3720 - Board of Claims

the pre-Contract period. Specifically, PennDOT’s failure to provide the Utilities with the
Construction Sequence and the final plans and drawings for the Project until immediately before
the start of work; PennDOT's failure to indicate poles to be moved and the position of the new
poles on its plans and drawings; and, most importantly, its failure to provide adequate space for
guy wires on certain relocated poles in its roadway design, together, constituted a failure to
properly coordinate utility pole relocation for the Project in the pre-Contract period and failure to
provide Intercounty with plans and drawings adequate to build the Project. These acts and
omissions actively interfered with Intercounty’s work and exhibit a failure on PennDOT's part to
act in an essential matter necessary to the prosecution of the Project. 11
Post-Contract Activity
In April 2001, PennDOT issued its invitation to bid on the Project. Bids were received
and opened on April 19, 2001. On June 5, 2001 PennDOT became the last party to execute the
Contract with Intercounty to perform the work on the Project. On June 11, 2001, PennDOT held
a pre-job meeting near the site attended by representatives from GPU, G.T.E, Blue Ridge
(collectively, the "Utilities") PennDOT, Intercounty, and the Pike County Conservation District.
Mr. Pilosi had arranged for the Utilities to be present.
During the June 11 pre-job meeting, the Utilities indicated that PennDOT had never
given them the Contract’s Construction Sequence. As a result, the Utilities had not had any
opportunity to see or consider the Construction Sequence prior to June 11, 2001 for planning
their work schedules for the Project. In fact, the Utilities had come to this pre-job meeting
unaware of the necessity of starting in Section One and performing their work in discrete
sections and phases and at different periods of time as the Project progressed, and stated they
11 As will become evident later, the Utilities, albeit late, did eventually relocate their poles in Section Three by late
October 2001, but then left the Project and did not return until late March 2002, only after resolution of the guy wire
design problem and relocation of the roadway in March 2002.
72