skip to Main Content
Asset Mandate Correspondence Sent To Chief Inspectors Reply Asset Requirement Mandate To Keep Trucks Running To Meet Production Target”

Asset Mandate Correspondence Sent to Chief Inspectors Reply Asset requirement mandate to keep trucks running to meet production target”

Excerpts From The Reply  Sent on 12th August 2020.  Attached is a Full Copy of the Reply

PDM Complaint reply

Chief Inspector of Coal Mines Qld

Re Complaint Investigation Report – Peak Downs dated 30th April 2020

Dear Peter;

This is the first formal follow up as promised on the matter of my Peak Downs Complaint.

This correspondence will deal with your comments regarding the “Asset”

During your evidence at the Ministerial Board of you answered under oath that you did not obtain any legal advice before making Interpretations of the Coal Mining Act and Regulations and then putting it into effect on at least one occasion.

  • Did you as Chief Inspector get any legal advice prior to your formal reply to me on the 30th of April?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

In short, I find it impossible to understand how anyone who professes to understand the Mining Act could ever come up with such a response.

It is against all the findings of the Moura Inquiry and its recommendations and the wording, intent and drafting Instructions etc of the Coal Mining Act.

In fact, the positions of SSE in particular and Operator were specifically framed to avoid the position of Asset that you endorse.

You are explicitly allowing the situation where the SSE answers to somebody else on site.

The Mines Department Investigation findings for the Daniel Springer fatality at Goonyella Riverside actually finds this.

Mines Department took no action to address this basic and disgusting fundamental and blatant non compliance that directly resulted in Mr Springer losing his life

This Post Has 0 Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *