Partial win for Shuswap development stung with $20K wastewater fine

A Shuswap housing development that discharges wastewater onto a golf course has won part of an appeal after it was fined almost $20,000. 

According to an Aug. 20 BC Environmental Appeal Board decision, the potential for adverse effects was “low to none,” but the province fined Shuswap Lake Estates $18,700 for using a lagoon without a permit.

The decision says the lagoon was one of three Shuswap Lake Estates had as part of the development’s sewage system.

However, only two of the lagoons had permits, while a third, which had been used for 12 years, didn’t have the correct environmental paperwork.

Shuswap Lake Estates argued the previous owner built the lagoon, and since the province got involved in had taken it offline.

The company argued the $18,700 fine was too steep and requested the Environmental Appeal Board to grant them a permit for the third lagoon and wipe the fine.

The 17-page decision gives plenty of technical information about the sewage treatment facility near Blind Bay. The decision says wastewater from the treatment plant comes from a commercial and residential complex and is discharged on the golf course. 

“(Shuswap Lake Estates) submits the facility does not discharge to a receiving water body, which means that no effluent enters Shuswap Lake, no nutrient loading occurs, no aquatic habitat is affected, no downstream drinking water intakes are impacted, and there is no environmental harm-either actual or potential,” the decision reads.

Shuswap Lake Estates says the overall system has an extremely low risk to the environment.

“According to Ministry of Environment reporting, two other nearby sewage systems discharged raw or poorly treated sewage directly into Shuswap Lake, or in close proximity to the lake, for many years,” Shuswap Lake Estates said in the decision.

The company argued that the third lagoon operated for roughly 13 years without a single environmental issue and that they do not receive any economic benefit from operating it. It points out that Ministry staff have not visited the site in six years, which would be unlikely if the risk was moderate as it claimed.

“(Shuswap Lake Estates) argues the actual or potential effects should be categorized as low to none as there is no discernible environmental or human health impact,” the decision reads.

In 2024, the company took the lagoon offline to comply with its permit, and said in doing so it reduced the water treatment quality.

The Ministry argued since the third lagoon was put in without its permission, it interferes with its ability to protect the environment.

The Environmental Appeal Board gave the company a little break.

“I find (Shuswap Lake Estates) did not take all reasonable steps to fulfill their obligation despite a clear record demonstrating it was informed of the need to operate in compliance with the permit,” the Appeal Board ruled.

However, the Board ruled the potential for adverse effects was “low to none” and reduced the fine to $10,700.

While the company had asked the Board to grant a permit for the lagoon, it refused to issue one, telling it to go through the normal channels.