• Friends of Cortes Island; Larry Cohen; Comox-Strathcona Regional District; British Columbia Shellfish Growers Association v. Environmental Health Officer

    Decision Date:
    1998-07-22
    File Numbers:
    Decision Numbers:
    98-HEA-12(a)
    Third Party:
    Triple R Developments Ltd., Permit Holder
    Disposition:
    BOARD WILL CONVENE A HEARING ON MERITS OF THE APPELLANTS’ APPEAL, APPEALS HAVE BEEN CONSOLIDATED AND WILL BE HEARD TOGETHER

    Summary

    Decision Date: July 22, 1998

    Panel: Toby Vigod

    This was a decision of the Board on the preliminary issue of the Board’s jurisdiction to hear an appeal of the Environmental Health Officer’s (“EHO”) decision to issue a Sewage Disposal Permit to Triple R. The Board’s jurisdiction was at issue because it had previously heard an appeal from the issuance of a sewage disposal permit for the same site, issued to the same company, in 1995. In the Board’s earlier decision it upheld the EHO’s previous decision to issue a permit. However, Triple R did not construct the permitted sewage disposal system, and the original permit expired. Triple R reapplied for a permit and was granted a new one in May, 1998. The British Columbia Shellfish Growers Association, the Friends of Cortes Island, Larry Cohen and the Comox-Strathcona Regional District all appealed the issuance of the new permit. None of these Appellants were involved in the previous appeal.

    The Board was satisfied that a new permit resulting from a fresh application was subject to all the requirements of the Sewage Disposal Regulation and the Health Act and that this included the statutory right of appeal. The Board concluded it had no authority to waive this statutory right of appeal. In addition, the Board was not satisfied that it should restrict the matter under appeal because a similar permit had been the subject of a previous appeal by a different appellant. The Board noted that the Regulation provides that a permit shall expire after one year. In this case, the Board found that over 18 months had elapsed since the original permit expired and that, during that time, changes may have occurred to the physical site. Further, there were new appellants that had not been before the Board during the previous hearing, and there were new standards in place regarding the overall planning of the area. The Board found it had jurisdiction to hear the appeal.