Who Owns the Float? Float Ownership in Construction Contracts

A Question with Serious Implications

"Who owns the float?" may sound like an abstract scheduling question, but it has significant implications for delay claims, time extension requests, and liquidated damages. The answer depends on contract language, jurisdiction, and the specific type of float in question. Understanding float ownership is essential for construction professionals on both sides of contract disputes.

What Is Float

Float (also called slack) is the amount of time an activity can be delayed without delaying the project's completion date. It represents scheduling flexibility. Activities with zero float are on the critical path — any delay to them delays the project. Activities with positive float can absorb some delay before impacting completion.

Float is calculated mathematically by CPM software based on logic relationships and durations. It is a property of the schedule, not a subjective judgment.

Types of Float

Total Float

Total float is the amount of time an activity can be delayed from its early start without delaying the project completion date. This is the most commonly discussed type of float and the one usually referred to in discussions of float ownership.

Free Float

Free float is the amount of time an activity can be delayed from its early start without delaying the early start of any successor activity. Free float is always less than or equal to total float.

Project Float

Project float is any excess time between the calculated early finish of the project and a contractually imposed completion date. For example, if the CPM calculation shows the project finishing on June 30 but the contract requires completion by July 31, there is 31 days of project float.

The Float Ownership Question

When a delay occurs that consumes float, the question is: who benefits from that float being available? Consider this scenario:

An activity has 10 days of total float. The owner causes a 5-day delay to this activity. Does the contractor get a 5-day time extension (because the owner's delay impacted schedule performance), or does the contractor absorb the delay using the available float (because the delay didn't impact the critical path)?

The Three Main Approaches

Owner Owns the Float

Some contracts explicitly state that float belongs to the project, and either party may use it. In practice, this means the contractor cannot claim a time extension unless the delay actually impacts the critical path (i.e., no float was available). This is the most owner-friendly position.

Contractor Owns the Float

Other contracts or jurisdictions treat float as a contractor benefit. Under this view, any owner-caused delay that impacts the contractor's planned completion date — even if float is available — warrants a time extension. This is the most contractor-friendly position.

First-Come, First-Served

The most common approach in modern construction contracts is "first come, first served" — whoever uses the float first owns that portion of it. Under this view, float is a shared resource that can be consumed by either party, but once consumed it is gone. Subsequent delays don't benefit from float that has already been used.

Practical Implications

For Contractors

Contractors should understand that float is not guaranteed to be theirs. If the contract is silent or uses "first come, first served," float may be consumed by early-project owner delays, leaving no buffer for contractor issues later. Planning schedules with minimal float can backfire.

Conversely, under a "contractor owns the float" interpretation, contractors should document float consumption carefully. Any float consumed by owner delays should be tracked and cited in time extension requests.

For Owners

Owners benefit from contract language clarifying float ownership. Ambiguous language leads to disputes. Most owners prefer the "first come, first served" approach because it treats delays equitably.

Owners should also avoid creating delays that consume float unnecessarily. Even if float absorbs the impact, it removes schedule buffer that could have mitigated later issues.

Float and Delay Analysis

Float ownership directly affects how delays are analyzed and claimed:

Best Practices for Schedulers

• Read the Contract: Understand float ownership provisions before creating the schedule. If the contract is silent, ask for clarification.
• Minimize Artificial Float: Don't create excessive float through artificial constraints or overly pessimistic durations. This can backfire under various ownership schemes.
• Track Float Consumption: Monitor float changes update-to-update. Significant float erosion is an early warning of schedule problems.
• Document Delay Sequences: Record the order and cause of delays carefully. Under "first come, first served," sequence matters.
• Address Float Issues in Narratives: Schedule update narratives should discuss significant float changes and their implications.

Federal Contract Provisions

Federal contracts typically address float through FAR clauses and agency-specific supplements:

• FAR 52.236-15: "Schedules for Construction Contracts" — requires CPM schedules but is silent on float ownership.
• USACE EFARS: Corps of Engineers federal acquisition regulations often include specific float provisions.
• Agency Specifications: Individual agency scheduling specifications (USACE ER 1-1-11, NAVFAC UFGS 01 32 01) may address float ownership.

International Perspectives

Float ownership varies internationally. FIDIC contracts generally treat float as project-owned. UK contracts often follow the "Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol" which recommends project-owned float. Each jurisdiction has its own nuances.

Final Thoughts

Float ownership is a technical issue with real-world consequences. A few days of float can mean the difference between a successful project and a liquidated damages assessment. Understand your contract's provisions, document float consumption carefully, and build schedules with appropriate buffers for the contractual framework you are operating under.

When float becomes contested, engage experienced forensic schedule analysts early. The technical analysis intersects with contract law in complex ways that require specialized expertise.