Free Answer - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:04-cv-00655-RHH

Document 8

Filed 08/12/2004

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) No. 04-655C ) ) (Judge Hodges) ) ) )

DEFENDANT'S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE For its answer to plaintiff's complaint, defendant admits, denies, and alleges as follows: 1. The allegations contained in paragraph 1 constitute conclusions of law and

plaintiff's characterizations of its case, to which no repsonse is required; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, admits that the National Archives and Records Administration awarded Contract No. NAMA-00-SEM-0012 to Grunley Construction Company, Inc., and admits the allegations contained in paragraph 1 to the extent supported by the contract, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations contained in paragraph 1. 2. The allegations contained in paragraph 2 are conclusions of law to which no

response is required; to the extent that they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. 3. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 3 to the extent supported by the

documents cited, which are the best evidence of their contents; otherwise denies the allegations contained in paragraph 3. 4. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 4 to the extent supported by the

document cited, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations contained in paragraph 4.

Case 1:04-cv-00655-RHH

Document 8

Filed 08/12/2004

Page 2 of 4

5.

Denies the allegations contained in paragraph 5 for lack of knowledge or

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters asserted. 6. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 6 to the extent supported by the

document cited, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations contained in paragraph 6. 7. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 7 to the extent supported by the

document cited, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations contained in paragraph 7. 8. 9. Denies. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 9 to the extent supported by the

documents cited, which are the best evidence of their contents; otherwise denies the allegations contained in paragraph 9. 10. Admits the allegations contained in the first sentence of paragraph 10 to the extent

supported by the documents cited, which are the best evidence of their contents; otherwise denies the allegations contained in the first sentence of paragraph 10. The allegations contained in the second sentence of paragraph 10 constitute conclusions of law and plaintiff's characterizations of its case, to which no response is required; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. 11. Denies the allegations contained in paragraph 11 for lack of knowledge or

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters asserted. 12. The allegations contained in paragraph 12 constitute conclusions of law, to which

no response is required; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. 2

Case 1:04-cv-00655-RHH

Document 8

Filed 08/12/2004

Page 3 of 4

13.

Denies the allegations contained in the first sentence of paragraph 13. The

allegation contained in the second sentence of paragraph 13 constitute conclusions of law, to which no response is required; to the extent they may be deemed allegations of fact, they are denied. 14. Admits that certain concrete masonry walls were built in the sub-basement of the

building by Grunley and/or its subcontractor; otherwise denies the allegations contained in paragraph 14. 15. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 15 to the extent supported by the

document cited, which is the best evidence of its contents; otherwise denies the allegations contained in paragraph 15. 16. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 16 to the extent supported by the

document cited, which is the best evidence of their contents; otherwise denies the allegations contained in paragraph 16. 17. 18. Denies. Denies that plaintiff is entitled to the relief set forth in the prayer for relief

immediately following paragraph 17, or to any relief whatsoever. 19. Denies each and every allegation not previously admitted or otherwise qualified.

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 20. Plaintiff's claim is barred by the plain language of the "Changes" clause because

plaintiff failed to provide the Government with timely notice of the additional costs it claims to have incurred. 3

Case 1:04-cv-00655-RHH

Document 8

Filed 08/12/2004

Page 4 of 4

Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director s/ Franklin E. White, Jr. FRANKLIN E. WHITE, JR. Assistant Director s/ Andrew P. Averbach ANDREW P. AVERBACH Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice 1100 L Street, N.W. Attn: Classification Unit, 8th Floor Washington, DC 20530 Tel. (202) 307-0290 Fax. (202) 514-8624 Attorneys for Defendant

Of Counsel: Stephani L. Abramson Assistant General Counsel National Archives and Records Administration 8601 Adelphi Road Room 3110 College Park, MD 20740

August 12, 2004

4