7 CFR 1780.35
§ 1780.35 Processing office review.
United States · 7 CFR — Agriculture · Status: effective
Cite this
- Citation
- 7 CFR 1780.35, § 1780.35 Processing office review, United States, version 1 as recorded 2026-07-09, yourstate.us, https://yourstate.us/provision/28088
- Permanent ID
ys:prov:28088@1- SHA-256
1a96b04a7337e01a038aed1e66349ec122029b52a7787e97f130eac42d25e0f6
The hash is SHA-256 of this version's text, with every run of whitespace collapsed to a single space and the ends trimmed. The ID always leads back here, and checking it says whether the text you cited is still the current version.
Full text
Review of the application will usually include the following:
(a) Nondiscrimination. Boundaries for the proposed service area must not be chosen in such a way that any user or area will be excluded because of race, color, religion, sex, marital status, age, handicap, or national origin. This does not preclude construction of the project in phases as noted in § 1780.11 as long as it is not done in a discriminatory manner.
(b) Grant determination. Grants will be determined by the processing office in accordance with the following provisions and will not result in EDU costs below similar system user cost.
(1) Maximum grant. Grants may not exceed the percentages in § 1780.10(c) of the eligible RUS project development costs listed in § 1780.9.
(2) Debt service. Applicants will be considered for grant assistance when the debt service portion of the average annual EDU cost, for users in the applicant's service area, exceeds the following percentages of median household income:
(i) 0.5 percent when the median household income of the service area is equal to or below 80% of the statewide nonmetropolitan median income.
(ii) 1.0 percent when the median household income of the service area exceeds the 0.5 percent requirement but is not more than 100 percent the statewide nonmetropolitan household income.
(3) Similar system cost. If the grant determined in paragraph (b)(2) of this section results in an annual EDU cost that is not comparable with similar systems, the Agency will determine a grant amount based on achieving EDU costs that are not below similar system user costs.
(4) Wholesale service. When an applicant provides wholesale sales or services on a contract basis to another system or entity, similar wholesale system cost will be used in determining the amount of grant needed to achieve a reasonable wholesale user cost.
(5) Subsidized cost. When annual cost to the applicant for delivery of service is subsidized by either the state, commonwealth, or territory, and uniform flat user charges regardless of usage are imposed for similar classes of service throughout the service area, the Agency may proceed with a grant in an amount necessary to reduce such delivery cost to a reasonable level.
(c) User charges. The user charges should be reasonable and produce enough revenue to provide for all costs of the facility after the project is complete. The planned revenue should be sufficient to provide for all debt service, debt reserve, operation and maintenance, and, if appropriate, additional revenue for facility replacement of short-lived assets without building a substantial surplus. Ordinarily, the total debt service reserve will be equal to one average annual loan installment which will accumulate at the rate of one-tenth of the total each year.
Legislative history
This is a federal regulation, adopted through agency rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act — not enacted by a recorded vote of Congress.