an  environmental   impact statement (EIS) is necessary.
  (2) An environmental review of a  project  plan  will   be   conducted   to determine whether any significant impacts are anticipated  and  whether   any changes can be made in  the  proposed  project   to   eliminate   significant adverse impacts. As part of this review,  the  director   may   require   the 
submittal of additional information or additional  public  participation  and coordination to justify the  environmental  determination.   Based   on   the environmental review, the director may prepare  an  environmental  assessment describing the following:
  (a) The purpose and need for the proposed project.
  (b) The proposed project, including its costs.
  (c) The alternatives considered and the reasons for their acceptance or rejection.
  (d) The existing environment.
  (e) Any potential adverse impacts and mitigative measures.
  (f) How mitigative measures will be incorporated into   the   project,   as well as any proposed conditions of financial assistance and  the  means   for monitoring compliance with the conditions.
  (3)  The  director  may  issue  a  FNSI,  based   upon   an   environmental assessment which documents that potential environmental impacts  will  not be significant  or  that   they   may   be   mitigated   without   extraordinary measures.
  (4) A FNSI shall provide a brief description of the  project,  its   costs, and its mitigative measures.
  (5) An EIS may be required when  the  director  determines   any   of   the following:
  (a) The project will have a significant impact on the pattern  and  type of land use or the growth and distribution of the population.
  (b) The effects of the project's construction or  operation  will  conflict with local or state laws or policies.
  (c) The project will have significant adverse  impacts  on   any   of   the following:
  (i) Wetlands.
  (ii) Floodplains.
  (iii) Threatened or endangered species or habitats.
  (iv) Cultural resources, including any of the following:
  (A) Parklands.
  (B) Preserves.
  (C) Other public lands.
  (D)   Areas   of   recognized    scenic,    recreational,     agricultural, archeological, or historical value.
  (d) The project will cause significant displacement of population.
  (e) The project will directly or indirectly,  such   as   through   induced development, have significant adverse effect upon any of the following:
  (i) Local ambient air quality.
  (ii) Local noise levels.
  (iii) Surface and groundwater quantity or quality.
  (iv) Fish.
  (v) Shellfish.
  (vi) Wildlife.
  (vii) Wildlife natural habitats.
  (f) The project will generate significant public controversy.
  (6) Based on the  EIS,  a  record  of  decision   (ROD)   summarizing   the findings of the EIS will be  issued  identifying   those   conditions   under which the proposed project can proceed and maintain   compliance   with   the national environmental policy act (NEPA) of 1969, 42 U.S.C. S4321 et  seq.
  (7) If 5 or more years have elapsed since a  determination  of   compliance with NEPA, or if significant changes in the project have   taken   place,   a redetermination of compliance with NEPA  requirements   is   necessary.   The project shall be reevaluated and the director may do any of the following:
  (a) Reaffirm the original FNSI or ROD through the issuance  of   a   public notice or statement of finding.
  (b) Issue an amendment to a FNSI or revoke a FNSI  and   issue   a   public notice that the preparation of an EIS will be required.
  (c) Issue a supplement to a ROD or revoke  a  ROD  and   issue   a   public notice that financial assistance will not be provided.
  (8) Action  regarding approval of  a project  plan   or   provision   of financial assistance shall not be taken during  a 30-day public comment period after the issuance of a FNSI or ROD.
 
R 323.955  Municipal coordination requirements. Rescinded.
  Rule 5. (1) A municipality is responsible  for   obtaining   any   federal, state, or local permits or clearances required for the  project   and   shall perform any surveys or studies which are required in  conjunction  with  such permits or clearances.
  (2)  A  municipality  shall  incorporate   all   appropriate    provisions, conditions, and mitigative measures included in   the   applicable   studies, surveys,  permits,  clearances,  and  licenses    into    the    construction documents. These documents are subject  to  review  by   the   director   for 
conformity  with  environmental   determinations   and   coordination requirements.
  (3) All applicable and appropriate conditions   and   mitigative   measures shall be enforced by the municipality or its  designated  representative  and shall  apply  to  all  construction   and    post-construction    activities, including disposal of all liquid or  solid  spoils,   waste   material,   and residuals from construction.
  (4) For tier I projects, where existing state law does  not   address   the scope of federal interest as described in the provisions of 40 C.F.R. part 6, subpart C, other  federal  coordination  requirements   contained   in   that subpart shall be adhered to.
  (5)  Applicants  may  seek  guidance   from    the    director    regarding coordination requirements specified in this rule.
 
R 323.956  Tier II environmental review requirements. Rescinded.
  Rule 6. (1) A project plan and any other documentation  provided  shall  be adequate  to  ensure  that  the  project  is   environmentally   sound    and consistent with state environmental laws. This   documentation   shall   take into consideration project need, alternatives  analysis,  and   environmental considerations.
  (2) Before issuing an order of approval for a project,  the  director   may consult with  other  review,  licensing,  or   permitting   authorities,   as necessary, to ensure that the project is consistent   with   all   applicable state environmental laws.
 
R 323.957  Development of state priority system. Rescinded.
  Rule 7. (1) The fund will be managed in accordance with  a  state  priority system for wastewater treatment projects designed to  achieve  optimum  water quality management. Such management shall be consistent with  the  goals  and requirements of the federal water pollution control act of 1972, 33 U.S.C.
S1251 et seq., Act No. 245 of the Public Acts of 1929,  as   amended,   being S323.1 et seq. of the Michigan Compiled Laws, and the act.
  (2) The priority system will be used  to  develop   2   separate   priority lists. One list shall be for sewage treatment works projects   and   1   list shall be for nonpoint source projects. The  priority   system   consists   of both of the following:
  (a) The methodology to rank eligible  projects  on   the   annual   project priority list (PPL).
  (b) The process for bypassing a sewage treatment works   project   on   the PPL if a higher priority project fails to  proceed  in   a   timely   fashion pursuant to the provisions of section 13 of the act.
  (3) In allocating the funds between sewage treatment  works  and   nonpoint source projects, the director will use the resulting  overall  water  quality improvement  as  the  principal  criteria  for   any   proposed    allocation identified in the annual intended use plan.
  (4) The priority system developed in accordance with this  rule  shall   be effective on October 1, 1990. Pursuant to the provisions of  section  18   of the act, the priority system provided pursuant to the   provisions   of   Act No. 329 of the Public Acts of 1966, as amended, being S323.111  et  seq.   of the Michigan Compiled Laws, shall be utilized through September 30,  1990.
 
R 323.958  Ranking sewage treatment works projects   on   annual   priority list; criteria. Rescinded.
  Rule 8. (1) Priority points will be assigned to a project  or  to  separate components of a project based on the project plan submitted and  as  is   set forth in these rules and section 6 of the act.
  (2)  Sewage  treatment  works  projects  that   receive   priority    point assignment under the provisions of section 6 of the act will  be  ranked   in descending order on the project priority list, based on  points  assigned  as follows:
  (a) Water pollution severity points. A sewage   treatment   works   project will be assigned water pollution severity points based   on   the   pollutant load or the receiving water impairment  that  the   proposed   project will abate. Each project will be assessed in 5 categories.   Each project will receive a score between 0 and 100 for each of the 5 categories, with the higher  score  corresponding  to  a  greater  degree   of    water    quality improvement. The cumulative sum will comprise  the  total   score   for   the project's water  pollution  severity  points.  The  5   categories   are   as follows:
  (i) Dissolved oxygen.
  (ii) Nutrients.
  (iii) Toxic materials.
  (iv) Microorganisms.
  (v) Groundwater discharges.
  (b) Enforcement points. If the proposed sewage treatment  works  project is necessary to comply with  a   construction   schedule   established   by   an order, permit, or other document issued  by  the  director   or   the   water resources commission or entered as part of an action brought  by  the   state against a municipality, 300 enforcement points will be assigned.
  (c) Population points. A municipality will be  assigned  population  points from the chart set  forth  in  this  subdivision,  based   upon   the   total existing residential population to be served by the  sewage  treatment  works project, as shown in the final project plan.
  POINT ASSIGNMENT POPULATION
  100 150,000 or more
  95 50,000 to 149,999
  90 21,000 to 49,999
  85 10,000 to 20,999
  80 6,000 to 9,999
  75 4,000 to 5,999
  70 2,600 to 3,999
  65 2,200 to 2,599
  60 1,800 to 2,199
  55 1,300 to 1,799
  50 900 to 1,299
  45 700 to 899
  40 500 to 699
  35 300 to 499
  30 1 to 299
  (d) Dilution ratio points. A sewage  treatment  works   project   will   be assigned dilution ratio points in accordance with  the  following  provisions and chart:
  (i) The points shall be based upon a ratio  derived   from   the   existing flow discharged, divided by the expected  flow  of   the   receiving   waters during the period of discharge.
  (ii) The expected flow for the  Great  Lakes  and   groundwater   will   be considered to be infinite. For lakes  other  than  the   Great   Lakes,   the expected flow will be considered to be the main stream  flow   out of the lake. If a lake does not have an outlet, then the expected flow will be 0.
 DILUTION RATIO POINTS DILUTION RATIOS
  100 Equal to or greater than .6
  85 Less than .6 to .06
  70 Less than .06 to .01
  55 Less than 0.01 to 0.002
  40 Less than 0.002 to 0.0002
  25 Less than 0.0002
 
R 323.959  Ranking nonpoint source projects on the  annual  priority  list; criteria. Rescinded.
  Rule 9.  Before  being  considered  for  priority   point   assignment   of nonpoint source projects, an applicant shall meet  at  least   one   of   the following conditions:
  (a) A municipality has submitted an approved  nonpoint   source   watershed plan,  or  equivalent,  which  documents   controllable    nonpoint    source problems. The watershed plan, or equivalent,  shall  contain   all of the following information:
  (i) A description of the watershed.
  (ii) A description of the water quality problem.
  (iii) Recommended programs.
  (iv) Agencies involved.
  (v) Project schedule.
  (vi) Public participation process.
  (vii) Project evaluation criteria.
  (viii) Project costs.
  (b) The municipality for which a project is proposed is   subject   to   an order or permit issued by the director or the  water   resources   commission for the control of nonpoint source pollution.
 
R 323.960  Point assignment for  ranking  projects   on   nonpoint   source priority list. Rescinded.
  Rule 10. Nonpoint source projects that receive  priority  point  assignment under the provisions of section 6 of the act shall be  ranked  in  descending order on the nonpoint source project priority list (PPL)  based   on   points assigned as follows:
  (a) If the proposed nonpoint source project is necessary to comply  with an order, permit, or other document issued  by  the  director   or   the   water resources commission or entered as part of an action brought  by  the   state against a municipality, 200 points will be assigned.
  (b) If the proposed project is a necessary component  of  a   comprehensive plan developed pursuant to the provisions of R 323.1064, 100  points  will be assigned.
  (c) If the project will address violations of water  quality  standards  in the watershed or project area, points will  be  assigned   based   upon   the severity of the receiving water impairment that the  proposed  project   will abate. Each project will receive a score of between 0  and   100   for   each standard violated based on the severity of the violation. A  maximum  of  400 points may be assigned for each project.
  (d) If  the  watershed  contains  high  quality  waters   which   must   be maintained, 200 points will be assigned.
  (e) If the watershed has high public  use  value,  200   points   will   be assigned.
  (f) If there is high landowner or municipal willingness  to  participate in controlling nonpoint sources in  the   watershed   or   project   area,   200 points will be assigned.
  (g) If there  is  ongoing  local,  federal,  or   state   nonpoint   source initiatives in the watershed or project area, 100 points will be assigned.
 
R 323.961  Segmenting sewage treatment works project. Rescinded.
  Rule 11. (1) Segments of a project  will  be   assigned   priority   points based on the project as identified in the final project plan.
  (2) After funding assistance for the  first  segment   is   accepted,   the remaining segments will retain first priority for   funding   assistance   on the next 3 fiscal year priority lists.
  (3) All projects with previously funded segments will  be  designated  with first priority in accordance with the provisions of subrule   (2)   of   this rule. Ranking order for these projects to receive funding assistance  will be subject to the relative ranking of all first segment projects.
 
R 323.962  Bypass action for sewage treatment works projects. Rescinded.
  Rule 12. (1) The director may bypass sewage treatment  works  projects   in accordance with the provisions of section 13 of the act.
  (2) An applicant may submit a written request to the director to  extend  a negotiated project milestone schedule for a period  of  not  more   than   60 days.  The  request  shall  show  cause  for  the   schedule   slippage. A municipality may  file  1  additional  30-day  extension   request   to   its 
milestone schedule.
  (3) The director will provide affected  municipalities   with   a   written notice of intent to bypass not less than 30 days before the bypass action.
  (4) For projects bypassed pursuant to the provisions of  this   rule,   the director will transmit, to the municipality, an official  notice  of   bypass for the fundable project, pursuant to the provisions of section  13  of   the act.
  (5) A bypassed project may be  eligible  for  ranking   on   a   subsequent fiscal year priority list. A revised milestone schedule  will  be  negotiated consistent with the project rank on  a  subsequent   fiscal   year   priority list.
  (6) Bypass action will  not  modify  any   compliance   dates   established pursuant to a permit, order, or other document issued by  the   director   or the water resources commission or entered as part of an  action  brought   by the state.
  (7) The director will notify municipalities with   projects   outside   the fundable range of bypass action, of the amount of  bypassed  funds  available for  obligation,  and  of  the  deadline  for  submittal   of   a   complete, approvable application. The director may set the deadline  to  ensure  proper administration of the fund.
 
R 323.963  Appeals; judicial review. Rescinded.
  Rule 13. Determinations made  by  a  designated   representative   of   the director may be appealed to  the  director.  Determinations   made   by   the director are  final.  Judicial  review  may  be  sought   pursuant   to the provisions of section 631 of Act No. 236 of the Public Acts of 1961, as amended, being S600.631 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
 
R 323.964  Termination of project; repayments. Rescinded.
  Rule 14. (1) An offer of financial assistance will be  withdrawn   if   the municipality fails to accept an offer of assistance from the  fund  within  a period of 30 days after receipt of a  proposed  loan   agreement   from   the Michigan municipal bond authority (MMBA).
  (2) If financial assistance to a project is terminated  pursuant   to   the provisions  of  section  15  or  16  of  the  act   before   completion    of construction, the  municipality  shall  repay   outstanding   loan   proceeds according to a schedule established by the MMBA.
  (3)  Any  settlement  costs  incurred  in  the   termination   of   project assistance are the responsibility of the municipality.
 
R 323.965  Determination of interest rates. Rescinded.
  Rule 15. (1) For purposes of the intended use plan,   the   director   will annually establish a methodology to  produce  the  interest   rates   to   be assessed for tier I and tier II projects. These rates of interest shall be in effect for loans made during the  fiscal  year   commencing   on   the   next October 1 date.
  (2) In establishing methodology, all of the following  criteria  shall   be considered:
  (a) Future demands.
  (b) Present demands.
  (c) Market conditions.
  (d) Cost of compliance with program elements.