Keywords: Health Act s. 5; Sewage Disposal Regulation – s. 2(2), 3; schedule 1 – s. 1, 2, 3; Policy On-Site Sewage Disposal – ch. 3; exercise of discretion
This is an appeal from a decision of the Environmental Health Officer (EHO) granting a permit for an on-site Sewage Disposal System to Chislet Manson and Company to convert a house into an office for a proposed sawmill with 30 employees without altering the sewage disposal system. The maximum amount of permitted discharge is unchanged. The house is near residences that draw drinking water from on-site wells and abuts Burns Marsh, a designated sensitive wetland. Mr. Burns appealed on the grounds that the site has high groundwater levels, that the residential permit and the current application contain factual and procedural inconsistencies, that residential system criteria are unsuitable for commercial systems, that the local wells could be contaminated, that the EHO knew about possible current sewage break out and that experts recommend changes to the current system.
The Board was unconvinced that an adequate site investigation was conducted by the EHO. The EHO lacked sufficient information about the nature of the disposal field area and the state of the system to be satisfied that there would be no public health or environmental risk. The board cancelled the permit but noted that the permit holder was free to undertake the usual testing and reapply. The Board upheld the appeal.
