INQUIRY TO LONG-TERM SOLUTION

SENT TO:

ELTA President for review (August 17, 2025)

Overview

On Monday, August 11, 2025, at the Township Board meeting, contracted engineer Tom Wheat issued the following remarks:

JoAnn (Supervisor): Okay. It was not modeled upon some forecast of what it's gonna be like in the future?

Tom Wheat (Engineer): No, because we don't know what that's gonna be. I mean, it's gonna likely be more. But…

We did talk to EGLE about maybe changing the permit, and that is possible to do, but you'd have to go through the whole process again. And until we get into a situation where we see that what we've got out there is not working, there's no reason to do that. There's no reason to go through the permitting process, the design process—you’re gonna have to replace pumps, you're gonna have to make changes to the infrastructure—for a system that is now working properly.

The Unknown

On June 24, 2022, a long-term application was submitted that included a supplemental document listing 500 and 800 GPM pumping thresholds. It is unclear who established these thresholds—whether they were determined by the Township engineer or provided by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). This inquiry seeks clarification on the origin of those figures and whether they were submitted prior to any formal consultation with the DEQ.

INQUIRY QUESTIONS

🧩 On Predetermined Pumping Thresholds

  • Who established the 500 and 800 GPM thresholds prior to June 24, 2022, application submission?

  • Was there any documented dialogue with the DEQ before these thresholds were included?

  • Were alternative thresholds ever considered or modeled before finalizing the application?

  • If the thresholds were not negotiated, does that imply they were treated and submitted as fixed rather than flexible?

  • What internal or external data informed the selection of those specific GPM values?

🕰️ On DEQ Responsiveness and Historical Openness

  • If the DEQ is now open to revisiting permits, why wasn’t that openness evident in 2022?

  • What has changed—politically, administratively, or environmentally—that might explain a shift in DEQ posture?

  • Were there any attempts made in 2022 to request flexibility or conditional thresholds from the DEQ?

  • Is there documentation showing the DEQ rejected or discouraged dialogue at that time?

🌧️ On Rainfall Forecasts and Future Design Implications

  • If increased rainfall is anticipated, has the township considered ramping up GPM capacity in future designs?

  • Did Tom Wheat or any other engineer ever recommend higher thresholds based on future conditions?

  • Was the possibility of permit modification ever formally proposed or discussed before August 2025?

🧮 On Modeling and Risk Assessment

  • What modeling tools or data sets are available that could support a revised permit application?

  • Has the township conducted any post-2022 modeling to reassess the adequacy of current thresholds?

  • What hydrologic modeling has been conducted to account for the new drainage infrastructure at the Vineyards and North Eagle—both of which were installed as floodwaters receded

  • What modeling was performed to evaluate whether recent development projects could compromise efforts to maintain the legal lake level and safeguard surrounding infrastructure?

📜 On Process Transparency and Public Oversight

  • Who signed off on June 24, 2022, application, and what was the chain of review?

  • Was the public ever informed that the thresholds were submitted before DEQ consultation?

  • What would the process/cost entail to revisit or revise the permit today—and who would lead it?

  • Is there a mechanism for residents to formally request a re-evaluation of the thresholds?

  • Did the DEQ simply transfer the recommended GPM values on the submitted application to the current DEQ permit?

  • What became of the previously existing high-output pump at Eagle, and was its removal or replacement influenced by the recommended GPM thresholds submitted with the June 24, 2022, application?