liners would be necessary. Def. Exh. DX-233. These repairs were required because the panels did not meet the dimensional tolerances required by contract specifications. Basically, Stellar created an unacceptable alignment which required reworking of the weld joints, adjustments to the liners, and the placing of shims to bolt the liners together. Simply stated, Stellar furnished defective materials which TVA had to repair. Stellar's claims that the panels were mis-assembled by TVA or left out in the field to their detriment are unpersuasive. I credit Mr. Rose's testimony.
54. By letter dated April 28, 1981, TVA notified Stellar that a backcharge account was being set up to repair the defects. Def. Exh. DX-234. Stellar did not repair the weirwall liners.
55. TVA's correction of the defects necessitated 815 man hours (boilermaker classification), as well as the necessary material and equipment to correct the unacceptable alignment of the liners. The total actual cost to TVA was $ 19,800.18. Def. Exhs. DX-235 and DX-231.
56. On May 9, 1983, TVA informed Stellar that, during the closeout of TVA's accounts on the contract, TVA had inadvertently failed to retain the $ 19,800.18 backcharge TVA had incurred while correcting the defects in liner alignment. Def. Exh. DX-235.
57. TVA's repairs were made necessary by defects in weirwall fabrication for which Stellar was responsible. TVA's actual repair cost was reasonable.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to the Contract Disputes Act of 1978, 41 U.S.C. §§ 601-613.
2. The Special Conditions part ("Claims and Protests by Contractor") of both of TVA's contracts with Stellar requires that all claims by Stellar must be filed with TVA's Contracting Officer within 30 calendar days "after the arising of the cause for any such claim." Stellar's failure to raise any of its claims timely as required by the contract constitutes a full and complete waiver of each claim.
3. The General Conditions part ("Notices") of TVA's contracts with Stellar provide that TVA's consideration of a claim does not waive the filing requirement. TVA's consideration and review of Stellar's untimely submitted claims does not serve as a waiver of the 30-day filing requirement.
4. The Contract Disputes Act requires that contractors making claims of more than $ 50,000 shall certify these claims to the Contracting Officer.
5. This court lacks jurisdiction over Stellar's 60-day claim. This conclusion is in accordance with my factual finding that Stellar did not certify that claim to the Contracting Officer.
6. Change Orders No. 1 & 2 constitute an accord and satisfaction between Stellar and TVA barring future claims by Stellar for compensation due to any delays resulting from events occurring prior to at least July 29, 1977. Stellar's 60-day claim is thus barred.
7. Stellar's gate frame claim is barred by an accord and satisfaction reached by the parties in January, 1979.
8. Stellar's gate frame claim is barred by the doctrine of promissory estoppel.
AND NOW, this 2nd day of March, 1989, after a trial on the merits, judgment is hereby entered in favor of defendant and against plaintiff on plaintiff's complaint and in favor of defendant and against plaintiff in the sum of $ 19,800.18 on defendant's counterclaim.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.