3720 - Board of Claims

men back and forth to do the undercutting on the Project and that there was likely some extra
movement of equipment up and down the roadway required here to do the undercut because the
Project was so disrupted and had to be worked in a non-linear sequence. Although we believe
that Intercounty's undercutting operation was made less efficient, to some degree, by the same
problems that affected its original excavation work, Intercounty has failed to provide us with a
calculation, methodology or evidence from which the Board can quantify this loss of
productivity. Specifically, we note that, by its nature, undercutting is not as lineal or sequential
an operation as original excavation and paving. This is due to the fact that original excavation,
backfilling and subgrade placement must occur before the area can be tested and determined to
be unstable. As a result, undercutting is typically done in spots along roadway construction in
something other than a continuous fashion. Therefore, although we recognize that Intercounty
did this undercutting work in a spread-out and random fashion, we cannot ascertain from the
evidence presented how much this problem was exacerbated by the disruption to the
Construction Sequence. Because we cannot estimate the additional cost of the undercutting work
caused by the disruption to the Project with any degree of reasonable certainty, we must decline
an award for this component of Intercounty's claim.
In summation, the Board finds Intercounty has incurred a total of $405,671 in damages
due to the disruption caused by PennDOT's active interference with its work on the Project. In
addition, Intercounty is due a further payment of $13,571.25 for undercutting work on the
Project outside the Class 1 Excavation category.
Claim for Ride Quality Incentive
The next issue is whether Intercounty is entitled to be paid the Bituminous Pavement
Ride Quality Incentive ("Ride Quality Incentive"). The Contract provided in Item 0404-001 that
109