My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL36031
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL36031
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:56:45 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 8:34:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981037
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
3/17/1995
Doc Name
HEARING PROTEST ON CWL CLAIM PO C-79064
From
CAPITOL COMPLEX FACILITIES
To
COLO WEST LEASING
Permit Index Doc Type
GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />the contractor feels that as a rPSUlt of chancing from 15 drop <br />structures @ 150" on center to 6 drop structures @ 100' on center <br />tit the work was more difficult to complete and the cost per <br />struc ure sho 7d have b n more <br />The first change from 15-12 drop structures was made prior to any <br />work being started in this area. The second change from 12-9 <br />drop structures occurred at a time when one structure had been <br />completed and two more were being excavated. This appears to be <br />tied into Claim #6 where the cost of re-establishing the <br />direction of the drop structures was addressed. The State has <br />already paid the contractor $400 and has now agreed to pay <br />another $180 to fill in the two excavations and to reset the <br />structures. With regards to the placement of the remaining six <br />structures, on which no work has been done, we can find no <br />justification for a claim. <br />Item #10 Amount - 53 500 00 <br />The contractor feels that the damage to his seed drill was the <br />result changes in cond~t~ons <br />This is part of the project and the contractor should have built <br />an equipment allowance into his bid. There is no justification <br />for this claim. It is my understanding that the equipment used <br />was not adequate for this project, which caused some of this <br />problem. <br />Item #11 Amount - S5 500 00 <br />The contractor quarried and stockpiled a large quantity of riprap <br />for which he feels that he should be paid <br />The State has agreed to pay for surplus riprap, that meets the <br />specification, at a rate of $28.00 a cubic yard (approx. 48). <br />The contractor must remove all of the stockpiled riprap that <br />doesn't meet specification. <br />Item #12 Amount - $40,000 <br />The contractor contends that the Ch n' Hill stockpile was much <br />deeper than what should have been anticipated and as such he <br />should be compensated for moving the additional topsoil <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.