Dredging Contractor Seeks Additional $3M

STONE HARBOR – It has been three years since Stone Harbor’s back bay dredging project concluded and the litigation continues. The troubled dewatering process during the dredging cost the contractor, Sevenson Environmental, unplanned expenses, which it wants the borough to fund. The case is in federal court.
The dredging effort involved removing 100,000 cubic yards of material from the channels and lagoons of the borough’s back bay. Sevenson, the primary contractor, proposed a geo-tube process for dewatering. In the face of protests from some neighboring residents, the borough located the dewatering site on the grounds and parking lot of the marina at 80th Street.
On Dec. 8, 2015, a geo-tube containing dredge material leaked about 20,000 gallons of dredge water. The state Department of Environmental Protection temporarily shut down the project. The dredging effort experienced two temporary work stoppages. At the end of the first year, there were still 82,000 cubic yards of dredge soils to remove from the waterways.
By August 2016, the contractor proposed a new plan for year two of the effort. Instead of the hydraulic dredging and the use of geo-tubes for dewatering, the dredging would be done mechanically and the contractor would mix the wet material with a dry product, Portland cement, to speed the process of bringing the material to the point that it could be trucked off the island.
The $11-million project was completed in the second year and the contractor was paid the contracted price by the borough.
The problem arose when the contractor wanted to have the borough reimburse it for the added cost of disposing of the much heavier dredge materials that had been mixed with the cement product. According to Borough Solicitor Marcus Karavan, Sevenson is suing the borough for an additional $3 million. Depositions have been taken and the case is in its discovery period.
This is not the only litigation to arise from the dredging effort. A water treatment products provider is suing its insurance company for failure to represent it in the course of litigation related to the dredging. Sevenson blames its subcontractor and has instituted litigation there as well as with the borough.
At a meeting of borough council in September 2016, a Sevenson representative referenced the initial geo-tube strategy and said, “The approach just did not work.” For the borough, the fact that the failure of that initial methodology led to another one more costly to the contractor does not obligate the borough beyond the limits of the contract.
To contact Vince Conti, email vconti@cmcherald.com.