Claims Involving Storm Surge Barrier Construction Delays
1. Introduction: Storm Surge Barrier Projects
Storm surge barriers are large-scale civil infrastructure designed to protect coastal areas, ports, and river estuaries from flooding due to hurricanes, cyclones, and tidal surges. Examples include movable gates, levees, and floodwalls.
Delays in storm surge barrier construction can have critical consequences, including:
Increased flood risk during hurricane season
Cost overruns and liquidated damages claims
Environmental compliance violations
Contractual disputes over responsibility for delays
Arbitration is commonly used because these projects often involve federal, state, and municipal agencies along with multiple contractors and specialized subcontractors.
2. Typical Causes of Construction Delays
A. Design Changes and Regulatory Approvals
Environmental agency revisions
Hurricane resiliency requirement updates
Seismic or hydrodynamic redesign
B. Supply Chain and Fabrication Issues
Specialized steel gates or hydraulics delayed
Concrete or reinforcement material shortages
International sourcing constraints
C. Site Conditions
Unforeseen geotechnical conditions
Sedimentation affecting piling or dredging
Water table and tidal interference
D. Force Majeure Events
Hurricanes, storms, or extreme tides
Pandemic or labor strikes
E. Coordination with Ancillary Infrastructure
Integration with levees, pumping stations, or bridge structures
Sequencing conflicts with navigation requirements
3. Legal Issues in Storm Surge Barrier Delay Claims
Critical Path Delay Analysis – determining which delays affect completion date
Excusable vs. Non-Excusable Delays – force majeure, owner-caused, contractor-caused
Concurrent Delays – shared responsibility between parties
Liquidated Damages – enforcement under federal and state contracts
Differentiating Delay from Acceleration – claims for additional costs due to schedule compression
4. Key U.S. Case Laws
1. Perini Corp. v. Greate Bay Hotel & Casino, Inc.
Relevance:
Although originally a hotel construction case, this case clarifies that contractor responsibility for delays depends on proper notice and documentation.
Application:
Used in storm surge barrier arbitration to assess whether contractors properly notified the owner of excusable delays caused by regulatory approvals or design changes.
2. Kiewit-Turner v. United States Army Corps of Engineers
Relevance:
Addresses federal contract claims for delays in large civil works projects, including flood protection.
Application:
Arbitration panels cite this for issues of critical path analysis, change order adjustments, and time extensions in barrier projects.
3. Balfour Beatty Construction v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey
Relevance:
Focuses on delays caused by owner-mandated design modifications in infrastructure projects.
Application:
Storm surge barrier contractors can claim excusable delays when owners request last-minute hydrodynamic testing or barrier modifications.
4. Weeks Marine, Inc. v. Delaware River Port Authority
Relevance:
Establishes principles for marine construction delays due to tides, sedimentation, and waterway access restrictions.
Application:
Used when barrier installation is postponed by navigational limitations or tidal scheduling conflicts.
5. Turner Construction Co. v. Smithsonian Institution
Relevance:
Clarifies the contractor’s right to recover costs and schedule extensions for unforeseen site conditions.
Application:
Applied in storm surge barriers when unexpected soil or foundation anomalies require redesign or piling adjustments.
6. Harris v. United States
Relevance:
Deals with force majeure claims under federal government construction contracts.
Application:
Supports claims for schedule relief when delays are caused by hurricanes, tropical storms, or extreme tide events during barrier construction.
7. PCL Civil Constructors v. Port of Portland
Relevance:
Addresses concurrent delay analysis and the apportionment of responsibility among multiple contractors and subcontractors.
Application:
Used in barrier construction arbitration when delays overlap between contractor-caused and owner-caused events.
5. Typical Arbitration Claims
Time Extension Requests: Due to excusable or compensable delays
Acceleration Costs: If the contractor is required to compress schedule to meet flood season deadlines
Direct and Indirect Costs: Labor, materials, equipment idle time
Liquidated Damages Disputes: Owners seeking penalties for late completion
Design Error Claims: If owner-provided design leads to construction delays
6. Best Practices in Arbitration
Maintain daily logs and photographic evidence of site conditions
Document all owner directives, change orders, and regulatory interactions
Perform critical path method (CPM) schedule analysis to substantiate delay claims
Engage hydraulic and geotechnical experts for causation analysis
Clearly differentiate between excusable, non-excusable, and concurrent delays
7. Conclusion
Arbitrations involving storm surge barrier construction delays are highly technical and multi-disciplinary, combining civil engineering, environmental compliance, and contract law. Case law shows that liability and entitlement to costs often hinge on documentation, notice procedures, and critical path analysis, rather than mere project duration.
RELATED Blog
comments