Plans to use state funds to help fund a private sewer system for part of the Village of Empire were dealt a major setback after the state Department of Environmental Quality rejected the application – largely because of administrative mistakes and a failure to demonstrate a need for the project.

Village officials briefly discussed the rejection at Tuesday night’s council meeting.

“I had hoped it would fly, but I wasn’t shocked it was rejected,” said trustee Karen Baja yesterday morning. She acted as the council’s liaison with a citizens group seeking the project.

“I think this was a unique opportunity in which a private individual was willing to work with other individuals to seek the solution of a bigger problem.”

At its June 26 meeting, the Village Council agreed to act as financing agent on behalf of the private citizens group seeking to build a private wastewater treatment system that would service up to 87 parcels. The citizens group, led in part by Paul Skinner, who also serves as chairman of the village Planning Commission, had asked the council to apply for funding through the DEQ’s Strategic Water Quality Initiatives Fund (SWQIF), part of the State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan program.

In a letter dated July 12, 2007, Chip Heckathorn, chief of the revolving loan and operator certification section, wrote that the project could not be ranked on the fiscal year 2008 project priority list because of the following deficiencies:

• The public hearing for the proposed project was held less than 30 days after publication of a public notice in the Enterprise. The public hearing notice was published on May 28, 2007, while the public hearing was held on June 26, 2007 – 29 days after the notice was published.

• A draft of the project plan was received and time stamped by deputy village clerk Darlene Friend on June 18, 2007, only eight days prior to the public hearing. Heckathorn said the DEQ’s guidelines require the project plans be available for public review the entire 30 days before the public hearing.

“Therefore, you are hearby notified that the project cannot be ranked on the SFR FY 2008 PPL because a complete project plan was not submitted by the July 1, 2007 deadline,” Heckathorn wrote.

Heckathorn wrote perhaps more damaging to the long-range health of the project, there was not enough information provided in the application to document an eligibility need for assistance.

“Evidence of on-site failures, identification of sites with holding tanks, extent of need, and an alternative analysis for central collection and treatment were not included in the project plan,” he wrote.

Heckathorn also took issue with the group submitting a request for funding to the Strategic Water Quality Initiatives Fund. He wrote that the type of preferred system Gourdie-Fraser Associates of Traverse City had recommended for the sewer district – a cluster system and effluent dispersal sites separate from individual properties – are considered SFR projects, not SWQIF, which would be more like replacing an individual failed septic tank system.

The citizens group can appeal the decision.

The council held a public hearing June 26 at the request of the citizens group. During the meeting the council approved a resolution to act as financing agency, emphasizing it was not supporting or opposing the project.

The draft sewer plan and application was prepared by Brett Gourdie, project engineer with Goufdie-Fraser.

At its meeting Tuesday night, the council attempted to address concerns about the project as voiced by village residents Pete and Beth Lavalley. In a letter he submitted to the council, Lavalley said the council should rescind the resolution it passed at the June 26 meeting to limit any liability related to the private sewer project.

Council president Sue Carpenter said after talking with Heckathorn about the project application, she did not think it was necessary for the council to rescind the motion.

“All the council agreed to do was act as the financing agent for the private citizens group, to submit the application,” she said.

The Lavalleys also attended the council meeting Tuesday. Pete Lavalley said after hearing Carpenter’s explanation that he still felt the council should rescind its motion of June 26.

Baja said she didn’t know if the citizens group would resubmit the application for consideration in the 2008-09 fiscal year. Skinner was not available for comment before presstime yesterday.