OPINION ISSUED DECEMBER 3, 1985

CARL M. GEUPEL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC
VS.
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS

(CC-82-200)

Wayne A. Sinclair, Attorney at Law, for claimant.
Robert F. Bible, Attorney at Law, for respondent.

PER CURIAM:

Claimant, Carl M. Geupel Construction Company, Inc. entered into a
contract with the
respondent, West Virginia Department of Highways, designated as Project
I-79-1(14)21, for
the construction of a section of I-79 in Roane County, West Virginia.
Notice to proceed was
given to the claimant on May 7, 1970, and the scheduled completion date
was September 30,
1972. Claimant experienced several delays during construction when
slides occurred on the
project. The delays resulted in an actual completion date for the
project in October, 1974. This
two-year delay resulted in alleged damages to claimant in the amount of
$577,068.35, for which
this claim was filed.

The first major delay occurred during the summer of 1970 when a
partially completed
embankment section suddenly slid as a result of a foundation failure.
Several months elapsed
before respondent instructed claimant as to required correction work
which could not be done
in the winter months. Further foundation failures occurred throughout
the construction of the
embankment which was not completed until March, 1972.

The respondent was required to redesign the foundation undercut in
another area of the
project resulting in further delay to claimant.
The longest delay on the project occurred when the project supervisor
for the respondent
ordered claimant to cease work in an area where bedrock was not
encountered at the elevation
shown on the plans. Various circumstances delayed the preparation of the
revised drawings by
the respondent. Once the change order for the work was prepared, an
additional delay was
experienced because the respondent had not acquired the right-of-way
needed for the revisions.
As a result of these delays, the corrective work could not begin until
January of 1973.

The claimant and respondent stipulated that there were numerous slides
which had an impact
on the time required for the construction of the project. Also the
original plans on which claimant
based its bid were inadequate as to design. The major reason for the
inadequate design was the
inadequate and erroneous sub-surface investigation of the foundations
upon which the design
was based. The parties also stipulated that claimant and its
subcontractors incurred increased
costs in the form of labor, materials, equipment, and overhead as
follows:

CARL M. GEUPEL CONSTRUCTION
Labor:
Foreman $ 3,675.41
Superintendent and Time
Keeper 8,713.32
Direct Labor & Fringe
Benefits 126,992.33
Total Labor $139,381.06

Material & Supply:
Ready Mix Cement $ 1,228.94
Field Office and Utilities 10,994.21
DOH Field Office 5,961.17
Total Material & Supply $ 18,184.32

Total Increase-Prime Contractor
$157,565.38
B
PRIME CONTRACTORS SUBTOTAL $161,031.82

HIGHWAY PAVING-SUBCONTRACTOR
Direct Labor Cost $ 22,377.22
Payroll Tax and Insurance 2,613.66
Fringe Benefits 2,089.68
B & 0 Tax 2.2% 595.68
$ 27,676.24

GRC CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
Payroll Increases $ 5,005.05
Material Increase 4,538.06
$ 9,543.11

BLACK ROCK CONTRACTING
Labor Cost Increase $ 22,294.81




Total Increase Subcontractors $ 59,514.16
Prime Contractor B & 0
Tax 2.2% 1,309.31
TOTAL SUBCONTRACTOR $ 60,823.47

TOTAL PRIME CONTRACTOR $161,031.82
TOTAL JOB INCREASE $221,855.29

The Court, having considered the facts and damages, as stipulated, is
of the opinion to make
an award to the claimant in the amount of $221,855.29.

Award of $221,855.29.

___________