1. (a) Policy. The rating process is designed to achieve optimum water quality management, consistent with public health and water quality goals, and to give consideration to the varying populations of the state's political subdivisions.

2. (b) Rating of principal projects. Proposals for inclusion of projects in an intended use plan will be rated based upon the principal project. Additional projects may be included in a proposal and may receive funding, so long as their costs represent 50% or less of the total project costs. The factors used to rate applications and the number of points assigned to each factor shall be as follows.

   1. (1) Where the principal project is a wastewater treatment plant or collection system in which the facility's hydraulic capacity requires expansion or removal of extraneous flow, the project will receive priority points according to the following considerations. A project may receive points for only one of the considerations listed in this section at subparagraphs (A) - (E) of this paragraph, whichever results in the largest score.

      1. (A) Where the wastewater treatment plant is at 90% or greater of its permitted capacity on an annual average flow basis as reported to the commission, or for plants which are permitted for less than one mgd, three consecutive months of the past 12 months as reported to the commission, the project will receive 3 points, provided that the project directly or indirectly improves the capacity problem at the facility.
      2. (B) Where the wastewater treatment plant is at 75% or greater but less than 90% of its permitted capacity on an annual average flow basis as reported to the commission, or for plants which are permitted for less than one mgd, three consecutive months of the past 12 months as reported to the commission, the project will receive 2 points, provided that the project directly or indirectly improves the capacity problem at the facility.
      3. (C) Where the wastewater treatment plant is at 65% or greater but less than 75% of its permitted capacity on an annual average flow basis as reported to the commission, or for plants less than one mgd, three consecutive months of the past 12 months as reported to the commission, the project will receive 1.5 points provided that the project directly or indirectly improves the capacity problem at the facility.
      4. (D) Projects intended to remedy collection system overflows under a schedule imposed by a court order, EPA administrative order, or commission enforcement order will receive 3 points.
      5. (E) Projects to expand an existing treatment facility, permitted for no discharge, where no self-reporting flow data is required to be reported to the commission will receive 1.5 points.
   2. (2) Where the principal project is under a schedule imposed by a court order, EPA administrative order, or commission enforcement order, the project will receive 1 point.
   3. (3) Where the principal project is required by permit to meet a higher level of treatment at a future date or where the principal project is a conversion to a no-discharge or partial reuse facility in order to avoid a higher level of treatment, the project will receive 1.5 points.
   4. (4) Where the principal project will provide service to an unserved area, the project will receive 1.1 points. In addition, where the applicant provides a finding from a public health official that a nuisance dangerous to the public health and safety exists resulting from water supply and sanitation problems in the area to be served by the proposed project, the project will receive an additional 3 points.
   5. (5) Where the principal project is to construct innovative or alternative wastewater management systems, the project will receive 3 points.
   6. (6) Where the principal project impacts stream segments designated as "high priority" or where a total maximum daily load (TMDL) analysis is underway or completed as identified in the current approved State of Texas 303(d) List and where the principal project will directly or indirectly mitigate the identified problem, the project will receive 4 points.
   7. (7) Where the principal project impacts stream segments designated as "medium priority," as identified in the current approved State of Texas 303(d) List, and where the principal project will directly or indirectly mitigate the identified problem, the project will receive 3 points.
   8. (8) Where the principal project impacts stream segments designated as "low priority," as identified in the current approved State of Texas 303(d) List, and where the principal project will directly or indirectly mitigate the identified problem, the project will receive 2 points.
   9. (9) Where the principal project impacts stream segments designated as "threatened" as identified in the current approved State of Texas 303(d) List, and where the principal project will directly or indirectly mitigate the identified problem, the project will receive 1 point.
   10. (10) Where the principal project will result in removal from service of one or more existing wastewater treatment plants, thus reducing the number of plant outfalls; or where the principal project will result in delivery of flow to, or receipt of flow at a regional facility, rather than create or continue use of a separate wastewater treatment facility, the project will receive 1 point.

   11. (11) Where there is documentation that the principal project as proposed will implement a regional solution, 3 points will be awarded if the project recommended is proposed to implement one of the following:

       1. (A) a regional facility plan for water resources funded in whole or in part by a grant from the board;
       2. (B) a commission regionalization or consolidation plan; or
       3. (C) other plans developed by state or regional entities pursuant to legislative authority.
3. (c) Rating of refinancing. If refinancing is sought for a completed project, the project will be rated in accordance with subsection (b) of this section, based upon the conditions which existed prior to the initiation of construction of the project. A completed project can not be combined with a project for which construction has not been completed, but must be rated separately.
4. (d) Rating score. The rating score will be the sum of the points assigned to the application under all criteria which are applicable to the application.
5. (e) Ranking for refinancing. Completed projects which involve refinancing will be listed in the intended use plan in the appropriate category as a separate group and will be placed below the group of projects in that category for which construction has not been completed.
6. (f) Tie-breaker. In the event more than one project as listed in the intended use plan receives the same rating score, funding will first be made available for the project in which the sewage treatment plant is at the greatest percentage of its rated capacity as calculated in subsection (b)(1)(A) of this section for projects improving plant capacity. For any remaining ties funding will first be made available to the applicant with the lowest annual per capita income.
7. (g) Abandoned facilities. Where the existing treatment facilities will be abandoned and sewage diverted to a different location, the diversion line will be given the rating score of the treatment facilities to be abandoned.
8. (h) Provisional projects or partially funded projects that are designated under §375.407(c) and (d) of this title (relating to Lending Rates) will receive priority consideration for a 0.0% interest loan under the intended use plan.

Source Note:The provisions of this §375.16 adopted to be effective February 11, 1999, 24 TexReg 769; amended to be effective February 10, 2000, 25 TexReg 812; amended to be effective October 7, 2009, 34 TexReg 6856.