Retainage Provision - AASHTO Subcommittee On Construction
| State | Do you have zero retainage? | If yes, is it for all projects? Explain. | Were you zero retainage prior to the DBE regulation changes? | If you were at zero retainage, have you had any problems with performance, sureties, payments, etc., that you can attribute to zero retainage? Discuss. | Contact Person | Telephone Number |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AL | Yes | Yes, all projects. | No | No problems to date. | Terry McDuffle | 334-242-6208 |
| AK | Gordon Keith | 907-465-5092 | ||||
| AZ | No | No | Ron Williams | 602-712-7323 | ||
| AS | Yes - Primes (FYI - Primes are allowed to hold up to 10% retainage on subcontracts.) | Yes, all projects. | Yes - Primes(FYI - Our specs permitted Primes to hold 10% on subcontracts prior to the DBE reg changes.) | No, none that can be attributed to our not holding retainage. | David B. Henning | 501-569-2121 |
| CA | No. Caltrans contract provisions require retention | *(No) | John McMillan | 916-654-2157 | ||
| CO | No, but we have zero retainage for subcontractors. CDOT withholds retainage only on work done completely by the Prime Contractor. There is no retainage held on work that is all or partially subcontracted, and the Prime Contractor is prohibited from withholding retainage on subcontractors. This provision applies to all projects. | *(No) This provision was developed in response to the DBE regulation changes. | The Prime Contractors are complaining that with zero retainage, they have a hard time getting subcontractors to return to the job for repair or cleanup work at the end of the project, if they have already been paid for their work. They are also unable to get bonds from some of the smaller subcontractors, and thus say the specification increases their risk and liability for the subcontractors' work and financial obligations. | Gary Self | 303-757-9592 | |
| CT | No. At the present time, Connecticut withholds retainage at the rate of 2 ½ % until the project is accepted. | *(No) As a result of the proposed DBE regulation revisions, if they are published as originally written, we will reluctantly change to zero percent retainage as we believe the other options are unworkable. | Arthur W. Gruhn | 860-594-2680 | ||
| DE | No. We retain 5% and will continue to hold retainage until the federal regulations require otherwise. Our local road building contractors are pushing us to adopt a zero retainage policy now. We will wait and see what the final regs look like and make a decision at that point. The current draft includes several options on how to handle this situation. Non of them are attractive to DelDOT. | No | Rob McCleary | 302-760-2179 | ||
| FL | Yes | Yes, all jobs. | No. We held retainage in the past. We changed as of 7/1/01. We only hold retainage if a contractor is more than 10% behind their schedule. | Too soon to tell. We do not foresee any problems. In Florida, the prime has to give us a monthly certification that says they are paying their subs their prorated share each month unless there is a dispute and then they have to list that sub on the certification saying that there is a dispute. | Gregg Xanders | 850-414-5203 |
| GA | Yes | Yes. We no longer hold retainage on any project. | No | No | David Graham | 404-656-5306 |
| HI | No | No | Earl Kobatake | 808-831-6704 | ||
| ID | (Both) Idaho has either 100% progress payments with no retainage or 5% retainage per pay estimate. The contractor's bonding company generally is the one who approves 100% payment to the contractor. The majority of pay estimates to the prime contractor has no retainage. The contractor's surety has to furnish written consent for 100% payments. | (Both) The contract specifications has been in effect for many years. | No problems specifically. However, keep in mind that sureties generally do not pay off immediately if there is an unresolved problem between the state and contractor. Idaho, by contract language, has the right to withhold payment if the Engineer deems the state's interest are not secure. | Gene Wortham | 208-334-8426 | |
| IL | No. | No | Gary Gould | 217-782-6667 | ||
| IN | Yes. 0% Retainage since July 1, 2001 |
We hold no retainage on all of our contracts, federal aid or state. | No, we held 3%. The federal regulation initiated the statute change. | This just went into effect so we have had no experience with it. | Tim Bertram | |
| IA | No. We retain 3% on the first $1,000,000 for a total max. of $30,000. This has been in place for approximately 3 years. We have no plans on changing our retainage provision. | *(No) | John Smythe | 515-239-1503 | ||
| KS | Yes | Yes, we use it on all projects. In general if required on Fed Aid Proj. we use the same on Kansas Funded Projects. | No, we were in the process of going to zero retainage and the new requirements just pushed us along and moved it up approx. 6 months. | We have had no problems. At the request of some prime contractors on striping projects either as prime or as sub-contractors we only pay for 90% of the material installed until 180 day acceptance period has run its course. | Dean Testa | 785-296-3576 |
| KY | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Amos Hubbard | 502-564-3730 |
| LA | Yes | Years back we gave the contractors a choice to either furnish us a retainage bond or we would hold retainage. All contractors now furnish us a retainage bond on all contracts. | **(Yes) | Performance bonds are another issue that we require, but have not had any problem with the retainage bonds other than the contractor quit putting pressure on the Project Engineer to complete the final estimate thus causing delays in closing out projects! The problem we have with the new DBE requirements is that our FHWA has stated that DOTD will determine when the contractor must release the retainage to the DBE. | James Little | 225-379-1503 |
| ME | No | No | Thomas A. Doe | 207-287-2759 | ||
| MD | No, our retainage is currently 5%. We do have a criteria by which a contractor can request a reduction in retainage based upon our evaluation of their performance. If, for example they have maintained an "A" rating for the last two years and also on their current project, they can request a reduction to zero after they have completed 15% of the current contract. | *(No) | Steve McClain or Robert Harrison | 410-545-0074 | ||
| MA | No | No | No | No | Michael McGrath | 617-973-7491 |
| MI | No | Not Applicable | No | Not applicable | Gian Taneja | 517-322-6181 |
| MN | Yes | All projects except retainage on landscape jobs where we retain for maint. and deductions for dead or failing plants. | **(Yes) We've had zero retainage for between 15 and 20 years. | We've had very little, if any problems over the years. We do retain as a "backsheet," items for unacceptable work, disincentives, erodible soils, prevailing wage shortfalls, etc. These are individual retainage items, and not blanket retainages. | Mike Marttila | 651-205-4400 |
| MS | No | No. We were at 5% retainage but reduced to 1.5% after DBE regulation changes. | Joy F. Portera | 601-359-7301 | ||
| MO | Yes | Yes, we depend on the contract bond. If the contractor gets in trouble on the project or fails to pay bills promptly, we can begin retainage. | No | No. Only in effect this year. | Kenneth Fryer | 573-751-2806 |
| MT | Yes | Yes, we use the same computer payment system to make monthly estimates on all projects. | No, we just went to zero retainage as a way to get our DBE program approved last July. | We have an overpayment problem on some projects where the final estimates end up having a quantity change that results the Department having set up an account to get money back to the Department particularly if the overpayment payback is in a period of low cash flow to the contractor. The larger the over payment the more the contractors complain. Also we are having more problems getting the necessary paperwork e.g. material certifications from contractors at the end of the project because they have been paid all the money that is owed them. The Department is going to go AASHTO SiteManager software for our field staffs and hopefully this will reduce substantially the amount of over payments because the pay quantities should not change from the monthly estimate to the final estimate. Even with zero retainage some contractors complain that our field staffs are not paying 100% of the quantities therefore we are holding a retainage on them even if the policy is no retainage. | Gary a Gilmore | 406-444-6206 |
| NE | No (1% with a max. of $25,000.00) | *(No) | Claude Oie | 402-479-4532 | ||
| NV | No, by statute we are limited to the lesser of $50,000 or 5% of the contract amount. | *(No) | Mark Elicegui | 775-888-7460 | ||
| NH | No | *(No) | Jesse J. Dennis | 603-271-2571 | ||
| NJ | No. We withhold 5% of the first 50% of the money due. | N/A | N/A | New Jersey does withhold 2.5% retainage (5% of the first 50% of the money due), however, we allow bonds placed in an escrow account for the amount of the retainage being held and we will then pay the retainage to the prime contractor. | Mike Seigfried | 609-530-3811 |
| NM | No | *(No) | Lee Onstott | 505-827-5631 | ||
| NY | James Tynan | 518-457-6472 | ||||
| NC | Yes | NC is not withholding retainage on Federal Aid projects only. | *(No) We instituted a "zero retainage" policy due solely to the DBE regulation changes. | To date we have not had any problems but it is too early to tell. We made the change last year so we have not had many projects (any?) that are nearing completion. It may be a year or so before we know the real effects. | Steven DeWitt | 919-833-8703 |
| ND | No. Currently 4% until project is 50% completed, then it is reduced to 2%. | *(No) | Cal J. Gendreau | 701-328-4899 | ||
| OH | Walid Gemayel | 614-466-3598 | ||||
| OK | Yes | Yes. In 1995, Oklahoma passed legislation that required the Department to eliminate retainage for all future construction projects. | Yes | We have incorporated an "overpayment Bond" to be included in all construction project contracts. We occasionally notice that contractors loose interest in completing exceptions noted at final inspections or punchlist items to totally complete the projects, possibly due to the fact that there are no monies left to be earned. Overall, it doesn't seem to have been too detrimental. | George Raymond | 405-521-2561 |
| OR | No, we continue to withhold retainage funds. We have discussed going to zero retainage, but felt we could live with finaling our subcontractor work items if they request final payments - including retainage - prior to project closeout. We have not ruled out going to zero retainage if the current system does not work out. | No | N/A | Ken Stoneman | 503-986-3023 | |
| PA | Yes | On all projects | Yes | No major problems. We do tend to have problems with contractors providing us with the necessary documents to close our projects. Retainage would probably give them more incentive to comply. | Amar Bhajandas | 717-787-6989 |
| RI | No | *(No) To the best of my knowledge, we have always withheld retainage. | Norman P. Marzano, Jr. | 401-222-2468 ext. 4312 | ||
| SC | Yes | Yes, for all projects. | No, we retained 5% up until 50% of the contract was complete and then it remained at that amount until completion of project. | Have not had any problems to date. | Danny Shealy | 803-737-1308 |
| SD | Yes | Yes, we do not have retainage on any projects. | Yes | No. | John Forman | 605-773-5155 |
| TN | No. We retain 3.5% as required by State Law; however, we are looking at actions we might want to take (zero retainage) for the next legislative session. | *(No) | David Donoho | 615-741-2414 | ||
| TX | No, our retainage is 4% or 5% depending if recycled materials are used. | No | Thomas Bohuslav | 512-416-2559 | ||
| UT | No | N/A | No | N/A | John C. Butterfield | 801-965-4111 |
| VT | No | N/A | No | N/A | Nate Danforth | 802-828-2593 |
| VA | Yes | Yes, unless the contractor falls more than 10% behind schedule or does not furnish a bond. | No | Not to date. | Robert C. Edwards for C.F. Gee | 804-786-2945 |
| WA | No, 5%. | No | N/A | Craig McDaniel | 360-705-7826 | |
| WV | Yes, we have zero retainage with a 102% performance bond or 2% retainage with a 100% performance bond. Once contractors found out that the cost of a 102% bond is the same as a 100% bond they all have chosen that option. | No | Too early to say since zero retainage has been in place only 2 months. We are concerned about potential overpayments to contractors since it seems to take longer to get check from contractor. The other concern is that without retainage there is less incentive to final project. | Robert Tinney | 304-558-3304 | |
| WI | No | No | Rory Rhinesmith | 608-274-7342 | ||
| WY | Yes | All highway construction projects starting with the October letting. | No | Mark Eisenhart | 307-777-4459 | |
| TOTALS | ||||||
| 47 States Resp. | 19 Yes 27 No 1 Both (Idaho) |
7 Yes 39 No 1 Both (Idaho) |
||||
*(No) - Interpretation of data supplied.
**(Yes) - Interpretation of data supplied.