PM40065271

Earthquake Early Warning Systems • OQM Audit Process • Engineering and Geoscience in the Community
JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS AND GEOSCIENTISTS OF BC
MARCH/APRIL 2016
Exploring
BC's Earthquake
Preparedness
PM40065271
Flood Management Along
The Vedder River and Canal

MARCH/APRIL 2016 [volume 20 number 2)
features
14 Continuing the Legacy: Flood Protection through the Vedder River and Canal
Sediment Removal Program
Stella Chiu, P.Eng., Rob Isaac, Eng.L., Tara Friesen, P.Eng., Frank Van Nynatten, AScT,
Lotte Flint-Petersen, P.Eng.
contents
20 Is BC Prepared for the Big One? Exploring BC's Earthquake Preparedness,
Resistance and Resilience
Dr. John Clague, P.Geo., FGC, FEC (Hon.), John Sherstobitoff, P.Eng., Andrew Seeton, P.Eng.,
Don Ehrenholz, P.Eng., Dr. Rishi Gupta, P.Eng., Dr. Dharma Wijewickreme, P.Eng.
29 Earthquake Early Warning Systems: Technology Detects, Analyses
and Acts on Seismic Signals
Dr. Iain Weir-Jones, P.Eng., FGS, Dr. Anton Zaicenco, P.Eng.
news
8 News Remembering Their Contributions: Robert (Bob) Handel, P.Eng., FEC;
John (Jack) Croll, CA
9 Association Notes Working with Government; Nominate a Colleague for an APEGBC
Award; Showcase Your Project in Innovation’s 2015/2016 Project Highlights; Guidelines
Cited by WorkSafe BC; Building Codes Updates Available; Seeking Volunteers for
Innovation Editorial Board
departments
4 President’s Viewpoint Oversight: Are You Responsible? 6 Letters 13 APEGBC
Professional Development 33 Registration Pilot Program Permits Licensees to Bridge
to Professional Status 34 Practice Organizational Quality Management Audit Process
Assists Organizations 35 Discipline and Enforcement Disciplinary Notice –
Peter T. George, P. Geo.; Disciplinary Notice – Yulin Gao, P.Eng. 36 Community
Branch Tours College’s Oil and Gas Training Facility; Imagine the Possibilities: National
Engineering and Geoscience Month 2016; Science Games Engage Kids
38 Removals 39 Membership 42 Professional Services
ON THE COVER:
Like Napa, California,
which experienced
a 6.0-magnitude
earthquake in 2014
(shown), communities on
BC's coast are vulnerable
to seismic events.
37
On March 5, the 2016
Science Games brought
together 160 enthusiastic
school-aged kids to
explore hands-on science.
Science Games are part
of National Engineering
and Geoscience Month,
one of APEGBC’s efforts to
promote the professions in
the community.
i n n o v a t i o n MARCH/APRIL 2016 3

v iewpoint
Oversight:
Are You
Responsible?
Dr. Michael
Wrinch,
P.Eng., FEC
President
president@
apeg.bc.ca
A 2007 Alberta incident involving two fatalities and a collapsed
fuel-tank roof structure resurfaced in February, when the
Alberta government publicly released its incident report. In
Workers Crushed by Collapse of Tank Roof Support Structure, the
investigators indicate that a lack of qualified engineers on the
project—which may have included inadequate supervision by
qualified engineers—may have contributed to the fatal collapse.
The story is complex. A number of international and Canadian
companies had created a jointly owned Canadian company to
design and construct 14 large fuel tanks in northeastern Alberta.
Many professional services and much of the construction were
completed by temporary foreign workers. The structure was
inappropriately designed to sustain wind loading. Workers were
working in, on and around the structure when its roof started to
fall in, the support cables failed, and it collapsed.
In 2009, Alberta Occupational Health and Safety laid 53 charges
against several of the companies—all but three charges were later
withdrawn. In 2013, one of the companies, SSEC Canada, pleaded
guilty to failing to ensure the safety of its workers and paid fines
totaling $1.5 million. Based on the new information within the
recently released report, the Association of Professional Engineers and
Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA) has restarted a review of the case.
While APEGA’s review unfolds, APEGBC members may want to
reflect on the incident. Offshoring and outsourcing of professional
engineering and geoscience services are common in BC and
Canada. Complex collaborations between companies with limited
legal or financial liability for each other’s misconduct or negligence
also occur. As a member who may be working within this
framework, have you considered your role in ensuring the public
is protected? How are you supervising your team? Or, if you work
under a professional member, is your direct supervisor meeting
the requirements that enable you to perform your work and meet
your obligations under the Engineers and Geoscientists Act? If
you are unsure, read APEGBC’s quality management guideline
for direct supervision, which can be found at apeg.bc.ca/QMG/
DirectSupervision.
When major incidents occur in BC, the question of whether
APEGBC should regulate firms that provide engineering and
geoscience services in the province is often raised. Council has
appointed a taskforce to explore this issue in depth and consult
with the membership on the matter over the next year.
In my experience, when multiple-company deals are signed,
careful assessment of responsibilities and risks by all collaborating
companies and members must occur before a project begins and as
changes occur. Changes must be logged and assessed to determine
where each professional’s responsibilities start and end. This can
protect you, your client, and the public interest.
Your Council is working to provide members with resources
to assist in preventing incidents—fatal or otherwise—before they
happen, by providing programs such as the Organizational Quality
Management Program, having professional practice advisors
available to answer questions and advise members, and developing
practice and quality management guidelines. We encourage you to
make full use of these resources.
MARCH/APRIL 2016 VOLUME 20 NUMBER 2
Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of BC
Suite 200 - 4010 Regent Street, Burnaby, BC Canada V5C 6N2
Tel: 604.430.8035 Fax: 604.430.8085
Email: apeginfo@apeg.bc.ca Internet: apeg.bc.ca
Toll free: 1.888.430.8035
2015/2016 COUNCIL, APEGBC
President Dr. M.C. Wrinch, P.Eng., FEC
Vice President R.P. Stewart, P.Eng.
Immediate Past President Dr. J.J. Clague, P.Geo., FGC, FEC (Hon.)
COUNCILLORS
C.J.A. Andrewes, P.Eng.; Dr. C.D. ‘Lyn Anglin, P.Geo.
D.E. Campbell, P.Eng.; R. Farbridge, P.Eng.
A. Fernandes, CIM, FCSI; C. Hall, P.Eng./P.Geo.
D.I. Harvey, P.Eng., Struct.Eng., FEC; K. Laloge, CPA, CA, TEP
S. Martin, P.Eng.; T. Mitha, LLB
C. Moser, P.Eng.; C.L. Park, P.Eng.
K.V. Tarnai-Lokhorst, P.Eng.; J. Turner, P.Ag.
ASSOCIATION STAFF
A.J. English, P.Eng. Chief Executive Officer and Registrar
T.M.Y. Chong, P.Eng. Chief Regulatory Officer and Deputy Registrar
J.Y. Sinclair Chief Operating Officer
M.L. Archibald Director, Communications and Stakeholder Engagement
J. Cho, CGA Director, Finance and Administration
D. Gamble Director, Information Systems
P.R. Mitchell, P.Eng. Director, Professional Practice, Standards and Development
D. Olychick Director, Member Services
G.M. Pichler, P.Eng. Director, Registration
E. Swartz, LLB Director, Legislation, Ethics and Compliance
V. Lai, CGA Associate Director, Finance and Administration
J.J.G. Larocque P.Eng., LLB, CD Associate Director, Professional Practice
M.A. Rigolo P.Eng., Associate Director, Engineering Admissions
Monique Keiran, Managing Editor
EDITORIAL BOARD
K.C. Chan, P.Eng., CPA; S. Chiu, P.Eng.
D.E. Falkins, Eng.L.; T. George, P.Eng.
R. Gupta, P.Eng.; S.K. Hayes, P.Eng.; M.A. Klippenstein, P.Eng.
I. Kokan, P.Eng.; M.J. Zieleman, EIT
Advertising material must reach the publication by the 5th of the preceding
month (e.g., January 5 for the Jan/Feb issue).
Advertising Contact: Gillian Cobban Tel: 604.929.6733
Email: advertising@apeg.bc.ca
Design/Production: Fusion FX Design & Marketing Inc
Printed in Canada by Mitchell Press Ltd on recycled paper
Subscription rates per issue $4.50; six issues yearly $25.00. Annual
subscriptions of Association members are apportioned from membership
dues in the amount of $15 per member (rates do not include tax).
Innovation is published six times a year by the Association of Professional
Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia. As the official publication of
the association, Innovation is circulated to members of the engineering and
geoscience professions, architects, contractors and industry executives. The
views expressed in any article contained herein do not necessarily represent
the views or opinions of the Council or membership of this association.
All material is copyright. Please contact the Managing Editor for reprint permission.
Submission Guidelines: Innovation encourages unsolicited articles and
photos. By submitting material to Innovation, you grant APEGBC a royalty-free,
worldwide licence to publish the material; and you warrant that you have the
authority to grant such rights and have obtained waivers of all associated
moral rights. Innovation reserves the right to edit material for length, clarity and
conformity with our editorial guidelines (apeg.bc.ca/innovation-editorial) and
is under no obligation to publish any or all submissions or any portion thereof,
including credits.
ISSN 1206-3622
Publications Mail Agreement No 40065271. Registration No 09799.
Return undeliverable Canadian addresses to Innovation,
Suite 200 - 4010 Regent Street, Burnaby, BC V5C 6N2.
US Postmaster: Innovation (ISSN 1206-3622) is published bimonthly for $25.00 per
year by the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British
Columbia, c/o US Agent-Transborder Mail, 4708 Caldwell Rd E, Edgewood, WA
98372-9221. Periodicals postage paid at Puyallup, WA, and at additional mailing
offices, US PO #007-927. POSTMASTER send address changes (covers only) to
Innovation, c/o Transborder Mail, PO Box 6016, Federal Way, WA 98063-6016.
4 MARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

Smart. Choice.
Since 1977, Nilex’s engineered, technically advanced geosynthetic
materials have provided customers with smart choices and alternatives
to conventional construction methods for less money.
Smart, environmentally conscious solutions used in road building,
Mechanically Stabilized Earth walls for grade changes, erosion and
sediment control, water management and containment.
Nilex. Smart. Choice.
nilex.com

Why do thousands of
APEGBC Members insure with
Park Insurance?
130,000+
policies
Power of Numbers
Over 130,000 policies issued to APEGBC
members since the programs inception.
98%
Customer Service
98% claims satisfaction rating from
APEGBC members.
25+
years
Expertise & Advocacy
Over 25 years of experience and advocacy
for APEGBC members.
$45
million
Results
Over $45 million in claims payouts to
APEGBC members.
Get protected with the
APEGBC Member Insurance Program!
Get your free no-obligation quote today www.park.ca/apeg/quote
Or call us for more details 1.800.663.3739

news
Remembering
Their
Contributions
Robert (Bob) Handel, P.Eng., FEC
APEGBC members who knew past president Robert
(Bob) Handel, P.Eng., FEC, will remember his
contributions to the association and the engineering
community, as well as his ready smile. The association
reports with regret Handel’s passing on January 31, 2016.
Handel earned his B.A.Sc. in electrical engineering
from UBC (1949), then worked with Ontario Hydro,
BC Power Commission, IPEC, BC Hydro and Power
Authority, and others. His career took him across
Canada, South America, China, Ethiopia, India,
Malaysia, and Pakistan, where he worked with a select
team designing major hydroelectric projects.
After many years volunteering with various
APEGBC committees, Handel was elected to Council
in 1972 and 1973, and as association vice-president
in 1976/1977, serving as president the following year.
He was awarded an APEGBC professional service
award in 1980, and continued to volunteer on many
of the association’s committees.
Handel’s dedication and contributions to the
association and the engineering community, his
distinguished career and service, and his great humour
are remembered with thanks and appreciation.
John (Jack) Croll, CA
With regret, APEGBC notes the passing of honourary
member Jack Croll, CA, on January 7, 2016.
A chartered accountant first qualifying in
Manitoba in 1952, Croll later qualified in BC, going
on to work with Placer Development, MacMillan
Bloedel, the Canadian Development Investment
Corporation, and Crestbrook Forest Industries,
among others. Following his retirement in 1992,
he continued to serve on the boards of various
resource companies.
A member of the first graduating class of Simon
Fraser University’s Executive MBA Program (1972),
Croll later served on the university’s senate and
board of governors, and on committees and as
president for the Institute of Chartered Accountants
of BC. He also served on APEGBC’s Council as a
lay member, and in 2002 was named an honourary
member—one of two such individuals outside of the
engineering and geoscience professions at the time.
In addition to his distinguished career and
professional service, Croll will be remembered with
gratitude for his contributions to the association and
BC’s engineering community.
Engineering that
makes an impact
BCIT engineering grads like Saarah are creative,
innovative and looking to shape the future of our
built and natural environments. We offer a wide
variety of program options to take your career to
the next level, including:
■ Building Science Graduate Program
■ Civil Engineering
■ Electrical Engineering
■ Mechanical Engineering
■ Mining and Mineral Resource Engineering
Learn more.
Saarah Malawiya
Mechanical Engineer, Integral Group
Conducting project work at VanDusen Gardens
bcit.ca/engineering
8 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n
1 Ad Name: Women in Engineering 1516

association notes
Working with Government
Moving BC’s Economy, Infrastructure and Communities Forward
On February 29 and March 1, APEGBC hosted receptions with the
BC Liberal Caucus and the BC Official Opposition Caucus in Victoria.
The purpose was to provide an informal forum where Council and
senior staff could interact with ministers and MLAs to share the ways
that APEGBC works on behalf of British Columbians and to answer
questions posed by officials. Dr. Carlos Ventura, P.Eng., Director of
UBC’s Earthquake Engineering Research Facility, presented on early
warning earthquake technology, highlighting an example of how
engineers and geoscientists are creating world-class innovations and
technologies here in BC.
Hon. Andrew Wilkinson, Minister of Advanced Education, brought
greetings on behalf of the BC Government at the evening reception,
which was attended by 28 caucus members including: Hon. Suzanne
Anton, Minister of Justice and Attorney General; Hon. Bill Bennett,
Minister of Energy and Mines; Hon. Mike Bernier, Minister of
Education; Hon. Peter Fassbender, Minister of Community, Sport, and
Cultural Development; Hon. Norm Letnick, Minister of Agriculture;
Hon. Mike Morris, Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General;
Hon. Coralee Oakes, Minister of Small Business and Red Tape
Reduction; Hon. John Rustad, Minister of Aboriginal Relations; Hon.
Amrik Virk, Minister of Technology, Innovation and Citizen’s Services;
Hon. Teresa Wat, Minister of International Trade; Hon. Naomi
Yamamoto, Minister of State for Emergency Planning; and, Dr. Ralph
Sultan, P.Eng., MLA West Vancouver–Capilano.
Kathy Corrigan, MLA for Burnaby–Deer Lake and Advanced
Education critic brought greetings on behalf of the BC Official
Opposition caucus at the breakfast reception, which was also well
attended with 12 caucus members present.
Top: Hon. Mike Bernier, Minister of Education, receives a “Champions of Earthquake
Resilience Award” for BC’s work on seismically upgrading schools.
From left: APEGBC President Dr. Michael Wrinch, P.Eng., APEGBC CEO Ann English, P.Eng.,
Minister Bernier, and UBC Professor Dr. Carlos Ventura, P.Eng.
Middle, from left: MLA Jane Thornthwaite; MLA Dr. Ralph Sultan, P.Eng.;
APEGBC Councillor Dr. ‘Lyn Anglin, P.Geo.; MLA Gordon Hogg.
Bottom, from left: APEGBC CEO Ann English, P.Eng., Hon. Andrew Wilkinson, Minister of
Advanced Education; APEGBC Councillor Caroline Andrewes, P.Eng.;
APEGBC President Dr. Michael Wrinch, P.Eng. Photos, Roop Jawl
Nominate a Colleague for an APEGBC Award
Nominations are being accepted for APEGBC’s President’s Awards and Mentor of the Year Award
until April 15, 2016.
The APEGBC President’s Awards recognise the exemplary and outstanding professional,
technical and community contributions of APEGBC members and allow the association to
showcase the professions. The President’s Awards include five categories of achievement,
and two awards for exemplary career-long contributions to the engineering and geoscience
professions.
APEGBC’s Mentor of the Year Award recognises excellence among mentors in BC’s
engineering and geoscience community. Nominees must be a mentor in the APEGBC
Mentoring Program.
For criteria and nomination procedures, visit: apeg.bc.ca/For-Members/Awards.
i n n o v a t i o n MARCH/APRIL 2016 9

association notes
Showcase Your Project in Innovation’s
2015/2016 Project Highlights
Deadline April 19
Innovation invites BC’s professional engineers and geoscientists to submit
photographs of their recent work for consideration for the magazine’s annual
project highlights showcase.
Members, licensees and companies may submit photographs of projects
undertaken since May 2015, within or outside BC, employing APEGBC members
and licensees. Submissions relating to all engineering and geoscience disciplines
are encouraged.
Submission criteria and details are available at apeg.bc.ca/pictorial. Please
note that image files must meet the stated specifications, and that submission
grants to APEGBC a royalty-free, worldwide licence to publish the material. For
information, see apeg.bc.ca/pictorial.
Submit your project highlights to pictorial@apeg.bc.ca no later than
Tuesday, April 19.
PM40065271
Act Change Consultation •● Benevolent Fund and Foundation Donors ●• Investigation and Discipline Update
JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS AND GEOSCIENTISTS OF BC
2014/2015
Project Highlights
Five Facets of
Successful Innovation
Climate Change:
An Issue of Risk Management
JULY/AUGUST 2015
Guidelines Cited by WorkSafe BC
A new WorkSafe BC guideline references three APEGBC/
Association of British Columbia Forest Professionals
(ABCFP) practice guidelines as the standards of practice
for assessing landslide risk in BC and for developing
written safe-work procedures under section 26.18 of
the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation.
Under WorkSafe BC guideline G26.18 Acceptable
standards for landslide risk assessments, the APEGBC/
ABCFP Guideline for Managing Terrain Stability in the
Forest Sector, Guideline for Professional Services in the Forest
Sector – Terrain Stability Assessments, and Guideline for
Professional Services in the Forest Sector – Forest Roads set
out the required standards of practice. In situations where a
WorkSafeBC prevention officer identifies that an individual
performing assessments lacks the required qualifications,
WorkSafe BC guideline G26.18 directs the officer to refer
the matter to the appropriate professional association.
The referenced guidelines were prepared by the
APEGBC/ABCFP Joint Practice Board, which comprises
professional members of both regulatory agencies and was
mandated to make recommendations on matters concerning
practice overlap among the professions.
All of APEGBC’s professional practice guidelines are
available online at apeg.bc.ca.
Building Codes Updates Available
The British Columbia government has released the update
package for Revisions 1 through 7 to the 2012 BC Building Code.
The package consolidates amendments to December 2014.
Hard copies may be ordered from BC Crown Publications.
For customers with the online version of the BC Building Code,
the updates are available online.
Changes to the National Building Code of Canada 2015
and the National Fire Code 2015 now permit construction of
six-storey buildings using combustible construction materials.
The Building Code also includes updates to accessibility design
requirements, changes to hazard values for seismic design
and design exemptions, introduction of Apparent Sound
Transmission Class, and significant changes that address
housing and small buildings.
The National Building Code can be purchased online from
the National Research Council Canada.
Seeking Volunteers for the Innovation Editorial Board
The Editorial Board for Innovation magazine seeks new volunteer
members. The board advises the Managing Editor on
content of interest to the magazine’s readership. Interested
volunteers should be able to meet four times each year, for
up to three hours each, as well as provide input by email.
For information, see apeg.bc.ca/Editorial-Board-Position.
To apply, fill out the volunteer application form at:
apeg.bc.ca/Volunteer-Application-Form.
10 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

APEGBC’s Council of elected
members and government
representatives meets throughout
the year to conduct the business of
association governance.
FEBRUARY 12, 2016
Reduced Wait Time under
Looking-to-Exempt Policy
APEGBC’s Looking-to-Exempt Policy
provides a means to recognise the
academic qualifications of applicants
with non-accredited engineering degrees
who are able to demonstrate they have
appropriate engineering or geoscience
experience. Previously, applicants who met
the defined level of academic qualification,
demonstrated low-risk reference profiles,
and had at least five years of experience in
Canada or the US were brought directly to
the Registration Committee for approval.
However, they may have had to wait up to
eight weeks between committee meetings for
their registration to be approved.
At the committee’s recommendation,
Council approved changes to the Looking-to-
Exempt policy that will see these applicants
added to the list of ‘non-contentious’ items
approved by the Director, Registration, or
Associate Director, Engineering Admissions.
The changes also take into account
experience acquired outside of Canada or
the US under this policy, if the required
Canadian Environment competencies for
registration have been demonstrated and
vouched for by appropriate references.
Professional Practice Examination Fee
Set at $310
To achieve licensure, candidates for
professional engineering and geoscience
registration in BC must write and pass the
Professional Practice Examination. The
Association of Professional Engineers and
Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA) provides
the exam.
In October 2015, APEGA converted to a
computer-based exam from a paper-based
exam. Increased charges of $55 for the
multiple-choice section and $25 for the essay,
which was previously handwritten, resulted.
Currently, APEGBC charges exam candidates
$230 to sit the exam.
Council approved an increase to $310
for the June 2016 Professional Practice
Examination session and, at the April 2016
Council meeting, will review and confirm
fees for future exam sessions.
2014–2017 Strategic Plan Update
Council received information on progress
towards achieving the goals indicated in the
2014–2017 Strategic Plan and reviewed the
targets for Year 2 of the plan.
Member Engagement with Council Meetings
At the 2015 AGM, the following motion
was passed: That Council consider increasing
its transparency and accountability to
members, whereby all members may access
the Association’s website, in an easy and
timely way, in order to view all agendas and
supporting materials of Council meetings that
are deemed ‘open.’
Currently, materials for Open Council
Meetings are provided to members and the
public upon request, and many APEGBC
documents, including Key Performance
Indicator (KPI) status, Council Governance
Policies, and approved minutes of Open
Council meetings, are posted on the
association’s website. This includes the dates
for all scheduled Council meetings.
In order to facilitate member
participation, Council approved a motion
to publish its Open Agenda and supporting
materials on the APEGBC website no fewer
than five days prior to each Council meeting.
Publication of Staff Salary Policy
At the 2015 AGM, the following motion was
passed: That Council consider publishing in
the financial reports the total compensation
(the sum of salaries and benefits) for all staff
who receive over $100,000 per annum, as well
as their reimbursed expenses.
Council discussed this matter in depth. It
recognised that members seek confirmation
that APEGBC salaries are reasonable and that
appropriate oversight is exercised in setting
salaries. Council recognized that publishing
staff salaries is not a practice followed by
other regulatory bodies in BC or nationally,
but wished to meet the intent of the motion
without compromising staff privacy. Council
therefore directed that the staff compensation
policy as well as the processes followed for
administration, compliance and oversight be
published on the APEGBC website.
The information can be found at
www.apeg.bc.ca/About-Us/Governance/
Responsible-Financial-Management.
First Nations Territorial Acknowledgement
At the 2015 AGM, the following motion was
council report
passed: That Council consider the inclusion of
territorial acknowledgement in all meetings.
In December 2015, Executive Committee
discussed the motion and reviewed a
report from staff outlining the practices of
other professional associations regarding
territorial acknowledgment. Considering this
information and advice received from the
Fraser Region Aboriginal Friendship Centre,
Executive Committee recommended to
Council that territorial acknowledgment be
included in large public meetings and events.
Council approved the recommendation.
Staff will contact local BC friendship
centres to develop appropriate scripts
and procedures to support territorial
acknowledgement at these events.
AGM Special Guest Policy Changes
APEGBC has a Council-approved policy
for special guest attendance at the APEGBC
annual conference and AGM, that specifies
the number of complimentary event
tickets offered and expenses covered for all
special guests. The Division of Engineers
and Geoscientists in the Resource Sector
(DEGIRS) requested amendments to the
policy to allow divisions greater opportunity
to interact with members, Council
members, and staff at APEGBC annual
conferences and AGMs.
To ensure the process is fair, fiscally
prudent and consistent, Council appointed
a working group to review the policy. The
working group reviewed each volunteer
group category and discussed their
participation at the AGM. Generally,
the working group felt that the subsidies
provided to most volunteer and guest groups
were appropriate. Two groups discussed in
further detail were divisions and branches.
After consideration, the working
group recommended that no change be
made to the package offered to divisions,
and that the package offered to branch
representatives be made consistent with
what is offered to the divisions, revising
the policy to invite one representative
from each branch to attend the Fall Branch
Representatives Meeting, rather than two.
Council approved the amendment.
Refugees without
Traditional Documentation
At Registration Committee’s recommendation,
Council approved a policy to create provisions
for refugees, displaced persons and persons
in refugee-like situations who are unable to
i n n o v a t i o n MARCH/APRIL 2016 11

council association report notes
obtain or provide traditional documentary
evidence for registration, while ensuring
administrative fairness and requiring
sufficient proof that standards have been
met. Under the policy, applicants in the
above situations will be given opportunity
to provide alternate means of proof of
qualifications.
APPOINTMENTS
Advisory Task Force on Corporate Practice
Susan Craig, P.Geo.
Mike Currie, P.Eng., FEC
Dr. Michael Davies, P.Eng./P.Geo.
Catherine Fritter, P.Eng.
Adrian Gygax, P.Eng., Struct.Eng.
Timothy Kwasnicki, P.Eng.
Scott Martin, P.Eng.
David Melville, P.Geo.
Andy Mill, P.Eng., Struct.Eng., FEC
Julius Pataky, P.Eng.
Greg Scott, P.Eng.
Colin Smith, P.Eng., FEC, FGC (Hon.)
John Turner, P.Ag. (ret.)
Selena Wilson, P.Eng.
Consultation on Limited Licence Title
At its June 19, 2015, meeting, Council
made several resolutions regarding further
exploration for adding value to the engineering
and geoscience licensee grade of membership.
These included a motion that APEGBC study
the merits of changing the titles “engineering
licensee” (Eng.L.) and “geoscience licensee”
(Geo.L.) to include the word “professional.”
APEGBC/ABCFP Joint Practice Board
Jeremy Araki, P.Eng.
Building Codes Committee
Oon-Soo Ooi, P.Eng.
Mihajla Vitkovic, P.Eng., CP
Climate Change Advisory Group
Dr. Johanna Wolf
Consulting Practice Committee
Robert Heikkila, P.Eng., FEC
Alan Bates, P.Eng.
Jason Olmsted, P.Eng.
Based on market research and
feedback from the Limited License
Subcommittee, Registration Committee
recommended to Council that stakeholder
consultation be conducted to consider
alternate designations for engineering
and geoscience licence holders. Council
approved the recommendation.
Professional Practice Committee
Matthew Cameron, P.Eng., FEC
Emily Cheung, P.Eng., FEC
Mark Porter, P.Eng., Struct.Eng.
Sustainability Committee
Christine Bieber, P.Geo.
Rimon Estawro, P.Eng.
Mukesh Sharma, P.Eng.
Dana Zheng, EIT
Technical Review Board
Adam Lubell, P.Eng
Shelly Zhao, P.Eng., Struct.Eng.
time for an
upgrade?
ON-LINE MASTER’S PROGRAM
In Electric Power Engineering
University of Waterloo | Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering
Since graduation, you’ve upgraded your computer, your cell phone
and probably even your car. What about you? Isn’t it time you
thought about upgrading your knowledge and skills?
Upgrade — your way — with an on-line Master’s program.
The on-line Master’s program in Electric Power Engineering in the
Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of
Waterloo, offers advanced, state-of-the-art, training in Electric Power
Engineering. The Program is designed for engineering personnel
from the electric power industry, electrical engineering graduates,
and other professionals looking to upgrade and accelerate their career
in the power and energy sector. The program offers a full spectrum
of courses, offered over three terms each year, which are relevant
to the power industry. Courses are taught by world-class faculty
members from the Department’s Power & Energy Systems Group;
one of the best power engineering research groups in North America.
Program Information
One of the following three program options is available to all
program participants:
» Master of Engineering (MEng) in Electric Power Engineering:
Awarded on completion of 9 courses
» Graduate Diploma (GDip) in Electric Power Engineering:
Awarded on completion of 6 courses
» Certificate of Completion: Awarded on completion of a single course.
The MEng and GDip Programs are fully approved by the Ontario Council
on Graduate Studies. For more information on course schedules, fees,
and other details, please visit ece.uwaterloo.ca/onlineMEng.
C009287
12 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

APEGBC Continuing Professional Development
Personal Investment. Professional Commitment.
Navigating Complexity: Implementing Change in
Unpredictable Times
April 26, 2016; Vancouver, BC
Implementing change requires making sense of and
influencing the evolutionary potential of the present rather
than investing in a future that one faithfully hopes will
materialise. A typical change management project has a
starting and an ending point. The evolutionary approach is
ongoing and focuses on building sustainability and resilience.
Heightening Your Communication Image
April 28, 2016; Richmond, BC
Electronic communication—the use of the written
word—is taking business communications by storm. Yet,
a good face-to-face conversation is still the best and most
effective way to establish trust, build rapport and develop
interpersonal relations. Be it one-on-one or presenting to
an audience, your words, tone and body language must be
in peak shape to achieve the success you strive for in your
workplace every working day.
Understanding Transient Recovery Voltages
May 5, 2016; Vancouver, BC
The principal cases of interest are the interruption of the
currents associated with terminal faults, short line faults
and out-of-phase switching and breaking capacitive and
inductive load currents. The seminar discusses each case in
detail and explains the origin and derivation of the attributes
associated with the transient recovery voltages, including
pole factors, amplitude factors, two- and four-parameter
representations and travelling waves, where applicable.
OQM Training
May 6, 2016; Fort St. John, BC
May 18, 2016; Burnaby, BC
APEGBC’s Organizational Quality Management (OQM)
Program has been developed to improve the quality
management of professional engineering and geoscience
practices at the individual and organizational level. This
voluntary program offers certification to participating
organizations.
Stormwater Modelling: A Hands-on
Demonstration
May 6, 2016; Vancouver, BC
The planning and design of stormwater management
infrastructure is becoming increasingly complex, thus
demanding a more advanced analysis methodology.
Advanced computer models are commonly used engineering
tools that address the need for more sophisticated analyses.
This seminar includes a hands-on demonstration of the
US-EPA SWMM 5 computer model and its application in an
urban setting, from initial project set-up of a project through
detailed design of a drainage system.
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) &
Failure Mode and Effects Criticality Analysis
(FMECA): Reliability Boot Camp
May 10, 2016; Vancouver, BC
Conducting a Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)
is a key step in determining the possible failure modes
of systems, equipment and processes. FMEAs are also
common starting points for asset reliability prediction and
improvement. When combined with Weibull analysis and
other tools such as RCM and RBDs, FMEAs can lead engineers
to optimised strategies for reducing or eliminating the
effects of failure such as: safety risks, environmental risks,
negative business effects, lost production and consequential
damage. This seminar gives participants detailed training
on conducting an FMEA, as well as an overview of how to
transform the FMEA into a strategic plan.
Fundamentals of Pumps, Valves, Piping and
Electrical from a Municipal Design Perspective
May 11, 2016; Vancouver, BC
June 8, 2016; Kelowna, BC
This seminar provides an understanding of the fundamentals
and terminology applicable to positive displacement and
centrifugal pumps, conventional and automatic valves, piping
and fittings, basic electrical, motor control components,
motors, generators and basic control. Also provides a ‘holistic’
approach to the application and interrelationship of these
water- and wastewater-handling components.
Mineral Resource / Reserve Classification and
Reporting, including Discussion of NI 43-101 and
Other National Reporting Standards
May 13, 2016; Vancouver, BC
All mining projects depend first and foremost on their
mineral resources and mineral reserves. These, in turn, have
three supporting processes: estimation, classification and
reporting. This seminar concentrates on classification and
reporting; estimation is a large topic in its own right and is
covered only briefly.
Water Quality System Modeling and Optimisation
May 13, 2016; Vancouver, BC
Participants will be introduced to topics in water quality
modeling and optimisation of water distribution and supply
systems.
Five Dimensions of an Authentic Leader
May 16, 2016; Webinar
More than ever, individuals at work want a leader whom
they can trust and whose values and character they can
identify with. The most impactful leaders demonstrate a
passion for their purpose; they are driven by vision and are
connected to their values while still being able to share their
own weaknesses and fears.
Writing Effective Proposals and Reports
May 17, 2016; Vancouver, BC
This seminar is for engineers and geoscientists who wish
to develop the confidence and writing skills necessary
to write effective proposals and reports. They will learn
the key elements of writing and submitting winning
proposals and reports, and how to tailor content for both
technical and non-technical audiences. In addition, they’ll
learn to determine what clients (internal and external)
are looking for, and how those clients will evaluate
proposals or review reports.
Maintenance Management: A Rational Approach
May 31, 2016; Vancouver, BC
This seminar provides a fresh, logical new look at all aspects
of maintenance, from business processes to the completion
and recording of maintenance work. This seminar is
for manufacturing and institutional executives and
maintenance, production and engineering leaders who see
opportunities for improving reliability and reducing costs
through better management of maintenance resources.
Take Control of Notes and Collaborate on Projects
with Microsoft OneNote 2016
June 2, 2016; Vancouver, BC
Your paper and digital notes are invaluable, but who wants
to waste time re-organising them, digging through them,
or deciding how and where they should be stored? Microsoft
OneNote is a digital notebook that makes it easy to save,
organise, search, share and review notes, websites, email,
voice recordings, images, etc.
Technical Writing: Solutions for Effective Written
Communication
June 14, 2016; Vancouver, BC
This seminar provides practical, applicable solutions and
techniques for expressing thoughts succinctly in written
format. You’ll learn to write effective emails, technical
memos, letters, reports, and other documents. Whether
you’re a junior employee or a seasoned professional in your
technical field, this seminar will help you to improve your
technical writing skills.
Call for Presenters
Are you an expert in your field who would like to
contribute to the future of engineering and geoscience?
APEGBC is actively seeking members to present on a
variety of topics. For more information, please visit
apeg.bc.ca/Events/Seminar.
For a complete listing of events or for more information, visit apeg.bc.ca/prodev/events or contact
APEGBC Professional Development at 604.430.8035 or 1.888.430.8035.
i n n o v a t i o n MARCH/APRIL 2016 13

features
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in the Natural Resources Sector
CONTINUING THE LEGACY
Flood Protection through the
Vedder River and Canal Sediment Removal Program
Dr. Matt Sakals, P.Geo.
Stella Chiu, P.Eng., Rob Isaac, Eng.L., Tara Friesen, P.Eng.,
Frank Van Nynatten, AScT, Lotte Flint-Petersen, P.Eng.
14 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

Vedder River and Canal System: Now and Then
The Vedder River and Canal, located in the City of Chilliwack
and City of Abbotsford, British Columbia, conveys water from
the Chilliwack River to the Fraser River. The Chilliwack River
originates in North Cascades National Park in Washington State,
crosses the US–Canadian border, then enters Chilliwack Lake.
The river exits the lake, flows west for 40 kilometres, and changes
its name to Vedder River at Vedder Crossing. The river then
crosses the floodplain and becomes the Vedder Canal, which joins
the Sumas River and flows into the Fraser River.
The entire Vedder River and Canal system is approximately
12 kilometres long, with a Design Flood 1 of 1,470 m 3 /s (Q200 2 ).
The system provides prime habitat for chinook, chum, coho, pink
and sockeye salmon and rainbow and steelhead trout, and is a
popular location for fishing.
Today, residents and private properties on both sides of the
system in the cities of Abbotsford and Chilliwack are protected
by flood control dykes. However, the system differs considerably
from what it was a century ago.
In those days, flooding from the Chilliwack and Fraser
rivers caused major damage and concern to early settlers and
communities. Before 1875, the Chilliwack River flowed north
from Vedder Crossing over a broad alluvial fan to the Fraser
River. In 1875, heavy rains caused a logjam that diverted the river
into two small streams: Vedder Creek flowed west, and Luckakuck
Creek flowed north. In 1882, a new logjam formed, causing
several streams to shift course westwards to become the Vedder
River and flow into what was then Sumas Lake (now Sumas
Prairie). In the early 1900s, the river was dyked and channelised.
The former Sumas Lake also experienced flooding from the
Fraser River during spring freshet. The flow of Vedder River into
the lake compounded drainage issues. The lake would swell from
4,050 hectares to 13,000 hectares during spring floods. In the early
1910s, Frederick (Fred) Sinclair, an engineer with the BC Electric
Railway, developed a plan for draining Sumas Lake to provide
flood control and to take advantage of the fertile soil in the
lakebed for farming. As part of the Sinclair Plan, the Vedder Canal
was constructed to divert Vedder River into the Sumas River.
The diversion of Vedder River was completed by 1922.
Draining of the lake began in 1923, with water pumped over the
dykes into the Fraser River by the old Sumas Station. This facility
was upgraded in 1975 and is now known as Barrowtown Pump
Station. It is the sole drainage point of the Sumas Lake-bottom
area and is one of the largest drainage pump stations in Canada.
Need for River Management
A major flood on December 3, 1975, caused significant damage
in the community of Yarrow and the Greendale area within the
City of Chilliwack, and a portion of Sumas Prairie in the City
of Abbotsford. The flood caused infilling of almost the entire
river channel downstream of the Vedder Crossing to the canal.
The need for improved river management, including dyking and
sediment removal along the Vedder River, became apparent.
As sediment accumulates on the river and canal bottom,
conveyance capacity decreases and water levels tend to rise.
This sediment aggradation in the Vedder River and Canal can
increase the risk of flooding and compromise public safety. In
Top: Vedder River, early 1900s; Bottom: The canal is dredged to divert
Vedder River into the Sumas River.
1976, the river channel was excavated to restore the channel
capacity prior to the fall and winter flood season.
Subsequent engineering investigations determined that new
dykes set back from the watercourse were required for flood
protection and to allow sufficient room for natural river processes.
In order to accommodate the setback dykes, it was necessary to
purchase a number of private properties along the river.
Vedder River Management Plan
The Vedder River Management Plan was adopted in 1983
to “ensure the integrity of the Vedder River floodway while
maintaining and enhancing the natural resources of the area
and incorporating, where compatible and desirable, recognised
historical uses and educational programs for the benefit of the
people of British Columbia” (BC Ministry of Environment 1983).
The area encompasses lands managed by the cities of Chilliwack
and Abbotsford, the provincial government, and private entities.
The Vedder River Management Area Committee (VRMAC)
oversees the plan’s ongoing implementation. The VRMAC is
made up of representatives from the City of Chilliwack, City of
Abbotsford, BC Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource
Operations (MFLNRO), and the federal Department of Fisheries
and Oceans. It also includes stakeholders such as the Fraser Valley
Regional District, First Nations and fishing groups. A technical
committee develops and recommends to the VRMAC a sediment
removal plan every second year on even years—timing that was
established to avoid affecting spawning pink salmon.
i n n o v a t i o n MARCH/APRIL 2016 15

features
The VRMAC has planned and managed sediment removals for
flood control purposes annually from 1990 to 1997, and biennially
from 1998 to present. Sediment was removed prior to 1990, but
those removals were not coordinated by VRMAC.
The Process
Natural river processes carry sediment from the upstream
Chilliwack River Basin into the Vedder River and Canal. Historically,
approximately 50,000 cubic metres of sediment are deposited, on
average, every year. The sediment reduces the channel’s capacity
to convey the Design Flood Event (DFE) and thereby increases
flood threat to surrounding communities. Sediment removal is
necessary to maintain the provincially recommended level of
flood protection (Q200), and removal sites are selected to preserve
sufficient freeboard along the dyking system during the DFE.
The sediment removal program, jointly funded by the cities of
Chilliwack and Abbotsford and the MFLNRO, is carried out in
two phases: (1) planning, and (2) removal and assessment.
The planning phase begins with a survey. More than 70
permanently established cross-sections along the system are
surveyed every second winter to calculate changes in sediment
volume over the preceding two years. The collected data are run
through a hydraulic model to calculate the DFE water surface
profile and to evaluate the change in dyke freeboard.
Sites for sediment removal are then selected, in consultation
with a registered professional biologist, to improve the
channel’s conveyance capacity where it is most required. Other
considerations include presence of vegetation, proximity
to sensitive and valuable habitat, road or other access for
machinery, and potential effects of sediment removal on existing
channel features and configurations.
During the removal and assessment phase, the three
agencies jointly tender the sediment removal, according to the
jurisdiction of each specific removal site. During removal, a
registered professional biologist monitors the activities. A survey
undertaken after the removal is necessary to determine the actual
removal volume. In addition, one year after removal, a biological
assessment by a registered professional biologist is conducted
to determine impacts on habitat along the river and canal. This
assessment GIC concludes Innovation the Qtr removal Pg PRINT.pdf and assessment 1 2016-03-11 phase. 1:03 PM
High water in the Vedder River, November 2006.
Challenges and Solutions
Although the program has been in place for many years, timing
remains a major challenge and is dictated by salmon runs and water
levels. Sediment removals are permitted to occur only during a
specific window—typically a month and a half in late summer—
when the river system’s salmon stocks would not be affected. This
means the planning phase work must be completed early in the
year to allow sufficient time for the Water Act and Fisheries Act
environmental reviews and the tendering process.
However, high water levels and velocities, as well as snow on
the ground, can delay the planning phase’s survey work, which
needs to take place in January or February. The Vedder River
is subject to fall and winter storm events, with water levels also
rising each spring and summer due to snow melt. Water levels in
the Vedder Canal are affected by the Vedder River events as well
as Fraser River spring and summer freshet events. Overcoming
these timeline challenges requires close coordination and
cooperation among the three agencies and the consultants who
undertake the work.
Sediment removal comes with other challenges. The sediment
removals can be delayed or interrupted by increasing water levels,
as mentioned above. Removal sites along the river and canal are
selected based primarily on the need to provide optimum Design
Flood protection, with secondary selection factors considering
how to minimise environmental impacts. However, tendering
16 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

Sediment is removed, 2014.
of the sediment removal is linked to influences unrelated to the
goals of the management plan—namely, the market’s capacity
to absorb sediment volumes. This capacity fluctuates according
to sediment supplies and construction activity in the region and
varies depending on the needs of local industries and economies.
The difference in sediment quality from one site to another along
the Vedder system adds to the tendering process’s complexity.
In any given cycle, the agencies may receive no bids, positive
bids, or negative bids to remove sediment. Positive bids help
subsidise the costs of the studies, but agency funding is still
required to cover shortfalls and to cover the costs of negative bids.
Moving Forward
Despite the challenges, the Vedder River and Canal sediment
removal program continues to meet its objectives to protect
public safety while maintaining and, where possible, enhancing
the area’s natural resources. For example, in 2014, during the
last cycle, approximately 55,000 cubic metres of sediment
were removed from six sites during the fisheries window to
improve the system’s conveyance capacity and reduce flood risk.
Habitat-enhancement activities included placement of large
woody debris, flow improvements to secondary channels, and
management of invasive plants.
Comprehensive planning and monitoring efforts, welldocumented
outcomes, and long-established relationships
among VRMAC members help facilitate the process to achieve
continued successes.
The planning phase of another sediment removal cycle
began in early 2016, with renewed emphasis on timing,
cooperation and coordination. Past experience indicates that
this year—and in future years—the Vedder River and Canal
sediment removal program will continue furthering Frederick
Sinclair’s century-old legacy for flood protection, achieving the
goals of the Vedder River Management Plan, and protecting
the public and the environment. v
Stella Chiu, P.Eng., is the City of Abbotsford’s Senior Drainage and
Wastewater Engineer, and has been involved with the Vedder River
Management Area Committee since 2011. She is a recipient of the
2007 APEGBC Young Professional Award and the 2008 Engineers
Canada Young Engineers Award.
City of Abbotsford’s Director of Wastewater and Drainage Rob
Isaac, Eng.L., has worked with the City of Abbotsford for close to
30 years, and currently oversees the wastewater, drainage and soil
divisions of the Engineering Department. He has been a member
of the Vedder River Management Area Committee since 2011.
As the City of Chilliwack’s Manager of Environmental Services,
Tara Friesen, P.Eng., oversees flood protection and environmental
programs. She has been a member of the Vedder River Management
Area Committee since 2002.
Frank Van Nynatten, AScT, has been employed by the City of
Chilliwack Engineering Department for the past 20 years. He has
been involved with the Vedder River Sediment Removal Program
and VRMAC since 2013.
Lotte Flint-Petersen, P.Eng., is a BC Ministry of Forests Lands and
Natural Resource Operations (MFLNRO) Senior Flood Hazard
Management Engineer in the Flood Safety Section of South
Coast Water Authorizations. She has worked with MFLNRO for
more than six years and has been a member of the Vedder River
Management Area Committee since 2010.
1Design Flood is a hypothetical flood used for dyke safety design, planning,
floodplain management investigations and emergency management. A
design flood is typically defined by its probability of occurrence.
2Q200 means the return period of a flood might be 200 years; otherwise
expressed as its probability of occurring equaling 1/200 or 0.5% in any
one year. This does not mean that, if a flood with such a return period
occurs, the next will occur in two hundred years’ time; instead, it means
that, in any given year, there is a 0.5% chance that such a flood will
happen, regardless of when the last similar event occurred.
i n n o v a t i o n M ARCH/APRIL 2016 17

whatif
Engineers Canada-sponsored insurance pla
Bridge
Change over within
60 days of your existing
group health plan enddate
— with no medical
questionnaire.
Base
Guaranteed
acceptance — with
no medical exam
when you apply.
NEW
Professional
Retiree
Health & Dental
Insurance Plan
Comprehensive
Coverage with the
highest maximums
in many benefit
categories.
SPECIAL
LIMITED-
TIME OFFER!
If you’re retiring or starting your own business, Engineers Canada offers three NEW Professional
Retiree Health & Dental coverage options. And right now, you can still apply for our Bridge plan —
with no medical exam — even if you don’t have a group plan at work, or even if it ended more than
60 days ago. Apply for Bridge before July 28, 2016 and your acceptance will be guaranteed!
PROFESSIONAL RETIREE
HEALTH & DENTAL INSURANCE PLAN
1 877 598-2273
professionalretiree.com/apegbc
Manulife and the Block Design are trademarks of The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company and are used by it, and by
Underwritten by The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company (Manulife), P.O. Box 4213 Stn A, Toronto, Ontario M5W 5M
The Manufacturers Life Insurance C

ns could give you fewer things to worry about?
Cost of
raising
children
Mortgage
debt
Term
Life
Insurance Plan
Non-mortgage
debt
University
fees
Household
expenses
Up to $1.5 million in coverage: The loss of a primary earner can have a major impact on those
left behind who may still need to pay for major ongoing expenses. That’s why the Engineers
Canada-sponsored Term Life Insurance Plan was created exclusively for engineers and
geoscientists to help protect those who count on you in more ways than one.
its affiliates under licence. © 2016 The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company. All rights reserved.
3.
ompany
TERM LIFE
INSURANCE
1 877 598-2273
manulife.com/apegbc

f eatures
Is BC Prepared
For The
2 0 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

Share in the Discussion
Share your expertise and views on “How APEGBC members can help improve
BC’s earthquake preparedness, resistance and resiliency, and what would be
required to make that happen” by writing to innovation@apeg.bc.ca. Letters
should not exceed 300 words and are published as space permits.
Innovation reserves the right to edit, condense or reject any contribution.
Exploring BC's Earthquake Preparedness, Resistance and Resilience
Since its founding 130 years ago, Vancouver has
yet to experience a damaging earthquake.
Yet geophysicists and geologists have shown
that such an earthquake is inevitable, although
they cannot tell us when it will happen. On
average, every 500 years, the BC south coast is
rocked by a magnitude 8 to 9+ earthquake caused
by rupture of the megathrust fault separating
the subducting Juan de Fuca plate from the
overlying North America plate. What would be
the consequence of such an earthquake today?
A report by the Insurance Bureau of Canada in
October 2013 concluded that it would cause about
$74 billion in damages due to the ground shaking,
a tsunami, landslides, fire, and business and
service interruptions.
The south coast is also at risk from two other
types of earthquakes—so-called ‘slab events’ at
depth within the subducting Juan de Fuca plate,
and shallow earthquakes on faults that cut the
crust of North America. Both types of earthquakes
are far more common than great subductionzone
earthquakes, although they are smaller in
magnitude and have smaller damage ‘footprints.’
The 2011 Christchurch earthquake, which was a
shallow crustal earthquake, is enlightening—even
though it was of only moderate size (magnitude 6.3)
and its strong shaking lasted only 10 seconds, the
earthquake seriously damaged many of Christchurch’s
downtown buildings and claimed 185 lives. The most
recent estimate of the cost of rebuilding the city is
NZ$40 billion (CDN$37 billion), equivalent to nearly
$10,000 for every New Zealand citizen.
Metro Vancouver is a rapidly growing urban
centre with a huge concentration of wealth
and significant national economic importance.
Accordingly, the risk from a damaging earthquake
is also growing. Residents want to know how
prepared we are to deal with a large earthquake.
Earthquake preparedness, of course, has many
dimensions—for example, public education,
emergency response after a severe quake, survival
of critical infrastructure, and the integrity of
building stock. Engineers play an important role in
ensuring our infrastructure suffers as little damage
as possible from a major earthquake. This matter
is of critical importance, because we must retain
a functioning economy and experience minimal
social disruption after an earthquake.
Regional geography, older buildings, and
the likelihood of widespread liquefaction and
amplification of seismic ground motions pose
challenges to engineers tasked with ‘hardening’
our building stock to withstand seismic ground
motions. In this context, we can take some
comfort that considerable progress has been,
and is being, made. Consider, for example, the
program being carried out by the BC Ministry of
Education in partnership with UBC and APEGBC
to upgrade seismically vulnerable schools.
Consider also the improvements to seismic
provisions in our building code and the seismic
retrofits that have been completed to most of the
area’s bridges.
In terms of response to a damaging
earthquake, Emergency Management BC
(EMBC) is the lead provincial agency responsible
for managing disasters and supporting other
authorities within their areas of jurisdiction. The
Government of BC has charged the agency to
develop a comprehensive provincial earthquake
plan. The BC Earthquake Immediate Response
Plan (IRP), released in July 2015, is the first
component of that larger plan and sets the
conditions for subsequent planning efforts
centred on sustained response and recovery. It
details how the Province will lead and coordinate
during a post-earthquake response phase, and
Dr. John Clague,
P.Geo., FGC,
FEC (Hon.)
Photo: Paul Joseph, cc by 2.0 i n n o v a t i o n M ARCH/APRIL 2016 21

f eatures
specifies the roles and responsibilities of the
government, its agencies, and its partners.
Despite this progress, much work remains to
be done, and the costs are daunting. Many tall
buildings (more than six storeys) are in need
of seismic retrofitting, and governments at all
levels must make resources available to replace
our ageing subsurface infrastructure (water,
gas, and sewer lines). Thanks to appropriate
seismic provisions in our building code and
modern engineering design, many buildings
have been constructed or retrofitted to withstand
a moderate earthquake. In my view, loss of life
in such an event probably would be small for
buildings that meet the higher seismic standards.
However, we have just started revising our
building code to prevent structural damage that
could leave a building intact or life-safe, but
render it unfit for occupation or use. We need
to incorporate into the code performance-based
measures that will help to ensure our building
stock can survive a strong earthquake without
catastrophic structural damage.
5 Perspectives
APEGBC has assembled five professional
perspectives on our state of earthquake
preparedness. The authors of these editorials are
experts on this topic and share their views on the
following aspects of earthquake preparedness,
resistance and resiliency:
• Seismic upgrade of high-risk buildings and
performance-based design of new buildings;
• Measures taken by the Vancouver Airport
Authority to minimise the impact of a large
earthquake;
• The role of the Board of Structural Engineers
Association of BC in educating clients about
the level of earthquake performance expected
from new and existing buildings, and in
suggesting options for improved performance
of our building stock;
• Development of sustainable and innovative
building materials that will help improve
structural resiliency in the event of an
earthquake; and,
• Challenges involved in ensuring the integrity
and safety of pipelines.
Dr. John Clague, P.Geo., FGC, FEC (Hon.), is
Shrum Professor of Science at Simon Fraser
University (SFU). He was a Research Scientist
with the Geological Survey of Canada from
1975 until 1998. Since that time, he has been
a professor in the SFU Department of Earth
Sciences, where he is currently Canada Research
Chair in Natural Hazard Research. Clague is
Past President of APEGBC and a Fellow of the
Royal Society of Canada.
OQM
Organizational Quality
Management Program
The following organizations have recently received OQM Certification. To find out more, visit apeg.bc.ca/oqm.
Access Engineering Consultants Ltd.
Amec Foster Wheeler Americas Limited–
Mining & Metals, Power & Process
CitiWest Consulting Ltd.
Embark Engineering Limited
Golder Associates Ltd.
MacLeod Nine Consultants Ltd.
Monaghan Engineering & Consulting Ltd.
Scouten Engineering Ltd.
Sorensen & Associates Engineering Ltd.
Thurber Engineering Ltd.
TRUE Consulting (Kelowna) Ltd.
West Coast Road Testing & Consulting Ltd.
Western Element Engineering
Westrek Geotechnical Services Ltd.
Zoom Engineering Ltd.
2 2 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

1Seismic Upgrading, Performancebased
Design and Public Education
Three items for improving BC’s resilience
and earthquake preparedness are discussed:
continued seismic upgrade of high-risk
buildings; performance-based design of new
buildings; and improved public education
regarding building performance, whether new
or upgraded.
The past 25 years have seen many
buildings and a significant amount of
infrastructure upgraded in BC—very
impressive progress considering no recent
history of damaging earthquakes in the
region. For example, the Ministry of
Education continues its program to upgrade
schools using custom, performance-based
guidelines to achieve life-safety upgrades of
high-risk buildings.
A challenge for upgrading public
buildings—provincial or municipal—is
adequate funding to complete the work in a
timely manner. An annual commitment and
budget to continually upgrade the highestrisk
public buildings in a priority manner,
using current performance-based guidelines,
is necessary to advance the mitigation.
Incentives or mandatory upgrades for highrisk
privately owned buildings, such as those
recently initiated in San Francisco and Los
Angeles, are needed to advance mitigation of
this building stock.
There is interest and intent worldwide
to revise building codes to a performancebased
approach that will result in betterperforming
buildings that will directly
contribute to community resilience. For
office and residential buildings, current
codes achieve ‘life safety’ performance
for the design earthquake. However, these
buildings may not be occupiable or useable
for some time after an earthquake until
repairs/replacements are carried out. This
is very different from functional use, or
continued occupancy, which is necessary
for a resilient community. For schools and
hospitals, the current codes offer improved
performance over ‘normal’ buildings, but
not in a quantifiable manner. For the next
National Building Code, 2020, a committee
regarding earthquake design is looking at
means to improve and quantify performance
of all buildings, using a performancebased
design approach. Acceptance of such
an approach may be a challenge, due to a
possible modest increase in the cost of new
buildings—likely less than five percent—to
achieve the more resilient designs.
Finally, improved public education is
important to make the public aware that
current code-designed buildings are not
‘earthquake-proof,’ but are designed to
generally dissipate earthquake energy by
controlled damage (ductility), which results
in buildings that are life-safe but may not
be occupiable nor useable after the design
earthquake. In areas of the world affected
by devastating earthquakes, the public is
requesting—and in some cases demanding—
better earthquake performance for new
buildings, as well as an understanding
of such performance. New buildings can
be designed to be fully functional for a
defined earthquake. Designs involving
base isolation and supplemental energy
dissipation (dampers, replaceable fuses)
are proven to achieve such a performance.
Furthermore, there are tools for engineers to
assess the performance of existing and new
buildings, and offer ‘resilience ratings’ readily
understood by the public. Such a rating
scheme was initiated in the US in late-2015
and could readily be adopted here in BC.
John Sherstobitoff, P.Eng., Principal, Seismic
& Structures, at Ausenco, Vancouver, has
been providing expertise in seismic upgrading
in BC for some 26 years. He is currently chair
of the Standing Committee on Earthquake
Design for the National Building Code
of Canada, and chair of subcommittees
regarding base isolation, supplementary
energy dissipation, and resilience/
performance-based design.
John Sherstobitoff,
P.Eng.
i n n o v a t i o n M ARCH/APRIL 2016 2 3

f eatures
Don Ehrenholz,
P.Eng.
2Plan, Implement, Assess, Adjust…
Then Repeat
As we have seen in Haiti, Japan and elsewhere,
the resistance and resilience of airports and other
transportation infrastructure to major seismic
events and earthquakes are critical to a region’s rapid
recovery. The Vancouver Airport Authority (YVR)
has a well-developed emergency response plan for
such an event. The methodology used for all YVR
emergency response plans starts with assessing the
current situation, planning a response or approach
to handle the event—including action plans for
immediate emergency response—training and
practicing the response, and implementing facilities
upgrades. Then the process starts again: we reassess
it to see if we got it right and to improve it further.
The first seismic assessment of the original Airport
Terminal Building (Domestic Terminal) conducted in
the mid-1990s showed the building—constructed in
the mid-1960s on liquefiable soil—would not perform
well in a major seismic event. Read Jones Christoffersen
Consulting Engineers developed a detailed seismic
upgrade masterplan, and YVR adopted a strategy to
include seismic upgrading as part of every upgrade
project. Projects as small as washroom or coffee shop
renovations include all seismic work identified in the
masterplan—within the floor, walls and ceiling, and
including shearwalls, braces and diaphragm work. In
some cases, renovations on one level have triggered
upgrades to major shearwalls down through other
levels, resulting in foundation upgrades such as pile-cap
enlargement, grade beams and soil densification.
After 20 years, approximately 80 percent of the
Domestic Terminal’s seismic upgrade work has been
completed. A task that seemed daunting in 1996 is
expected to be complete within another decade—and
the terminal has remained operational throughout.
The phased approach has proved to be a costeffective
and operationally efficient way to upgrade
complex existing infrastructure.
The other side of YVR’s emergency preparedness
involves developing emergency response plans,
training operations and emergency response providers,
and practicing the plans through exercises that include
YVR staff, airlines and emergency response agencies.
The response plans are designed to enable the airport
to respond immediately to emergency situations in
the terminal, take care of the people in the facility at
the time of an event, assess the facilities, and return to
operation as quickly as possible.
The airport maintains operations, building
maintenance and airfield emergency services teams
onsite 24 hours a day. These employees are tasked with
handling immediate response, dealing with facility
issues, responding to medical issues, and taking care
of thousands of passengers that could be stranded at
the airport for days after an emergency event such
as an earthquake. Their response will be critical to
minimising impact and managing the situation onsite.
A key part of emergency training comprises
up-to-date assessment of the potential damage to
airport facilities—buildings, bridges and runways.
In order to better plan and prepare detailed
immediate response plans, emergency operations
people need to know what to expect after a major
earthquake and how various facilities will perform.
To that end, structural consultants recently
completed Post Earthquake Rapid Damage
Assessment Manuals (PERDAMs) for the Domestic
and International terminals, and the Airside
Operations and other buildings. The manuals
outline a systematic method for non-structural
engineers or YVR operations, maintenance
or airfield emergency service responders with
PERDAM training to quickly assess each building’s
safety, area by area, within hours of an earthquake.
The manuals include floor layouts, step-by-step
paths through areas, pictures of each structural
element to be checked, and checklists. The manual,
for example, directs responders to look for cracks
on a concrete staircase’s interior and exterior
wall (a shearwall). Depending on the size of any
cracks observed, a responder would post colourcoded
cards to indicate whether the area is safe to
occupy (Green), can be accessed only with caution
(Yellow), or is unsafe (Red).
The Airport Authority is integrating the manuals
into its earthquake emergency response plan, and
volunteers from the engineering, maintenance,
operations and emergency response groups are
undergoing PERDAM training by the structural
engineers for each of the buildings.
2 4 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

When this is done, we will run through our
process once again, reassessing it to see if we got it
right and to improve it further.
As YVR’s vice president, Engineering & Environment,
Don Ehrenholz, P.Eng., oversees long-term planning of the
Airport and implementation of YVR’s capital program,
3
Earthquake Performance of Buildings
Over the past 30 years, the state of practice in the
seismic design of buildings and other structures has
seen considerable advancement. Lessons gleaned
from earthquake events and academic research have
made their way into modern building codes, and our
profession has largely embraced these developments
and incorporated them into our designs. In this regard,
we owe ourselves some credit. But in the bigger picture,
there is much more that we can do as professional
engineers to enhance the earthquake resilience of our
communities and the province.
As engineers, we understand that code-compliant
buildings are expected to sustain
considerable—perhaps irreparable—
damage during the design-level earthquake.
But building owners and the general public
do not share this understanding. Many
may imagine their new building to be
earthquake-proof or consider the upgrading
of an existing building to be an unnecessary
burden. Others do not perceive a large
earthquake to be a threat to our region.
The Board of the Structural Engineers
Association of BC (SEABC) has often
contemplated this dilemma. It is necessary
for professional engineers to educate clients
about the level of earthquake performance
that can be reasonably expected from new
and existing buildings, and to suggest
options for improved performance. We
have the skills to encourage the design
of better buildings, using performancebased
design techniques to show expected
outcomes in terms that are meaningful to
project stakeholders and the public. This
effort requires participation from multiple
engineering disciplines: mechanical,
including terminal expansion, airside construction and
infrastructure upgrades. He joined the Airport Authority
in 1994 as manager, Engineering Projects, held the role
of director, Engineering Projects, for many years and
also served as vice president, Airport Operations and
Engineering, during his 22 years at YVR.
electrical, geotechnical, and other non-structural
aspects of building performance all come into play.
Building rating systems that categorise expected seismic
performance, such as the one recently launched by
the US Resiliency Council (www.usrc.org), offer a
promising way to convey the message to the public and
assign a value to seismic safety in the marketplace.
When a large earthquake eventually strikes near a
densely populated community of BC, engineers will
have a key role to play in the response and recovery
phases of the emergency. The SEABC’s Post-Earthquake
Response Committee is working with APEGBC,
Emergency Management BC, BC Housing, the City
Andrew Seeton,
P.Eng.
i n n o v a t i o n M ARCH/APRIL 2016 2 5

f eatures
of Vancouver, and other stakeholders to develop a
framework to guide the participation of engineers in
damage assessments. These assessments will be critical
in terms of protecting the immediate safety of the
public, as well as enabling expedient resumption of
building occupancy where it is safe to do so. Under the
BC Earthquake Immediate Response Plan, BC Housing
is tasked with establishing and leading the Building
Damage Assessment Branch at the Provincial Emergency
Coordination Centre. To that end, BC Housing is
preparing a disaster assessment program for buildings,
which will provide government and organisations with an
integrated format to prioritise, coordinate and optimise
safety and damage assessments of buildings following
an earthquake. SEABC and APEGBC are seeking to
Take project success to
new heights
The Masters Certificate in
Project Management
VANCOUVER & VICTORIA LOCATIONS
Get the knowledge and tools you need to
consistently deliver projects on time, on budget,
within scope – and beyond expectations. This
18-day program features the very best trainers
in Canada and is delivered over five months to
minimize interruptions to your work schedule.
Call 250-721-6429 to receive a detailed brochure.
Email epcoord@uvic.ca • execprograms.uvic.ca/ProjectManagement
In partnership with…
Enrolment Bonus:
Receive the newest iPad
“Go Green” and manage your learning
materials paperlessly – yours to keep
afterwards!
formalise and clarify the role of professional engineers
in this program. Stay tuned for information/training
sessions and the launch of a roster of engineers interested
to participate in damage assessments.
Andrew Seeton, P.Eng., is a Senior Structural Engineer at
Glotman Simpson Consulting Engineers. He has more than
10 years of experience in the structural and seismic design
of commercial, residential, and institutional buildings.
Seeton volunteers as a director of the Structural Engineers
Association of BC (SEABC) and chairs SEABC’s Post-
Earthquake Response Committee.
Dr. Rishi Gupta,
P.Eng.
4
Understanding How
Building Materials
Affect Infrastructure
Life
I write this article from the
financial capital of India
(Mumbai), where I was
asked to give a keynote and
co-chair a full-day workshop
on Sustainable and Efficient
Buildings in Smart Cities.
This workshop was organised by the India–Canada
IMPACTS (India–Canada Centre for Innovative
Multidisciplinary Partnerships to Accelerate Community
Transformation and Sustainability) Centres of Excellence.
While at the workshop, I have learned from various
prominent speakers that both Canada and India share
certain common issues related to infrastructure. Several
examples have been provided that prove that some
infrastructure—including bridges, roads, buildings, etc.—
is not meeting its design life.
In regions such as BC, where risk exists for significant
earthquake events, this is a serious concern. Buildings
and other infrastructure that do not meet their design
life and, in fact, may be deteriorating prematurely are
at greater risk for damage—and for more significant
damage—in the event of a major earthquake.
One of the key issues related to determining safe
remaining life of existing structures is the lack of
understanding about the durability of materials that
are being developed at a very rapid pace. Several new
materials marketed as “green” or “sustainable” perform
2 6 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

poorly compared to conventional construction materials.
Life cycle assessment needs to be applied to materials and
structures as a whole to determine the environmental
impacts of products, processes and services, through
production, usage, and disposal. Consideration of expected
life and impact on the environment will help determine
materials’ and structures’ true sustainability.
Canada is a developed country and our infrastructure
deficit is in the billions of dollars. A substantial amount
of future work will focus on repair and rehabilitation
of structures. This will require concerted effort from
multiple engineering disciplines. Repair and rehabilitation
of structures is made more challenging during times of
economic downturn and in locations like BC, where the
seismic risk needs to be studied carefully.
However, the need for more information about
material durability’s influences on structural design life is
beginning to be addressed. At the University of Victoria,
for example, a new Facility for Innovative Materials and
Infrastructure Monitoring (FIMIM) will focus first on
developing sustainable and innovative materials with full
understanding of their relevant mechanical characteristics
and long-term properties. We will be working to develop,
for example, cement-based composites that are “crackfree”
with the ability to self-seal any cracks that develop
over a period of time, and have high energy-absorption
capacity and fracture resistance; these properties can be
useful for improving structure resiliency. The facility will
also assist infrastructure owners and operators to evaluate
the condition of infrastructure, which is an imperative
task prior to developing a repair strategy either for
seismic retrofitting or after environmental events such as
earthquakes. The facility will house state-of-the-art nondestructive
evaluation techniques and structural health
monitoring (SHM) capabilities for this purpose.
Structural health monitoring is a key requirement
for determining how material durability and aspects of
design affects infrastructure life. Whether it be with new
construction or repaired infrastructure, SHM is being
more commonly specified in projects. It typically involves
use of sensors that provide insight into both the short-term
load effects on structures and the long-term effects of the
environment. It should be noted that properly installed
sensors with accurate interpretation of sensor data can
also be effectively used to study the residual capacity of
structures after exposure to events such as earthquakes.
One of the projects funded by IC–IMPACTS will allow the
research team based out of the FIMIM to implement noncontact
techniques on infrastructure both in India and
Canada that can complement use of sensors for SHM.
Dr. Rishi Gupta, P.Eng., is a faculty member in the University
of Victoria’s (UVic) new Department of Civil Engineering.
His current research focuses on the early-age properties and
plastic shrinkage of cement-based composites containing
supplementary cementing materials and fibres. Areas of
interest include sustainable construction technologies and the
behavior of masonry structures, structural health monitoring,
and non-destructive testing. Dr. Gupta currently serves as the
chair of the international affairs committee of the Canadian
Society for Civil Engineering (CSCE) and is the officiating
liaison for India. He is also treasurer of CSCE’s western region
and faculty advisor for the student chapter at UVic.
SHK is construction law.
Build Better. Build with SHK.
shk.ca
i n n o v a t i o n M ARCH/APRIL 2016 2 7

f eatures
Dr. Dharma
Wijewickreme,
P.Eng.
5Pipeline Safety During Seismic Events
Pipelines are critical to the safe transport of fluids, such
as drinking water, oil, and gas, that are essential to the
day-to-day life of citizens and operations of our province.
With large numbers and sections of BC's pipelines
located belowground, the risk of earthquake damage to
pipelines arising from ground displacements such as soil
liquefaction and landslides is a major concern.
It is in everyone’s best interest to ensure that our
pipelines are safe and secure—to ensure our health
and quality of life, to protect the communities and
environment, and to promote economic growth and
value creation. Utility owners, pipeline operators, and
government are paying increased attention to pipeline
integrity, with a collective aim “towards zero incidents.”
Professionals in fields such as geology, seismology, civil,
mechanical, and materials engineering play key roles
in improving the earthquake resilience of BC’s pipeline
infrastructure. Despite its simple tubular structure, a
pipeline’s engineering becomes complex when it must
cross varied topography and geology over long distances.
The challenges increase when the terrain to be crossed
presents earthquake-related risks.
From a high-level perspective, there is a need to
focus on a number of key aspects with respect to
pipeline integrity and safety. These include: teaching/
training to generate a skilled workforce; research for
innovation, advancing technology and engineering
state-of-practice; generation of reliable information
for use by engineers and society; and effective
dissemination of such information.
From a technical perspective, opportunity exists
for continued improvements in pipe materials,
geotechnical approaches used for buried-pipeline
construction, structural design solutions, and, in turn,
for reduced earthquake-damage risk to pipelines.
The pipeline sector has undertaken several initiatives
to address these recognised needs. The recently
established Pipeline Integrity Institute at the University
of British Columbia (UBC) is one good example in this
regard. The institute is inspired by the ongoing research
at UBC and the needs identified by industry and
government. It offers a new undergraduate specialisation
in pipeline engineering and conducts applied-outcome
research on pipeline-related topics.
Implementation of seismic improvements falls into
two main categories: retrofit of existing infrastructure;
and construction of new infrastructure to accord
with current knowledge, approaches, technologies,
and practice. Retrofitting can be challenging due
to complexities presented by site constraints,
environmental conditions, and so on. For new
construction, engineering designs must be undertaken
with due consideration given to the anticipated seismic
shaking demand for a given geographic location.
The approach for pipeline safety should be no
different than the approach we undertake—as we
learn more—to continually improve the earthquake
resistance of our buildings, bridges, and other
infrastructure. Implementation of improvements
is always a long-term process that needs to be
administered in a sequential manner; as such, “now”
is the best time to commence this work.
Resources needed to implement improvements to
existing and new pipelines include: trained engineering
personnel with the right expertise; development of
innovative and cost-effective technologies; and reliable,
adequate amounts and rates of funding. Securing
resources to hedge against relatively infrequent, highconsequence
events, such as earthquakes, means
convincing potential funding agencies. In this regard,
dissemination of reliable information to, and effective
engagement with, decision makers—the public,
government, regulators—are essential.
Any direct measurement of the value and significance
of seismic upgrading of infrastructure would be possible
only after the occurrence of a strong earthquake event.
Experience elsewhere indicates that investing to increase
earthquake resilience of infrastructure significantly
contributes towards increased life safety, reduced
environmental and economic impact, and so on. Seismic
upgrading work already undertaken by government
agencies and local utilities in BC and in other seismically
active regions supports the rationality of this thinking. v
Dr. Dharma Wijewickreme, P.Eng., is a Professor
of Civil Engineering at UBC and also Director of
the Pipeline Integrity Institute at UBC. He recently
assumed responsibility as president-elect of the
Canadian Geotechnical Society and will serve as
the society’s president starting 2017. He has 11 years
of experience as a consulting engineer and over 15
years as an academic. His main research focus is on
earthquake-induced soil liquefaction and pipeline
geotechnical engineering.
2 8 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

features
Earthquake Early Warning Systems
Technology Detects, Analyses and Acts on Seismic Signals
Dr. Iain Weir-Jones, P.Eng., FGS
Dr. Anton Zaicenco, P.Eng.
Engineers and geoscientists cannot yet predict over the short-term the
time and location of an earthquake. However, we can deploy reliable,
autonomous systems that warn populations in seismically active regions of
imminent earthquakes. Earthquake early warning systems are commercially
available, have been deployed in British Columbia for a number of years,
and contribute to the safety of hundreds of thousands of British Columbians
every day. This article explains how the systems work, outlines their general
capabilities and limitations, and describes how two systems we designed
responded during a recent earthquake on BC’s south coast.
i n n o v a t i o n M ARCH/APRIL 2016 2 9

features
Velocity, m/s
6
X10 -3
4
2
0
-2
-4
P wave
at 41.5 sec
P wave triggering threshold
S wave
at 51.1 sec
10 sec
-6
0 50 100 150
Local time starting at 23:39:00. [sec]
Above: The December 29, 2015, earthquake’s hypocentre (red)
was only 61 kilometres from the George Massey Tunnel (green), yet
records (top) obtained from the tunnel early warning system show the
intensity of the P-wave was about six percent of the level required to
trigger the tunnel’s closure.
Below and previous page: The Massey Tunnel earthquake warning
system consists of sensor arrays above the tunnel's north and south
entrances. Photo, this page: Weir-Jones Engineering Consultants; previous
page: Stephen Rees, cc by-nc-nd 2.0
Seismic events generate two main wave types:
compressional (P) and shear (S) waves. The S-waves
carry more energy and provide the base parameter
for the design of earthquake-resistant structures. The
P-waves are less destructive, propagate faster, and
precede the coming S-waves. The difference in the waves’
propagation velocities forms the basis of operation for
most earthquake warning systems. The system recognises
the P-wave, analyses its characteristics in terms of the
probability that a dangerous S-wave is imminent and, if
it determines that the probability is high, autonomously
triggers alarms and protective measures.
Earthquake warning systems that measure P-wave
arrivals can be regional (network-based) or on-site
(stand-alone) systems.
In 2009, our first commercial on-site earthquake early
warning system was designed and installed on behalf of
the BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure at
the George Massey Tunnel on Highway 99. The tunnel
provides a critical transportation link beneath the
Fraser River within the BC Lower Mainland, with about
100,000 vehicles passing through every day. Because of
the high cost of tunnel downtime, the warning system,
which is built to ISO 9001:2008 quality standards, must
provide total reliability during continuous, autonomous
operation, with no false alarms. It must also be accessible
over a secure Internet link, and be supported by a
comprehensive, round-the-clock maintenance plan.
The tunnel earthquake warning system uses triaxial
sensors to continuously search for and identify P-wave–
associated ground motions. The system’s sensor array
consists of three instrumented boreholes, about 50
metres and 10 metres deep, located at the tunnel’s
north and south ends. The data acquisition systems,
communications, and power supply units are mounted
on poles next to the boreholes, and are connected as a
local area network (LAN) by a fibre-optic cable running
through the tunnel’s service duct. All data channels are
synchronised using a GPS timing unit.
Real-time data from the sensor array are streamed
to the central computer, which fuses and synchronises
the data streams, archives storage of data files in a
circular buffer, detects potential seismic events using
a robust pre-triggering algorithm, and routes the
message about pre-triggered events to the P-wave
detection module.
Configurable P-wave detection software compares realtime
data against the parameters of a high-risk seismic
event. The software analyses the physical properties
of an incoming P-wave—including the polarisation
properties of wave-produced, three-dimensional particle
motions—against the known properties of both P- and
S-waves to calculate the seismic event’s ground-zero and
probable S-wave severity and arrival time. If the software
determines an earthquake is hazardous, the decision to
close the tunnel is made within 0.7 seconds of the threat’s
automated identification.
3 0 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

If a potentially hazardous situation is detected, the
computer triggers tunnel-closure and alert measures. The
system signals the traffic lights at both entrances to the tunnel
to turn red and posts closure messages on the electronic signs
along Highway 99, immediately closing the tunnel’s northand
southbound lanes to new traffic.
The tunnel system analysed the December 29, 2015,
earthquake that occurred at 11:39 PM (Pacific Standard
Time), 19 kilometres north–northeast of Victoria, in less
than one-half second. Despite the epicentre being only 61
kilometres from the tunnel and the magnitude being 4.8, the
system determined the quake presented no risk to the tunnel.
The authors have since installed earthquake early
warning systems elsewhere in the Pacific Northwest, and
at most US nuclear power plants. To date, no false alarms
have occurred, while the systems have continuously
monitored ground motion, and have recorded and
analysed many non-hazardous regional earthquakes.
Warning time, based on the travel-time difference
between the P- and S-waves, can range from zero when an
earthquake’s epicentre is very close to where an earthquake
warning system is installed, up to dozens of seconds when
the epicentre is located hundreds of kilometers away but still
generates dangerous ground motion. Therefore, even with
reliable early warning systems, populations located close to an
earthquake’s focus may have only a few seconds to react before
the destructive S-wave arrives. Those seconds could be enough
to save lives and limit damage to equipment and infrastructure
in the immediate area—if people are aware of the alert signal,
know what to do when it sounds, and are prepared. As distance
from the epicentre increases, greater advance warning becomes
possible. Even then, however, early warning cannot compensate
for individuals’ lack of preparation.
The practical benefit of having earthquake early warning
stations located close to an earthquake’s epicentre and
integrating their data with data from stations near monitored
facilities was demonstrated with the December 29 earthquake.
The event’s hypocentre, or point of origin within the
Ampitude
Ampitude
Site #19:
Hypocentral distance: ~420 km
~83 sec
P 1 S 1 P 2
40 sec S 2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
P 1
S 1
Site #7:
Hypocentral distance: ~80 km
10 sec
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Local time starting at 23:39:00. [sec]
The December 29, 2015, earthquake’s hypocentre (red) was less
than 80 kilometres from Site #7 (orange+green) in the Lower Mainland,
and about 420 kilometres from Site #19 (green) north of Kamloops.
By combining the P-wave arrival at Site #7 with that at Site #19
(top), the total warning time of the arrival of the earthquake’s
S-wave at Station #19 became 84 seconds. The amplitudes shown
are normalized to compensate for the loss of seismic energy with
distance. (Data collected during the December 29, 2015, earthquake at two
commercial ShakeAlarm ® earthquake early warning system installations.)
Leading edge technologies to solve your precision measurement, alignment & mapping requirements
Kodiak Measurement Services
Industrial Alignment Specialists
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
mapping, imagery & remote sensing
Robert Simmerling, P.Eng.
Certified Portable 3D Metrologist
www.kodiakmeasurement.com
250-354-0330
Peter LeCouffe, BGIS
GIS & UAV Professional
www.harriersurveys.ca
i n n o v a t i o n MARCH/APRIL 2016 31

features
earth’s crust, was less than 80 kilometres from Site #7, in
the Lower Mainland, and about 420 kilometres from Site
#19, north of Kamloops. The seismogram from Site #19
shows the earthquake’s P-wave arrived there at about 87
seconds and the S wave arrived at about 127 seconds—
providing a 40-second advance warning. However, the
Site #7 system detected the P-wave about 45 seconds
before it arrived at Site #19. Allowing one second for
communications-system delay, the combined systems
extended the practical advance warning of the S-wave’s
arrival at Site #19 to about 83 seconds.
Had the S-wave’s predicted intensity presented a threat
to facilities near Site #19, the extended advance warning
would have provided time for personnel to evacuate. In
addition to triggering facility alarms, the system would
have notified clients via mobile app. It would have also
automatically shut down production equipment and gas,
water and electricity intakes, triggered start-up of standby
generators, and notified emergency first responders.
The December 29 event demonstrates the dual use of
on-site earthquake warning systems. They reduce seismic
risk for critical facilities and collect continuous, regional
seismic data for use in research.
Experience in BC over several years has shown that,
although we cannot predict precisely when earthquakes
will occur, well-designed and integrated earthquake
early warning systems can provide enough warning of
an imminent earthquake to reliably and cost-effectively
reduce risk to the public and to infrastructure. v
Dr. Iain Weir-Jones, P.Eng., FGS, and Dr. Anton Zaicenco,
P.Eng., are respectively Chief Technology Officer and Chief
Seismologist at Weir-Jones Engineering Consultants Ltd.,
in Vancouver, BC. The company designs autonomous
systems that collect and analyse real-time data for clients
around the world.
Low-Cost Earthquake Warning System Alerts Schools
British Columbia’s south coast school districts are responsible
for hundreds of schools and for the safety of students, faculty
and staff learning and working within them. Although early
earthquake warning systems have been around for years,
when a school board seeks to install the systems in dozens or
even 100 schools, the systems’ cost becomes a concern.
A device made of strong motion detectors and designed
by University of British Columbia (UBC) engineers a few
years ago provides cash-constrained school districts with a
basic solution. The systems—developed by civil engineers at
the UBC’s Earthquake Engineering Research Facility—use
off-the-shelf accelerometers that cost pennies each, detect
vibrations and measure ground motion. Large numbers of
low-cost accelerometers are assembled and configured to
optimise the quality and sensitivity of the motion signals
detected and measured.
As with most early earthquake warning systems, the devices
designed for schools are calibrated to detect earthquakes’
compression (P) waves, which children may not notice and
adults may ignore. Fast-moving P-waves, which rarely damage
structures, may be mistaken for the rumbling of a heavy truck
nearby. They precede a quake’s slower, damaging shear (S)
waves—by just a few seconds or as many as tens of seconds,
depending how far away the earthquake’s ground zero is.
Encased in plastic cylinders, the school devices are
usually buried in pairs—each about 30 metres apart from its
partner—and about two metres deep in a schoolyard. They
connect to black boxes in the schools, and relay signals and
measurements to powerful servers at UBC, where software
monitors and analyses them.
The system is calibrated to recognise and disregard
tremors caused by construction, transport trucks or school
buses. In actual earthquakes, it triggers alarms in the
schools. This occurs within milliseconds and gives children,
teachers and staff seconds to seek shelter beneath desks or in
designated safe areas before the damaging S-wave arrives.
Earthquake Engineering Research Facility Director Dr.
Carlos Ventura, P.Eng., presented information about the
earthquake early warning system already implemented and
operational in the province to the BC Liberal caucus and
Opposition leaders during APEGBC’s recent meetings with
the provincial government (see page 9).
Large numbers
of off-the-shelf
accelerometers
are assembled
and configured to
detect and measure
vibrations and
ground motion.
3 2 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

egistration
Pilot Program Permits
Licensees
to Bridge
to Professional Status
APEGBC has developed a pilot
bridging program that is designed
to allow qualified and experienced
Engineering Licensees (Eng.L.'s) to
demonstrate that they have met the
requirements for full professional
status and help them obtain a
Professional Engineer (P.Eng.)
designation.
In order to be considered for this
pilot program, candidates must already
meet the following criteria:
• They must be an Eng.L. in good
standing;
- They must have obtained a
minimum of a two-year diploma
in science or technology in
engineering, applied science,
science or technology;
- They must have a low-risk profile,
which means that all of their
references are positive, at least two of
the references are from P.Engs that
practice in the same field and at least
one is a supervisor who is a P.Eng.;
• They must have at least 10 years
of well-documented, progressive
engineering experience, including
at least four years as an Eng.L, at
least one year working in a Canadian
engineering environment, and have
attained a position that demonstrates
the competencies of a P.Eng.
The bridging program requires
engineering licensees to also complete
the following requirements to be
considered for a P.Eng. designation:
• They must pass the Fundamentals of
Engineering (FE) and Professional
Engineers (PE) exams or other
suitable exam protocol set by a Board
of Examiners;
• They must execute an engineering
project based on their area of practice
and on a topic assigned by a technical
panel, prepare a technical project
report, and pass an interview by
an APEGBC panel of experienced
engineers about the report.
“Basically, they have to design and
conduct a technical thesis project
and defend it in front of an interview
committee,” says APEGBC Associate
Director of Engineering Admissions
Mark Rigolo, P.Eng. “However,
instead of their project being based on
university course work, the project is
based on work experience.”
The report and defense are judged
on the extent to which the candidate
demonstrates clear understanding of
engineering principles and key technical
aspects relating to the topic assigned
that one would normally expect from
someone graduating with a four-year
bachelor’s degree in engineering or
applied science.
Challenging and rigorous, the
bridging process is designed to help
ensure successful candidates meet
the requirements of a professional
engineer. “Licensees will need to have
commitment and rigour to pursue
this route,” says Rigolo. Engineering
licensees might opt for the bridging
program to advance their careers or as
a means to open the door to a broader
range of projects and responsibilities.
At this time, the pilot applies only to
engineering licensees, but Rigolo says
the intent is to broaden it to APEGBC
geoscience licensees.
The program that APEGBC
is piloting is similar to those of
other regulatory bodies elsewhere,
which provide bridging systems or
programs for licensees to gain full
professional status. v
Advance your team.
Do you have an experienced practitioner on your team
with a science degree or an engineering diploma?
They could be a candidate to become an
Engineering Licensee.
An Eng.L. can take full professional responsibility within
their scope of practice, bringing increased value to your
team.
For more information contact Mark Rigolo at
mrigolo@apeg.bc.ca.
apeg.bc.ca
i n n o v a t i o n M ARCH/APRIL 2016 3 3

practice
Organizational Quality Management Audit Process Assists Organizations
Lindsay Steele, P.Geo.
OQM
Organizational Quality
Management Program
Organizations that employ professional engineers and
professional geoscientists can take part in APEGBC’s voluntary
Organizational Quality Management (OQM) program. The
program helps organizations improve their quality management
practices, reduce risk, and support their professional employees.
One of the program’s benefits is site auditing—organizations
certified under OQM consider site audits a benefit.
Many people find the word “audit” frightening, picturing timeconsuming
processes and punitive outcomes. However, OQM
audits are designed to be helpful and informative experiences.
To ease the fear of auditing, we outline the OQM audit
process and describe the typical audit day.
Audit Process: General Information
An organization’s first site audit ideally takes place within 18
months of the organization being OQM certified. Subsequent
audits take place every five years, unless required sooner.
The OQM auditors notify the OQM certified organizations of
their proposed audit date two to three months beforehand. They
coordinate with the organization to schedule the audit for a day
that works for all parties. For organizations with multiple offices,
a proportion of the total number of BC offices will be audited.
For example, if an organization has four BC offices, an audit
takes place at head office and one additional office.
How long an audit lasts depends on the number of
professionals working at that location, whether or not the
organization is ISO:9001 compliant, and the number of auditors
available at the time.
No fees are associated with regularly scheduled audits.
However, if an organization requests additional audits or if
significant quality management issues are identified during
an audit that require a site to be re-audited the next year, the
organization pays for those audits.
The Typical Audit Day
Opening Meeting
The auditing team begins the audit by meeting with the
organization’s OQM representatives and invested parties to
discuss the schedule, the purpose of the audit, confidentiality,
and possible outcomes.
Project Selection
Before the day of the audit, the organization’s contact person
is asked to have a list of projects, by department, available on
the day of the audit. After the opening meeting, the auditors
review the list and randomly select a number of projects to
look at in detail.
Interviews
The auditors interview the project manager/Professional of Record
responsible for each selected project. The audit team looks at the
organization’s processes and procedures as they relate to OQM.
The auditors also speak with at least one Engineer-in-
Training or Geoscientist-in-Training (EIT or GIT) to get his or
her perspective on the OQM program, particularly in regards to
direct supervision, one of the quality management requirements.
The Report
At day’s end, the auditors take about one hour to write their
report. The report details the audit’s findings, describes the
areas of practice that require improvement, and notes any
exceptional or innovative quality management-related practices
within the organization.
An audit report may identify some or all of the following
categories of areas for improvement:
1) Opportunities for Improvement (OFIs). The auditors
observe nothing wrong; however, there may be areas where
risk can be mitigated. Opportunities for improvement do
not require follow-up action.
2) Minor non-conformances (NCs). The auditors observe
isolated or non-systemic issues that require follow-up
action.
3) Major non-conformance (NCs). The auditors observe
systemic issues that require follow-up action and
possible re-auditing in 12 months. In some cases, nonconformances
may lead to the organization’s OQM
certification being revoked.
If no non-conformances are found during the audit, the
audit finishes at the end of the day. If the audit identifies
minor or major non-conformances, the organization must
prepare and send a corrective action plan to the auditors
within 30 days, outlining the organization’s strategy for
addressing the non-conformances.
Closing meeting
During the closing meeting, the auditors present their findings
to the organization and review the audit report details and
required follow-up action.
Our experience shows that the OQM audit helps
organizations identify where their quality management
practices can be improved and provides a framework for
making those improvements. This, in turn, helps organizations
increase efficiencies and customer satisfaction, reduce risk,
and support their professionals in meeting their professional
requirements. Auditors frequently receive positive feedback on
the audit process from organizations and—a true sign of how
organizations value the OQM-audit experience—are regularly
asked by organizations to conduct additional audits.
For more information about APEGBC’s OQM program,
see apeg.bc.ca/oqm. v
3 4 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

discipline and enforcement
Consent Orders and notices of inquiry and determination are posted on APEGBC’s website. Information about
APEGBC’s complaint, investigation and discipline process can be found at apeg.bc.ca or by contacting us at 604.412.4869
(toll-free at 1.888.430.8035, ext. 4869) or complaints@apeg.bc.ca.
Disciplinary Notice – Peter T. George, P. Geo., Cochrane, Alberta
A Notice of Inquiry was issued to Mr. Peter George
regarding his Technical Report dated August 12,
2012, for the Barkerville Project owned by Barkerville
Gold Mines Ltd. (the “Barkerville Report”) and with
respect to two technical reports for Rubicon Minerals
Corporation dated January 11 and April 11, 2011, for
its Phoenix Gold Project in Ontario (the “Rubicon
Reports”).
In lieu of proceeding to a disciplinary inquiry, Mr.
George agreed to a Consent Order dated December 3,
2015. In the Consent Order, Mr. George admitted that
he demonstrated unprofessional conduct, incompetence
or negligence. The Barkerville Report and the
Rubicon Reports fell below the standard expected of a
reasonably prudent Qualified Person and professional
geoscientist in similar circumstances.
Mr. George also admitted that he contravened
APEGBC’s Code of Ethics as he accepted responsibility
for a professional assignment when he was not
sufficiently qualified by training or experience and he
failed to keep himself informed in order to maintain his
competence.
As part of the Consent Order, Mr. George accepted a
reprimand and agreed that he will:
1. Pay a fine of $15,000.
2. Pay $20,000 towards APEGBC’s legal costs.
3. Have a condition imposed on his membership in
APEGBC that he must not perform mineral resource
or mineral reserve estimations as defined in National
Instrument 43-101 (“N1 43-101”). Despite this
condition, Mr. George is permitted to:
(i) partner with other professional geoscientists with
expertise in mineral resource or mineral reserve
estimations, provided that the other professional
geoscientists take responsibility for the mineral
resource or mineral resource estimations in an N1
43-101 report; and
(ii)prepare geological reports which do
not involve mineral resource or mineral
reserve estimations.
4. Complete the course entitled “Mineral Project
Reporting Under NI 43-101 (a CIM Course)” offered
by EduMine.
If Mr. George fails to comply with any of the orders,
his membership in APEGBC will be suspended until he
is in full compliance with those orders.
Disciplinary Notice – Yulin Gao, P.Eng.
A Notice of Inquiry dated March 26, 2015, was issued
to Mr. Yulin Gao, P.Eng. In lieu of proceeding to a
Disciplinary Inquiry, Mr. Gao agreed to a Consent Order
admitting that between 2008 and 2012, he engaged in
unwanted conduct toward a female employee to whom
he was in a position of authority at the engineering firm
where he was employed.
More specifically, Mr. Gao admitted that, while at the
firm’s office and in public settings, he at times positioned
himself closer to the employee than appropriate
for business communications and, while doing so,
sometimes deliberately made physical contact with her.
On occasion, he made comments to the employee about
her appearance that she reasonably perceived to be of
a sexual nature. On other occasions, he requested and
received a hug from her. He contacted the employee by
text message, email and telephone after hours for nonbusiness
purposes and on occasion asked her to perform
tasks, such as minding his children while they were in
the office, that were unrelated to her employment. The
communication and contact was unwanted by the female
employee and continued despite her verbal and written
requests that he stop.
Mr. Gao now understands that his conduct constitutes
unprofessional conduct and is inappropriate in the
workplace. APEGBC has no evidence to suggest that
Mr. Gao engaged in such behaviour toward any other
person. Mr. Gao has taken steps to educate himself on
appropriate professional boundaries in his interactions
with co-workers.
As part of the Consent Order, Mr. Gao is suspended
for six months; however, the suspension is stayed and will
not come into effect if he provides satisfactory evidence
to APEGBC by March 15, 2016, that he has successfully
completed a specific individualised in-person Sensitivity
and Boundaries Coaching Program. Mr. Gao must also
complete follow-up sessions to the program at one week,
one month, two months, three months, six months, nine
months and twelve months. Mr. Gao must complete the
program and the follow-up sessions at his own expense
and pay $10,000 as a contribution towards APEGBC’s
legal costs.
If Mr. Gao fails to comply with any of the terms of
the Consent Order, his membership in APEGBC will be
suspended until he is in compliance.
i n n o v a t i o n MARCH/APRIL 2016 3 5

community
Branch Tours College’s Oil and Gas Training Facility
In northeastern British Columbia, multiple industries, including agriculture, forestry,
renewable energy, and oil and gas, flourish. APEGBC’s Peace River Branch had received
requests from members to tour the region’s oil and gas facilities. However, the dangers and
safety requirements of the oil and gas industry made arranging tours in this industry difficult.
Fortunately, an alternative was available. Branch members connected with Northern Lights
College, BC’s energy college, to tour its simulated well-site and drilling-rig facility in Fort St. John.
Over the years, the college has received donations of equipment used in oil and
gas exploration, extraction, and transportation processes from industry partners and
stakeholders. The equipment includes a drilling rig, service rig, flare stack, pumpjack,
pigging station, and gas processing, separation units, dehydration, and sweetening. The
units are retrofitted to operate at lower pressures, making for a safe training environment.
Fourteen APEGBC members toured the facility. Northern Lights College President
and CEO Bryn Kylmatycki and Associate Dean of Trades and Apprenticeships Robert
McAleney provided two hours of knowledge sharing, and students demonstrated their
knowledge of the energy industry. The safe training environment meant members could
enter simulated processing facilities and operate valves that moved compressed air.
Imagine the Possibilities: National Engineering and Geoscience Month 2016
March is National Engineering and Geoscience Month (NEGM).
This year, the NEGM theme is Imagine the Possibilities. By looking
through the eyes of a professional engineer or professional
geoscientist, we can view the world differently and better
appreciate the work that goes into engineering and geoscience
projects. To demonstrate this, APEGBC used various media and
NEGM events and activities to promote the professions and the
roles of engineers and geoscientists in our communities.
“The work of professional engineers and professional
geoscientists lives all around us,” says Ann English, P.Eng.,
APEGBC CEO and Registrar. “They see the world through a
different lens—they are explorers, problem solvers, and inventors.”
Captivating kids with science and encouraging today’s
students to consider careers in engineering and geoscience
is one of the ways APEGBC is promoting the professions
within the community and working to ensure there are
enough future engineers and geoscientists. Other activities
to promote the professions within the community include
Science Games, NEGM Challenge, and branch and careerawareness
events.
The association also promoted the professions through:
Videos: In each video, APEGBC followed two of our members
around their job sites to see what they do as a professional
engineer or professional geoscientist.
Online Ads: To reach residents throughout BC, APEGBC ran
two 15-second online video ads on the Vancouver Sun and Post
Media webpages, and one ad on the Victoria Times Colonist
online newspaper.
Print Ads: Throughout March, APEGBC placed advertisements
in the following newspapers: Alaska Highway News, Kelowna
Daily Courier, Kamloops This Week, Prince George Citizen,
Vancouver Sun and Victoria Times Colonist.
Posters: To reach the younger generation of engineers and
geoscientists, APEGBC placed posters in select, high-traffic areas
at Simon Fraser University, University of British Columbia, and
the British Columbia Institute of Technology.
To view the ads and videos, visit apeg.bc.ca/NEGM.
3 6 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

Science Games Engage Kids
School kids converged at Science World at
TELUS World of Science on March 5 to take
part in APEGBC’s 2016 Science Games. The kids
explored science through hands-on activities and
problem solving.
Generous sponsorship by BC Hydro, Fortis BC,
Klohn Crippen Berger, Knight Piésold Consulting,
Port Metro Vancouver and Stantec helped make
the games possible. APEGBC volunteers ran
and judged the activities, led by members of the
Science Games Steering Committee. GEERing Up
UBC Engineering & Science for Kids entertained
everyone with a science demonstration.
Division 1 teams showcased how today’s coal
originated 200- to 145-million years ago, then
explored density and propulsion by racing sail
boats, and solids, liquids and porosity by creating
water filters.
Division 2 students showed off their geologicalhazard
models, devised simplified instructions
to mimic computer programs, and created paper
rockets to explore aerodynamics, drag and force.
A big thank you to teams, volunteers and
sponsors for a successful, inspiring Science Games.
More information is available at apeg.bc.ca/
science-games.
Medal Winners
Division 1 Teamwork: Sensational Scientists;
Creativity: Mighty Tigers; Gold: Science
Star; Silver: Sensational Scientists; Bronze:
Coal Explorer
Division 2 Teamwork: Raging Methane;
Creativity: Ice Quakers; Gold: Ice Quakers;
Silver: Raging Methane; Bronze: Woodward
Science Kittens. v
i n n o v a t i o n MARCH/APRIL 2016 3 7

emovals
Removals for Non-Payment of Membership Renewal Fee
At the direction of Council, the following members have been removed from the register and are held in arrears of membership renewal
fees for 2016 (Section 21, Engineers and Geoscientists Act, 1996). To determine whether the member has been reinstated, please check
the APEGBC Membership Directory at apeg.bc.ca/Member-Directories or call 604.430.8035 or toll-free 1.888.430.8035.
H.U. Ahmed
H.T. Alagao
D.G. Allen
R.W. Allen
N. Al-Samarrai
T. Ambrose
E.C. Amoroso
D. Anand
V. Anand
K. Arai
V. Arantes
L. Arcand
J.P. Archbell
G.S. Arnold
F. Arsene
J.E. Ashburner
S. Ashrafi
F. Azhari
B.C. Babcock
Z.N. Baczynski
G. Bak
R.E. Baker
M. Banaei
Esfahani
A.S. Bayan
R.A. Belak
J.G. Belland
V.J. Bello Figari
H. Berde
E. Bergeron
R.G. Bischoff
T.R. Blackburn
J. Blanchfield
M.R. Blusson
M.E. Bodin
A. Bolanos Luna
G.D. Bosecker
P.A. Boulton
A.K. Bowden
A.P. Brisbin
J.L. Brisson
M.A. Brodie
R.C. Brooks
C. Brosseau
C.R. Brown
C.N. Brown
D.J. Brown
C.D. Buettner
M.M. Buhler
L. Buitrago
A.M. Bustin
F.R. Cabije
J.A. Carter
N.E. Ceron
Correa
A.L. Chakraborty
L.Y. Chan
V.C. Chan
W.C. Chandler
R.D. Chase
S. Chaudhary
A. Chauhadiya
V.H. Chee
S.K. Cheema
B.L. Chen
C. Chen
L. Cheng
P.Y. Cheng
A. Chow
E. Chu
J.J. Chu
W.Y. Chu
A. Clain
D.A. Claire
J.W. Clark
S. Clark
W.E. Clark
J.J. Cormier
A.J. Coyle
T.L. Craig
K.R. Crawford
A. Cruz
O.M. Cruz
S.D. Curry
W.E. Curtis
A.G. Cushing
B.M. Dahle
S. Daly
P. Daoust
P.K. Das
S.K. Das
J.A. Date
B.O. Davies
C.G. Davis
Z.C. Davis
J.C. Dean
G.T. DeFosse
M.W. Delich
M.P. Delorme
R.J. Desmarais
S. Despres
S.J. Devivo
J. Diao
E.C. Dillon
Q. Ding
C.L. Drewlo
S.C. Duchek
J.P. Dueck
N.W. Dumaresq
R.I. Duncan
S. Durocher
I.J. Dyck
L. Earle
S. Ebrahimi
G. Ehrler
V. Ehvert
B. Emaminia
E. Entezaralmahdi
A. Eshaghzadeh
A. Estaki
C.M.C. Farish
A. Fatehi
3 8 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n
S.D. Federko
R.M. Ferguson
E. Fernandes
N.M. Fernandes
M.I. Fernandez
A.I. Field
N.P. Fleming
A.T. Floor
S.N. Foellmi
T.T. Fok
H. Fontaine
S.S. Foo
J. Fournier
A.K. Frackowiak
K.K. Fu
S.C. Fulton
C.D. Gabel
M.S. Gadala
A.H. Gajjar
I. Ganelin
J.A. Garcia
Salmon
E. Garfinkel
N. Gasmi
M.R. Gautam
M.R. Gerrits
B.A. Girard
D.S. Girard
M.T.H. Golke
X. Gong
L.A. Gonzalez
J.S. Gordon
C.D. Gore
J. Goudarzi
A. Goyette
D.A. Grant
S.J. Gunson
G. Haddad
E.A. Hagerty
M.F. Hall
R.A. Hall
A.J. Hamilton
C.I. Hamilton
J.D. Hamilton
B.G. Hamwi
W. Hansen
S. Haque
L.I. Hardy
J.A. Harjula
G. Harvey
B.M. Henkel
M. Hermelin
C.J. Hewitt
M. Hildebrand
T.L. Hilderman
L.G. Hird
J.A. Holash
R.B. Hollinger
R.T. Holmes
W.B. Holtsbaum
J.T. Hong
J.P. Hope
P.E. Hopkins
W.B. Horie
J.W. Horner
H. Hoseini
S. Hou
J. Huang
M.W. Huang
J.S. Hulsman
S. Hussain
T.H. Huynh
C. Hwu
A.E. Ibhahebhomen
A.R. Jackman
E.C. Jackson
G.E. Jackson
J.P. Jacob
J.J. Jakes
X.S. Ji
C. Jiang
X. Jiang
D.J. Johnson
S. Jovanovic
P.E. Judd
S.K. Julio
K. Kabiri
J.G. Kalbfleisch
C. Kamp
X. Kang
S. Kanji
B.S. Karpoff de
Korsounsky
M.J. Kennedy
A. Khamsi
N.N. Kharma
R.J. Kilpatrick
P.M. Kim
G.L. King
K. Kishimoto
E.J. Kolla
E.H. Kollmar
V. Kondrosky
C. Koutsaris
W. Kowalski
T.A. Kryczka
J.H. Kuehl
T. Kumar
T.P. Kuo
N.J. Ladd
S.M. Lagace
C.P. Lagan
J.P. Lailey
L.S. Lam
P. Lambert
L.L. Lambiotte
J.G. Lamont
Y. Lao
K. Larson
R.K. Larson
F.J. Lauzon
W.D. LeBlanc
M.J. Leclerc
S.J. Leclerc
G.R. Lee
H. Lee
A. Lemieux
Claveau
F. Letourneau
V.K. Leung
J.P. Lewis
J.C. Lewis
D. Li
K.R. Li
L. Li
S. Li
Y. Li
Z. Li
K. Liao
R.A. Lidgren
T.D. Lin
T. Lin
G.M. Lindsay
A.D. Liu
K. Liu
P.H. Liu
Y.H. Liu
Y. Liu
C.A. Lochhead
K.G. Lockhart
R.J. Loeffler
S.C. Loptson
T.M. Lovse
H. Lu
Y. Lu
F. Luan
D.W. Lubarsky
O.M. Lund
T.M. Lung
A.T. MacGibbon
K.J. Maddox
M.K. Madugula
T.J. Magowan
R.K. Mah
B.W. Maitson
M. Malek-Afzali
P.K. Malhotra
C. Malone
A.A. Mamun
K.M. Manzer
J.G. Martin
J.D. Martinello
J. E. Martinez
D. Martinez
Fonte
R.J. Massinon
K. Mazlomi
L.S. McCauley
D.W. McGeough
R.F. McIntyre
M.A. McKeown
W.S. McLean
A.E. McLeod
J.K. McMahon
M.D. McMillen
T.W. McMullen
S. Medianu
E. Meheriuk
F. Mehrkhodavandi
B. Mepe
V. Mermut
D.F. Merrick
D.J. Metz
H.G. Meuser
A.K. Miah
B.D. Miller
J.D. Miller
S.C. Miller
C. Minerva
S.E. Minhas
S. Mirea
S. Mirshafie
N. Moazzami
H. Moffedi
K.R. Moftah
M. Mohammed
T.L. Moore
M.R. Morgan
G.W. Morris
B.J. Morrison
M.E. Morrison
B. Mosberian
S. Moskalyk
J.C. Moyse
D.N. Murray
M. Naji Esfahani
S. Nandi
J.W. Nauss
A.Z. Nawaz
J.E. Neitsch
T.D. Newmark
L.B. Ng
T.L. Ngo
A.G. Nicholson
L. Numanoglu
J.C. Nycz
O.T. Odeleye
M.P. Olsen
K.G. Olshaski
A.A. Omran
B.R. O’Neill
E.K. Oxley
Y. Pageau
S.D. Palmer
D.W. Paolone
T.S. Pape
M.K. Parrott
R.R. Patel
S.R. Patel
J.E. Patterson
R. Paul
M.D. Pavlakovich
S.M. Pavlin
E. Pawliw
R. Penner
R.F. Peper
K.T. Pettet
C.A. Pocock
T.A. Pohl
B. Pomo
R. Portnoy
S.M. Potts
A. Prasad
D.D. Quidilla
P.I. Raina
M. Raissi
N. Rajabi Nasab
V.M. Rambaran
E. Ramirez
Bettoni
M.G. Rauch
C.P. Reddin
P.B. Rege
C.L. Rehaume
D.J. Riehm
B.D. Ritchie
R.E. Robbins
D.O. Robertson
K.E.M.H.
Robitaille
K.M. Rogers
M.A. Rohrbach
P. Rose
D. Roy
B. Ruette
C.P. Runyan
J. Ryu
A.R. Sabry
A.M. Sadeghi
H.A.S. Sadeq
J. Saeidi
L.S. Sakuragi
R.M. Salli
I.V.Samarasekera
K.J. Sanderson
R.M. Sarrazin
P. Saunier
L.M. Sawchyn
M.A. Schmidt
M.B. Scott
R. Seto
M.A. Setzekorn
C. Shah
R.N. Shakirov
S. Sharma
L. Shen
M. Sherkat
B.J. Sherriff
W. Shi
D.J. Shields
N. Shir-
Mohammadi
D.J. Simard
R.G. Simington
D. Simons

T.L. Simpson
S.P. Singh
S.J. Sirard
N.K.W. Siu
M. Slivar
M.E. Smale
Y.R. Small
C.M. Smith
K.E. Smith
L.S. Smith
R.L. Smith
W.R. Smith
D.R. Smuin
B. Sohrabi
M. Soleimani
P. Soleimani
J.M. Somers
Y. Song
C.J. Sparrey
G.S. Springle
V. Stanojevic
L. Steers
E.L. Stephens
T.W. Stoner
A.W. Stradling
T.J. Stuffco
Y. Sukhorukov
P.J. Sullivan
M. Sun
K.W. Sunderman
I.A. Svorinic
D.E. Sweeney
L.B. Tacoma
D. Tamblyn
J. Tang
B.E. Tangjerd
A.R. Tattersall
C.C. Taylor
M.A. Taylor
D. Tessier
I.G. Theaker
S. Theriault
N. Theroux
J.N. Thibault
L.K. Tjiong
M.J. Tokar
T.M. Topham
L.C. Topp
J. Torres
C.E. Trechi
Mederos
D. Trieu
W.S. Tse
S. Tu
E.J. Turcotte
W.J. Twasiuk
F. Valeri
S. Vaudrin
G. Vranici
D.R. Wager
T.P. Wagner
A.M. Waibel
J.M. Walker
B.D. Wallace
T.L. Wallis
M.D. Walsh
A.P. Walther
Y. Wan
H. Wang
L. Wang
R. Wang
Y. Wang
K.J. Warman
C.J. Warren
S.R. Warren
A.S. Watson
W.L. Wegner
F. Wei
I.M. Wilcox
J.G. Wilczynski
N. Williams
A.W. Winter
C. Wong
C.T. Wong
C.W. Wong
J.V. Wong
S.K. Wong
S.M. Woodworth
B.M. Woudstra
C. Xia
D. Xiao
C. Xie
R. Yada
T. Yang
P.E. Yassa
J.K. Yee
C.C. Yeh
T. Yeung
T. Yip
Y. You
H. Yu
J.Y. Yu
D.R. Zabarylo
S. Zandi
S.P. Zhang
D. Zhao
M.A. Zuccarini
C. Zuo
A. Zwierzchlewski
membership
IN MEMORIAM
The Association announces
with regret the passing of the
following members:
J. Akerley, P.Eng. B.Sc.
RMC Canada ’94, B.Sc.
Queen’s ’61
A. Aligizakis, P.Eng. Dipl.
Calgary ’81
C.N. Armstrong, P.Eng.
B.Sc. Strathclyde ’64
L.M. Baxter, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’70
G. Bramhall, P.Eng. Ph.D.
Syracuse ’70, M.Sc. UBC
’67, B.A.Sc. UBC ’46
R.D. Cameron, P.Eng.
Ph.D. Washington,
Seattle ’70, M.Sc.
Alberta ’67, B.Sc.
Alberta ’55
J.H. Casimir, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. Toronto ’64
R.G. Cawker, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Manitoba ’50
D.A. Duncan, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’55
R.K. Good, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’89
R.D. Handel, P.Eng., FEC
B.A.Sc. UBC ’49
P.C. Hensman, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Coventry ’48
P.G. Hill, P.Eng. Sc.D. MIT
’58, M.Sc. Birmingham
’55, B.Sc. Queen’s ’53
J.F. Hills, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’42
J.A. Hudson, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’52
R.F. Hughes, P.Eng. B.S.
North Dakota ’67
J.L. Kinsey, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
Toronto ’50
G.J. Mckenzie, P.Eng. B.S.
Washington State ’55
N. Moysa, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’53
V.R. Nordrum, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. Waterloo ’70
D.A. Poole, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Western ’72
N.R. Risebrough, P.Eng.
Ph.D. UBC ’66, M.A.Sc.
Toronto ’61, B.A.Sc.
Toronto ’60
R.A. Ruddell, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’50
V. Ruzicka, P.Eng. Ing.
Tech.U. Brno ’50
T. Schootman, P.Eng.
APEGBC Exams ’65,
H.T.S Rotterdam ’43
J. Scott, P.Eng. B.Tech.
Loughborough ’71
E.H. Tarrant, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’45
H. Van borrendam, P.Eng.
B.Eng. Concordia ’71
J.T. Walford, P.Eng.
Treforest ’64, HNC
Acton ’57, ONC
Birmingham ’52
R.J. Wood, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’59
LIFE MEMBERS
The following members have
been granted Life Membership
under Bylaw 10c1
J.G. Abbott, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Carleton ’75
J.D. Adams, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Manitoba ’72
G.D. Akins, P.Eng. B.Sc. St.
Andrews ’65
D.P. Allan, P.Eng. M.A.Sc.
UBC ’71, B.A.Sc. UBC
’68
J.D. Altmeyer, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’69
M.N. Anderson, P.Eng.
B.Sc. Manitoba ’53
J.S. Arnold, P.Eng. LL.B.
UBC ’81, B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’69
R.S. Artis, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Westminster, London
’71
T.J. Babcock, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’60
D.G. Bailey, P.Geo. Ph.D.
Queen’s ’78, B.Sc.
Victoria, Wellington
’73
R.A. Bailey, P.Eng. M.B.A.
McMaster ’76, B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’71
R. Banner, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’72, B.Sc.
Alberta ’68
J. Barker, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’69
E.H. Bassett, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Saskatchewan ’70, B.E.
Saskatchewan ’68
J.L. Batho, P.Eng.
Okleveles Budapest U.
Tech. Econ. ’52
P.A. Beauchemin, P.Eng.
B.Sc. Alberta ’67
D.R. Bennett, P.Eng.
HNC, Bristol ’67, ONC
Bristol ’64
C.J. Berg, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’66
C.W. Berg, P.Eng. B.S.
Washington State ’71
T. Berg, P.Eng. Siviling’r
Norwegian U.Sci.
Tech. ’66
K.E. Bespflug, P.Eng.
M.A.Sc. Toronto ’72,
B.Sc. Alberta ’67
G.E. Bidwell, P.Geo. B.A.
Saskatchewan ’67
J.G. Biggs, P.Eng. B.Eng.
McGill ’56
J.M. Bond, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’68
I.R. Booth, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Aston, Birmingham ’51
W.G. Botel, P.Eng. B.Sc.
UBC ’60
R.T. Boughner, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. Waterloo ’70
A.R. Bowers, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’69
J.R. Branson, P.Eng.
M.Sc. Alberta ’66, B.Sc.
Alberta ’61
H. Brennert, P.Eng. Civ.
Ing. Stockholm ’64
G.A. Bridger, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Birmingham ’72, B.Sc.
Southampton ’67
D. Broomhead, P.Eng.
M.Sc. Birmingham ’71,
B.Sc. Coventry ’70
D.L. Bruce, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Queen’s ’71, B.Sc.
Queen’s ’69
J.T. Buchan, P.Eng. M.S.
CalTech ’65, B.Sc.
Edinburgh ’64
V.L. Buchholz, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’81
I.R. Burden, P.Eng. B.E.
Auckland ’68
R.B. Buss, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Manitoba ’62
D.L. Byers, P.Eng. B.S.
California State, LA ’69
W. Chan, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Carleton ’72, B.Eng.
Hong Kong Tak Ming
Coll. ’63
A.T. Chattaway, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’71
W.S. Chyplyk, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’70
D.C. Clark, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Nottingham ’66
J.J. Clarke, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’69
P.W. Clarke, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Queen’s ’69
R.F. Cleven, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’71
N.J. Cole-Morgan, P.Eng.
M.B.A. Western ’70,
B.A.Sc. Toronto ’67
J.S. Collins, P.Eng. Ph.D.
Washington ’73, M.Eng.
TUNS ’66, B.E. TUNS
’64
T.S. Coulter, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Dublin City ’69, B.A.
Dublin City ’67
R.J. Cowan, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’72
J.P. Crane, P.Eng. M.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’71, B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’69
B.W. Creelman, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’70
J.R. Cross, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Leeds ’66
D.A. Davidson, P.Eng.
M.A.Sc. UBC ’60,
B.A.Sc. UBC ’57
R.E. Davis, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’62
M.M. de Spot, P.Eng. Ing.
Catholic U. Louvain ’70
J.R. Dean, P.Geo. B.Sc.
McGill ’68
W.H. Dreher, P.Eng. M.Sc.
UBC ’75, Dipl.Ing.
Swiss Federal Inst.Tech.
ETHZ ’69
D.H. Ericson, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’69
R. Eshref, P.Eng. Y.Muh.
Istanbul ’73
D.M. Ethier, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’72
R.L. Evans, P.Eng. Ph.D.
Cambridge ’73, M.A.Sc.
Toronto ’70, B.A.Sc.
UBC ’68
O.J. Ewanchyna, P.Eng.
B.Sc. Manitoba ’74
D.J. Flintoff, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
Toronto ’70
M.F. Foster, P.Eng. M.B.A.
UBC ’71, B.A.Sc. UBC
’69
R.G. Friesen, P.Geo. B.Sc.
UBC ’67
R.J. Friesen, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’71
I.I. Frydecky, P.Eng.
M.A.Sc. UBC ’80,
B.A.Sc. UBC ’71
B.T. Furneaux, P.Geo.
B.Sc. UBC ’60
T.J. Gardner, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Strathclyde ’68
D.F. Gillespie, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’69
R.B. Granholm, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’71
D.B. Grant, P.Geo. B.Sc.
Memorial ’70
J.P. Gregoire, P.Eng. B.Sc.A.
HEC Montréal ’72
T.A. Haksi, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’69
I.W. Hargreaves, P.Eng.
B.Sc. Leeds ’61
V. Haubert, P.Eng. Inz.
Czech Tech.U. Prague
’69
J.B. Hayman, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Queen’s ’54
J.M. Hill, P.Eng. M.B.A.
SFU ’90, Ph.D.
Newcastle ’71, B.Sc.
Newcastle ’67
A.F. Ho, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Toronto ’82, B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’77
J.D. Hood, P.Eng. Dipl.
London, South Bank ’70
G.D. Hooper, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’70
I.F. Humar, P.Eng. M.Sc.
New Brunswick ’76,
B.Sc. New Brunswick
’71
A.C. Hume, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’66
B.I. Ingimundson, P.Geo.
Dipl.Tech. Manitoba ’65
D.M. Jenkins, P.Geo. M.S.
Florida ’66, B.A. S.
Florida ’63
i n n o v a t i o n M ARCH/APRIL 2016 3 9

membership
J.K. Johansen, P.Eng.
M.A.Sc. Waterloo
’77, B.A.Sc. Waterloo
’71
R.H. Johnston, P.Eng.
M.A.Sc. UBC ’72, B.Sc.
Guelph ’68
V. Kahle, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Tech.U. Brno ’68
P.S. Kashyap, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Portsmouth ’69
M.I. Kassam, P.Eng. M.S.
Houston ’71, B.E. Pune
’68
T.W. Kern, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’77
A.A. Khalil, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alexandria ’68
M.H. Khan-abadi, P.Eng.
B.S. Missouri, St. Louis
’71
R.G. Killam, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’71
T.W. Kirkham, P.Eng. B.S.
Washington, Seattle ’68
M.J. Knapp, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’71
T.E. Koepke, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC’ ‘67
M. Kotler, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Carleton ’73
W.B. Kruger, P.Eng. M.B.A.
SFU ’92, B.Sc. Alberta
’70
M.J. Lake, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Imp. Coll. Sci.Tech.Med.,
London ’67
H.F. Lam, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’69
T.G. Lam, P.Eng., FEC
B.A.Sc. UBC ’69
M.H. Lau, P.Eng. M.A.Sc.
UBC ’72, B.Sc. Queen
Mary, London ’68
J.L. Lebel, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Manitoba ’73, B.Sc.
Queen’s ’71
A.R. Lefevre, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Strathclyde ’72
R.A. Leitzman, P.Eng. B.S.
Arizona ’64
G.B. Lemieux, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’66
S.I. Leppanen, P.Eng. Dipl.
Ins. Helsinki U.Tech. ’70
H. Lillquist, P.Eng. Dipl.
Ing. Swiss Federal Inst.
Tech. ETHZ ’71
D.G. Lindsay, P.Eng. B.Sc.
New Brunswick ’69
R.H. Lloyd, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’74
D.M. Macquarrie, P.Eng.
M.A.Sc. UBC ’93,
B.Eng. RMC Canada
’69
D.C. Malcolm, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’71
J.M. Marr, P.Geo. M.Sc.
Manitoba ’70, B.Sc. St.
Andrews ’68
J.H. McAusland, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’62
R.L. McCabe, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Queen’s ’62
J.A. McDonald, P.Geo.
Ph.D. Wisconsin,
Madison ’63, M.Sc.
Manitoba ’60, B.Sc.
Manitoba ’58
T.C. McGauley, P.Eng. B.S.
Washington State ’72,
B.Sc. SFU ’69
J.A. McLeod, P.Eng.
M.A.Sc. UBC ’75, B.A.Sc.
UBC ’69
P.A. McNiven, P.Eng.
M.B.A. SFU ’79, B.A.Sc.
Toronto ’69
D.W. Mogridge, P.Eng.
B.Sc. Alberta ’58
R.P. Moline, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’71
P.D. Monahan, P.Eng. B.E.
Melbourne ’63
M.C. Moncur, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Waterloo ’91, B.A.Sc.
Windsor ’72
B.A. Montpellier, P.Eng.
B.Sc. UBC ’70
J.R. Morse, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’68
G.B. Munro, P.Eng. B.E.
Sydney ’60
G.A. Neale, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’74
R.K. Nelson, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’64
R.A. Nemeth, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’63
A.R. Nurmohamed,
P.Eng. M.S. Virginia
Polytech.Inst. ’73, B.Sc.
Nairobi ’69
W.K. Oldham, P.Eng. Ph.D.
Texas, Austin ’65, B.A.Sc.
UBC ’59
T. Ong, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Strathclyde ’74
A.S. Orchard, P.Eng.
M.B.A. Western ’73,
B.A.Sc. UBC ’69
R.E. Owen, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’68
M.D. Palmer, P.Eng.
Ph.D. Toronto ’71,
M.Sc. Queen’s ’65, B.Sc.
Queen’s ’60
R.C. Palmer, P.Eng. B.Eng.
McMaster ’69, M.B.A.
Washington, Seattle ’88
O.K. Parmar, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Eng. Punjab ’68
A.B. Parmeter, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. Windsor ’72
T.J. Partridge, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Manitoba ’61
D.S. Patsula, P.Eng. B.E.
Seattle ’69
C.A. Pearson, P.Geo.
R.M. Platt, P.Eng. M.S.
Washington, Seattle ’73,
B.A.Sc. Toronto ’67
I.W. Pond, P.Eng. A.C.S.M.
Exeter, Inc. Camborne
Sch. Mines ’67
A.K. Quan, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’69
A. Rader, P.Eng. Dipl.Ing.
Trier ’68
A.W. Randall, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’72
R.E. Rasku, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Queen’s ’63
F.V. Rathje, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Manitoba ’69
M.A. Redfearn, P.Eng. B.S.
Michigan Tech.U. ’68
T.F. Reimchen, P.Geo.
M.Sc. Alberta ’68, B.Sc.
Alberta ’66
S.R. Rettie, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Manitoba ’71
B.E. Riddick, P.Eng.
M.B.A. McGill ’79, B.Sc.
Queen’s ’68
D.J. Robek, P.Eng. Inz.
Czech Tech.U. Prague
’69
W.J. Roberts, P.Geo. B.Sc.
UBC ’68
R.B. Robertson, P.Eng.
B.Sc. Manitoba ’66
R.J. Rodger, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Queen’s ’61
D.W. Root, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Calgary ’73
F. Roque, P.Eng. Ing. El
Salvador ’71
P. Rosecky, P.Eng. Inz.
Tech.U. Liberec ’68
P.A. Rufenacht, P.Eng.
Dipl.Ing. Swiss Federal
Inst.Tech. ETHZ ’70
P.E. Salt, P.Eng. M.Eng.
UBC ’76, M.E.
Auckland ’69, B.E.
Auckland ’68
G.T. Sawayama, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. Toronto ’69
B.A. Schalke, P.Eng. B.S.
Michigan Tech.U. ’72
R. Schwertner, P.Eng.
Ing. Oskar Von Miller
Polytech. ’62
H.W. Sellmer, P.Geo. M.Sc.
UBC ’66, B.Sc. UBC ’64
A. Shivji, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Nairobi ’69
A.B. Skalmstad, P.Eng.
M.B.A. Toronto ’85, Civ.
Ing. Stockholm ’70
R.B. Smith, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Saskatchewan ’72, B.Sc.
Saskatchewan ’69
R.W. Speers, P.Eng. M.E.
New S. Wales ’71, B.E.
New S. Wales ’67
S. Sridhar, P.Eng. B.Tech.
Indian Inst.Tech., Delhi
’69
G.B. Stanwood, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’60
H.J. Steinberg, P.Eng. Ing.
Staatliche ’63
L.W. Stock, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’69
W.P. Stokes, P.Eng. HND
North Staffs Coll. ’67,
ONC Cannock Tech. ’63
N. Streat, P.Eng. Ph.D.
UBC ’74, B.Sc. City U.,
London ’66
V.M. Strijack, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Saskatchewan ’58
B.R. Suchy, P.Eng. Inz.
Tech.U. Liberec ’69
M.S. Tam, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Hong Kong ’63
S.I. Taylor, P.Eng. M.S.
CalTech ’65, B.A.Sc.
UBC ’63
J.T. Thompson, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’68
N.E. Thompson, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’68
B.F. Vernon, P.Eng. M.A.Sc.
Toronto ’76, B.A.Sc.
Windsor’’69
H.G. Wagner, P.Eng. B.I.
Eng. General Motors
Inst. ’71
R.J. Walker, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’70
R.S. Walker, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Birmingham ’70
R.D. Wallace, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’70
E.J. Wayte, P.Eng. B.E.
Auckland ’71
P.A. Wiebe, P.Eng. D.I.C.
King’s Coll., London
’64, M.Sc. Aberdeen ’63,
B.A.Sc. UBC ’60
D.A. Williams, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Westminster, London ’66
D.J. Wilson, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Queen’s ’80
J.F. Wilson, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Queen’s ’71
R. Yazdani-Mehdiabadi,
P.Eng. Ph.D. New
Brunswick ’82, M.Sc.
Tehran ’70, B.Sc.
Tehran ’65
F.Y. Yu, P.Eng. B.Sc. Queen’s
’70
D.W. Zandee, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’69
A. Zielinski, P.Eng. Dr.N.T.
Wroclaw ’71Mgstr.Inz.
Wroclaw ’67
G.H. Zielke, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’69
R.D. Zimmerman, P.Eng.
M.Sc. Manitoba ’75,
B.Sc. Manitoba ’71
NEW MEMBERS
PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERS
D.S. Abeygoda, P.Eng.
B.Eng. Curtin U.Tech. ’05
B.S. Abrera, P.Eng. B.E.Sc.
Western ’00
M. Ali, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Ryerson ’10
L.J.R. Allard, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Laval ’07
M. Angers, P.Eng. M.A.Sc.
UBC ’12, B.Ing. Laval ’10
K.B. Arnstead, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. Regina ’11
K.J. Askew, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Alberta ’12, B.Sc. Alberta
’08
D. Aubin, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Sherbrooke ’88
E. Auger, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Montreal ’96
A. Bahrami, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Ferdowsi U. ’06, B.Sc.
Ferdowsi U. ’02
A.K. Barclay, P.Eng. B.Eng.
UVic ’10
C.A. Barrera, P.Eng. Ing.
Saint Thomas ’94
G. Bau Baiges, P.Eng. Ing.
Tech.U. Cataluna ’00
P. Bazargani, P.Eng. Ph.D.
UBC ’14, B.Sc. Shiraz ’06
C. Beaubien, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Sherbrooke ’10
M. Berger, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Ryerson ’10
O.S. Beruar, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Laurentian ’09, B.Tech.
Indian Sch. Mines ’87
A.O. Birkeland, P.Eng. B.S.
Colorado Sch. Mines ’72
R. Blanchard, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Manitoba ’91
A.J. Boissonneault,
P.Eng. B.Eng. Sudbury,
Laurentian ’01
C. Boris P.Eng., B.Sc.
Calgary ’05
J.V. Bourcet, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBCO ’11
M.C. Brace, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Eng. Queen’s ’09
D.J. Brault, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Montreal ’09
S.T. Brooks, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’11
S.D. Buckles, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Queen’s ’95
M. Budnicki, P.Eng.
M.Eng. Toronto ’92,
Mgstr.Inz. Tech.U.
Szczecin ’84
J.D. Burgess, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’01
A.C. Camacho, P.Eng.
B.S.E.E. Adamson ’96
P.J. Campbell, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Imp.Coll. London ’06,
B.A. Portsmouth ’00
K.C. Cancade, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’10
J.C. Castillo, P.Eng. B.S.C.E.
West Negros U. ’97
A. Chakraborty, P.Eng.
M.Eng. Calgary ’09,
B.Eng. Sambalpur ’06
H. Chateauneuf, P.Eng.
B.Eng. Montreal ’96
A. Chaudhury, P.Eng.
B.Tech. S.V. Regional
Coll.Eng.Tech. Surat ’80
A.N. Cheema, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’11
C. Chen, P.Eng. M.S.
Missouri, Columbia ’01,
B.S. Missouri, Kansas
City ’00
Y. Chen, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Alberta ’06, B.Eng.
Shandong ’96
Z. Cheng, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Shandong ’87, B.Eng.
Shandong ’85
H. Cheong, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Hong Kong U.Sci.
Tech. ’06, B.Sc. Alberta ’03
L.N. Chmilar, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’08
A. Chowdhury, P.Eng.
M.A.Sc. UBC ’11, B.Sc.
Engg. Bangladesh Inst.
Tech. ’07
P.C. Choy, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ‘06
N.A. Christopher, P.Eng.
B.Sc. Calgary ’98, B.G.S.
SAIT ’93
J.A.C.M. Chu, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Resselaer Polytech.
Inst. ’05
C.C. Chukwu, P.Eng.
M.A.Sc. U.Ontario
Inst.Tech. ’08, M.Sc.
Mälardalen ’07
M.B. Clayton, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Queen’s ’07
A.S. Clennett, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’05
D. Cocis, P.Eng. Dipl. Petru
Maior ’95
S.M. Colaco, P.Eng. B.Tech.
BCIT ’13
R.D.B. Corbet, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’76
K.A. Cormack, P.Eng.
B.S.E.E. Manitoba ’11
E.P. Corrigan, P.Eng.
M.B.A. Trinity Coll.
Dublin ’09, Post.Grad.
Dipl. Trinity Coll. Dublin
’07, Post.Grad.Dipl.
Trinity Coll. Dublin ’05,
B.E. U.Coll. Dublin ’00,
Dipl.Adv.Tech. U.Coll.
Dublin ’97
P. Corriveau, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Quebec, Trois-Rivieres
’01
R.J. Crook, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Lakehead ’93
J. Crossman, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’06
C.W.G. Croy, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBCO ’11
W.A. Davis, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’10
E.T. Denne, P.Eng. B.S.
Montana Tech. ’08, Dipl.
Tech. SAIT ’05
J. Dufour, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Quebec, Chicoutimi ’79
C.T. Emodi, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Saskatchewan ’07,
B.Eng. Nigeria ’03
F. Eskandari, P.Eng. Ph.D.
Memorial ’15, M.Sc.
Sharif ’07, B.Sc. Sharif ’04
P.A. Evans, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Portsmouth ’77
H. Fadhel, P.Eng. B.E.Sc.
Western ’11
A.W. Fairgrieve, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. Ottawa ’09
R.R. Faith, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Nanyang Tech.Inst.U. ’06
M.J. Forsberg, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Chalmers Inst.Tech. ’06
O.J. Franchi, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Northwestern ’80
S. Frey, P.Eng. B.Eng.
McMaster ’05
4 0 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

B.B. Gaffney, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Lakehead ’98
J. Gagnon, P.Eng. Ph.D.
Laval ’12, M.Sc.
Sherbrooke ’05, B.Sc.
Eng.Sherbrooke ’01
C. Galbraith, P.Eng. M.B.A.
SFU ’80, B.A.Sc. UBC ’01
D.S. Garcha, P.Eng. M.B.A.
Toronto ’14, M.A.Sc.
Toronto ’04, B.A.Sc.
UBC ’02
J.E. Gemmill, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’69
O. Ghandchitehrani,
P.Eng. M.Sc. Islamic
Azad ’07, B.Sc. Islamic
Azad, ’03
A.F. Gibson, P.Eng. B.Eng.
U.Ontario Inst. Tech. ’07
P.C. Givens, P.Eng. Post.
Grad.Dipl. Athabasca
U.Ontario ’10, M.Sc.
Alberta ’96
G.G. Godin, P.Eng. B.Eng.
RMC Canada ’95
N. Goodfellow, P.Eng.
B.Eng. Loughborough
’09
G. Greco, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
Toronto ’93
L.J.D. Gregory, P.Eng.
B.Eng. U. Ontario Inst.
Tech. ’10
A.M. Greig, P.Eng. B.Eng.
UVic ’12
J.F. Groves, P.Eng. .A.Sc.
UBC ’14, B.A.Sc. UBC ’09
R.L. Grunerud, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’12
E. Gudino, P.Eng. B.S.E.E.
Metropolitana ’87
G. Gulino, P.Eng. B.Eng.
McMaster ’93
M.M. Hallett, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Eng. New Brunswick ’02
Z. Han, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Zhengzhou ’88
P. Hao, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Tianjin ’92
M.I. Hassan, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Memorial ’12, B.Sc.
Islamic Inst.Tech. ’08
S.I. Hassan, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Calgary ’09, B.Sc. NWFP
U.Eng.Tech. ’98
R.J. Hix, P.Eng. M.Eng. UBC
’10, B.A.Sc. UBC ’09
J.B. Hogeboom, P.Eng.
B.Eng. Dalhousie ’05
L. Hollingsworth, P.Eng.
B.Sc.Eng. Queen’s ’11
O. Homay Nikfar, P.Eng.
M.Sc. Iran U.Sci.Tech.
’06, B.Sc. Khaajeh
Nasir-e Toosi ’00
Q.H. Huynh, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Calgary ’09
B.D. Iuvancigh, P.Eng.
B.Sc. Queen’s ’10, B.A.
Queen’s ’10
J.R. Johnson, P.Eng.
M.S. MIT ’79, M.Eng.
Tennessee ’77, B.S.
Tennessee ’74
K.A. Johnson, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Calgary ’02
F. Kaboodanian, P.Eng.
M.Sc. Iran U.Sci.Tech.
’97, B.Sc. Sharif ’95
G.L. Kaechele, P.Eng. B.S.
Georgia Inst.Tech. ’07
G.A. Kareem, P.Eng.
M.Eng. Toronto
’13, M.Sc. Kharkov
Tech.U.Agric. ’95
E. Kello, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’10
J. Kempson, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Ryerson ’97
R. Khoja-Mendwi, P.Eng.
M.Sc. Concordia ’10,
B.Sc. Iraq U.Tech.,
Baghdad ’91
J. Kjelland, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’11
T.A. Knight, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Carleton ’85, B.A.Sc.
UBC ’81
R. Komenda, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’07
D. Kroondijk, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’10, Adv.
Dipl. Camosun ’08, Dipl.
Tech. BCIT ’05
M.A. Kulkarni, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’09
N.V. Kulkarni, P.Eng. B.E.
Pune ’97
B. Kumar, P.Eng. Dipl.
Mgmt. VIU ’10, B.Tech.
Indraprastha U. ’05
M. Lalancette, P.Eng.
B.Eng. Quebec
V. Lallier-Couture, P.Eng.
B.Eng. Quebec ’09
M.R. Latimer, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’91
H. Lau, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’07
F. Lavoie, P.Eng. Int.B.Eng.
Quebec, Chicoutimi ’81
L.T. Lee, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’11
P.S. Lee, P.Eng. B.Eng. BCIT
’10, Dipl.Tech. BCIT ’08,
Dipl.Tech. BCIT ’01
C.D. Lehane, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Wales ’11, B.Eng. Cork
Inst.Tech. ’09
O. Lessard Fontaine,
P.Eng. B.Ing. Sherbrooke
’05
C.S. Leung, P.Eng. M.Eng.
UBC ’10, B.A.Sc. UBC
’06
K.K. Leung, P.Eng. M.Eng.
UBC ’11, B.A.Sc. UBC
’09
T. Li, P.Eng. B.Eng. Tianjin
’89
E.S. Liu, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Toronto ’99, B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’93
H.B. Liu, P.Eng. M.Eng.
U.Petrol., Beijing ’96,
B.Eng. Hebei U.Tech. ’83
X. Liu, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Windsor ’11, B.Sc. S.
China U.Tech. ’10
S.L. Lundgreen-Nielsen,
P.Eng. B.Eng. RMC
Canada ’00
W.L. Ma, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’10
A.W. Mackay, P.Eng.
B.Eng. Dalhousie ’06
A.M. Mahmood, P.Eng.
B.Sc. UET, Lahore ’78
H.W. Mak, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’11
N. Maleki, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Sistan, Baluchistan ’93
M. Mallakzadeh, P.Eng.
Ph.D. UBC ’07, M.Sc.
Sharif ’95, B.Sc. Sharif
’92
A.S. Mangat, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’07
J.T. Mansoff, P.Eng. B.S.
Maine ’04
C.C. Manucot, P.Eng.
B.S.E.E. Mapua Inst.
Tech. ’90
M. Marini, P.Eng. B.Eng.
McMaster ’10
C.M. Markwart, P.Eng.
B.Sc. Regina ’05
E.A. Martinez rojas,
P.Eng. M.Sc. IHE-Delft
’03
J.A. Matchett, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Queen’s ’10
H. Mathews, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Ryerson ’08, B.Tech.
Regional Eng.Coll.,
Calicut ’88
H. Mathur, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Calgary ’06, B.E.
Amravati ’02
R.K. Mcfee, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’07
B. Mcghee, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Heriot-Watt ’03
C.A. Mckellar, P.Eng.
B.Eng. Queensland
U.Tech. ’05
I. Mckellar, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Queensland U.Tech. ’04
B.B. Medlar, P.Eng. B.Eng.
UVic ’08
R.K. Mehta, P.Eng. B.S.
Mississippi State ’75,
B.Sc. Gujarat ’72
D.G. Metry, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Napier ’09, Higher Cert.
Dundalk Inst.Tech ’07,
Cert. Dundalk Inst.
Tech ’06
J.R. Mior, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Calgary ’96
J.C. Miranda Trevino,
P.Eng. Ph.D. Memorial
’12, M.Eng. Memorial
’03, Ing. Ibero-American
’00
P. Miville-Deschenes,
P.Eng.B.Eng. Quebec ’12
E.E. Moase, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Eng. Queen’s ’11
A.K. Moharana, P.Eng.
Ph.D. Western ’13, B.E.
Utkal ’05
K.A. Mosier, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’07
S. Mousseau, P.Eng. B.Eng.
BCIT ’11
P.S. Mui, P.Eng. M.Mgmt.
UBC ’10, B.Eng. UVic
’09, Adv.Dipl. Camosun
’06
H. Na, P.Eng. B.Eng. Hong
Ik ’89
J. Nadeau, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Sherbrooke ’07
E. Ngwenya, P.Eng. M.B.A.
Bradford ’10, M.Sc.Eng.
Witwatersrand ’01, B.Sc.
Zimbabwe ’96
M. Nikoo, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Tehran ’04, B.Sc. Sharif ’01
B.W. Norquist, P.Eng.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’08
R.N. North, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’07
L.V. Novakovska, P.Eng.
Dipl.Spec. Kiev Inst.
Highway Eng. ’83
C.D. Nygren, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Calgary ’10
C.A. Oickle, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Dalhousie ’06, Dipl. St.
Mary’s ’03
J.C. O’Reilly, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Edinburgh ’11, B.Sc.
Edinburgh ’09
D. Ortis, P.Eng. Dott.Ing.
Padua ’00
D.J. Ostergard, P.Eng.
B.Eng. RMC Canada ’95
S. Othayoth, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Calicut ’81
R.V. Outtrim, P.Eng.
M.A.Sc. Dalhousie ’05,
B.Sc. Calgary ’99
T.V. Paananen, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Eng. Alberta ’97
K. Parishani, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Islamic Azad ’00
V. Patel, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Sardar Patel ’04
J.C. Pereira, P.Eng. M.Eng.
UBC ’12, B.Tech. Calicut
’91
L.M. Perera, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Lakehead ’09
D.N. Perrin, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’06
S. Perron, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
Ottawa ’99
T.P. Petschke, P.Eng. Ph.D.
Tech.U. Madrid ’11,
Masters Tech.U. Madrid
’02, Dipl.Ing. Tech.U.
Munich ’99
C.W. Phui, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Calgary ’01
H.M.A. Piagno, P.Eng.
B.Eng. Guelph ’08
A. Pojhan, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’05
M. Pope, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’06
N. Popovic, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Belgrade ’95, Masters
Belgrade ’95
D.R. Porter, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’12
J.J. Pyliuk, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’09
J.Y. Qiu, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Beijing Union ’94
M. Rababy, P.Eng. B.E.
McGill ’80
M.K.A. Rahman, P.Eng.
M.S.E.E. Arkansas ’10,
B.Sc.Engg. Bangladesh
U. ’89
R.T. Redfern, P.Eng. B.Eng.
UVic ’04
D.B. Reimer, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBCO ’11
S. Rezaeikeneti, P.Eng.
M.Sc. Calgary ’11, M.Sc.
Tehran ’07, B.Sc. Isfahan
’04
M. Rezqi qomi, P.Eng.
M.S. Amir Kabir U.Tech.
’94, B.S. Tehran ’91
Y.S. Ro, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’75
A. Romano, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Concordia ’11
G.M. Ross, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBCO ’11
S. Roy, P.Eng. M.A.Sc. UBC
’11, B.Sc. Bangladesh ’08
K. Rushdi, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Manitoba ’11, B.Sc.
Bangladesh U.Eng.
Tech. ’09
N. Sabbagh, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Quebec, Rimouski ’06
D.J. Sawatzky, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’08
M. Sayahan, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Shahid Beheshti ’04,
B.Sc. Petrol.U.Tech. ’99
T.J. Scott, P.Eng. B.Eng.
BCIT ’12
R. Serrano Pardo, P.Eng.
Ing. Tech.Inst. Pachua
’93
C. Shi, P.Eng. B.Eng. Tongji
’93
W. Shi, P.Eng. B.Sc. Calgary
’09
A. Singh, P.Eng. B.Tech.
Punjab Tech.U. ’06
R. Singh, P.Eng. B.E.
Motilal Nehru Region.
Eng.Coll. ’95
D.J. Smith, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Dalhousie ’09
A.E. Snead, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’98
S. Soltaninia, P.Eng.
M.Eng. Sharif ’01, B.Eng.
Shahid Bahonar ’99
C. Song, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Eng. Zhengzhou
Inst.U.Tech. ’88, B.Sc.
Eng. Zhengzhou Grain
Coll. ’85
J.A. Sossa Echeverria,
P.Eng. M.A.Sc. UBC ’12,
Ing. Indian U. Santander
’07
C.G. Spence, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Hons. Queen’s ’00
A. Ste-Marie, P.Eng. B.Ing.
Quebec, Chicoutimi ’07
C.S. St-Germain, P.Eng.
M.A.Sc. Ottawa ’12, B.Sc.
Ottawa ’10
P.J.R. St-Onge, P.Eng.
B.Eng. Montreal ’01
K.W. Stubbs, P.Eng. Dipl.
Civ.Eng.Tech. Camosun
’04, B.A.Sc. UBC ’08
R. Sugiharto, P.Eng.
M.Eng. McGill ’05, B.S.
Florida ’01
N. Sundresh, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’06
V.M. Tadiparty, P.Eng.
B.Eng. Bangalore ’78
S. Talebi, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Lausanne ’04, M.S.
Shiraz ’93, B.S. Tehran
’88
K. Tenjoh, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Regina ’13
J.R. Teres-Flores, P.Eng.
M.Sc. Alberta ’05, Ing.
Puebla ’98
G.F. Terris, P.Eng. H.N.C.
Edinburgh Telford
Coll. ’80
T.T. Teshale, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’02
L. Tian, P.Eng. M.Sc.Eng. S.
China U.Tech. ’02, B.Sc.
Tianjin ’95
L. Tran, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Alberta ’04
R. Tremblay, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Quebec, Chicoutimi ’82
M.J. Trousdale, P.Eng.
B.Sc.Eng. Queen’s ’07
S.H. Truant, P.Eng. B.Eng.
UVic ’12
L.N. Truong, P.Eng. B.Eng.
McGill ’08
K.C.Y. Tse, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’08
J.M. Turcan, P.Eng. Ing.
Slovak Tech.U. Bratislava
’65
C.D. Urbinsky, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Calgary ’07
D.J. Vanier, P.Eng.
Ph.D. Montreal ’94,
M.Eng. Concordia
’79, B.Eng. RMC
Canada ’74
S. Vedula, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Andhra ’74
R.J. Versteeg, P.Eng. B.Eng.
BCIT ’10
C.A. Vos, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Queen’s ’11
C.A. Wan, P.Eng. M.A.Sc.
Toronto ’11, B.A.Sc.
UBC ’09
L. Wang, P.Eng. M.A.Sc.
Memorial ’08, B.Eng.
Wuyi ’05
G.W. Wick, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Calgary ’85
P.K. Wight, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Queen’s ’85
P. Williams, P.Eng. B.Eng.
McGill ’97
M.A. Willms, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Calgary ’10
B.T. Wilson, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’10
A.C. Wong, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’12
i n n o v a t i o n MARCH/APRIL 2016 41

p rofessional services
Power and Control Engineering
Suite 1630 – 1177 West Hastings Street
Vancouver, BC V6E 2K3
Phone (604) 638 8021 • Fax (604) 638 8027 • www.aedon.ca
• Electrical, P&C, Civil/Structural, SCADA
and Telecom Engineering for MV and HV
Substations, including 500 kV
• Utility and Industrial Applications
• Power System and Optimization Studies,
FEED, Preliminary and Detail Design
DYNAMIC
AVALANCHE CONSULTING LTD.
Professional snow avalanche expertise:
‐ Hazard mapping & risk assessment
‐ Engineering design & protection structures
‐ Avalanche safety plans & worker training
‐ Avalanche forecasting & risk control
Alan Jones, P.Eng. Kevin Fogolin, RPF
Revelstoke, BC
Whistler, BC
250.837.4466
www.dynamicavalanche.com
Automation solutions
Release your full potential
• High- delity dynamic process simulators
• Process control, instrumentation,
electrical, and power engineering
• Competency-based operator training
simulators
• Autonomous and remote process
plants
www.andritz.com
Local Expertise
ISL delivers planning and design
solutions in municipal, water
and wastewater, structural and
transportation engineering. We
have recently added landscape
architecture and environmental
management to our local team.
Connect with us:
Engineering_innovation2015_B.indd 1
7/7/15 10:56 AM
islengineering.com
LANGLEY BURNABY SQUAMISH
WEST KOOTENAY EAST KOOTENAY
Surrey Head Office ■ Central City Surrey ■ Vancouver ■ Kelowna ■ Calgary
www.aplinmartin.com
Jack Sekhon & Associates Inc
• Foundations & Excavations
• Slope Stability
• Geotechnical Hazards
• Pavement Assessment & Design
604-513-4190 • www.braungeo.com
Advertising in
For more information, please call:
Gillian Cobban
Ph: (604) 929-6733
Email: advertising@apeg.bc.ca
4 2 MARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

membership
B.S. Wong, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Calgary ’90
M.Y.S. Wong, P.Eng.
M.B.A. UBC ’12, B.A.Sc.
UBC ’06
J.M. Worley, P.Eng.
M.A.Sc. Queen’s ’12,
B.Eng. McGill ’09
S. Xiao, P.Eng. Ph.D. Jilin
’97, M.Sc. Jilin ’91, B.Sc.
Jilin ’88
Y. Xiong, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Tongji ’93
K.A. Yakimovich, P.Eng.
B.Sc. Alberta ’04,
M.B.A. Royal Roads ’13
F. Yazdani, P.Eng. B.Sc.
Shiraz ’93
H. Yong, P.Eng. M.A.Sc.
Toronto ’07, B.A.Sc.
Toronto ’03
D.S.D. Young, P.Eng.
M.B.A. Calgary ’08,
B.Eng. Cape Town ’85
A.A. Younis, P.Eng.
Ph.D. UVic ’10, M.Sc.
Al-Fateh U. ’00, B.Sc.
Al-Fateh U. ’95
S.A. Zaidi, P.Eng. B.A.Sc.
SFU ’09
Z. Zhang, P.Eng. M.Eng.
Toronto ’03, B.Eng.
Gansu U.Tech. ’93
PROFESSIONAL
GEOSCIENTISTS
W.P. Barnett, P.Geo. B.Sc.
Cape Town ’94, B.Sc.
Cape Town ’95, M.Sc.
Cape Town ’98,
H.M. Chishti, P.Geo.
Ph.D. KwaZulu-Natal
’07, Ph.D. Leeds ’99,
M.Sc. Punjab ’82, B.Sc.
Punjab ’79
A.J. Fitzpatrick, P.Geo.
Ph.D. Queen’s ’08,
M.Sc. McGill ’99, B.Sc.
Queen’s ’95
T.E. Flynn, P.Geo. B.Sc.
Manitoba ’06
L.A. Keir, P.Geo. M.Sc.
Calgary ’06, B.Sc.
Calgary ’01
N.B. Luckman, P.Geo.
B.A.Sc. UBC ’88
J.A. Mcdivitt, P.Geo. B.Sc.
UBCO ’11
R.O. Moore, P.Geo. Ph.D.
Cape Town ’87, B.Sc.
Cape Town ’81
C. Pelletier, P.Geo. B.Sc.
Québec, Montréal ’92
P. Richard, P.Geo.
B.Sc.A. Québec,
Montréal ’04
B.A. Robinson, P.Geo.
M.Sc. East Anglia ’97,
B.Sc. Kingston ’95
S.A.M. Robinson, P.Geo.
B.Sc. W. Australia ’02
K.A. Sarioglu, P.Geo. B.Sc.
Memorial ’07, Dipl.
SAIT ’03
T. Strate, P.Geo. B.Sc.
Sydney ’91
G.W. Streitel, P.Geo. B.Sc.
Saskatchewan ’93
DESIGNATED
STRUCTURAL
ENGINEERS
M.L. Anderson, P.Eng.,
Struct.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’02
J.G. Zickmantel, P.Eng.,
Struct.Eng. B.A.Sc.
UBC ’91
NON-RESIDENT
LICENSEES
B.M. Albers, P.Eng. B.S.
Texas A&M ’06
P.R. Bott, P.Eng. B.S.
Washington, Seattle
’79
N.J. Bourne, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Griffith ’07
K.B. Bridwell, P.Eng.
B.S. Montana State,
Bozeman ’05
J. Christensen, P.Eng. B.S.
Gonzaga ’98
M.A. Foret, P.Eng. B.S.
Lafayette Coll. ’06
D.C. Glover, P.Eng. M.S.
USC ’68, B.S. USC ’66
C.J. Guidry, P.Eng. B.S.
Lafayette Coll. ’00
K.T.J. Haase, P.Eng. B.E.
Queensland ’09
C. Hillard, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Hons. Queensland ’93
M.D. Matthews, P.Eng.
M.S. Purdue, W.
Lafayette ’01, B.S. Ohio
State ’89
A.K. Moharana, P.Eng.
Ph.D. Western ’13, B.E.
Utkal ’05
L.D. Page, P.Eng. B.Eng.
Hons. Queensland ’05
S.G. Patel, P.Eng. M.S.
Cincinnati ’72, B.E.
Gujarat ’70
A.H. Pettis, P.Eng. M.S.
Washington, Seattle
’10, B.S. Washington,
Seattle ’05
R.L. Presleigh, P.Eng.
M.S. California, Davis
’11, B.S. California
State, Chico ’04,
L.J. Ramo, P.Eng. B.S. New
York, Binghamton ’95
J.A. Ruggieri, P.Eng. M.S.
Wisconsin, Platteville
’07
K.M. Smith, P.Eng. B.S.
California, San Diego
’93
S. Talebi, P.Eng. M.Sc.
Lausanne ’04, M.S.
Shiraz ’93, B.S. Tehran
‘88
J.R. Williams, P.Eng.
Physics B.S. Penn
State ’96
AWARD-WINNING
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Engineering innovative
solutions for clients worldwide
• Engineering and detailed design
• Global procurement
• Project and construction management
• EP/EPC turnkey solutions
• Asset reliability and system optimization
OQM
Organizational Quality
Management Program
604-637-2275 | info@cwaengineers.com | cwaengineers.com
Aviation
Bridges and Highways
Civil and Utilities
Fire & Life Safety
Pipelines
Ports
Rail
Rail Systems
Transit
Tunnels
www.hatchmott.com
i n n o v a t i o n MARCH/APRIL 2016 4 3

p rofessional services
membership
International Consultants
Power and Control Engineering
Lex Engineering Ltd. • Quanta Services Inc.
200-2560 Simpson Rd. Richmond, BC V6X 2P9
Phone (604) 273-1758 Fax: (604) 273-1759
E-Mail: lex@lexeng.com • www.lexeng.com
Office: 250-590-8912 . Fax: 250-590-8917 . Email: info@primeeng.ca . www.primeeng.ca
4 4 MARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n
• 35 years of Quality Service
• High Voltage Substations & Transmission Lines
• Industrial Power Distribution & Control
• Dynamic Power Systems Analysis
• IPP Interconnection & Power Generation
• Utility Liaison
• Concepts, Detailed Design
• Contract Administration and Start-ups
Trusted partners in the creation & management of sustainable world class infrastructure
• Asset Management
• Energy
• Environmental
• Geomatics
• Infrastructure
• Research
• Resources
• SCADA
www.opusdaytonknight.com
• Survey
• Transportation
• Wastewater
• Water
Abbotsford Calgary Kelowna North Vancouver Prince George Smithers
Terrace Victoria Whitehorse
• High Voltage Maintenance
• Testing and Commissioning
• Power System Protection
and Electrical Design
• MV Switchgear and unit
substation supply
VANCOUVER KELOWNA SANTIAGO LIMA RENO
M.N. Yamasaki, P.Eng.
M.S. Stanford ’10,
M.S. Stanford ’09, B.S.
Michigan ’03
W.J. Zimmerman, P.Eng.
B.S. Oregon State ’09
MEMBERS-IN-
TRAINING
ENGINEER
M. Abdullah, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’16
P.F. Abercromby, EIT B.E.
Auckland ’11
T. Alam, EIT M.Eng. UBC
‘15, B.Sc. Islamic Inst.
Tech. ’12
L.M. Ang, EIT B.Sc.
Alberta ’10
P.D. Arora, EIT M.Eng.
UVic ’15, B.Eng. Gujarat
’11
K.W. Awad, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’15
S.P.Q. Babulic, EIT B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’12
G.E. Ballachey, EIT
M.A.Sc. Carleton ’12,
B.Sc. UVic ’07
A.C. Bender, EIT B.Eng.
UVic ’15
O. Berbar, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’15
K.I.A. Blank, EIT B.Eng.
Saskatchewan ’13
A.J. Bodlack, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’15
G.A. Bossons, EIT M.Eng.
UBC ’15, B.A.Sc. UBC
’14
S.C. Bow, EIT B.Eng.
UVic ’15
D.K.S. Braam, EIT Physics
B.Sc.E. Queen’s ’15
J.S. Brar, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’16
C.K. Budden, EIT B.Eng.
Memorial ’12
D.D. Bumanglag, EIT
B.S.M.E. Tech.Inst.
Philippines ’95
J. Bundgaard, EIT
B.S.M.E. Saskatchewan
’14
T.J.F. Burch, EIT B.Eng.
UVic ’15
E.T. Burke, EIT B.E.Hons.
Dublin Inst.Tech. ’10
Y. Byun, EIT B.S. Illinois
’11, M.S. Illinois ’13
Y. Cao, EIT M.A.Sc. UBCO
’15, B.Eng. Hehai ’12
A.D.F.C. Chan, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’15
J.K. Chan, EIT Electrical
B.A.Sc. UBC ’11
C.L. Chaw, EIT M.A.Sc.
UBC ’15, B.A.Sc. UBC
’12
W. Chen, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’15
Z. Chen, EIT B.A.Sc.
Toronto ’13
S. Chow, EIT B.A.Sc.
SFU ’15
M. Curbelo, EIT B.A.Sc.
Toronto ’14
A.J. Dahl, EIT B.Eng.
BCIT ’15
C.A. De Guzman, EIT
B.A.Sc. SFU ’15
W. Deng, EIT B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’13
A.I. Dimopoulos, EIT
M.A.Sc. UBC ’12, B.Eng.
UVic ’05
J. Du Toit, EIT B.Eng.
BCIT ’15
R.W. Eden, EIT B.E.Sc.
Western ’14
M. Fakoorpakdaman,
EIT Ph.D. SFU ’15,
M.Sc. Tehran ’11, B.Sc.
Amir Kabir U.Tech. ’08
K.L. Fan, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’13
D.J. Farina, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBCO ’15
E.K. Finney, EIT B.A.Sc.
UNBC/UBC ’16
F.D. Gage, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBCO ’15
A.R. Gerber, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’13
A.M. Gerry, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’11
A.J. Girdner, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’13
R.T. Gray, EIT B.Sc.
Calgary ’12
A.J. Gurnett, EIT B.Sc.
Calgary ’14
J. Hall, EIT B.Sc. Alberta
’15
R.P. Hargrove, EIT B.A.Sc.
SFU ’15
J.P. Hart, EIT B.Sc.Eng.
Saskatchewan ’15
P. Hartnett, EIT B.Eng.
Cork Inst.Tech. ’11
D.B. Heath, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBCO ’15
R.K. Heer, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBCO ’15
A.J. Heffelfinger, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBCO ’15
J.W. Herriot, EIT B.Eng.
UVic ’12, Dipl.Tech.
Camosun ’08
M.E. Hladky, EIT B.Eng.
UVic ’15
M.R. Holland, EIT B.Eng.
UVic ’14
K.W. Hu, EIT B.Tech. BCIT
’16, Dipl.Tech. BCIT ’08
Q. Huang, EIT B.Eng.
Dalhousie ’15
M.R.V. Hussey, EIT B.Sc.
Alberta ’15
N. Jain, EIT M.Eng. UBC
’15, B.S.M.E. Drexel ’13
I.O. Jalasan, EIT B.S.C.E.
Mindanao State, Iligan
Inst.Tech. ’02
A.M. Johnson, EIT
M.A.Sc. UBCO ’13,
B.Eng. UVic ’08
D.M. Joyce, EIT Physics
B.A.Sc. UBC ’14
L. Kaler, EIT B.Sc. Calgary ’15

professional services
S. Kassem, EIT M.S.
Oregon State ’12,
B.A.Sc. UBC ’09
L. Kaur, EIT M.Eng.
Waterloo ’16,
Cert. Waterloo
’15, B.E. Thapar
Inst. ’14
P.D. Kazakoff, EIT
B.Eng. UVic ’15
N. Khera, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’15
P. Krzesinski, EIT
B.A.Sc. SFU ’16
O. Kyomasu, EIT
B.S.M.E. Oklahoma
State ’10
K. Lad, EIT B.Eng.
McMaster ’15
B.D. Lalonde, EIT
B.S.E. Walla Walla
Coll. ’13
A.C. Lambert, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBCO ’14,
B.G.S. SAIT ’10,
Adv.Dipl. Camosun
’12
A.Y. Law, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBCO ’15
Y. Lei, EIT M.A.Sc.
UBC ’15, B.A.Sc.
UBC ’12
J.P. Li, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’14
S.L. Lord, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’15
R. Lubana, EIT B.Sc.
Alberta ’15
M.J. Lumb, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBC ’15
G.W. Mackinnon,
EIT B.Sc.Eng. New
Brunswick ’15
J.V. Macsween, EIT
M.A.Sc. UBC ’16,
B.Sc.Eng. Queen’s
’13
K.W. Mair, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBCO ’14
L. Malaguti, EIT
B.Eng. Concordia
’15
C. Manchanda, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBC ’12
G.A. Manley, EIT A.B.
Harvard ’14
A.W. Massier, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBC ’15
J.M. Matthews,
EIT B.Sc.
Alberta ’14
T.M. Mawson, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBCO ’15
C.A. Mcclement, EIT
B.Sc.Eng. Queen’s
’15
S. Moayedinia, EIT
M.A.Sc. UBC ’14,
B.A.Sc. UBC ’11
J.N.J. Mollard, EIT
B.A.Sc. Waterloo ’14
R.C. Moosoohur, EIT
B.Eng. UVic ’15
S. Mudaliar, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBCO ’13
S.Y. Muntasir, EIT
M.A.Sc. UBC
’16, B.Sc.Engg.
Bangladesh ’11
M.A. Naismith, EIT
B.Eng. BCIT ’15
P. Novotny, EIT Inz.
Tech.U. Brno ’10,
Bc. Tech.U. Brno ’07
A.M. O’Brien, EIT
B.Eng. Lakehead
’15
G. Oliva Gil, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBC ’13
M.E. Ormrod, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBCO ’14
B.D. Pattison, EIT
B.A.Sc. SFU ’15
E.S. Peach, EIT B.Sc.E.
Saskatchewan ’15
E. Peatt, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’15
A.N. Piccini, EIT
B.A.Sc. UNBC ’16
J.D. Pierce, EIT B.Eng.
Dalhousie ’14
V. Polyakova, EIT
B.Eng. UVic ’15
K.N. Preston, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBC ’14,
Dipl.Civ.Eng.Tech.
BCIT ’09
M. Rabbi, EIT M.Eng.
UBC ’15, B.Sc.
Islamic Inst.Tech.
’12
J.M. Rae, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’13
R. Rahmatullah, EIT
M.Eng. Manchester
’10
N.K. Randall, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBCO ’15
A.M. Rao, EIT B.Eng.
UVic ’15
N. Rathinakumar,
EIT B.S.P. Queen’s
’12
B.T. Regier, EIT B.Eng.
BCIT ’14
J.R. Rendell, EIT
B.Eng. UVic ’15
K.J. Rhoda, EIT B.Sc.
Manitoba ’10
K.D. Rollins, EIT
M.Eng. UBC ’15,
B.Eng. Portsmouth
’12
P.C. Ruiz, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’16
K. Salimian, EIT
B.Eng. Manchester
’14
A. Sangha, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’13
K.W. Schapansky,
EIT B.Eng.
Saskatchewan ’13
A.A. Selinger, EIT
B.Eng. UVic ’14
T.M. Shobab, EIT
B.Eng. BCIT ’14
M.T. Stafford, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBCO
’16
S.L. Steele, EIT
B.A.Sc. SFU ’14
N.J. Stone, EIT B.Eng.
UVic ’16
M. Su, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’14
H. Sung, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’15
L.V. Swank, EIT
B.A.Sc. UNBC ’16
T.T.N. Ta, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’11
C.A. Thomson, EIT
B.Eng. Curtin
U.Tech. ’12
D. Tiessen, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’15B.A. Tomasz,
EIT B.Eng. McGill ’12
M.K. Toor, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’14
K.P. Tulloch, EIT
B.Eng. Lakehead
’14
S. Tzinder, EIT B.S.
Florida Atlantic ’15
K. Valera, EIT B.A.Sc.
Windsor ’13
F.W.P. Venini, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBC ’15
B.A. Versteeg, EIT
Physics B.A.Sc.
UBC ’10
A.S. Vickerman, EIT
B.S. MIT ’13
M.L. Villanueva, EIT
Dipl.Tech. BCIT ’07,
Cert. UBC ’10, B.S.
Nueva Caceres ’90
C. Wang, EIT M.Eng. UBC
’09, B.A.Sc. UBC ’07
Smart Solutions
for a Complex World
Tetra Tech’s engineers and scientists
are developing sustainable solutions
for the world’s most complex
projects. With 3,500 employees in
Canada and 13,000 total employees
worldwide, we have grown to
become one of North America’s
largest engineering firms.
tetratech.com/canada | /tetratech | /tetratech
C.K. Wang, EIT B.Eng.
McMaster’15
L. Wang, EIT B.A.Sc.
SFU ’15
T.J. Watanabe, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBC ’15
C.N. Williams, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBCO ’16, Adv.
Dipl. Camosun ’13
J. Wollin, EIT B.A.Sc.
Waterloo ’15
C. Wong, B.A.Sc.
UBC ’15
J.J. Wong, EIT B.Sc.
Calgary ’15
M. Wong, EIT
B.Sc.Eng.
Queen’s ’12
S. Xue, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’15
C.J. Yang, EIT B.A.Sc.
UBC ’15
R.T. Yaskow, EIT
B.A.Sc. SFU ’14
K. Yuen, EIT B.Eng.
BCIT ’15
J.D.B. Zago, EIT
B.A.Sc. UBC ’15
Q. Zhang, EIT M.A.Sc.
UBC ’16, B.Eng.
China Agric. ’13
GEOSCIENCE
T.K. Cruz, GIT B.Sc.
SFU ’13
M.D. Donohoe, GIT
B.Sc. Dalhousie ’14
P.N. Fortin, GIT
B.Sc. UBC ’15,
B.A. Concordia ’06
A.M. Friesen, GIT
B.Sc. UBCO ’14
S.D. Gervais, GIT B.Sc.
UVic ’15, Assoc.Sc.
N.Island Coll. ’10
G.J. Grundy, GIT B.Sc.
UVic ’15
M. Hairabedian, GIT
M.Sc. Alberta ’11, B.Sc.
McGill ’07, D.E.C. John
Abbott Coll. ’03
D.B. Hamilton, GIT
B.Sc. UBC ’11
K.J. Hujdic, GIT B.Sc.
UVic ’15
C. Kemm, GIT M.Sc.
UBC ’15, B.Sc.
UBC ’11
L.M. Laderoute, GIT
B.Sc. UBCO ’14
i n n o v a t i o n MARCH/APRIL 2016 4 5

p rofessional services
...……….focused engineering
solutions for a broad range of
geotechnical situations……….
MEG Consulting Limited
604-244-9400
megconsulting.ca
Continuous core of
coarse gravel formation.
Large diameter core
of sand formation.
You can’t afford
to guess!
Will your drilling method show samples like these?
Does your project’s geotechnical report include a soil stratigraphy
borehole log based upon SONIC DRILLING TECHNOLOGY?
The SONIC DRILLING SYSTEM provides the highest quality soil and ground
water samples to meet the challenges of today’s geotechnical and
geo-construction markets.
∎ Protective Coating
& Lining Evaluation
∎ Specification Writing/Review
∎ Failure Analysis
∎ Quality Assurance Inspection
∎ Quality Control Inspection
∎ Project Management Services
#110 19188-94th Avenue,
Surrey, BC V4N 4X8 Canada
Office: 604.882.1818 Fax: 604.882.1814
Email: ray@norskecorrosion.com
sales@norskecorrosion.com
www.mudbaydrilling.com | p. [604] 888.2206
membership
J.W. Loran, GIT B.Sc.
UVic ’15
J.M. Marsh, GIT B.Sc.
SFU ’15
E.A. Massey, GIT
B.Sc. UBCO ’14
L.S. Mcphee,
GIT B.Sc.
UBCO ’11
L.F. Nymeyer, GIT
B.Sc. UVic ’15
I.A. Ross, GIT B.Sc.
UVic ’15
K.L. Silk, GIT B.Sc.
UBCO ’15
REINSTATEMENTS
T.M. Myrfield, P.Eng.
P.K. Wight, P.Eng.
T. Strate, P.Geo.
S.J. Brown, EIT
R. Chehrehpardaz,
EIT
A.T. Cheng, EIT
E.M. Colombo, EIT
C.J. Crocker, EIT
D.R. Dievert, EIT
J.L. Henderson, EIT
J.M. Parro, EIT
G.I. Seaton, EIT
RESIGNATIONS
R. Abdel Maksoud
G. Abdelaziz
A. Aghajan Zadeh
Ahrabi
R. Ahmed
K. Al arab
M.N. Alam
A. Al-Azzawi
J. Allan
J.A. Ally
H.M. Alshaikhabdou
M.Y. Aly
C.D. Amy
J.M. Anderson
C.D. Andreas
E.G. Anthony
F.M. Antunes
N.M. Aragon
V.Y. Arkadyev
A. Asnaashari
A. Azmin
N.S. Bajwa
S.K. Bajwa
J.F. Bao
C.A. Baptie
R.J. Bartlett
A.K. Barton
R.J. Bartoy
R. Barua
D.J. Basnett
B.M. Batanghari
A. Bazylak
R.M. Beck
B.E. Bell
A.R. Bellefleur
L.L. Benjamin
K.E. Benotmane
M. Beri
T.T. Berry
M. Bhatnagar
K.W. Biggar
G.W. Birkbeck
D.C. Bishop
A. Bittar de Oliveira
K.A. Bliss
S.R. Blomfeldt
R.C. Boenawan
M.G. Boily
D.D. Boland
M. Bolour
T. Bonnet
D.A. Bossons
M. Bouthot
C.C. Boyd
J.J.B. Briscoe
V.F. Brochu
O.M. Brodeur
K.G. Broom
C.B. Brown
R.G. Brown
J.N. Bryan
G.B. Bryden
T.P. Bult
M.J. Burian
A. Cajiao
W.N. Campbell
M.A. Cancilla
J.O. Castillo
J. Castonguay
J.K. Cavers
A.J. Cej
T. Cetiner
D.M. Chambers
A.L. Chamorro
Belalcazar
S.C. Chan
W.W. Chang
H. Chartier
T.J. Chebuk
V.K. Chen
Z. Chen
D.Y. Cheng
C. Cheung
D.W. Cheung
W.W.H. Cheung
S.Y.Y. Chien
S. Chinen
B.A. Chisholm
A.G. Choudhry
C. Chow
C.K.M. Chu
S. Chu
D.B. Clark
L.V. Clarke
D. Colpron-Labelle
K.N. Colquhoun
C. Cossette
M.F. Cramer
V.H. Cruz Velasco
R.R. Culbert
B.M. Curry
J.L. Cutting
M.H. Czerwinski
J.W. Dacey
M.A. Dafoe
J.D. Daley
J.T. Dance
E.P. Davis
4 6 M ARCH/APRIL 2016 i n n o v a t i o n

membership
G.H. Davy
B.D. De micheli
R.B. Deboeck
J.E. Deenihan
R.I. Defaz
J.T. Delisle
D. Della Ventura
M.R. Demchuk
L.E. Denton
A. Derakhshan-Far
B.C. Desmet
A.A. Dessouki
H.S. Dessureault
B. Dewonck
T.K. Dhaliwal
T.M. Docherty
L. Doiron-Codere
G.R. Dong
A.W. Douglas
P.C. Dowling
J.D. Duck
R. Duclos
L.M. Dufour
C.M. Dumonceau
P.K. Egyir
M.A. Elkady
N. Ellamil
J.K. Elliott
K.S. Elrayes
C.A. Enage
W.A. Evenson
B. Fan
W.W. Fan
Y. Fang
M. Fazili
D.D. Fehr
K. Filsoof
P.D. Finch
J.W. Fisher
P.L. Forseille
W.R. Fowler
C.L. Fox
A.M. Frank
N. Freedman
M. Frigon
P. Fronc
A.Y. Fung
J. Gaëtan
B.J. Galloway
H.C. Gan
A.T. Garusinghe
J. Gauthier
S. Gauthier
J.M. Geisler
C.J. Genge
M. George
M.C. Gheorghita
D.B. Ghile
J.B. Gibson
W.S. Gin
B. Girgrah
L.T. Giroday
K.E. Giroux
G.J. Goddard
E.O. Golding
J.E. Goosney
D.I. Gourley
B.D. Green
R.R. Gregory
K.M. Guay
R.C. Gue
W. Guo
K. Gurses
J.R. Gutjahr
T.A. Hakim
B.A.R. Halabieh
K.A. Hansen
J.D. Harvey
W.D. Haymond
J.F. Hazzard
C. He
K. Hendrikx
C.M. Hendry
K.W. Hern
A.L. Hill
C.C. Holt
D.M. Holyer
J.S. Hood
M. Hosseini
W.R. Hovdestad
K. Howard
R.D. Howe
P.F. Hsiao
A.T. Hsie
S. Hu
Y. Hu
D.K. Humphris
T.R. Hunter
T.S. Hunter
M. Iacob
P. Ilica
K. Imai
P. Iosifidis
J.J. Isabelle
M. Islam
J.G. Ivory
M. Izadi
R.E. Jackson
M. Jamei
G.M. Janovick
E.H. Janssens
R. Jellema
J. Jeon
S. Jiang
N.D. Jinks
G.R. Jordan
M.M. Jreda
I. Judd-henrey
F.L. Kaempffer
S.P. Kaija
A. Kannan
K. Kao
M.E. Kao
L.I. Karrei
N. Kazakova
J.A. Keays
D.A. Keef
C.W. Kennedy
M.S. Khan
J.J. Kiezik
B.L. Kilama
S. Kim
S.J. King
M. Klassen
J.M. Knudsen
M.M. Kostecky
P.S. Kouam simo
J.M. Kozlowski
K.O. Krombholz
L.C. Kung
D.J. Labrecque
M. Laflamme
D. Lafreniere
J. Lam
S.A. Laporte
M. Larocque
A.J. Larsen
K.K. Lau
G.D. Laurin
M.M. Lea-Wilson
L. Leclerc
M.J. Leclerc
B.J. Lee
B.Y. Lee
D. Lee
R.W. Lee
W. Lee
M. Leger
A. Lepiarczyk
A.K. Leson
B.K. Li
N. Li
G. Liston
S.T. Liu
R.D. Lockwood
M.T. Loconte
R.A. Lozada
A.Y. Luk
H. Ma
M.J. Macmorran
M.G. Madore
W. Mai
M.T. Makhijani
R.P. Malach
G.P. Malcolm
S. Malhotra
S.M. Mandlon
G.E. Marchak
A.M. Marsh
W.A. Marsh
T.E. Martel
B.J. Mason
M.J. Maughan
C.P. Mayer
T. Mbanga
J. Mc Ara
J.J. McArthur
J. McCarthy
D.H. McCulloch
T.K. McEwan
J.J. McFadden
M.J. McGregor
R.V. McGregor
L.J. McInnes
L.G. McLaren
G.C. McPhee
S. McQueen
C. McRae
S.K. Mehta
K.A. Melney
W.D. Melnyk
R.A. Menon
J.M. Mew
V.H. Middleton
D.J. Mihial
G. Millar
R.J. Millington
M. Milot
A. Mir
C.K. Mitchell
P.E. Mocan
R.A. Monteyne
T.A. Montgomery
L.A. Morris
S. Moslehi
C.R. Mountenay
M. Munasinghe
R.N. Naguib
M. Najafi
P. Nayak
Y. Negash
J.H. Nehera
M.A. Nessim
T.L. Nguyen
W.P. Nickel
X. Nie
R.E. Nixon
P.F. Njamo
G.E. Norman
F. Nzotungwanimana
B.G. O’Donovan
G.J. Ouellette
C.P. Outtrim
W.S. Owen
O. Oyewole-Eletu
I. Ozpazarcik
F. Pagnotta
K. Pan
K.S. Panesar
J. Park
D.R. Parks
B.D. Patychuk
A.M. Pauwels
M.R. Pawlick
C.N. Penninga
G. Perkin
C.A. Perra
J.E. Peverelle
J.C. Pham
A.J. Phillips
G.T. Pierce
P.J. Pigeon
A. Plamondon
M.T. Pletch
A. Porretta
S.K. Porteous
R.L. Powley
A.J. Pratt
D.C. Preston
R.P. Prokopenko
M. Proulx
Y.U. Ramyead
D. Rana
J. Rand
J.C. Ransom
E.H. Rantala
K.W. Rarama
C.A. Rempel
T. Ren
S.B. Riegert
A.T. Robb
B.H. Roberts
M.D. Roberts
K.L. Robichaud
S.E. Roess
M.S. Saini
C. Salvian
B.H. Sanden
J.S. Sandhu
D. Santangelo
J. Sarai
A.K. Sarker
P. Sauve
C.S. Seinen
G. Sergiannis
P.A. Seth
A. Setiawan
K. Shahverdi
H.H. Shakarchi
R.A. Shambrook
A. Sharon
K. Shaw
B.S. Sheehan
J.W. Shewchuk
M.W. Shum
B.P. Siemens
T.K. Siu
C.L. Sluggett
G.A. Smith
P.W. Smith
A. Sokolowski
S.P. Sopora
R.M. Spencer
I.M. Squires
G.H. Srour
G.F. Stebnicki
L.M. Stelkia
A.J. Stewart
T.J. St-George
C.J. St-Hilaire
T.P. Stokes
W.K. Stokes
B.G. Stone
J.R. Storry
L. Su
T.E. Sully
X. Sun
P.R. Surati
N. Suzuki
E.A. Swanlund
M. Taiebat
E.A. Taillon
D.R. Tait
V.J. Tanner
M.H. Tareque
A. Tegzes
M.R. Telhaoui
D.B. Thompson
J.P. Thomson
B.C.E. Tollefson
C.V. Tomlinson
S. Towfighi
D.R. Trommelen
T.T. Truong
J.P. Tsang
L.W. Tse
A.G. Tworo
J.C. Ulmer
A. Umer
A.K. Urquhart
A. Vachalil
Narayanan
M.J. Valino
A.P.F. Van den Hurk
C.H. Van der Lely
H. Van der
Westhuizen
R.J. Van Kleeck
I.P. Vanin
P.M. Varro
R.L. Vaughan
M.A. Velez
S.J. Viau
J.A. Vides
C.D. Villar
Echegaray
J.H. Vincent
D.W. Vogt
P. Voisin
A.A. Voth
A.C. Vyas
D.P. Vyselaar
S.H.J. Walinga
A.M. Walsh
M.P. Walsh
C.L.J. Wandfluh
B.W. Wang
T. Wang
J.A. Warkentin
P.W. Watson
G.V. Wazny
N. Weinrauch
K.P. Welsh
L.A. Wheeler
D.N. Whiteside
J.C. Whiteside
T.M. Wierenga
J.D. Williams
N.K. Williams
K.A. Williston
R.E. Willms
B.K. Wilson
J.I. Wilson
C. Wong
C.P. Wong
D. Wong
E. Wong
B.J. Woock
C.L. Workman
R.C. Wouts
T.J. Wright
J. Xiang
D.J. Yakimchuk
E.S.L. Yan
P.J. Yang
B.J. Yee
M.K. Yeung
W. Yeung
Y.K. Yim
Y. Yu
K.K. Yue
I.R. Zahynacz
J.D. Zdunich
S. Zhang
X. Zhang
Y. Zhang
Z. Zheng v
Mission: Innovation
As APEGBC’s official publication, Innovation aims to publish information that is of interest and relevance to the professions, is
balanced, objective and impartial, affects the conduct of members, and showcases innovative engineering and geoscience work of
members. A secondary aim is to provide a forum for the exchange of views among APEGBC members through the publication of
letters to the editor.
Innovation Seeks Articles by Members
Do you have a story to share? If so, we want to hear from you! For information or to suggest an article idea, contact the Managing Editor
(innovation@apeg.bc.ca).
i n n o v a t i o n M ARCH/APRIL 2016 4 7

®
CGIS has a
commitment to understanding
the application and ensuring that
our customers always get the right
valve. We take the time to really
understand where the valves are
being installed and what it
needs to do, well before a
dollar is spent.
CGIS has experience
working with The World's
®
Best Valves controls, and
automation, since 1980. See
how the right valve can improve
your operational reliability by
visiting www.cgis.ca