Five Deaths Demand Justice Petition

[Widow]

Why did flyingsafely edit out the part about the dispatcher telling the OM/CP that she was in charge? And about the other operator concerned about the dispatchers lack of training and offering to train, and being refused?

[flyingsafely]

Widow,
Mea Culpa.
I posted just after 6 pm, went home, couldn't sleep as I was fretting about what I'd said, got out of bed and edited it out about 11 PM.
Why? Because it wasn't my story. It was information I'd been given by the people involved, and it's up to them, not me, to make the decision to share it with the readers of AVCANADA.
Your posting let me know that you had heard the story before.

What is the happening in regard to the body that was observed near where the engine was found?

flyingsafely

[Widow]

Thanks for the explanation, flyingsafely. Indeed, the operator who had offered to train the dispatcher gave us a written statement to that effect. This was an attachment to our original "report" of March '06.

The article which talked about the body left the impression that it had been seen during this last recovery effort, whereas in fact it was spotted summer '06 when we first located the engine. Kevin will be back on the water when he has the time/money/help to try to get it on film ... in which case the indication is that the RCMP/coroner would have to recover, as there is no way of knowing (without recovering) who it is ... it could conceivably be someone else altogether.

[xsbank]

"Remains" were found on the beach on Jedediah Is. in August this summer - was that related?

[Widow]

A man's size 12 right foot/shoe was found on Jedediah, and about a week later another mans size 12 right foot/shoe was found further south ... and since this was so soon after Kevin had been dragging the bottom we wondered - certainly the currents could carry that way - someone lost from Quadra had previously turned up around Parksville ... but no one ever took DNA from the four missing men, and although we contacted our RCMP officer we have heard nothing.

[Widow]

Police empty-handed in foot investigations
By Alli Vail - Parksville Qualicum Beach News - October 05, 2007

There is no new information about two feet, still encased in running shoes, that washed up on Jedidiah and Gabriola islands in late August.

Corporal Garry Cox, from Oceanside RCMP, said it has been five weeks since the two feet were found and police are still waiting for feedback from a forensic analysis. Police have been following up tips, but have no information.

“We’ve had very few tips for missing people,” Cox said, adding police have followed up on tips they received.

“Everything has been negative so far,” he said.

The first foot was found by an American tourist on Jedidiah Island on Aug. 20.

The second foot was found Aug. 26 on Gabriola Island. Although both feet were size 12 and found in sneakers, the shoes were different brands.

BC Local News

They still have not asked family members for DNA from our missing men.

[snoopy]

"The second foot was found Aug. 26 on Gabriola Island. Although both feet were size 12 and found in sneakers, the shoes were different brands."

That is really creepy. Surely they must be from the same person - what are the chances?! But different brands?

Snoopy

[Widow]

Both right feet. Had to be different people. Really, really, creepy.

[snaproll20]

This whole incident seems fraught with a lack of committed investigation.
Maybe I have watched too many CSI episodes on TV, but surely DNA samples from relatives should have been done by now.
Did the RCMP ask family how the victims were dressed that fateful day?
Have they asked what brand sneakers the various men owned?

[Widow]

My conversations with the other families indicate that the RCMP never asked for details of how the a/c occupants were dressed. I, like you snaproll20, would have expected them to take DNA samples when the men were declared missing persons ... it would seem that if remains turn up, they should be able to attempt identification BEFORE contacting family members.

Indeed, the investigation by all parties has been disjointed at best. The original RCMP officer on the case left the area at the same time the wreck was recovered ... taking with him all his personal insights and instincts brought up in the early investigation.

Even the original coroner was transferred to the Child Death review ... her instincts about Dave's cause of death and questions about how/why he was left to drown seem irrelevant to the "new" coroner.

Perhaps some of these things will be questioned publically with the upcoming W-Five update into this story ... they were here last week doing interviews for the follow-up. You can be sure I will let you all know when the episode is scheduled for airing!

[Widow]

----- Original Message -----
From: Kirsten Stevens
To: Merlin Preuss
Cc: Terry Burtch ; Glenn McKenna ; Roger Collin ; Roberta Ellis
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 2:30 PM
Subject: Engine Recovered: TC Docket #AAR2006G097207


Dear Mr. Preuss;

By now I expect you have heard that the families of Arnie Feast, Doug and Trevor Decock, Fabian Bedard and Dave Stevens have been successful in recovering the engine of the accident aircraft C-GAQW (Docket #AAR2006G097207: February 28, 2005). Having delivered the power section and what remains of the blower and accessory section (recovered July 28, 2005) to the TSB office in Richmond on September 13th, 2007, we trust that:

· Transport Canada Civil Aviation representatives of Maintenance and Manufacturing knowledgeable in DHC-2 aircraft, P&W R-985 engines, Hamilton Standard propellers and Edo 4580 floats will be assigned to take part in the investigation;

· Transport Canada Civil Aviation Occupational Health and Safety will finally appoint a Minister’s Observer in respect of the agreement with the Minister of Labour, to ensure that all safety measures were adhered to in compliance with the Canada Labour Code, especially Part II:

o "Duties of Employers: Specific Duties"125 (1)

§ "(c) investigate, record and report in the manner and to the authorities as prescribed all accidents, occupational diseases and other hazardous occurrences known to the employer;"

§ "(k) ensure that the vehicles and mobile equipment used by the employees in the course of their employment meet prescribed standards;"

§ "(o) comply with prescribed standards relating to fire safety and emergency measures;"

· Should it be found that any party’s negligence contributed to this accident and/or the fatal nature of the accident, that such party will be held accountable using both TCCA Enforcement and the involvement of the RCMP further to the Criminal Code of Canada which states

o “everyone who undertakes, or has the authority, to direct how another person does work or performs a task is under a legal duty to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm to that person, or any other person, arising from that work or task.”

o Dangerous operation of motor vehicles, vessels and aircraft: 249. (1) Every one commits an offence who operates (c) an aircraft in a manner that is dangerous to the public, having regard to all the circumstances, including the nature and condition of that aircraft or the place or air space in or through which the aircraft is operated;".

In light of the Canada Labour Code and Criminal Code of Canada quoted above, we urge you to consider your own statement that it was “responsibility of the company to decide when the aircraft is missing and take the appropriate action”. The following are known facts:

· My husband Dave Stevens’ body was found and his autopsy completed on March 7th, 2005 indicating that he had drowned with no serious injury and despite wearing a Mustang Survival jacket, after suffering extensively from hypothermia. This was a survivable accident.

· According to the initial report made to the Joint Rescue Co-ordination Centre, a communications search was initiated at about 11:15 local time (aircraft clock stopped at 10:16), although MJM Air should have been aware the aircraft was missing shortly after 10:30 when it’s destination called to say it had not arrived.

· Said communication search was conducted by telephone only as MJM Air did not have a dispatch radio, contrary to the industry standard for the area.

· Shortly after 12:00 noon, a small scale search was initiated by the Operations Manager when he flew a chartered flight to Johnson Straight and waited for his passengers to finish in the showers before returning sometime after SAR had been contacted at about 14:15.

· Operations Manual 3.4.1 and CARs 723.26 (2) state: "Flight Following for a Type D system is the monitoring of a flight's progress and the notification of appropriate air operator and search-and-rescue authorities if the flight is overdue or missing."

· Canadian Aviation Regulations, Part VII, Standard 723.16, (1)(d) states: “Each aircraft shall be equipped with serviceable and functioning communications equipment that permits the pilot-in-command to communicate with a ground radio station for the purpose of flight following with the air operator. Such a ground station may be operated by the government, the air operator or a private agency.” There was no ground radio station for the purpose of flight following.

· MJM Air Operations Manual Emergency Checklist states that SAR will be contacted within ONE HOUR of an aircraft being identified as overdue (missing).

· A witness heard calls for help three hours after the accident is known to have occurred.

· TP14371 Aeronautical Information Manual, SAR 2.0 Flight Planning, 2.2 Request for Search and Rescue Assistance states: “As soon as information is received that an aircraft is overdue, operators or owners should immediately alert the nearest RCC or any ATS unit, giving all known details. The alerting call should not be delayed until after a small scale private search. Such a delay could deprive those in need of urgent assistance at a time when it is most needed. “

It is clear that MJM Air was not operating in accordance with the Regulations or Standards.

At this time, we further wish to recommend that commercially operated floatplanes (or those being used to transport workers) have a mandatory requirement for an ELT beacon which works underwater; passengers on commercially operated floatplanes (or those being used to transport workers) be required to don their inflatable life jackets prior to boarding, and that such life jackets be equipped with whistles and dye markers/streamers or other means of visually aiding location; equipping said life jackets with Personal Locator Beacons.

<snip>

We look forward to your prompt response.



Stay Safe,


Kirsten Stevens

Two responses have recently been received ...

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nowzek, David" <NOWZEKD>
To: <kis>
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 1:42 PM
Subject: Civil Aviation Issues Reporting System (CAIRS) File Number NC-2336


> Dear Ms. Stevens
>
> Thank you for your e-mail of September 16, 2007 regarding the aircraft accident on February 28, 2005.
>
> Since receiving your correspondence, departmental officials have advised me that the Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) has conducted an engineering examination of the engine and propeller of aircraft C-GAQW. The examination to date has not uncovered any pre-existing conditions that would lead to an engine failure. The families of the deceased have been advised of the by the TSB.
>
> During the examination, a Transport Canada Inspector attended as a Minister> '> s Observer. The Minister Observer is responsible to obtain timely information relevant to the Minister of Transport Canada> '> s responsibilities with respect to the Aeronautics Act and Canadian Aviation Regulations.
>
> A Minister Observer is not assigned on behalf of the Minister of Labour. However, I want to emphasize that Transport Canada staff initiated an investigation immediately upon notification of the occurrence on February 28, 2005. This investigation was done under the auspices of the Canada Labour Code and the Civil Aviation Occupational Health and Safety program.
>
> The investigation under this authority, focused on employees of the aviation company involved and did not include passengers. It is unfortunate, however, there were no witnesses to the accident nor any confirmed cause of death of the pilot. Based on this lack of information, the file was closed on June 20, 2006.
>
> As previously stated in my correspondence dated January 18, 2007, The CARs were developed in consultation with the aviation industry in such a manner as to manage the risks to an acceptable level. This does not mean that all risk can be removed. The Type D operational control requirements are intentionally permissive in recognition of the realities that limit communication in some areas of the country. CAR 723.16 dealing with Type D Operational Control does not require the pilot and the operator to be in constant communication with each other, either directly or indirectly through a third party. The regulation requires aircraft equipment that permits a pilot to communicate. It does not require that the pilot-in-command be capable of communicating with a ground station at all times. Such a regulation would seriously hamper aviation operations wherever line-of-sight VHF communications are not possible. The accident aircraft was equipped with a serviceable VHF onboard radio plus an operating cell phone (thereby satisfying CAR 723.16(1)(d)).
>
> I would like to take this opportunity to again express our condolences on your loss and to also thank you for sharing your views.
>
>
>
David J. Nowzek
Regional Director, Civil Aviation / Directeur régional, Aviation civile
Tel: 604-666-8317
......................................................................................................
Transport Canada / Transports Canada
620 - 800 Burrard Street / 800, Rue Burrard, pièce 620
Vancouver, BC (C-B) V6Z 2J8
Facsimile / Télécopieur: 604-666-1175

----- Original Message -----
From: "Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities / Ministre des Transports, de l'infrastructure et des Collectivités" <MINTC>
To: <kis>
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 1:10 PM
Subject: Accident investigation


Ms. Kirsten Stevens
kis.ca@telus.net


Dear Ms. Stevens:

Thank you for your correspondence of September 17, 2007, which was further to your previous correspondence to the Honourable Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, regarding the investigation into the airplane accident that occurred on February 28, 2005. The Minister has asked me to reply on his behalf.

Since receiving your initial correspondence, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) has conducted an engineering examination of the engine and propeller of aircraft C-GAQW. The examination to date has not uncovered any pre-existing conditions that would lead to an engine failure. The TSB has informed the families of the deceased of the examination's results.

During the examination, a Transport Canada Inspector was involved as a Minister's Observer. I should clarify that a Minister's Observer is not assigned on behalf of the Minister of Labour.
Rather, the duties of a Minister's Observer are to obtain timely information relevant to the Minister of Transport's responsibilities with respect to the Aeronautics Act and the Canadian Aviation Regulations.

I should note that Transport Canada officials initiated an investigation immediately upon notification of the accident on February 28, 2005. This investigation was carried out under the auspices of the Canada Labour Code and the Civil Aviation Occupational Health and Safety program. The investigation under this authority is for employees of the aviation company involved, and does not include passengers. Unfortunately, due to lack of information, the file was closed on June 20, 2006.

I have noted your suggestions regarding the use of life preservers on seaplanes. You may be interested to know that under the direction of the Canadian Aviation Regulation Advisory Council, two working groups evaluated issues related to the provision and use of flotation equipment onboard aircraft. The working groups recommended that life preservers be available immediately during flights taking off from and landing on water, with an advisory recommending that the life preservers be worn.

Based on the recommendations regarding survival equipment, the advisory material produced will include the recommendation that life preservers be worn on seaplanes, and that seaplane operators acquire life preservers with additional means of signalling, such as those you have suggested, including whistles, dye markers, streamers and personal locator beacons.

I trust that this information clarifies the Minister's position with respect to these matters. Again, thank you for writing.

Yours truly,


Andrew Walasek
Special Assistant - Ontario and Western Canada

Notes for my response include

CASI–OH&S hold their delegation from the Minister of Labour, upon recommendation by the Minister of Transport following successful completion of a basic training program.

Civil Aviation Safety Inspector - Occupational Health & Safety Manual (TP 7886)

and

1.3 These Regulations apply in respect of employees employed on aircraft while in operation and in respect of persons granted access to such aircraft by the employer.

CANADA LABOUR CODE: Aviation Occupational Safety and Health Regulations

and

The purpose of the Minister's Observer Program is to obtain timely information relevant to the Minister's responsibilities for safety and to contribute to the identification and evaluation of hazards revealed by investigations into aviation, rail, and marine occurrences.

Minister's Observer Program

and

TSB investigation is NOT complete, there were (sound) witnesses

and

Further to compliance with CAR 723.16(1)(d), we would like to know where the “ground radio station for the purpose of flight following with the air operator” was located.

[Widow]

Attention: Andrew Walasek, Special Assistant to the Minister of Transport
Dave Nowzek, Regional Director, Transport Canada Civil Aviation


C.C. Jean-Pierre Blackburn, Minister of Labour
Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Transport
Merlin Preuss, Director General Transport Canada Civil Aviation
Catherine Bell, MP Van. Isle North
XX, RCMP Island District GIS
YY, BC Coroner Service
ZZ, Worksafe BC
(Legal Firm)




Dear Sirs,

Thank you for your letters of November 22nd and November 26th respectively.

Unfortunately, we are highly dissatisfied with your responses.

Once again, you have stated that MJM Air was operating in accordance with CAR 723.16. If this is indeed the case, we would like to know where the “ground radio station for the purpose of flight following with the air operator” was located. We would also like to note that through Access to Information we requested proof of the training received by the “flight follower”, but the page(s) was excluded. This was disappointing, especially in light of Transport Canada’s lack of adherence to its own Frequency of Inspection Policy and the many changes to the MJM operation in the few years immediately prior to the accident – and, of course, the owner’s safety record in the forest industry.

In our letter dated September 16th, we trusted that Transport Canada Civil Aviation Occupational Health and Safety would appoint a Minister’s Observer (Min Ob) to ensure that all safety measures were adhered to in compliance with the Canada Labour Code. Perhaps our confusion in assuming that the Min Ob would be appointed in conjunction with the agreement with the Minister of Labour comes from the following:

CASI–OH&S hold their delegation from the Minister of Labour, upon recommendation by the Minister of Transport following successful completion of a basic training program.[1]

These Regulations apply in respect of employees employed on aircraft while in operation and in respect of persons granted access to such aircraft by the employer. [2]

The purpose of the Minister's Observer Program is to obtain timely information relevant to the Minister's responsibilities for safety and to contribute to the identification and evaluation of hazards revealed by investigations into aviation, rail, and marine occurrences.[3]

This information clearly indicates that CASI-OH&S does have an obligation to investigate for infringements of the Canada Labour Code with respect to non-aviation employees. Again, my husband, Dave Stevens, was recovered and a cause of death determined. Furthermore, there were (sound) witnesses to the accident. The Transportation Safety Boards refusal to interview these witnesses does not negate their existence. My husband’s death was purely the result of negligence. As the provincial Worker’s Compensation Board (WorksafeBC) does not have jurisdiction to investigate, kindly explain to us who is authorized to take action, if not Transport Canada.

Your letters also imply that the Transportation Safety Board investigation is complete. This is most certainly not the case. In a letter dated November 26th, Nick Stoss, the Director of Air Investigations, has informed us that “due to workload issues and our desire to conduct a thorough research of specifications and regulations, along with metallurgical examinations, the Engineering Branch Report has not yet been completed”. We, therefore, again request that a CASI-OH&S Inspector be assigned to evaluate the due diligence performed by MJM Air, and that we be kept abreast of any and all enforcement actions which are or will be in process.

We are pleased to hear that Canadian Aviation Regulation Advisory Council has discussed the use of floatation devices, however, do not feel that a simple recommendation that “life preservers be available immediately during flights taking off from and landing on water, with an advisory recommending that the life preservers be worn” is enough. As evidenced by this accident, there is seldom time or opportunity to don a life preserver after the fact. We feel that often, even pilots do not understand the importance of this safety measure. Therefore, we would like to further recommend that commercial floatplane pilots be required to take an underwater egress course in order to obtain their licences.

We will look for your prompt response.



Stay Safe,



Kirsten Stevens
On behalf of the Stevens, Decock, Feast and Bedard Families
******************
[1] Civil Aviation Safety Inspector - Occupational Health & Safety Manual (TP 7886), Chapter 2.1

[2] CANADA LABOUR CODE: Aviation Occupational Safety and Health Regulations, Part 1.3

[3] Minister's Observer Program, Part 2.0

[viccoastdog]

Hi Widow,

Are you refering to this paragraph of Canadian Aviation Standards 723.16

(d) Communications

Each aeroplane shall be equipped with serviceable and functioning communications equipment that permits the pilot-in-command to communicate with a ground radio station for the purpose of flight following. Such a ground station may be operated by the government, the air operator or a private agency.

?

My understanding as an Ops Manager who's taken the TC test for Ops Managers (and it's pretty easy) is that this standard only requires an aircraft to have a VHF radio (in this part of the country, obviously other radios up North perhaps etc etc) and doesn't require the aircraft to be in, or able to be in, permanent contact with a ground radio station. Indeed Campbell Radio is close by.

Might I draw you attention to the next paragraph:

e) On Duty

A person, qualified and knowledgeable in the air operator's flight alerting procedures, shall be on duty or available when IFR or VFR at night flight operations are being conducted.

Perhaps this should be changed to include day VFR as well, so that there is always a person of authority or knowledge available at all times.

[Widow]

Yes, that is the CAR reference ... I understand that the aircraft does not need to be able to be in permanent contact with a ground radio station ... the point is, that there was NO ground radio station for the purposes of flight following, i.e. MJM Air did not have a dispatch radio, nor did they use the dispatch radio of any other company when they were doing their "communication search" after becoming aware that the a/c was missing ....

And as to "on duty", indeed, the "responsible person" was irresponsible. I agree, there should be a qualified person actually AVAILABLE at all times when there is a commercial flight in the air.

[Widow]

Received today.

December 7, 2007
Ms. Kirsten Stevens
492 South McPhedran Road
Campbell River BC V9W 5K5

Dear Ms. Stevens:

The British Columbia Coroners Service (BCCS) continues to conduct an investigation into the aviation incident that resulted in the death of your husband and four others on February 28,2005. All factors, such as human, mechanical, environmental, or other, that may have contributed to the incident, are being examined by the coroner. The Chief Coroner has full confidence in the investigation conducted by the Transportation Safety Board, including most recently, the examination ofthe aircraft's engine. The investigation will address any and all relevant concerns with respect to the logging industry and the mechanics of the airplane.

It is mandatory that aviation as well as forestry related incidents be reviewed by the Inquest Committee at the Office ofthe Chief Coroner. That review is currently underway, and once it is completed the committee will then make the recommendation to the Chief Coroner whether the matter should go to public inquest.

The coroner's investigation is independent, focusing on the facts, rather than assigning fault or blame. At the conclusion of the investigation, recommendations may be made to prevent a similar event from occurring in the future. These recommendations can be made by the coroner
in their Judgement of Inquiry or by a jury at a public inquest.


Thank you for writing.

Yours truly,



John Les
Solicitor General

Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General

Also received today was a shipment of engine parts returning from the TSB. Hopefully this means that the engineering report will soon be complete.

[Widow]

The final engineering report has been received from the TSB. They have not identified a specific concern which led to our contended engine failure, although there were certain 'anomolies' both in and of the report. I will give more information when I have had time to fully read and assess the report myself.

Oh yes, and to repeat myself:

The follow-up W-Five episode to "A Routine Flight" has been scheduled for December 29th, 2007.

The episode, titled "Kevin's Quest", continues the chronicle of the families' efforts to find answers, focusing on the recent recovery of the engine from C-GAQW, the aircraft whose loss also resulted in the loss of our loved ones, Arnie Feast, Fabian Bedard, Dave Stevens, and Kevins' brothers, Doug and Trevor Decock on the 28th of February, 2005. The story will air the second half of the program.

We hope you will join us in watching "Kevin's Quest".

[C-FABH]

Hey Widow -- was channel surfing after dinner and am watching the show right now. I have the whole family tuned into it!

[Widow]

Hope you enjoyed it C-FABH ... the program was bumped here in the west by an American football game (grrr). It may air again this afternoon ...

In any case, "Kevin's Quest" can now be viewed at the WFive website here:

Kevin's Quest

It isn't what we'd hoped, but it is something.

[snoopy]

Hi Widow,
Thank you for the online link! While it may not have been what you hoped, given the lack of an obvious "smoking gun", it was very well done indeed. It certainly shows the dedication of the family to find answers to what happened, and the human element is very poignant. We as pilots can only hope, that in the unlikely event that misfortune befalls us, that someone remains to persevere in the same way, for truth and justice.
You got this far, something will come of it...
Best Regards,
Snoopy

[xsbank]

Me too, with bells on!

Snoopy, PM me?

[Widow]

Well, you know, I'm "Kirsten" not "Kristen" (I am devastated that Malorek said my name incorrectly ... know the feeling Snoopy???). They also gave undeserved credit to Nuytco ... it was International Underwater Surveyors and their ROV (remote operated vehicle) which indentified and provided underwater footage of the wreck - Nuytco spent three days recovering it in July '05, left behind the engine, then spent three more days in Feb/March '07 attempting to locate the engine (which sat exactly where it had been when still attached to the fuselage).

This episode was basically a rehash of the "A Routine Flight" with a little new information. We were hoping for a little investigative journalism piece, and what we got was a little sob story. Oh those poor families ...

So, now we wait for the Coroner's decision ... and in the meantime, plan our own engineering inspections of various parts.

[Widow]

January 23, 2007

Your file: Z 5015-11760 U
RDMIS# 3845196
Mrs. Kirsten Stevens
492 S. McPhedran Road
Campbell River, BC
V9W 5K5


Dear Mrs. Stevens,

I am responding to your e-mail correspondence dated December 5,2007. The
department has no further information to provide you beyond what has previously
been communicated to you. However, to reiterate:

With regards to your Access to Information request, every effort is made to
ensure requested documents are provided should they be in the custody of
Transport Canada. The training records of the flight follower are not in our
possession, nor are they required to be by regulation or policy.

As stated in previous correspondence, an investigation was initiated with respect
to the Canada Labour Code and the Civil Aviation Occupational Health and
Safety Program. It is recognized that your husband and the other passengers
onboard the aircraft were deemed "persons granted access" to a federally
designated workplace, but unfortunately there were no witnesses to this accident,
and no determined cause of death of the pilot due to the body never being
recovered. ( ) As a result of very limited information, the investigation was closed.
Since the closing of the investigation, there has been no additional factual
information brought forward that would have influenced the decision to close the
investigation.

Your recommendation that float plane pilots be required to undertake egress
training, will be forwarded to the Secretariat, Civil Aviation Regulatory Advisory
Council, on your behalf.

As noted in previous correspondence, a Minister's Observer was and continues to
be assigned to this accident. In addition, we also reiterate the company was
operating in compliance with CAR 723.16(1)(d).

I would like to take this opportunity to again express our condolences on your loss
as a result of this accident and also thank you for sharing your views.

Yours truly,

David J. Nowzek
Regional Director, Civil Aviation

As I'm sure you can imagine, I find it extremely frustrating that having a clear cause of death for MY HUSBAND, has no affect on the decision to investigate for infringements of the labour code.

So, if we go down, we go down with guns blazing ...


We are in what we hope will be the final leg before finally getting some (proof positive) answers. In order to help ensure this becomes a reality, we ask for your help in finalizing the petition. If you have not already done so, please sign and pass on to anyone else you think may be interested in our cause. If you have been collecting signatures on a paper petition, please contact me at dhc2widow@hotmail.com, or via facebook, as soon as possible, to arrange for their return.

Thanks all and, as always, stay safe.

http://www.petitiononline.com/cgaqw/petition.html

[Widow]

So after a third foot washed up (see this thread: http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... 49&t=39815) I've created this map to show where we were dragging (the star) and where each of the three feet have washed up. DNA has still not been collected despite our requests. Why don't the RCMP or the coroner see there might be a connection? Seems so obvious, they should clear it up immediately. Just more foul-ups for the families to contend with.



Is there a government agency that hasn't screwed up in this case????

[Widow]

CBC News (TV and Radio) is doing a spot today, the 3rd anniversary of the accident.

If it's a slow news day, it may get picked up from the Vancouver region for use in the national edition.

[Widow]

Turns out A-Channel did a much more interesting story ...

Enjoy ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRRWeoOC4zk