• Katzie First Nation; Eleanor Ward; Dan and Virginia Burdett; Pitt Watershed Network; Burke Mountain Naturalists; Michael Farnworth MLA; R.B. Edward v. Deputy Director of Waste Management

    Decision Date:
    File Numbers:
    Decision Numbers:
    Third Party:
    Swaneset Bay Resort, Permit Holder


    Decision Date: July 30, 1996

    Panel: David Perry, Bob Radloff, Elinor Turrill

    Keywords: Waste Management Act – s. 11; pollution; ultraviolet monitoring; jurisdiction of Board; jurisdiction to consider land development issues; zoning

    This is an appeal from a decision of the Deputy Director of Waste Management amending a permit held by Swaneset Bay Resort Ltd. (“Swaneset”). The major amendment was an increase in the rate of effluent to be discharged under the permit. The Appellants appealed on the grounds that the authorized discharge raised pollution concerns, the ultraviolet treatment process of effluent was insufficient, the development was being allowed to occur before there was adequate infrastructure to support it, the sewage disposal system should not be monitored by Swaneset, and that it was preferable to have the development linked to the sewage treatment system already in place in the lower mainland.

    On the evidence presented, the Board found that the stringent standards imposed by the permit together with the extensive monitoring and alarm systems produced an effluent that would not harm the environment. However, the Board held that the current level of ultraviolet treatment of effluent was not sufficient to cope with additional flows from increased development and amended the permit to increase the ultraviolet treatment requirements. The Board held that it had no jurisdiction to consider land and development issues regarding the Swaneset development. The Board found the requirement that testing be done at approved facilities and the power of the regional waste manager to make random inspections were adequate measures to protect the environment. Finally, the Board held that it was not preferable to connect the development to the Greater Vancouver sewer system as the effluent discharged in that system was inferior to that proposed for the Swaneset development. The Board ordered that the permit be amended to require use of effluent for irrigation purposes on Swaneset’s property. The appeal was dismissed.