Now assume the owner caused a delay of three days in the start of activity E (so it starts on its original late dates). The owner can use the argument that activity E had three days of total float, thus the contractor does not qualify for time extension or compensation (see Figure 13.4). The contractor argues that this delay will force it either to hire a second crew on days 20, 21, and 22 or finish the project three days late. For this reason, the contractor requests additional compensation and/or time exten- sion for 3 days. 35 The answer to this argument generally lies in the contract agreement. If the contractor granted the owner ownership of the float, the owner can use the float to absorb any delay. If the contractor has ownership of float, he may be entitled to time extension or compensation if he can prove that the delay disrupted his resource allocation plan, even though it affected a noncritical activity and did not delay the entire project (see Figures 13.5 to 13.7).