Senate committee restores $523,238 claim for Progressive Electric after claims commission testimony

The Senate Finance Committee amended the annual claims bill to restore a $523,238.50 award to Progressive Electric Incorporated after the legislative claims commission presented findings that the state bore a moral obligation to pay the claim.

Janet Kaywash, clerk of the Legislative Claims Commission, told the committee that Progressive Electric— a West Virginia corporation that performs state electrical work—was awarded $523,238.50 by the claims commission following a two‑day hearing. Kaywash said the commission found the contractor had sought to save the state money by proposing alternate equipment and that the engineer of record administered submittal reviews inconsistently.

“The claims commission found that the claimant was in, was trying to save the state money in using the Caterpillar equipment, and that the engineer of record... was not providing a fair and thorough review,” Kaywash said, adding that the commission concluded “a moral obligation did exist because the work has been done, the work has been completed, the state is enjoying the benefit of that work at the expense of its contractor.”

Committee counsel described the underlying dispute as a contract claim arising from a Capital Complex chiller plant modification project. Counsel said the claimant initially proposed Caterpillar equipment at a lower price but, after a series of submittals and an inconsistent review process, the contractor was required to use the originally specified (and more expensive) Cummins generator and later submitted a change order that was denied.

A senator noted that the House stripped the Progressive Electric claim out of the House version of the claims bill even though the legislative claims commission had found the claim valid. In response to committee discussion, the Senate’s senior senator from the eighth offered and the committee adopted an amendment to put the Progressive Electric award back into the committee substitute for the claims bill. The chair then reported the committee substitute, as amended, to the full Senate with a recommendation that it do pass; the chair declared the ayes have it on the voice vote.

Why it matters: the committee’s action attempts to restore an award that the claims commission judged equitable after contested contract administration. Committee members discussed procedural options — including originating a separate bill — but counsel advised the panel that, because it is past crossover, a separate Senate bill could not be originated and the remedy must be handled through amendment to the claims bill.

The committee’s amendment will now travel with the committee substitute to the full Senate; the House previously removed the claim from its version of the claims bill, and further negotiation between chambers may determine final payment.