Image
Copyright & Fair-use Agreement
UNLV Special Collections provides copies of materials to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. Material not in the public domain may be used according to fair use of copyrighted materials as defined by copyright law. Please cite us.
Please note that UNLV may not own the copyright to these materials and cannot provide permission to publish or distribute materials when UNLV is not the copyright holder. The user is solely responsible for determining the copyright status of materials and obtaining permission to use material from the copyright holder and for determining whether any permissions relating to any other rights are necessary for the intended use, and for obtaining all required permissions beyond that allowed by fair use.
Read more about our reproduction and use policy.
I agree.Information
Digital ID
Permalink
Details
More Info
Rights
Digital Provenance
Publisher
Transcription
Since there was a legal question involved relative to acceptance of the contract with the knowledge of possible defective workmanship or materials, a motion was duly made by Director Thorn, seconded by Director DuBravac, and unanimously approved by the five Directors present, that action be deferred until Counsel studied the matter and submitted his opinion to the Board for consideration. SPECIFICATION NO. 4. SCHEDULE II - SET TIME FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION WITH LEMBKE-CLOUGH AND KING It was noted that at the meeting of April 16, the Board agreed to set a date for further discussion with Lembke-Clough and King relative to liquidated damages under Specification No. 4, Schedule II. Following a brief discussion, the Directors agreed to meet with these representatives at 7:30 P. M., Tuesday, May 8, 1956, and the Manager was instructed to notify the Contractor of the Board1s decision. SPECIFICATION NO. 11 The following letter from J. M. Montgomery dated April 20, 1956, relative to acceptance of contract Specification No. 11 was considered by the Board. ’•Mr. W. C. Renshaw Chief Engineer and General Manager Las Vegas Valley Water District P. 0. Box 1109 Las Vegas, Nevada Subject: Specification No. 11 - Construction of Distribution Mains - Hallmark Construction Company, Contractor Dear Mr. Renshaw: The last of the pick-up items were completed on April 11, 1956. Accordingly, it is recommended that the contract be accepted. Inasmuch as the Contractor was several months late in completing the work, the question of assessment of liquidated damages must be resolved before the final payment is made. The pertinent facts relating to the contract are outlined as follows: Contract price --------------------------- $ 191,459.02 Total amount of extra w o r k -------------- 214.80 Contract awarded---------- -------------- 5-5-55 Original contract completion date--------- 9-2-55 Lines became usable ---------------------- 10-11-55 to 1-17-56 All work complete ---------------------- 4-11-56 A literal interpretation of Section 54 of the Specifications would establish April 11, 1956 as the completion date of the work. However, in assessing liquidated damages in connection with the other contracts, the District has considered the date the facility became usable as the date of completion for purposes of computing the amount of liquidated damages. In this contract, the various lines became usable on the following dates: