NR 153.14
NR 153.14 Eligible targeted runoff management projects. NR 153.14(1)(1)
Applicability. This section applies only to targeted runoff management projects.
NR 153.14(2)
(2) Project categories. The following four categories of targeted runoff management projects are eligible for funding under this chapter:
NR 153.14(3)
(3) General administrative project criteria for all projects. Any project funded under this section shall meet all of the following administrative criteria:
NR 153.14(3)(a)
(a) The project application submitted under
s. NR 153.17 shall specify the watershed, sub-watershed, or specific site that will be served by the project.
NR 153.14(3)(b)
(b) The project shall be consistent with priorities identified by the department on a watershed or other geographic basis.
NR 153.14(3)(c)
(c) The project shall be consistent with the county land and water resources management plan approved under s.
92.10, Stats.
NR 153.14(3)(d)
(d) The project may not have been allocated full cost-share funding by the department of agriculture, trade and consumer protection under the joint allocation plan approved under ss.
92.14 (14) and
281.65 (4) (pm), Stats.
NR 153.14(4)
(4) General water quality criteria for all projects. Any project funded under this section shall implement nonpoint source pollution control in an area that is a target area based on at least one of the following:
NR 153.14(4)(a)
(a) The need for compliance with performance standards established by the department in
ch. NR 151.
NR 153.14(4)(b)
(b) The existence of impaired water bodies that the department has identified to the federal environmental protection agency under
33 USC 1313 (d) (1) (A).
NR 153.14(4)(c)
(c) The existence of outstanding or exceptional resource waters, as designated by the department under s.
281.15, Stats.
NR 153.14(4)(e)
(e) The existence of an animal feeding operation that has received a notice of discharge under
ch. NR 243 or a notice of intent to issue a notice of discharge.
NR 153.14(4)(f)
(f) Other water quality concerns of national or statewide importance as identified by the department in application materials.
NR 153.14(5)
(5) Large-scale TMDL implementation project eligibility criteria. Large-scale TMDL implementation projects shall meet the following specific criteria:
NR 153.14(5)(a)
(a) The project shall directly implement the pollutant-specific goals of either a draft TMDL, a US EPA-approved TMDL, a draft TMDL implementation plan, a department approved TMDL implementation plan, or an equivalent to any of the foregoing as identified by the department.
NR 153.14(5)(b)
(b) The project shall be designed to control the most critical nonpoint pollution sources within a designated watershed area.
NR 153.14 Note
Note: The boundaries of the watershed area will be based on factors including the amount of funds available, the management needs identified in the TMDL and the management strategy set forth in the TMDL implementation plan.
NR 153.14(5)(c)
(c) The project shall be limited to managing agricultural sources of nonpoint pollution.
NR 153.14(5)(d)
(d) The project shall focus on controlling those nonpoint pollution sources in the project area that are determined to be significant based on their relative contribution to the impairment and that can be cost-effectively controlled.
NR 153.14(5)(e)
(e) The intended project period may not exceed 3 years in duration, with the possibility of extension to 4 years if approved by the department.
NR 153.14(6)
(6) Small-scale TMDL implementation project eligibility criteria. Small-scale TMDL implementation projects shall meet the following specific criteria:
NR 153.14(6)(a)
(a) The project shall directly implement the pollutant-specific goals of either a draft TMDL, a US EPA-approved TMDL, a draft TMDL implementation plan, a department approved TMDL implementation plan, or an equivalent to any of the foregoing as identified by the department.
NR 153.14(6)(c)
(c) The project may address nonpoint pollution from either agricultural or urban sources.
NR 153.14(6)(d)
(d) The project shall focus on controlling those nonpoint pollution sources in the project area that are determined to be significant based on their relative contribution to the impairment and that can be cost-effectively controlled.
NR 153.14(6)(e)
(e) The intended project period may not exceed two years in duration, with the possibility of extension to 3 years if approved by the department.
NR 153.14(7)
(7) Large-scale non-TMDL control projects eligibility criteria. Large-scale non-TMDL control projects shall meet the following specific criteria:
NR 153.14(7)(a)
(a) The project shall implement water resource management goals included in a watershed plan or strategy acceptable to the department.
NR 153.14(7)(b)
(b) The project shall be designed to control the most critical nonpoint pollution sources within a designated watershed area. The designated watershed area shall be not less than 8 square miles nor more than 39 square miles in areal extent.
NR 153.14 Note
Note: The Wisconsin Buffer Initiative finds that watersheds in this size range provide the best opportunity for cost-effectively solving surface water resource problems in threatened or partially degraded waters using agricultural nonpoint source pollution control best management practices. The Wisconsin Buffer Initiative is published by the University of Wisconsin College of Agricultural and Life Sciences. Copies are on file with the department and the secretary of state.
NR 153.14(7)(c)
(c) The project shall be limited to managing agricultural sources of nonpoint pollution.
NR 153.14(7)(d)
(d) The project shall focus on controlling those nonpoint pollution sources in the project area that are determined to be significant based on their relative contribution to the impairment and that can be cost-effectively controlled.
NR 153.14(7)(e)
(e) The project shall focus on attainment of performance standards and prohibitions established by the department under s.
281.16 (3), Stats.
NR 153.14(7)(f)
(f) The intended project period may not exceed 3 years in duration, with the possibility of extension to a fourth year if approved by the department.
NR 153.14(8)
(8) Small-scale non-TMDL control project eligibility criteria. Small-scale nonpoint source control projects shall meet the following specific criteria:
NR 153.14(8)(b)
(b) The project may address nonpoint pollution from either agricultural or urban sources.
NR 153.14(8)(c)
(c) Agricultural projects shall be designed to achieve attainment of agricultural performance standards and prohibitions established by the department under s.
281.16 (3), Stats. Urban projects shall be designed to achieve attainment of non-agricultural performance standards established by the department under s.
281.16 (2), Stats.
NR 153.14(8)(d)
(d) The intended project period may not exceed 2 years in duration, with the possibility of extension to 3 years if approved by the department.
NR 153.14 Note
Note: TMDL implementation projects contribute to the cost-effective removal of surface waters from the state's impaired waters list in a way that is consistent with TMDLs and TMDL implementation plans. The degree to which compliance with state performance standards and prohibitions is needed to address these impairments will vary by waterbody.
NR 153.14 Note
Non-TMDL control projects improve degraded surface waters (including surface waters on the section 303 (d) list that do not yet have TMDLs or TMDL implementation plans), to improve degraded groundwater and to protect threatened and high quality surface and ground waters from degradation. These projects achieve their goals by implementing state performance standards and prohibitions.
NR 153.14 Note
Large-scale projects and small-scale TMDL implementation projects set control priorities based on a watershed plan or other process to identify needs and cost-effective strategies. Small-scale non-TMDL control projects implement state performance standards and prohibitions wherever they may occur, leading to a general reduction in nonpoint source pollution.
NR 153.14 History
History: CR 00-025: cr.
Register September 2002 No. 561, eff. 10-1-02;
CR 09-112: r. and recr.
Register December 2010 No. 660, eff. 1-1-11; correction in (7) (title), (8) (title) made under s.
13.92 (4) (b) 2., Stats.,
Register December 2010 No. 660.
NR 153.145
NR 153.145 Eligible notice of discharge projects. NR 153.145(1)(1) This section applies only to notice of discharge projects.
NR 153.145(2)
(2) Eligibility for funding under this section includes notice of discharge projects that implement best management practices for animal waste management at animal feeding operations for which the department has issued a notice required under s.
281.65 (4e), Stats. Notice of discharge projects shall be designed to meet the water quality goals established in s.
281.65 (4e), Stats.
NR 153.145 Note
Note: The department may fund management practices to meet notice of discharge requirements in two ways. It may fund required management practices through a notice of discharge project authorized under s.
281.65 (4e), Stats. Alternatively, it may fund the required management practices under a targeted runoff management project authorized under s.
281.65 (4c), Stats. This chapter establishes separate requirements and procedures for each of these alternative funding mechanisms.
NR 153.145 History
History: CR 09-112: cr.
Register December 2010 No. 660, eff. 1-1-11.
NR 153.15
NR 153.15 Cost sharing for best management practices. NR 153.15(1)(a)(a) The department may provide cost sharing for the construction or implementation of best management practices in any project selected for funding under the chapter. The department may attribute design and construction services costs to the cost of construction or implementation of the best management practice. State and local administrative permit fees are not reimbursable as part of the construction cost.
NR 153.15 Note
Note: Although local administrative fees are not reimbursable, the department may reimburse governmental units for design and construction services subject to the limitations of s.
NR 153.27 (4).
NR 153.15(1)(b)1.1. If the purpose of the best management practice is to comply with agricultural performance standards and prohibitions identified in subch.
II of ch. NR 151, technical standards for the best management practice shall be included in subch.
VIII of ch. ATCP 50 in order for the best management practice to be considered eligible for cost sharing under this chapter.
NR 153.15(1)(b)2.
2. Subd.1 does not apply if the department determines there is no technical standard in subch.
VIII of ch. ATCP 50 capable of meeting the performance standard or prohibition.
NR 153.15(1)(c)
(c) If the purpose of the best management practice is to comply with a non-agricultural performance standard under subch.
III or
IV of ch. NR 151, or if the purpose of the best management practice is to reduce pollution from a source for which a performance standard is not included in
ch. NR 151, the best management practice shall meet one of the following criteria to be considered eligible for cost sharing under this chapter:
NR 153.15(1)(c)4.
4. Be identified by the department as an interim best management practice or alternative design criteria in accordance with
sub. (3) (b) 4.
NR 153.15(1)(d)
(d) The best management practice shall be constructed in accordance with applicable technical standards and conditions identified in this chapter, subch.
VIII of ch. ATCP 50,
ch. NR 154, in a document that meets the requirements of subch.
V of ch. NR 151 or a runoff management grant agreement as provided for under
sub. (3) in order to be considered eligible for cost sharing under this chapter.
NR 153.15(1)(e)
(e) The best management practice shall be included as an eligible item for cost sharing on a runoff management grant agreement, signed by the department and the governmental unit or state agency, in order to be considered eligible for cost sharing under this chapter.
NR 153.15(1)(f)
(f) If a cost-share agreement is required, the best management practice shall be included as an eligible item on the cost-share agreement, signed by the governmental unit and a landowner, land operator or state agency in order to be considered eligible for cost sharing under this chapter.
NR 153.15 Note
Note: This section governs what pollution sources are eligible for cost sharing under ch.
NR 153. It does not address requirements for compliance with performance standards, nor does it address cost-share funding as a precondition for compliance. Compliance requirements, including when cost-share funding must be made available as a precondition of compliance, are set forth in ss.
NR 151.09 and
151.095.
NR 153.15(2)
(2) Ineligible costs. All of the following practices, sources or activities are ineligible for cost sharing under this chapter unless approved by the department as part of a demonstration project in accordance with
sub. (4):
NR 153.15(2)(ag)
(ag) Best management practices to address pollution from a livestock facility or cropland practice that was previously in compliance with standards and prohibitions on or after the date the standard or prohibition became effective under
ch. NR 151, regardless of cost share history. The department may make an exception and provide cost sharing to replace practices or practice components previously cost shared by the department that are ineffective during the operation and maintenance period due to unforeseen design problems.
NR 153.15 Note
Note: If a source loses its compliance status because of changes to the standard, cost sharing may be offered for management measures needed to bring the source into compliance with the new standard.
NR 153.15(2)(ar)
(ar) Best management practices to address a pollution source for which the department included a previous offer of cost sharing as part of a notice issued pursuant to
ch. NR 151 and the management practices were not installed within the required compliance period.
NR 153.15(2)(b)
(b) Routine operation and maintenance of best management practices. The department may provide cost sharing one time to re-establish an agricultural best management practice cost shared after October 1, 2002, that is damaged within the cost-share operation and maintenance period by natural causes beyond the control of the landowner or land operator.
NR 153.15(2)(d)
(d) Significant expansions of livestock operations are not eligible for cost sharing. The department shall use the criteria in this paragraph for determining whether an increase in the size of the livestock population constitutes a significant expansion and is ineligible for cost sharing. In this paragraph, “livestock population size" means the size of the livestock population, in animal units. In this paragraph, “base livestock population size" means the livestock population size determined when the department or governmental unit, including a county land conservation committee, documents the size of the livestock population. In this paragraph, “animal unit" has the meaning given it in
ch. NR 243.
NR 153.15(2)(d)1.
1. If the base livestock population size is less than or equal to 250 animal units, that portion of the expansion that results in a livestock population size exceeding 300 animal units is considered to be significant and ineligible for cost sharing under this chapter.
NR 153.15(2)(d)2.
2. If the base livestock population size is greater than 250 animal units but less than that required to apply for a WPDES permit under
s. NR 243.12 (1) (a) or
(b), and the expanded livestock population size will be less than that required to apply for a WPDES permit under
s. NR 243.12 (1) (a) or
(b), that portion of the expansion that is greater than 20% of the base livestock population size is considered to be significant and ineligible for cost sharing under this chapter.
NR 153.15(2)(d)3.
3. Any expansion to a base livestock population size that results in a livestock population size required to apply for a WPDES permit under
s. NR 243.12 (1) (a) or
(b) is considered to be significant and ineligible for cost sharing under this chapter, and shall also render the base livestock population component ineligible for cost sharing in accordance with
par. (f) 2.
NR 153.15 Note
Note: The department may not provide cost sharing under this chapter for activities requiring coverage under a WPDES permit for livestock operations.
NR 153.15(2)(e)
(e) Best management practice installation activities conducted prior to the signing of the runoff management grant agreement and the cost-share agreement. This paragraph does not preclude the department from providing reimbursement for structural best management practice design work commenced or completed prior to signing the runoff management grant agreement and the cost-share agreement, provided that practice construction commences after the grant agreement is signed by all parties.
NR 153.15(2)(f)
(f) Activities requiring coverage under a WPDES permit including any of the following:
NR 153.15(2)(f)1.
1. Activities requiring WPDES permit coverage at livestock operations with less than 1,000 animal units that have been issued a WPDES permit by the department under
ch. 283, Stats. In this paragraph, “livestock operation" has the meaning given in s.
281.16 (1) (c), Stats. In this paragraph, “animal unit" has the meaning given in
ch. NR 243.
NR 153.15(2)(f)2.
2. Activities requiring WPDES permit coverage at livestock operations that have, or will have within 12 months, at least 1,000 animal units and are required to apply for a WPDES permit under
s. NR 243.12 (1) (a) or
(b).
NR 153.15(2)(f)3.
3. All other activities requiring coverage under a WPDES permit issued under
chs. NR 200 to
240 and
245 to
299 except for activities required of the city of Racine to comply with municipal storm water permit requirements under
ch. NR 216.
NR 153.15 Note
Note: A municipality required to comply with storm water permitting requirements under ch.
NR 216 may apply for grant funding under ch.
NR 155.
