3720 - Board of Claims

More documents

Recommendations

Info

V. DAMAGE SUMMARY For all the foregoing reasons, the Board grants judgment against PennDOT and in favor of Intercounty in the following amounts: 1. Delay Damages Extended Field Conditions $ 12,470.02 Extended Maintenance and Protection of Traffic $ 14,225.79 Material Cost Escalation $144,945.00 Total Delay Damages (including markup $171,640.81 for supervision, overhead and profit) 2. Disruption Damages $405,671.00 3. Additional Cost of Undercutting $ 13,571.25 4. Rideability Incentive -0- 5. Rehandling of Stockpiled Materials -0- 6. Attorney’s Fees and Costs -0- TOTAL DAMAGES $590.883.06 Plus Pre-judgment Interest (28.67%) + $169,406.17 TOTAL $760,289.23 112
ORDER AND NOW, this 23 rd day of April, 2009, IT IS ORDERED and DECREED that judgment be entered in favor of Plaintiff, Intercounty Paving Associates, LLC, and against Defendant, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, in the total sum of $760,289.23 for damages incurred in the amount of $590,883.06 plus $169,406.17 in prejudgment interest thereon. In addition, Plaintiff is awarded post-judgment interest on the outstanding judgment at the statutory rate for judgments (6% per annum) beginning on the date of this Order and continuing until the judgment is paid in full. Each party will bear its own costs and attorney fees. BOARD OF CLAIMS _______________________ Jeffrey F. Smith Chief Administrative Judge _______________________ Harry G. Gamble, P.E. Engineer Member ________________________ Andrew Sislo Citizen Member 113
Page 1 and 2:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA INTERC
Page 3 and 4:
where PennDOT renamed it the “Con
Page 5 and 6:
5) Grade areas behind shoulders. 6)
Page 7 and 8:
38. In late 1999, two years before
Page 9 and 10:
could properly schedule their crews
Page 11 and 12:
egarding what PennDOT could do to m
Page 13 and 14:
during the pre-Contract period, and
Page 15 and 16:
timetable and order of operations w
Page 17 and 18:
pole relocation delays were hinderi
Page 19 and 20:
perform more clearing and grubbing
Page 21 and 22:
160. Mr. Pilosi also testified he d
Page 23 and 24:
177. On March 11, 2002, Intercounty
Page 25 and 26:
when doing its excavations subgrade
Page 27 and 28:
construction problems that arise. H
Page 29 and 30:
214. PennDOT clearly misled Interco
Page 31 and 32:
Delay Damages 225. Intercounty clai
Page 33 and 34:
244. The Tilcon letter, Exhibit P-5
Page 35 and 36:
265. With appropriate markup per Se
Page 37 and 38:
281. The Board finds that the diffe
Page 39 and 40:
started to work, it had to finish t
Page 41 and 42:
315. Removal of the unsuitable mate
Page 43 and 44:
desirable to complete the project.
Page 45 and 46:
352. Since no required road testing
Page 47 and 48:
8. To minimize erosion, the Conserv
Page 49 and 50:
21. By prescribing the character, d
Page 51 and 52:
30. Section 105.06(a) of the 408 Sp
Page 53 and 54:
36. Because Intercounty was instruc
Page 55 and 56:
performance, the Contract’s excul
Page 57 and 58:
Intercounty for the cost of general
Page 59 and 60:
71. Because the Contract (including
Page 61 and 62: 89. Although these provisions apply
Page 63 and 64: OPINION Plaintiff, Intercounty Pavi
Page 65 and 66: In addition to dividing work on the
Page 67 and 68: II. UTILITY POLE RELOCATION ISSUES
Page 69 and 70: the Project. Specifically, Intercou
Page 71 and 72: Moreover, we find PennDOT's defense
Page 73 and 74: were unprepared to do so. The Utili
Page 75 and 76: approximately five months. Actual p
Page 77 and 78: even though the as-planned sequence
Page 79 and 80: completed. Finally, Mr. Sebastianel
Page 81 and 82: can find no excuse for his complete
Page 83 and 84: To conclude, we find that, in subst
Page 85 and 86: Super. 1963); Angelo Iafrate Const.
Page 87 and 88: Construction Sequence could not be
Page 89 and 90: Paving undertook to negotiate the m
Page 91 and 92: adequate room for guy wires in its
Page 93 and 94: hoc weekly work schedules were addi
Page 95 and 96: For the Extended Field Conditions,
Page 97 and 98: PennDOT objected to admission of Ex
Page 99 and 100: y Chad Nansteel (Project Superinten
Page 101 and 102: (through Mr. Pilosi and Mr. Sebasti
Page 103 and 104: days of original excavation and the
Page 105 and 106: had to finish that section before m
Page 107 and 108: e necessary in order to stabilize t
Page 109 and 110: men back and forth to do the underc
Page 111: utilities. A prevailing party in an
show all

3720 - Board of Claims

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?