NR 153.19(4)(c)2.2. The department shall adjust the enforcement multiplier based on the scope of the local ordinance coverage. Adjustments under this subdivision shall be made so that the multiplier is greater than 1.0 but less than 1.15 for instances where the local regulations cover some, but not all, of the state non-agricultural performance standards and prohibitions or where a local regulation is applicable to some, but not all, of the sites where the state non-agricultural performance standard or prohibition applies. The department may request that a copy of applicable ordinances be made available to the department for review in determining the enforcement multiplier.

NR 153.19(4)(c)3.3. The department may adjust the multiplier if the ordinance contains a variance clause that significantly reduces the effectiveness of the ordinance in achieving compliance with performance standards.

NR 153.19(4)(d)(d) If the department is required to assign a multiplier pursuant to this section and the project is not clearly rural or urban in nature, the department, in consultation with the applicant, shall choose and apply one of the multipliers in accordance with par. (b) or (c).

NR 153.20(2)(b)(b) From the total budget available to fund targeted runoff management projects, the department shall create annual budget sub-allocations for each of the project categories the department intends to fund in the application cycle. Sub-allocations may change from year to year. The amount in each sub-allocation shall be based on the department’s water quality goals and the quality of applications submitted.

NR 153.20(2)(d)1.a.a. Identify the highest scoring project in each department region. Provided that the highest regional project score is equal to or greater than the median score for all qualifying applications submitted statewide, place the project with the highest regional score at the top of the statewide selection list. If the highest scoring project in the department region is less than the median for all qualifying applications, the project may not be moved to the top of the statewide selection list and shall be ranked with other projects in accordance with subd. 1. b.

NR 153.20 NoteNote: This will increase the likelihood that at least one project from each department region will be at the top of the statewide selection lists for each small scale project category.

NR 153.20(2)(d)1.b.b. Following projects with the highest regional score, the department shall place all remaining eligible projects on the statewide selection list, in rank order from highest to lowest score.

NR 153.20(2)(d)1.c.c. Projects shall be selected in order from the top to the bottom of the statewide selection lists until available funds have been allocated.

NR 153.20(2)(d)2.a.a. The department shall place all eligible projects on the statewide selection list, in rank order from highest to lowest score. There may be no regional adjustments in the ranking for large-scale projects.

NR 153.20(2)(d)2.b.b. Projects shall be selected in order from the top to the bottom of the statewide selection lists until available funds have been allocated.

NR 153.20(2)(d)3.3. Notwithstanding subds. 1. and 2., the department may do the following when selecting any small or large scale project for funding:

NR 153.20(2)(d)3.a.a. Not select a higher scoring project in favor of funding a lower scoring project if federal funds are being allocated for the project, the higher scoring project is ineligible to receive the federal funds, and the lower scoring project is eligible to receive the federal funds.

NR 153.20 NoteNote: There are geographic restrictions on the use of certain federal funds being used to support grant awards, such as those allocated to the state under section 319 of the Clean Water Act. In order to use the available federal funds, it may be necessary to leap-frog down the ranked list to match a project with the federal funds.

NR 153.20(2)(d)3.b.b. Establish a maximum total amount of funding that a grantee may receive in multiple grant awards in any one year. This amount may not exceed 20 percent of the grant funds available in the funding category or the maximum allowable funding amount allowed for a single project, whichever is greater. Projects on the ranked list whose selection for funding would exceed the allowable grantee total will be moved to the bottom of the list and funded only after all other eligible projects have been funded.

NR 153.20(2)(d)3.c.c. Establish a maximum grant award that any single project can receive based on the amount of funding available and the funding demand in any year. For purposes of administering this subdivision paragraph for small scale projects, all management practices proposed on contiguous property shall be considered part of a single project regardless of whether the management practices are submitted on the same or separate project applications. In this subdivision paragraph, “contiguous” means touching or sharing a common boundary with a second parcel of land. A lake, river, stream, road, railroad or utility right of way which separates any part of the parcel from any other part does not render the parcel of land non-contiguous.

NR 153.20(2)(d)3.d.d. Offer reduced grants for projects that do not require minimum cost-sharing to meet the requirements of s. 281.16 (3) (e), Stats. Reduced grant offers may be based on a reduction in the cost share rate or a reduction in the maximum project grant award amount.

NR 153.20 NoteNote: This includes projects that are not being implemented to meet required state performance standards or prohibitions under ch. NR 151.

NR 153.20(2)(d)3.e.e. Offer an award of less than the amount requested if that is the only funding remaining. In these circumstances, the applicant is required to complete the project as specified in the application if the partial funding is accepted.

NR 153.20(2)(e)(e) The department shall notify the land and water conservation board of project scores and ranks no later than September 1 of each year.