Third Party: Forest Practices Board
APPEAL NO. 2014-FRP-001

This appeal relates to a decision rejecting Stella-Jones Canada Ltd.’s declaration that a free growing stand had been established on a cutblock. The decision-maker found the survey evidence to be contradictory and, for this reason, could not decide with certainty whether a free growing stand had been achieved. The decision-maker said that he would conduct his own survey before making a final decision. The Board took the position that a decisionmaker should be able to conduct a survey if needed to resolve uncertainty and make the best forest management decision. However, due to the wording and requirements of section 107 of FRPA, the parties consented to an order that the appeal be allowed.

Appeal allowed.

Consent Order: http://www.fac.gov.bc.ca/forestAndRange/2014frp001a_consent_order.pdf

Audit – ARC/169
December 2014

REQUEST

Burns Lake Specialty Wood Ltd. report back to the Board by January 31, 2015, on the progress made in completing the outstanding abatement obligations and reporting the required information for current and past abatement activities to government.

Closing Letter

Special Investigation – SIR/41
October 2014

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Government should establish a publicly-accessible, online database of all penalty determinations under FRPA and WA. Comment – If there are concerns related to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, these could be addressed through a regulation or statute similar to section 6.1 of the Ministry of Environment Act.
2. Government should, by regulation, include the size of the enterprise as a required consideration for decision makers. Comment – This could be done relatively quickly, using the regulation-making authority under section 71(5)(g) of FRPA and section 71 of WA.
3. To promote sound decision-making and consistency, the government should consider reducing the number of delegated decision-makers for penalty determinations so that decision-makers would gain more experience.
4. Decision makers should consider levying larger penalty amounts, particularly where the gravity and magnitude of the contravention is more than minimal, the person has previous similar contraventions or the contravention is deliberate. Comment – This consideration would be in addition to removing any economic benefit.
5. Compliance and enforcement staff should: (a) examine the reasons why so many investigations exceed the policy guidance of one-year maximum and take steps to reduce investigation time; (b) where possible, present evidence to decision makers to enable them to address the issue of economic benefit from contraventions; and (c) consider making more use of agreed statements of facts.
6. Decision makers should complete determinations promptly after the opportunity to be heard, and should include the incident or discovery date in their determinations so that timeliness can be monitored.
7. Decision makers and compliance and enforcement staff should continue the practice of “de-briefing” after a penalty determination has been made, to discuss opportunities for improvement. The Board is not requesting a response to Recommendations 4 to 7, but will continue to monitor these issues.

Response to Recommendations

Special Investigation – SIR/40
April 2014

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Strengthening FRPA’s requirements for the protection of drinking water. Government should undertake a review of FRPA’s requirements for the protection of drinking water generally, and in community watersheds specifically. The review should include:

• revising government’s objective for community watersheds with the intent of emphasizing the importance of source water protection;
• revising the water quality practice requirement, in all applicable FRPA regulations, to address the inherent risk to human health associated with sediment;
• clarifying the meaning and scope of cumulative hydrological effects including whether the assessment and management of these effects is appropriate within the confines of FRPA or should be implemented under a different process; and
• examining the appropriate use of specific water quality objectives under the Government Actions Regulation and provisions under the Drinking Water Protection Act, where watershed condition is at risk.

2. Strengthening the content and approval of forest stewardship plans. Government should provide clear direction to delegated decision-makers that ensures results and strategies in FSPs pertaining to the community watershed objective are measurable or verifiable.

3. Ensuring the content of professional assessments is meaningful. The Association of BC Forest Professionals and the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of BC should develop guidance for their members on the appropriate content of a watershed or hydrological assessment. This should include:

• the elements necessary to address government’s objective for community watersheds, including where the surface water source has changed to a groundwater source;
• procedures for considering cumulative hydrological effects at the watershed scale;
• integration of the needs of licensed waterworks; and
• examples of recommendations providing clear direction for implementation.

4. Monitoring the protection of drinking water. Government should expand its monitoring of the effectiveness of forest and range practices in protecting water quality to include water used for drinking both within and outside of community watersheds.

5. Updating the status of community watersheds. Government should undertake a comprehensive review of the status of community watersheds and determine which watersheds warrant designation and require special management.

Responses to Recommendations – Government

Responses to Recommendations – APEGBC and ABCFP

Complaint Investigation – IRC/193
April 2014

RECOMMENDATION

Kalesnikoff Lumber Co. Ltd. (the licensee) update the 2004 watershed assessment using the standard as outlined in Land Management Handbook 61 – Managing Forested Watersheds for Hydrogeomorphic Risks on Fans.

Response to Recommendation (a report)

Closing Letter

Audit – ARC/163
March 2014

REQUEST

Penelakut notify the Board by April 30, 2014, of the progress made in reporting the required information on current and past activities to government.

Closing Letter

Special Investigation – SIR/38
March 2014

REQUEST

The Board requests that the Joint Practices Board of the Association of BC Forest Professionals and the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia advise it of the steps planned or taken to address the professional practice issues identified in this report.

Response to Request

Audit – ARC/162
February 2014

REQUEST

Halalt notify it by April 30, 2014, of the progress made in reporting the required information on current and past activities to government.

Closing Letter