Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Claim of Monetary Entitlement <br />Note: This Claim includes monies collected, retainage and <br />claims of damages. <br />Item #1 Amount - 549.530.94 <br />This claim involves four (41 separate issues. The first issue <br />is the matter of the unclaimed retainage. The second, third <br />and forth issues are all similar in that they all involved <br />time spent to move topsoil and to rip the area from which the <br />topsoil was removed. Included in the forth item was the time <br />spent to move some brush on the east side of the East Pit. <br />On the issue of unpaid retainage, the balance of the retainage <br />is due the contractor after satisfactory completion of the <br />work, including the advertisement for closure, the <br />satisfaction that all claims had been rectified and that the <br />punch list had been reasonably completed. As of this date the <br />punch list has not been completed to the State's satisfaction. <br />The major items yet to be completed include the removal of <br />unacceptable riprap stockpiled on the site, correcting the <br />unacceptable ditch, replacing topsoil which was lost in the <br />East Pit, reseeding the areas which did not receive proper <br />coverage of topsoil due to the loss of available topsoil in <br />the East Pit, etc. Several of these items are discussed in <br />more detail under subsequent issues. <br />The claim as stated with regards to the movement of topsoil <br />from the north side of Chen's Hill is not accurate. After <br />further review of this matter, I made note that Amendment #1 <br />of the contract noted under Item 3 that Task-4 should be <br />modified to include the topsoil and overburden growth medium <br />which is located in the topsoil stockpile located above the <br />drainage on the east side of Chen's Hill and the two <br />stockpiles located on the North side of Chen's Hill must be <br />evenly placed on the out slopes having a finished grade to a <br />depth of 6". It is also noted that the contractor was paid <br />extra for this work based on hourly rates as set forth on page <br />I of 1 titled Revised Bid Schedule, line items 16 & 17 of the <br />agreement. Please see invoices dated June 26, 1994 and July <br />24, 1995. It would appear that the State has incorrectly paid <br />an extra for something that was a part of the base price. <br />