Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Applications Phase 2 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission receives 178 Phase 2 applications and weighs one-time exception to score late submissions
Summary
Division staff reported 178 Phase 2 applications (114 water, 64 sewer) requesting far more than program capacity; commissioners debated — and discussed allowing — limited late submissions to be scored but noted they would not be eligible for funding this round.
Tracy Watts told the Water Sector Commission that the division had received 178 Phase 2 applications seeking substantially more funding than available. “We received 178 applications totaling a request of 406,627,000,” she said, broken into 114 water applications (about $243,956,153) and 64 sewer applications (about $162,664,743). The division and partner agencies (LDH and DEQ) are reviewing applications and must provide funding recommendations by Jan. 27.
Why it matters: The total request far exceeds available program funds; commissioners voiced concern about fairness and workload when applicants submit after the portal deadline. Senator Bass asked the commission to allow one applicant (a sewer application from Bossier City represented by Wagner Engineering) to be scored as a late submission because the match commitment letter missed the submission deadline by a narrow margin. The senator framed the request as a single, limited exception and suggested the application be marked as late and not eligible for funding this round.
Staff and commission response: Division staff said the agencies could score additional complete applications but emphasized workload implications and the need to prioritize timely submissions. Staff proposed a compromise: score late but complete submissions, mark them as late in the recommendations spreadsheet, and exclude them from funding consideration unless the commission decides otherwise later. Members agreed staff could provide scored, marked results and bring them back for discussion so on-time applicants retain priority.
Next steps: Staff will proceed with scoring and will mark any post-deadline but complete submissions as late and indicate in the recommendations spreadsheet that they were not considered for funding in this cycle. Commissioners asked staff to present the scored late submissions separately and to allow applicants an opportunity to testify at a future meeting if needed.
Ending: The commission emphasized that on-time, complete applications will receive priority and that any scoring of late submissions will be informational and clearly marked in staff recommendations.
