Before the First Pile Is Driven: Getting the Design Codes Right on Waterfront Projects

Ask most owners which code their pier, wharf, or bulkhead was designed to, and you'll get a polite shrug. That's understandable. You hired an engineer so you wouldn't have to know.

 But after 35 years designing marine and waterfront structures, I've learned that choosing the codes is one of the most consequential decisions on any project. It affects your cost and your schedule, and if something goes wrong, it decides who carries the liability. It's also a decision made before a single beam is sized.

 Here's what I want everyone on a waterfront project to understand, whether you own the facility, run it, or design it.

 Most states don't have a waterfront code

 Building codes are written for buildings on land. A few states address docks, piers, and bulkheads directly, but most say nothing about in-water structures at all.

 That gap gets filled with engineering judgment. We start with the state building code and the specific editions of ACI, AISC, and ASCE standards it adopts.

Then we supplement it with marine-specific guidance: Navy UFC manuals, Corps of Engineers EMs, ASCE 61, PIANC reports, and others. Two qualified engineers can assemble that combination differently. That's why the choices need to be made deliberately and written down.

 Who you are decides the rulebook

Which codes apply starts with one question: who owns the project?

• Private, industrial, and municipal owners: The state building code usually governs. Local jurisdictions can add stricter requirements, but they can't relax the state minimums.

• State DOTs: The agency's own design manuals control, typically built on the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.

• The Navy: Navy work follows the Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC).

• The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Corps projects follow USACE Engineer Manuals (EMs) and Engineer Regulations (ERs).

• Railroads: Rail work layers the AREMA Manual for Railway Engineering on top of each railroad's own requirements.

• Other federal projects: These typically follow UFC and USACE criteria, which name the edition of the International Building Code to be used for design.

The same pier could be designed to three different rulebooks, depending on whose name is on the contract.

 Newer is not automatically better

 This one surprises people. Shouldn't we always use the latest edition?

Not necessarily. Each state's building code adopts specific editions of the referenced standards, and those editions are what govern. If your state adopts ACI 318-14, the design follows ACI 318-14, not the 2022 edition. If a project ever ends up in a claim or a courtroom, the first question will be whether the design followed the codes in effect when the work was done. "We used something newer and stricter" is not the defense most people expect it to be.

Newer also doesn't always mean more correct. I drive across a bridge every day that was designed to the most current code available in 1970. That code turned out to have issues. The bridge has been through multiple repairs and upgrades since, and it's currently in year two of a three-year repair project.

 Codes conflict, even within one agency

 On a recent federal waterfront project, two UFC manuals pointed in different directions:

• UFC 4-152-01 (Piers and Wharves): Ties loading to ASCE 7-05.

• UFC 3-301-01 (Structural Engineering): References the 2018 IBC, which points to ASCE 7-16, with different seismic and wind provisions.

 UFC 4-152-01 states that no other standard supersedes it for loads. Our resolution was to determine loads per UFC 4-152-01 and design individual structural elements per UFC 3-301-01. We documented that reasoning in the Basis of Design, and the federal client reviewed and approved it before detailed design moved forward.

 The decision mattered. Having it in writing and approved by the owner mattered more.

 Getting it right from the start

 You don't need to be a code expert to protect your project. Owners, operators, designers, and contractors all have a part in making sure that, from day one:

1. The governing codes and editions are identified early, at kickoff or in the proposal, before any design work begins.

2. The reasons those codes apply are clearly understood by everyone at the table, not just the design team.

3. Conflicts between codes, standards, and owner specifications are brought forward and resolved before design moves ahead, not discovered during construction.

4. The decisions are put in writing and reviewed by the owner.

 On large federal work, that's a formal Basis of Design. On a smaller private project, a clear email you can review and approve is often enough. The format matters less than the habit. As I often say: if it wasn't written, it wasn't said.

 Codes are tools. They don't design your wharf. Judgment does, and documented judgment protects everyone at the table.