Document QJgweZxYqYqYNKGwOBkRJopEo

M^atMISS o 9- <$twW > CC: H. 0. Boyce _ !. ou Pont dc Ncmouns S Company J. C. Lang (Info.only) R. K. Mason Wilmington, Oclawanc W. C. Weaver H. C. Harden C. J. Adolph ,R. J. Ham tMSIMtXIHMS DKMWT Route: Wesleyi"- SPi 81368* if' C* Jones, Purchasing ee: . Bowen 'Fttre BrittoQn4 * +ass**. Day *iljSepte--mber 12, 1968 FIELD PROJECT MANAGERS: V X/^, F. C. BATLIS w. s. BRIGGS A. D. DAT w. s. FREE H. S. STANTON, JR. W. C. XANNEAR R. H. DAVIS R. C. STERNBERGER J. K. ADDISON ASHTABULA BEAUMONT CAPE FEAR CHATTANOOGA CIRCLEVILLE FLORENCE KINSTON LOUISVILLE MARTINSVILLE W. A. SAMANS A. S. TRUMPORE,JR. H. F. REDMILE w. s. LEWIN A. W. ROGERS, ASST. R. L. SPITZ S. KREWATCH W. G. HARRIS MAY PLANT MD'IPHIS WORKS OLD HICKORY PARLIN SPRUANCE WASHINGTON WKS. WAYNESBORO TERKES ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING k SUPPLY CORP. . Reference - Letter of May 2, 1968 to Arastrong Contracting k Supply Corp. Letter of July 19, 1968 to FPM's on those sites where Armstrong Contracting k Supply Corp. is working. It is noted that in accordance with established procedures, inspections are being made by Arastrong's insurance carrier, Aetna Life k Casualty Company, and in at least one instance a copy of their inspection report has been furnished to Du Pont. Witnout commenting on the ade quacy of the report, we believe it is important to keep the following points in mind: ' 1. We should take no action on the basis of a copy of the Aetna report to Arastrong. If the report is forwarded by Armstrong with their recommendation for action, then we should proceed so long as the recommendations "fall within the general intent of the contract." 2. If the recommendations Involve radical changes in facilities or are in any way controversial, they should be referred to this office. We will review the proposals with H. C. Karden and Division Manage ment and sttempt to assure uniformity in dealing with the subject at all sites. If inspection has not been made of your facilities you should contact the Arastrong Branch or District Office servicing your Job and remind them of their obligation. Similarly, follow-up inspections at six ecttcw tmimos r-- serve* uviwo ... r**o tarmr fe. W> 1200006 3 2 September 12, 1968 month intervals should be expected. Even though you do not receive any communication from Armstrong relative to the inspection, your site records should be adequately documented as to date, participants and extent of inspection and any pertinent comments by Aetna. * CJLJr./jrr *v DUP 1200007