Backers of a sewer project that has received about $4.7 million in state clean water grants to reduce pollution to the Intracoastal waterway and coastal creeks are asking for another $3 million despite a state law that caps the amount going to one project.

The latest request for the Brunswick County project will be considered Monday by the board of directors of the Clean Water Management Trust Fund, an independent state agency that doles out grants to protect and improve water quality.

Two years ago, state legislators increased the trust fund's pot of money for grants to $100 million a year. At the same time, they added restrictions to make sure the money was spread around and to discourage pork barrel spending. They set a cap of $3 million for wastewater projects to any single applicant over a three-year period, effective in January 2006.

Brunswick County, a prosperous, fast-growing county, has been one of the top recipients of clean water grants. The county, along with its beach towns and cities, has collected more than $30 million in the past decade. The trust fund's former chairman, Robert Howard, who headed the board for six years, is from Brunswick County.

Southport received $3 million last year for a sewerage upgrade -- the maximum under the cap. Some board members questioned whether the cap ruled out another grant to continue the project.

But the most recent request was made by a different group, which fulfills the technical language of the law, if not the spirit. The new applicant is the Southeast Brunswick Sanitary District, a separate government entity, which will handle Southport's sewage as part of the plan. The sanitary district is seeking $3 million to help fund the $8.6 million expansion of its treatment plant to treat Southport's waste. The project is to be completed in the next five years.

Richard Rogers, executive director of the trust fund, said the board was considering the request, because Southeast Brunswick Sanitary District is a different applicant than Southport. In reviewing the application, the trust fund staff noted the project "is essentially a continuation of the previous effort funded by the Clean Water Management Trust Fund."

The staff recommended funding $1.5 million of the request because removing the sewer discharges from the waterways has water quality benefits. Staff also reduced the grant amount because the area is wealthy and has more ability to pay than some economically distressed communities.

"We're looking at it from a very technical perspective," Rogers said. "We're going to have a full discussion of the projects for the board to get the full picture. They're the ones that make the final decision."

Phil Baddour, chairman of the Clean Water Trust Fund's board of directors, said the board should try to adhere to the spirit of what lawmakers intended.

"The question is: Are these really different entities?" Baddour said. "Is anybody trying to get around a loophole in the law? We don't want anybody gaming the system."

Southport's plans to revamp its sewage treatment have unfolded in several phases.

In 2005, Southport received a $1.68 million state grant to cover most of the $2 million cost to acquire more than 400 acres to use as a site for spraying treated wastewater. Getting the land was the first step in removing Southport's discharge pipes and reducing pollution of the waterway. It eventually plans to shut down its sewage treatment plant.

Administrators of the state's shellfish sanitation program strongly endorsed the application, saying it could help reopen about 625 acres of closed shellfish waters.

Last year, Southport sought another $6 million to build lines and pump stations to transport its sewage to the Southeast Brunswick Sanitary District treatment plant. The project was backed by then-chairman Howard.

The board eventually gave Southport half that amount after an attempt failed to get the effective date of the cap delayed.

Howard said the Southeast Brunswick Sanitary District's new request is separate from the earlier Southport requests.

"The Southeast Brunswick Sanitary doesn't have anything to do with Southport." Howard said. "They are two separate systems."

John Crumpler, co-chairman of the board's wastewater committee, said it may be possible under the law to provide funding to the Southeast Brunswick Sewer District.

"My recommendation to our board is we behave within the spirit of the current law," Crumpler said.

Southport officials could not be reached for comment.