RE: MIB/goingunderground30 Apr 2021 13:18
MIB, are you saying your son-in-law has researched the relevant data and considered the siting of the plant and mine, analysed this and feels that the flooding risk was actual and foreseeable. Alternatively, is it a general statement saying foreseeable risk should have allowed for this.
Personally having visited the site, from a layman’s point of view I really wouldn’t have thought flooding to be a foreseeable risk. It seems to me that it was an unusual occurrence. Bear in mind Rio Tinto Zinc operated there for, I think, some decades. I believe they also employ geologists.
Having said that if you son in law has carried out a full analysis I would gracefully concur that it should have been factored in.