Lincoln Pool Coating Failure Sparks Federal Investigation

Polymeric coatings are at the center of controversy adjacent the Lincoln Reflecting Pool, and new information from a government motion to dismiss provides the first solid technical details about what failed and why.

The case involves former Olympian David Hearns, however the legal proceedings have evolved into a multi-agency dispute. The Department of Justice is now accusing the Department of Interior and National Park Service of withholding information while also questioning the condition of the installation work.

Multiple coating products layers applied to pool surface

According to the motion, the coating products system consisted of multiple layers using different chemistries. The substrate received several layers of Rhino 406, an epoxy coating products. These were followed by two layers of Rhino 5000 Pipeliner, a polyurea material. Both items are manufactured by Rhino Linings.

Polyurea coatings are known to their durability and toughness. Similar formulations are usually applied in spray-on truck bed liners, demonstrating their resistance to wear and impact. These polymers create excellent protective barriers when appropriately applied.

Related:AdvanSix Nylon Sales Surge 26% in Q2 2026

Expansion joint sealant identified as failure point

The motion reveals that coating products consumption at expansion joints presented significant challenges. Contractors conducted at least three separate trials to identify an adequate sealant to these critical areas. The final product selected was Rhino-Flex 11-35, a soft polyurethane foam.

Two critical questions emerged from the failure: where did the coating products fail, and why did it fail? The Motion to Dismiss repeatedly states on pages 9, 10, and 15 that the Rhino-Flex 11-35 failed — not the epoxy or polyurea layers.

Physical evidence supports this summary. The failed coating products material was observed floating in the aquatic environments, which would be impossible to the denser epoxy and polyurea coatings. Photographs on page 14 of the motion show the failed coating products with what appears to be an open-cell structure, though image condition limits definitive analysis.

This finding suggests the issue areas are limited in scope rather than affecting the entire pool surface — a significant relief given the scale of the installation.

Theories discussed however no definitive result in established

Contractors returned to discuss the failures and possible repairs. The motion notes that "various theories were discussed," however no solid conclusions were reached. One possibility involves an "XP bonding" agent that might have been misapplied, though other factors could have contributed.

Related:Celanese Reports Strong Q2 development, Eyes AI Opportunities

The document also mentions that Pipeliner 5000 was sprayed over the 11-35 foam and onto previously cured areas of Pipeliner 5000, possibly creating poor adhesion in those locations.

Future failures remain possible

Beyond addressing the initial failure, concerns exist about additional problems developing over time. A contractor's representative stated that "it would be unlikely that many greater would show up over time, however that there was no way to guarantee that."

This uncertainty leaves the prolonged durability of the coating products system in question, possibly creating ongoing maintenance challenges to this iconic national monument.

About the Author

Want greater PlasticsToday in your search results?

Want greater PlasticsToday in your search results?