Fraser River Policy established by board Cebruary 2, 1968 called for not
Ve than pripary treateent and chlurination on all sovade discharges to
th: cover Fraser by Jan, 1/75 excent the North and Siddle Aras which re-
quired secondary treatment and chlorination by the same date.

. or

Accordingly, application was made by GYSaRN on Oct. 29, 1979 to divert the
existing raw discharges from Burnaby, Hew Yestrinster, Surrey, Delta and
environs to a proposed primary plant on Annacis Island discharging to the
main stem of the Fraser. ilumerous objections received but a hearing was not
held, presumably because of a previous hearing at Whalley in 1967.

Permit PE-387 was issued ilarch 3/71 requiring the primary plant to be built
by Jan. 1/75 and Permittee to arrance approved monitoring.

Appeals were Jaunched by SPEC, the Richmond Anti-Pollution Association and
the United Fishermen and Allied Workers Union but were denied as proposal
fn accord with GSoard Policy.

Adverse comments from other agencies included concern from Fish & Wildlife
ever possible "pollution blocks" and concern for possible oxygen depletion
at ultiniate flow, by Federal Fisheries.

Subsequent to a review of Annacis by Hinisters Williams & Cocke and ULAs
Steves, Gabelmann and Liden, a press release was issued by Nitliams in
part stating “the Government (has) instructed the Pollution Control Board
to reconsider its 1966 Policy for the Lower Fraser River....the new policy
will require secondary treatment prior to discharging effluent from the
{Annacis) plant into the River." Completion date to be determined by the
Director PCB. . ce : . .

Accordingly, the Board amended its policy Sec. 13, 1972, to include under
Section 1 of the Requirements “Secondary treatment shall be required at
the Annacis Island plant prior to discharging effluent from the plant into
the Fraser River." a Lo ° :

The Director subsequently ordered GYS&CD to ensure’ plant effluent would meet
SS 69 mg/7 and BOD 45 mg/l and the permit was amendad: accordingly with com-
pletion date for the works to be April 1, 1977. SVS&DD filed notice of
appeal of this amendment on Feb. 27, 1973 and requested procedural direc-
tive. Oeadline date for submission of details of appeal has been progress~
ively extended to Feb. 28, 1974. . .

On Harch 15/73 the Board discussed the possibility of bringing the primary
plant on line when completed. Chairman wrote the Minister regarding this
on April 17/73. Brought up again July 10/73 at Coard meeting but not.
resolved. HLAs to review,

Plans for the primary treatment plant were approved June 20/73.

Feb. 12/74 Board clarified policy on Lower Fraser:

Phase I Small discharge allowad prior to Jan. 1/75 te permit testing
and adjusting of prinary plant.

Phase II After connissioning of primary plant al] discharge to receive
primary treatment plus super chlorination and dechlorination.

Phase 111 On or before April 1/77 secondary plant to be commissioned and
all discharge to receive secondary treatment plus fost cilor-

. ination.
Poriait was aniended to reflect this on Feu. 22/74. Several letters and peti-
tions of concern were received, arc 7/74 OVSAUG advised the Director of its
intention to appeal tne amendkent, presumably to the Board. Solicitar for the
Branca was later advised that GVS&00 wished to appeal the question of secon-
(irv treatment to the Cabinet. April 25/774 Chaircian confirmed that the appeal
in essence was considered to be against tie order of the Board dated Feb. 12/74
and sheuld therefor. be heard Ly the Licutenant-Governor fn Council.

Accordingly, the Board regarded uatter as subjudice aud declined request for
meeting and for documentation as to why secondary treathient was necessary. dead-
Vine for suimission of appeal material qiven - subsequently extendad to June 21/74.