Regina engineer Scott Gallagher will face a disciplinary hearing next month over allegations that he broke the rules when he designed a bridge in Saskatchewan that collapsed just hours after it was opened to the public.
On September 14, 2018, Clayton’s Rural Community (RM) announced on its Facebook page that “Dick Memorial Bridge is now complete and open.”
Later that day, the bridge collapsed. No one was injured.
In an interview just days after the collapse, RM’s Reeve Dwayne Hicks said some of the pillars on which the bridge was built had collapsed.
“So something tells me that something happened underground. I don’t know what happened. They don’t know what happened. Nobody knows what happened,” he said.
At the time, Hicks attributed it to “God’s action.”
However, there may have been another explanation.
Hicks also revealed that the engineer who designed the bridge, Scott Gallagher, did not do a geotechnical survey of the riverbed before installing the pilots.
After years of investigation, the Saskatchewan Association of Professional Engineers and Geologists (APEGS) published a statement on its website on Wednesday saying Gulacher would face a disciplinary hearing in early June.
Regina engineer Scott Gallagher faces a disciplinary hearing next month over his work on the design of a collapsed bridge. (LinkedIn)
The association claims that Gulacher did not exercise “care and diligence” when designing the bridge and the propellers that were supposed to hold it. APEGS also claims that Gulacher offered services or advice in an area beyond his professional competence.
The association also claims that he was not “careful and diligent” in designing bridges in four other RMs in Saskatchewan, including Scott, Caledonia, Purdue and Mervyn.
Gulacher is also facing lawsuits
These bridges have also been the subject of a series of lawsuits.
RM of Clayton is suing Gullacher and two companies he and his wife control: Can-Struct Systems Ltd., which is described as a bridge-building company, and Inertia Solutions Ltd., which provides engineering services.
RM claims that Gulacher and his companies violated their contract because the bridge was supposed to last 75 years, but only a few hours remained. The lawsuit states that Gulacher failed to “design and / or build a bridge that will not collapse immediately.”
The lawsuit states that “no geotechnical report has been prepared to determine the underground conditions under the bridge” and “The design of the Can-Struct bridge required the use of screw piles, unlike industry-standard downed piles.”
RM instructed that no geotechnical survey should be carried out, as RM was concerned about additional costs and delays. – Defense statement by Scott Gullacher and Inertia
In response, Gulacher and his companies agreed not to conduct a geotechnical survey, but insisted it was at the client’s request.
“RM instructed that no geotechnical survey should be carried out, as RM was concerned about additional costs and delays,” the Gullacher and Inertia defense said in a statement.
“Inertia admits that part of the bridge collapsed,” the statement said, “but denies that its design or specifications caused the collapse and puts the plaintiff in strong evidence of this.”
Inertia says RM may bear some guilt because it has decided to abandon geotechnical work. He also says that after the bridge was built, RM “installed gravel on the bridge at a depth of 13 to 16 inches with an average depth of 14 inches, which far exceeds the specified load.”
In its action, the RM of Clayton seeks compensation for the costs of repairing and replacing the bridge, as well as for the loss of use of the bridge.
Inertia says that not only has she done nothing wrong, but she also “denies that [RM] has suffered any damage or loss, as alleged or not at all … Alternatively, Inertia says that the loss or damage claimed by the plaintiff is too distant. As an alternative, Inertia says the plaintiff did not take reasonable steps to mitigate his losses, if any. ”
Scott’s RMs, Caledonia, Purdue and Mervin also sued Gullacher and his companies, which built bridges in those RMs. The lawsuits note that since the collapse of the Dyke Memorial Bridge, inspections commissioned by the Saskatchewan Rural Association have raised concerns about “deficiencies” in the design and construction of other bridges.
As a result of the inspections, restrictions on the weight of the bridges were imposed.
In response, Gulacher and his companies say the bridges have been designed and built to proper specifications and have no problems with them. The defense statement said that “any weight restrictions imposed in connection with the bridge are unnecessary and imposed without consultation” with Gulacher or his companies.
According to Gullacher’s LinkedIn profile, he left his company Inertia Solutions in July 2019 and started Driftstone Consulting, a Regina-based engineering firm. He was a director and shareholder.
However, according to the corporate register, he resigned as director at the end of last month and is no longer a shareholder.
The CBC called Gullacher’s phone number. The woman who responded said Gulacher would not want to talk to the CBC and then hung up.
RM wanted to build a “cheaper” bridge
Clayton’s RM hired Gullacher’s construction company, Can-Struct, in early July 2018 to design and build the bridge.
Earlier that year, RM refused $ 750,000 in provincial funding for the bridge because it was tied to the province’s strict technical specifications for the bridge. RM officials felt these requirements were excessive and would make the bridge unnecessarily expensive.
“This bridge is beyond our needs,” Kelly Ree, then RM administrator, told a public forum. “We don’t need this bridge.”
WATCH Clayton’s Kelly Ria expressed concerns about the criteria for funding the bridge:
Kelly Ria of Clayton’s RM is concerned about the criteria for funding the bridge
Kelly Ria of Clayton’s RM is concerned about the criteria for funding the bridge
The province’s more expensive bridge would cost a total of $ 1.075 million. Since the province said it would cover $ 750,000 of that, RM would be on the hook for $ 325,000.
In other words, the province’s “more expensive bridge” would cost RM exactly the same amount as the bridge it eventually approved – which fell shortly after its official opening.
Late last year, RM announced a tender for a new bridge.
The lowest bid and winner of the competition was Harbuilt Construction. His bid was $ 1,923,786.06, including taxes.
The CBC asked RM to update the recovery project, but did not respond.
Add Comment