Laserfiche WebLink
• • <br />STATE CLAIMS <br />#1 <br />The State has a claim of 5200 for a Ponderosa Pine which was <br />damaged by the contractor. <br />The Ponderosa Pine was outside of the work area and there was <br />no justification for the damage sustained. Regardless of this <br />the State has elected to drop the claim. <br />#2 <br />The State claims that the contractor has not completed the <br />work on the Chen's Hill ditch in accordance with the contract. <br />This issue was covered under #7 above and it is my finding <br />that the contractor should correct the work or that the State <br />should use the funds available in the retainage for the <br />purpose of having the work completed. <br />#3 <br />The State has a claim a~cainst the contractor for topsoil lost <br />in the East Pit for 530.695. <br />The State has claimed that the contractor spilled 3226 cu. <br />yds. Of "B" Horizon (growth medium) over the East Pit high <br />wall. The contractor contends that it was more like 50-100 <br />cu. yds. An on site visit was of little help except that I <br />was able to identify an area (approx. 100'x150") that was <br />directly in front of the topsoil pile clearly shown in several <br />photos. Photos of the area show blade marks and the resulting <br />windrow of "B" Horizon along the high wall up to the point <br />