Keywords: Sewage Disposal Regulation – Schedule 3, s. 11; s. 7(1)(b); Innovative Design and Technology Policy; proper exercise of discretion; Land Title Act – s. 215; ozonation; Code of Good Practice
This is an appeal from a decision of the Environmental Health Officer (EHO) refusing to issue a sewage disposal permit to the Appellants for a combined package treatment plant, ozonation system and raised mound. The Appellants Property did not meet the standards for a conventional package treatment plant system. As a result, the Appellants proposed an alternate system, designed by an engineer, as allowed under the Regulation. The EHO rejected their proposal as not being appropriate to meet the omitted standards having regard to safeguarding public health. The sole issue before the Board was whether the EHO properly exercised his discretion in refusing to issue the permit.
The Board held that the EHO did not properly exercise his discretion under the Act and the Regulation. It found that the system proposed by the Appellants would overcome the omitted standards and that it was sufficient to safeguard public health. The Board therefore found that a permit should have been issued but ordered conditions to ensure that the system is properly monitored and maintained. The Board also recommended that the EHO require the Appellants to register a covenant under the Land Title Act in favour of the Ministry of Health confirming their agreement to monitor and maintain the system. The appeal was allowed.
