The Connecticut State Pier in New London is already serving as a new launching point for offshore wind turbines, but two sections of the newly renovated port facility will need to be fixed due to flaws in parts of the $311 million construction project.
Paul Whitescarver, the chairman of the state Port Authority, informed Connecticut lawmakers last week that one of the retaining walls at the pier and a separate transportation corridor at the facility will need to either be reengineered or entirely rebuilt in order to meet the original design specifications.
The issues with the retaining wall, also known as a toe wall, is the result of steel pilings being bent during installation, and the problem with the transportation corridor was caused by the incorrect type of soil being used as fill.
Correcting those problems is expected to cost, at a minimum, several million dollars, Whitescarver told legislators, and the work might not be completed until 2027, due to the ongoing use of the pier as a staging ground for offshore wind projects.
Who will pay for the additional engineering and construction costs in the coming years is still unclear, however.
Officials with the Port Authority believe Kiewit, the construction manager on the project, should be responsible for fixing the mistakes, since the company oversaw the construction effort and won several bids to build large portions of the pier.
But Whitescarver acknowledged that Kiewit, one of the largest construction firms in North America, is unlikely to accept that outcome willingly.
"All of the above would be at Kiewit’s expense. They will ask the CPA to cover the cost. We would obviously not agree to pay," Whitescarver told lawmakers in an email. "They should be held accountable for methods (procedures) used during construction."
Kiewit told The Connecticut Mirror on Dec. 19 that it stood behind its work on the project, and the company said it was not to blame for the issues it encountered with construction.
"The issues noted by the CPA can be directly traced to site conditions that did not match those identified in the contract," said Teresa Shada, a spokeswoman for Kiewit. "Throughout the project, we communicated with the CPA about these issues and worked diligently in close partnership with them to address these unexpected conditions."
"We continue to work closely and actively collaborate with the CPA to resolve these outstanding items, including determining accountability for associated costs," Shada added. "Any more questions related to testing, regulatory requirements or potential remediation costs are best directed to the CPA, as they are leading and overseeing these efforts."
If the Port Authority is forced to pay for the fixes at the state pier, the cost of the repairs is likely to consume the roughly $1.7 million that remained in the project's overall budget at the end of November.
Whitescarver told lawmakers that a "temporary fix" on part of the pier's toe wall could cost around $1.1 million. And he said AECOM, a company advising the Port Authority, estimated an additional $1.5 million will be needed to drive new pilings into a 4,000-square-foot section of the pier, which can't handle the weight loads it was intended to carry.
Whitescarver also noted that those costs could climb into the tens of millions if more extensive work is deemed to be necessary.
A fuller rebuild of the toe wall, which is one of the locations where ships dock at the pier, could cost around $17 million, Whitescarver said. And if the additional pilings don't increase the carrying capacity of the transportation corridor, that entire section might need to be ripped apart and rebuilt, which he said would "cost a great deal more."
The need to fix portions of the new pier is already drawing scorn from Republican lawmakers, who have been critical of the project for years due to its ballooning price.
When the redevelopment of the pier was announced in 2019, it was billed as a $93 million project. But the overall cost has since climbed to roughly $311 million — part of which is being paid for by Ørsted, a Danish company that is currently developing several wind farms in the Atlantic.
Sen. Heather Somers, R-Groton, was one of the lawmakers who received the news about the State Pier from Whitescarver last week. She said it was frustrating to learn about additional costs at the pier, even as the project was supposed to be in its final stages.
She said the Port Authority and the state are now in a difficult position. With hundreds of millions already invested in the project, she said, the state can't simply ignore the construction flaws on the pier.
"CT families are barely scraping by to pay for groceries, insurance heat and electricity," Somers and other Senate Republicans said in a statement. "When they learn that more than a quarter of a billion dollars of their money has gone to this project, they are disgusted. And rightly so. Imagine the tax relief that money could have provided people."
Whitescarver, who did not respond to emailed requests for comment, tried to allay any concerns that state lawmakers might have about the required fixes at the pier.
In his email to legislators, he emphasized that the segments of the pier that needed to be reengineered or rebuilt represented a very small portion of the overall project. And he suggested that identifying flaws on a project like the state pier are typical.
"The engineering solutions being negotiated bring the pier to full design requirements. This is common during construction after quality checks are conducted and design requirements are not met," Whitescarver said. "Both sides have to agree on the engineering of the solution."
Even more, Whitescarver told lawmakers that the issues with the current construction have not inhibited Ørsted from using the facility to ship turbine blades, towers and other components out into the Atlantic Ocean.
A spokesperson for Gov. Ned Lamont said he was aware of the issues with the pier project and that he believes Kiewit should be responsible for paying for the necessary fixes.
"As the governor has said multiple times, he believes State Pier is an important economic engine for the southeastern Connecticut region and for the state’s maritime industry," said Julia Bergman, Lamont's spokeswoman. "The renovation of the pier has enabled Connecticut to be a key player in the offshore wind industry by supporting projects here and in other states, and the pier is now positioned to bring in a wider range of cargo than ever before when not in use by the industry."
The Port Authority officially celebrated the "substantial completion" of the pier in June.
Since then, members of the Port Authority noted during board meetings that several portions of the new pier might not meet the original design specifications for the project.
But up until last week, there was little shared publicly about the scope of the issues or the estimated cost that will be required to bring those portions of the pier into compliance.
When the topic did come up, Whitescarver and other board members were quick to argue that Kiewit, not the Port Authority, should bear the cost of the mistakes.
"We are standing pretty firm on what the total project is, right?" John Johnson, another Port Authority board member, said during a recent meeting. "I hope. I mean, Jesus, what do we have to pay them, for god's sake?"
"It's certainly not like Kiewit gave us any bargain," Johnson added. "I think at this point they are obliged to comply with what was planned."
This article first appeared on CT Mirror and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
