In a move to cut red tape and reduce costs by cutting staff, the Government of B.C. passed legislation on May 31, 2005 to “deregulate” the design and installation of small scale, on-site sewerage systems in communities not served by sewerage systems.
Part of the government’s rationale for deregulating was to allow the development of small parcels of land and to encourage innovation in the sewerage disposal industry.
Lawsuits against the health authority had also become costly.
“Deregulation” meant that the design, installation and maintenance of septic systems was placed in the hands of private sector technicians known as Registered Onsite Wastewater Practitioners (ROWPs) or private sector engineers, “authorized persons,” as they are known in the industry.
Up until the time the sewerage disposal regulations were changed, the design and installation of septic systems had to pass the close scrutiny of a health officer.
Since 2005, homeowners have had to work with either a ROWP, or a private sector engineer. ROWPs may have as little as 15 days training in the design and installation of septic systems.
Oversight of the work of the technicians and engineers is provided by provincial councils called the Applied Science Technologists and Technicians of BC (ASTTBC) and the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of BC (APEGBC). Complaints about new systems are registered with either of these bodies.
The British Columbia Onsite Sewerage Association (BCOSSA) and the Western Canadian Onsite Wastewater Management Association of BC (WCOWMA) provide educational and technical support for practitioners.
Has deregulation worked? Is the lack of involvement by the local health authority a positive step? Do homeowners have confidence in the system? Have there been failures? According to a study published in 2009 by the Sewage System Regulation Improvement Coalition (SSRIC) with assistance from the Environmental Law Clinic at the University of Victoria, after less than four years the system had become “a case study in regulatory failure.”
The SSRIC study was thorough and addressed a long list of serious concerns: no government inspection or approval; conflict of interest when a technician authorizes and installs a system; no protection for the public by posting information; no public right of appeal; no monitoring of technicians and no government disciplinary process; a reliance on the ASTTBC and the APEGBC to discipline their members; no onsite monitoring; secrecy around disciplinary measures taken; a lack of legally enforceable standards; a lack of accountability to the public and the government; and, a lack of accountability on the part of practitioners for their work.
The SSRIC report with recommendations was submitted to George Abbot, Minister of Health Services, Mary Polak, Minister of Healthy Living and Sport, and Murray Coell, Minister of Advanced Education and Labour Market Development
Unfortunately, it appears that little action has been taken by government to improve the system. The acts that were passed in 2005 are substantially the same and there is still no government oversight.
The removal of any government involvement in a matter that could be the cause of serious health hazards is a retrograde step.
Rural homeowners deserve more than what they got with the self regulated system and the government has a responsibility to address the issues that have come to light in the past eight years, and there are many.
Have there been problems in Boundary Country with the design and installation of small-scale sewerage systems? Without a reporting system that is open and transparent, residents have no way of knowing about them and how they were addressed.
Homeowners who are looking for a sewerage system technician or engineer are well advised to do thorough background investigations on local and regional practitioners before making a choice.
Due diligence is critical and caution is in order.
– Roy Ronaghan is a columnist for the Grand Forks Gazette