Laserfiche WebLink
leave a message at the office indicating he had any concern or problem with the plans. Dr. <br /> Corley later told me in a phone conversation we had on July 26,that he had in fact received <br /> this message. while it may be the case that prior written consent was not adequately <br /> addressed, It is unclear to me how Dr. Corley can contend he had no prior knowledge of <br /> our plans when I personally informed him verbally of the plans prior to commencing with <br /> them. <br /> Dr. Corley did intercept the single truck which was being used to transport fill materials to <br /> the subsidence holes on the afternoon of Friday, July 23. He stated to the Contractor that <br /> he did not recall consenting to the bac of the subsidence holes, but since Dr. Corley, <br /> wanted the holes filled and sealed (we have letters from him in our files requesting and <br /> indicating that it was important to him that they be fulled and sealed), he consented to <br /> continuing the work, but requested payment of$25/per load. The Contractor said that if <br /> that was what it would take to make him happy, so be it. The Contractor agreed to keep <br /> a load count and pay Dr. Corley for use of the fill. The Contractor indicated to me that <br /> when-Dr.Corley left the site that evening, "he had a smile on his face", and that there was <br /> no further problem. Based on this agreement, the Contractor showed up the following <br /> Monday to continue the work. It as Dr. Corley suggested to you, he never gave consent <br /> for the backfilling work, why was the Contractor back on the job Monday continuing the <br /> work? <br /> Between Friday,July 23, and Monday,July 26, Dr. Corley must have reviewed the consent <br /> form for the project. Due to either-a mire up in the IMR files, or because Dr. Corley re- <br /> typed the consent and left the backfilling part out, the bac llsng work was not specifically <br /> mentioned in the Consent Narrative he has in his possession (it is interesting to note that <br /> the consent dated March 18, 1993 from Energy Fuels,the lessee, contain the backfiliing <br /> clause). As Dr. Corley continues to be embroiled in disagreement with the Division on <br /> other matters, he seized upon this discrepancy in order to have something "to use against <br /> the Division`, as he stated to me in our phone conversation of July 26. <br /> 1 called Dr. Corley on Monday, July 26. At that time he_had changed his uund regarding <br /> the consent he had given on Friday to continue the backfilling work. He requested that <br /> work on the project be stopped immediately until the issue was sorted out. The Contractor <br /> was working under the agreement he had made with Dr.Corley the previous week. I called <br /> the mine and had them give a message to the Contractor to call me, and shortly thereafter <br /> spoke with him. I informed hint of the situation, and asked him to stop the work. I <br /> instructed him to consider the job finished as far as he was concerned, because I knew it <br /> would take weeks or months for the issue to be cleared up, and he had another job to go <br /> to. I also told hint to go ahead and honor the agreement be entered into with Dr. Corley <br /> regarding performing the backfilling work. He sent Dr. Corley a check in payment for the <br /> 23.5 loads of fill he had hauled to that point. Dr. Corley did not "estimate" 23.5 loads-this <br /> was the load count presented to him with the payment check,which he subsequently cashed, <br /> thereby acknowledging in writing consent to perform the backfilling work as of July 23. <br /> The final reclamation of roads and areas disturbed during the work was not completed <br /> because Dr. Corley requested that work on the project he stopped until the issue was <br />