Laserfiche WebLink
~ FRDM~natural ~ TD=DMG <br />16. 1994 S~14PM tt915 P,02 <br />Mar, 15, 1994 <br />The Corley Company <br />ww~aeaasow ao.ew,ez, <br />cotoawo svanv~s, co~oa~,oo enoo, <br />Dir, Stephen M. Brown <br />Assistant Attorney General <br />1525 Sherman St, <br />Denver CO 80203 <br />Dear Mr, Rrown: <br />Your representatives are correct that 7 visited the GEC reclamation <br />site. The rest of your statements roncerning that visit are incorrect. <br />The contractor was working on part of Che East Pit in the wrong sequence <br />according to the Contract, and he. was pushing topsoil into the Yit <br />without saving 'it ae required by the Contract. When I told Hr. Nelson <br />of these concerns he was uncoucerned and did not have an appropri.a[e <br />response. As a matter of fact, I have complained ei.nce to the Division <br />with no response. Topsoil. is still being Iost, particuler].y nnw being <br />mixed with boulders and too much rock substrata. <br />Next. i informed Mr, Nelson that the dozers did not have the required <br />safety equipment such as backup alarms. His reply was that "the <br />operators have just gotten tired of listening to them and have turned <br />them off". At my urging, Mr. Nelsoa stopped one dozer only to leas <br />that the alarm was not in operating conditi.nn, I stopped the second <br />dozer that dial not have apt alarm. At this point Hr. Nelson's only <br />comments were vulgarities. Lacer, I asked Hr. Nelson if he wished to <br />inspect the dozers. He said "you do i.t". That was the only time that I <br />climbed on a machine. Sl,ou].d 1 not do what Hr. Nelson said for me to <br />do? The dozer operator said that he was not wearing his s;eatbelc, <br />Interference, dangerous? How can insistence for safety he defined that <br />way? 7 am willing to assume liability for mp safety. Please note that <br />I was the only individual on tl,e site in compliance with OSHA <br />requirement for a hard hat. When you take your legal steps, it will <br />make interesting testimony Ll,at your representatives are not interested <br />in safety rules and that "efficiency and timclyness" are more important <br />than safety. <br />Since my previous efforts to request the best saving of the topsoil. have <br />fail.cd, I am making this a formal complniut that the Division's ovn <br />regu].atlons for the saving of topsoil are not being met. There iF also <br />no compactiou in lifts of material being dozed into the East Pit. The <br />966 loader has many broken windows. <br />Sincerely, <br />W <br />W,D, Corley, J , <br />President <br />