Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Deal Lake commission disputes DEP denial that stalls grant-funded stormwater work
Summary
Commissioners said a DEP reviewer rejected approved manufactured treatment devices (MTDs) for a grant-funded parking-lot retrofit, leaving a $400K construction grant in limbo and prompting options including appeals, alternate funding or returning funds.
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Deal Lake Commission on Feb. 19 said a reviewer for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection rejected a grant application to install manufactured treatment devices (MTDs) intended to treat stormwater from an existing mall parking lot, halting a project the commission says has been under design and review for more than two years.
The chair summarized the commission's account: the design was revised and the number of MTDs reduced from four to three to match DEP-approved models, but the application was nonetheless denied by a single reviewer. "The information you provide shows that the units will not provide a meaningful water quality improvement. Therefore, they are unacceptable," the chair quoted the rejection notice as saying; the chair added that the commission believes the denial is inappropriate for this application.
Commissioners said the project had previously been approved multiple times for similar devices in other local projects and that the commission had already received a progress payment exceeding $200,000 to purchase MTDs. The chair said the commission has resubmitted answers to repeated DEP questions and sought higher-level review: "We're trying to get the right ears. Hopefully a new commissioner will listen," the chair said.
Faced with the denial, commissioners outlined options: seek a DEP waiver or reversal, ask an elected official to intervene, pursue private or foundation funding, return unused grant funds, or consider legal action. "If we don't get that, we have a couple options," the chair said, listing returning funds, finding alternate funding sources or asking a representative to intervene on the project's behalf.
Commissioners emphasized technical constraints and budget limits: larger MTD units that meet DEP's higher particulate-removal standard could cost about $220,000 apiece, which would exceed the grant budget if installed in the number needed. The chair said the commission sought to reuse existing concrete MTD structures wherever possible and noted the project had engineering, bid and contract steps completed before the suspension.
The commission also described outreach steps: staff met with DEP coastal land-use and water-enforcement supervisors, and members planned a March meeting to press their case and request status updates. The chair asked commissioners to submit questions for that meeting by Feb. 27 so the commission could include them in the DEP agenda.
The meeting closed the discussion with a pledge to explore alternative grants and private funding sources while pursuing DEP review. The commission did not report a final administrative outcome at the meeting.
What happens next: the commission said it expects further contact from DEP leadership within the following week; if the department does not reverse the denial the commission may return unspent grant funds or pursue other funding avenues.

