Lost in a fog of secrecy

Prior to committing to a renewal of work activity at Site C, it is incumbent on the Minister Responsible for Public Safety to issue a public statement by an Independent Professional Engineer that the Site C Project is a safe site for future generations and the downstream citizens should not fear from a potential dam breach such as happened from the Teton Dam in Idaho in 1976. The written certification by an Independent Professional Engineer is paramount.

This is now critical as in a August 22, 2018, CJDC Interview BCHPA spokesperson Dave Conway confirmed that there is no bedrock at Site C but that the Shaftesbury shale is an adequate anchor for the dam site.

article continues below

”…we know what rock is here…we’re NOT looking for bedrock, the dam is going to rest on shales, …and the powerhouse is going to be anchored into the shales.” (How come it is moving?)

I would think that Cabinet should be extremely concerned with these revelations at this late date. Due diligence would be to demand surety by a written professional statement that the shales are an adequate substitute for bedrock. NOTE: In a report presented to the Canadian Dam Association, dated Oct. 15-20, 2017, these same engineers made the following observation: “moderately weak, flaky to fissile shale interbedded with thin beds of siltstone, sandstone and shale.”

The 120-plus residents of Old Fort are vulnerable to a dam failure. They have already been harmed by a subterranean landslide of the shales some 300’ below the surface. This ‘bedrock’ failure severed the road access. It was likely caused by a high rainfall event, leaking sewer lagoons, snow dumps, and a disposal well. There are no bedrock conditions present at Site C.

Mr. Milburn’s pending report is unlikely to provide a knowledgeable and unbiased recommendation for the continuation of what will be a non-functional project.

I have not received any answers in response to three previous letters to the Minister Responsible for Public Safety, The issue of safety is lost in a fog of secrecy. The silence is deafening. It provides the answer that Site C is not safe. The irresponsible, unsafe and unnecessary Site C project is a convenient vehicle for passing vast amounts of public wealth ($12 Billion) to the boys in the backroom. It needs to be stopped or at the very least declared to be safe.

— Arthur Hadland, Baldonnel

- - - - -

Email your letters to editor@ahnfsj.ca

© Copyright Alaska Highway News


NOTE: To post a comment you must have an account with at least one of the following services: Disqus, Facebook, Twitter, Google+ You may then login using your account credentials for that service. If you do not already have an account you may register a new profile with Disqus by first clicking the "Post as" button and then the link: "Don't have one? Register a new profile".

The Alaska Highway News welcomes your opinions and comments. We do not allow personal attacks, offensive language or unsubstantiated allegations. We reserve the right to edit comments for length, style, legality and taste and reproduce them in print, electronic or otherwise. For further information, please contact the editor or publisher, or see our Terms and Conditions.

comments powered by Disqus

Popular News

Lowest Gas Prices in Chetwynd, Dawson Creek, Fort Nelson, Fort St John, Tumbler Ridge
British Columbia Gas Prices provided by GasBuddy.com

Community Event Calendar

Find out what's happening in your community and submit your own local events.