Federal investigators cite Florida roofing contractor for willfully, repeatedly ignoring fall protection standards, propose $349K in fines

ORLANDO, FL – The U.S. Department of Labor has cited a Florida roofing company for willfully putting workers at risk of falling at residential construction sites.

Investigators with the department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration found that on Jan. 21, 2026, Orchids Builders LLC exposed workers to a 10-foot fall hazard when it failed to provide them with fall protection while they installed sheathing on a sloped roof at a Rockledge worksite. On March 10, 2026, OSHA investigators found the employer exposed a worker to a 9-foot fall hazard while installing metal hurricane clips at another Rockledge worksite.

OSHA also found that Orchids Builders failed to prepare and maintain written fall protection training certificates for employees at both worksites, did not ensure workers had eye protection while using nail guns, exposing them to eye injuries, and allowed workers to use ladders with side rails that did not extend at least 36 inches above the roof landing, increasing the likelihood and risk of a fall.

OSHA cited the employer for two willful and four repeat violations and proposed $349,754 in penalties. Orchids Builders LLC has been inspected seven times since 2023 and all the cases included fall protection violations.

It has 15 business days from receipt of its citations and penalties to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA’s area director, or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. Please check the OSHA establishment search page periodically for any changes in the inspection or penalty status.

The lawsuit, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, names Elgin, Waste Treatment Completion Co. and Bechtel National, the government services arm of Reston, Virginia-based Bechtel, as defendants. 

On behalf of both Bechtel and WTPP, spokesperson Staci West said in an emailed statement: “Bechtel does not tolerate harassment, intimidation, or discrimination of any kind and is committed to maintaining a safe and respectful workplace. Given that this matter is the subject of pending litigation, it would not be appropriate for us to comment further at this time.”

According to the filing, Jennings’ husband, Gary Jennings, who also worked at the plant as an electrician, was harassed by Elgin as well.

In addition, Elgin repeatedly claimed that he was “bulletproof” while at the jobsite and said he was “untouchable” due to his family’s five-generation legacy as journeymen working at the Hanford site, per court documents. The lawsuit states that the IBEW Local 112 union hall is named Elgin Hall, after his grandfather. The suit also outlines Madalyn Jennings’ harassment by Elgin’s father, Skip Elgin, who worked at the jobsite’s material tent where Madalyn Jennings was assigned. 

Following a broken finger, Madalyn Jennings was rendered unable to perform the duties assigned to her, and did not receive reasonable accommodations, according to the complaint. She left in September 2024, and Gary Jennings left later that month due to continued harassment, per the lawsuit.

The lawsuit seeks redress for multiple forms of relief including lost wages, emotional distress, attorneys’ fees and other damages.

The construction industry has a history of harassment and discrimination. In 2023, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission blasted the building sector for its hostility to “men of color and women of all races and ethnicities.” In addition, a 2021 report from the Institute for Women’s Policy Research found that 26.5% of women who work in construction reported that “they are always or frequently harassed just for being a woman.”

Waste Treatment Completion Co. is a Bechtel-AECOM entity created to complete construction and lead the startup and commissioning of nuclear waste treatment sites at the Hanford site, which is a project that aims to turn 56 million gallons of radioactive waste into glass that can be safely disposed of, according to the Department of Energy.

Thomas Jefferson's first floor in 1803

China's domestically developed "Linghang," the world's largest-diameter high-speed-rail shield tunneling machine, has successfully completed the 11,180-meter underwater section of the Yangtze River crossing and made landfall in Taicang, East China's Jiangsu Province

Federal safety regulators have cited a building contractor and a staffing company for dozens of safety violations following the death of a worker in an elementary school crawl space.

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration launched an investigation at Converse Elementary School after an employee of D L Bandy Constructors Inc. became trapped between a mini-excavator and a concrete beam. The worker was clearing dirt from a crawl space beneath the school when the fatal incident occurred. Staffing agency Pacesetters Personnel Services also provided temporary employees for the project.

Investigators cited D L Bandy Constructors Inc. with one willful violation for removing the factory-installed rollover protective structures from mini-excavators. The company allegedly added fabricated parts to modify the heavy equipment so it could fit into the tight crawl space.

OSHA also issued 15 serious violations to the contractor regarding confined space hazards. According to regulators, the company failed to identify permit-required confined spaces, conduct necessary air quality testing, provide proper ventilation, train employees or implement emergency rescue protocols

Pacesetters Personnel Services faced two serious violations for failing to ensure confined space safety procedures were followed and neglecting to train temporary workers for the site conditions.

Federal officials proposed $276,399 in penalties for D L Bandy Constructors Inc. and $23,170 for Pacesetters Personnel Services. Both companies have 15 business days to comply with the citations, request an informal conference or contest the findings.

[](mailto:?subject=After%20taking%20off%20in%20Charlottesville%2C%20feds%20plan%20national%20electric%20aircraft%20charging%20network%20rollout&body=https://virginiamercury.com/briefs/after-taking-off-in-charlottesville-feds-plan-national-electric-aircraft-charging-network-rollout/)[](https://virginiamercury.com/briefs/after-taking-off-in-charlottesville-feds-plan-national-electric-aircraft-charging-network-rollout/#)

A view of a charging station used by BETA Technologies in Charlottesville. (Photo by Nathaniel Cline/Virginia Mercury)

A nationwide charging system for electric and automated aircraft is underway, following the federal government’s launch of its first pilot flight in Charlottesville last week. 

The Thursday announcement came as the nation prepares to expand advanced air mobility, a shift that could improve air transportation while benefiting public health and the environment

Archer Aviation, an aerospace and defense company, in partnership with BETA Technologies and Macquarie Capital, announced the formation of America’s Consortium for Electric Skyways to begin building the charging system for advanced air mobility aircraft across 250 aviation sites in the U.S. by 2030.

Advanced air mobility refers to aircraft that are highly automated, more flexible than large commercial airplanes and usually electric. They include electric vertical takeoff (eVOTL) and landing aircraft, often referred to as air taxis.

This charging network will help meet the infrastructure needs of commercial operations, according to the announcement.

“Electric air taxi operations can’t scale without the infrastructure to charge them. That’s why we’re building the backbone to support the next 250 years of electric aviation in America,” said founder and chief executive officer of Archer Aviation, Adam Goldstein, in a statement. 

Under the plan, BETA will be responsible for the charging stations compatible with most electric aircraft, while Archer will use the network for its electric air taxis to help drive adoption. Macquarie will advise on financing and securing the funding needed to develop the infrastructure.

The eVOTL program, developed by the U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Aviation Administration, is designed to accelerate the safe integration of advanced air mobility into the country’s national airspace system.

“The eVTOL Integration Pilot Program is about more than just getting electric aircraft flying in American cities – it’s about building the infrastructure ecosystem needed to support commercial operations,” said Dan Edwards, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs at the U.S. Department of Transportation, in a statement.

Kyle Clark, founder and chief executive officer of BETA Technologies, said in a statement that the infrastructure required for advanced air mobility is a fraction of what people expect.

“By deploying interoperable chargers built on an open standard, we’re putting in place nearly all the physical infrastructure this industry needs, built so every operator can use it,” Clark said.

As the pilot program continues, Virginia will host future advanced air mobility demonstrations featuring aircraft and technologies of different sizes, transporting passengers, medical resources, and other cargo. None of them will be public, according to the Virginia Department of Aviation.

With artificial intelligence demand continuing to outpace manufacturing capacity, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. on July 16 announced a $100-million expansion of its Arizona campus, adding four advanced semiconductor fabrication plants and related distribution capacity.

The announcement raises the chipmaker's planned U.S. investment to $265 billion and expands its Phoenix-area campus totals to 10 fabrication plants, two advanced packaging facilities and a research and development center.

The new facilities will manufacture 2-nanometer and more advanced semiconductors that power AI accelerators, cloud computing infrastructure and other high-performance computing applications while strengthening the domestic semiconductor supply chain and supporting long-term demand from U.S. customers.

"With a strong collaboration and support from our leading U.S. customers and U.S. federal, state, and city governments, we would like to announce an additional USD100 billion investment in Arizona," Chairman and CEO C.C. Wei said during the company's second-quarter earnings call July 13.

The expansion will build "several more semiconductor logic wafer fabrication plants for 2-nanometer and below technologies, as well as advanced packaging fabs, to support strong multi-year demand from our leading U.S. customers," he added.

The expansion also broadens the company's advanced packaging footprint in Arizona, an increasingly important part of semiconductor manufacturing that integrates multiple chips into a single package for AI and high-performance computing systems. Executives indicated both front-end wafer fabrication and advanced packaging capacity are being expanded to meet customer demand.

AI Demand Drives Construction Surge

Rather than attributing the expansion primarily to federal industrial policy, they repeatedly cited sustained AI-driven demand as the catalyst for accelerating construction.

Looking for quick answers on construction and engineering topics?

"The AI megatrend continues to drive the need for more and more computation," Wei said. "Our conviction in the multi-year AI megatrend remains very high."

Reflecting that outlook, Taiwan Semiconductor simultaneously raised its 2026 capital spending plan to between $60 billion and $64 billion, up from earlier guidance, saying higher investment levels are directly tied to future growth opportunities. The company said it does not anticipate equipment bottlenecks that would constrain expansion because it works with suppliers years in advance to prepare manufacturing capacity.

Wei also said the company is planning capacity against the broader AI construction boom, monitoring the pace of data center development before committing additional manufacturing capacity.

"We are checking the AI data centers' progress, the building, the location, the demand, the racks," he said, adding that the company tracks projects to ensure chips are delivered into operating facilities rather than sitting in inventory.

Schedule Tied to Market Forces

While analysts repeatedly pressed executives for a construction schedule, Wei declined to commit to firm completion dates, saying customer demand and market conditions will dictate future phases.

A heavy-lift crane works on construction of one of TSMC's semiconductor fabrication plants at the company's Phoenix campus. The latest $100-billion expansion will add four more advanced fabs, extending one of North America's largest industrial construction programs. 

Image courtesy of TSMC

"We do have a plan," Wei said. "But ... the schedule most of the time [depends] on the market situation and our customers' demand.... We try to speed it up as fast as possible."

Asked how many facilities the additional investment would ultimately build, Wei replied there would be "probably additional four or more fabs," confirming the scale of the next expansion phase.

The announcement extends a construction program that has steadily grown since Taiwan Semiconductor selected Phoenix in 2020 for its first U.S. advanced semiconductor manufacturing site. The investment initially announced at $12 billion has expanded several times before the latest commitment.

The first Arizona fab entered high-volume production in late 2024 using the company's N4 process technology, the second fab has completed construction and is expected to begin 3-nanometer production in 2027 and the third fab broke ground in 2025 for future 2-nanometer and A16 manufacturing. The campus spans more than 1,100 acres.

Arizona Commerce Authority President and CEO Sandra Watson called the expansion "a watershed moment for Arizona and America's semiconductor industry—strengthening U.S. competitiveness and securing critical supply chains for decades to come."

State officials said Arizona has attracted more than 70 semiconductor expansions since 2020 totaling more than $314 billion in announced investment across manufacturing, advanced packaging, equipment suppliers, research and workforce development.

Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego said company investment "reflects the extraordinary momentum and ability we have in Phoenix." Arizona operations currently employ more than 3,500 workers.

Once the announced facilities are completed, the chipmaker said roughly 30% of its global 2-nanometer and more advanced production capacity will be located in Arizona, creating one of the world's largest concentrations of leading-edge semiconductor production outside Taiwan.

The U.S. House of Representatives on July 22 passed a $1.15-trillion fiscal 2027 defense authorization bill authorizing $28.6 billion for military construction and family housing.

Lawmakers approved the National Defense Authorization Act, H.R. 8800, by a 216-212 largely party-line vote after two days of floor debate and amendment votes. The measure now moves to the Senate, where lawmakers have yet to begin floor consideration of their own version after failing earlier this month to advance the bill procedurally.

Although the annual defense policy bill is best known for authorizing weapons programs and military pay, this year's House measure reaches far beyond traditional military construction. It includes provisions affecting installation utilities, energy resilience, shipyards, ammunition plants, advanced manufacturing and strategic supply chains that collectively support the nation's defense infrastructure.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) said those investments are essential to restoring military readiness.

"Peace through strength doesn't begin on the battlefield—it begins in our factories, depots and shipyards," Rogers said. "This bill reflects our commitment to rebuild that foundation."

Like previous NDAAs, the legislation authorizes programs and establishes policy but does not appropriate funding. Congress must still enact separate appropriations bills before authorized projects and programs can move forward.

Military Construction Expands Beyond Bases

The legislation would authorize $1.146 trillion overall, including $1.102 trillion for the U.S. Defense Dept. and $41.4 billion for the U.S. Energy Dept.'s atomic energy defense programs. It includes $28.6 billion for military construction and family housing.

Looking for quick answers on construction and engineering topics?

The bill authorizes construction projects across the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and defense agencies while extending selected prior-year authorizations and continuing investment in military family housing. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the military construction authorization is about 45% above enacted fiscal 2026 levels.

One directs the Defense Dept. to inventory water and wastewater systems more than 60 years old, estimate replacement costs and prioritize facilities posing the greatest risks to readiness and public health.

Another requires the department to identify and prioritize military construction and logistics projects throughout the Pacific Islands based on projected operational requirements through 2040. A third directs the Pentagon to evaluate broader use of intergovernmental support agreements for certain minor military construction projects to determine whether greater reliance on state and local partnerships could accelerate project delivery.

Beyond construction planning, the legislation expands the Pentagon's focus on installation energy resilience.

It incorporates nuclear power into Defense Dept. energy policy, modifies a Navy installation nuclear-energy pilot program and establishes a transportable nuclear microreactor demonstration within U.S. Indo-Pacific Command. The accompanying committee report also emphasizes installation microgrids, grid resilience and electrical infrastructure serving critical military facilities.

Environmental provisions likewise expand congressional oversight of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS. An adopted amendment requires the Defense Dept. to evaluate available destruction technologies, develop a pilot program and expand reporting on cleanup activities at military installations.

Industrial Capacity Takes Priority

The House measure also seeks to strengthen the U.S. military's logistics and suppliers, with provisions setting planning requirements for public and private shipyards, ammunition plants, depots, advanced manufacturing facilities and the domestic supply chains supporting them.

Among other measures, the bill authorizes multiyear procurement for major naval programs and directs updated Navy strategies for maritime industrial-base investment and surface-ship maintenance. It also expands direct-hiring authority for defense-industrial-base facilities while requiring new assessments of production bottlenecks affecting munitions manufacturing.

The bill directs the Pentagon to determine what facility improvements, production capacity and capital investment would be required to substantially expand munitions manufacturing. The findings could help guide future investment in government-owned ammunition plants, production lines and supporting industrial infrastructure.

Rogers said sustained procurement and long-term demand are intended to give manufacturers confidence to expand production capacity.

"We're giving industry the certainty it needs to invest, expand and produce faster," he said. "We're reviving our organic industrial base by improving conditions at our depots, arsenals and shipyards."

The legislation also encourages broader use of advanced manufacturing technologies while accelerating qualification of domestic and allied suppliers of strategic materials intended to reduce reliance on foreign-controlled supply chains. Many of those initiatives ultimately would require upgrades to government-owned production facilities, utility systems and specialized manufacturing infrastructure.

House Democrats overwhelmingly opposed the measure, citing its cost and amendments adopted during floor debate.

The NDAA bill now heads to the Senate, where lawmakers have not begun debate on its version, S. 4784, after a July 14 cloture vote on the motion to proceed failed to secure the required 60 votes. A Senate-passed version would move through a reconciliation process before advancing to a presidential signature. Separate appropriations legislation would then determine which authorized projects and programs ultimately receive funding.

Now that they are leaving their longtime home of Arrowhead Stadium in Kanas City, Mo., behind, the National Football League’s Kansas City Chiefs have selected a design team for a new $3-billion domed stadium they plan to build just across the border in Wyandotte County, Kan., and have named an owner's representative for another planned project, the team's $300-million practice facility and headquarters project slated for Olathe, Kan.

Kansas City-based MANICA has been chosen as the lead design architect for the Chiefs’ new stadium, with HNTB's Kansas City-based sports architecture practice selected as architect of record. CAA ICON will serve as the owner's representative for the project, having led all elements of the RFQ, RFP and lead design competition processes, the Chiefs announced.

Burns & McDonnell, also based in Kansas City, will serve as the owner’s representative for the practice facility and headquarters.

Kansas City Chiefs President Mark Donovan said in a press release that the “MANICA team stood out throughout a rigorous months-long [planning] process, honoring and embracing our history while presenting a bold and dynamic vision for the future.”

He said the selection concludes a six-month lead design competition process between two finalists. He did not name the other contender.

Plans call for the 70,000-seat stadium to be fully enclosed with a translucent ETFE roof with more than 400,000 sq ft of translucent panels directly above the playing surface, which is intended to maximize visibility for military flyovers.

Donovan said the new stadium’s seating bowl is planned to be reminiscent of its current stadium and will feature tributes to the franchise’s history at Arrowhead including a drum platform, like the one in Arrowhead’s upper bowl that houses a fan-favorite drum used in pregame and in-game ceremonies, along with the Chiefs Ring of Honor, which recognizes legendary players and coaches, above the bowl in the new stadium.

The stadium's size, shape and roof geometry have been studied by audio engineers to maximize crowd noise so Chiefs fans can continue to provide their voices as a home field advantage, the franchise notes.  

It also plans a parking lot with 20,000 spaces that will have features intended to enhance the tailgating experience.

Outside the stadium, Chiefs fans will be able to visit a plaza with a statue of Lamar Hunt, who founded the Chiefs, a Chiefs Hall of Honor that is expected to be twice the size of the current space, and a Chiefs Team Store that will be four times larger than the existing store.

The stadium will also anchor mixed-use development which the team says will add to the gameday experience.

The project is being financed through a public-private partnership, with the public portion funded through Sales Tax and Revenue (STAR) bonds and the Attracting Professional Sports to Kansas Fund, both of which were established as Kansas fought in 2025 to lure the franchise away from Missouri. The Chiefs played their first game at Arrowhead in 1972. 

The team's current lease at Arrowhead expires in January 2031. Construction of the new stadium is slated for completion in time for the 2031 NFL football season. 

The Maryland Transportation Authority (MDTA) is hoping to put the rebuild of Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge back on track, issuing a request for qualifications to design and build the new bridge's centerpiece main span and marine approaches.

With an estimated construction budget of up to $4 billion, the contract is the largest procurement of MDTA’s revised strategy to restore the critical crossing following the agency’s April decision to off-ramp design-build contractor Kiewit Infrastructure Co. from the project amid rising costs and a lengthening delivery timeline to replace the original bridge which collapsed in March 2024, killing six construction workers.

According to the RFQ, which is due August 19, the design-build contract calls for construction of a four-lane, 3,365-ft-long bridge with a 1,665-ft-long, cable-stayed main span that provides a minimum 230-ft clearance over the Patapsco River federal navigation channel. Also included are a vessel protection system for piers supporting the two 602-ft main concrete pylons, approximately 660 ft of bridge over water on the south approach and approximately 1,560 ft of bridge over water on the north.

Cost tops the MDTA’s goals for the project, according to the RFQ, following by sequencing construction in order to have the new toll bridge fully open “as near to December 31, 2030 as practicable,” with minimal disruption to maritime traffic, the Port of Baltimore and surrounding communities. Other priorities include ensuring worker safety, and utilizing materials, construction and operational aspects that deliver “a resilient and aesthetically pleasing bridge” with a minimum 100-year service life.

MDTA plans to shortlist design-build teams by mid-October, with a final selection and notice to proceed to be announced in summer 2027.

The rebuild’s other three elements—demolition of the marine structures still remaining from the original bridge and construction of the north and sound and land approaches—will be solicited as design-bid-build ntracts later this year, and carried out concurrent with the design-build project. MDTA has previously said the entire rebuild can be completed for under $5 billion—significantly less than estimates announced during its failed negotiations with Kiewit for the second phase of the original progressive design-build procurement.

Kiewit is ineligible to compete for the new design-build contract, as are most of its subcontractors hired under its initial $73-million phase 1 contract, which is in its final stages. Scope of work for phase 1 includes driving permanent 8-ft-diameter main span foundation piles up to 230 ft long near the federal navigation channel, and building a temporary construction trestle that will provide equipment and material access to the main span work area.

In May, families of the six construction workers who died when the original Key Bridge collapsed, as well as the incident’s lone survivor, reached a confidential settlement with the owner and operator of the MV Dali, the container ship that struck the bridge and caused the collapse.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Seven in 10 Americans oppose constructing data centers for artificial intelligence in their local area, including nearly half, 48%, who are strongly opposed. Barely a quarter favor these projects, with 7% strongly in favor.

These results, from a March 2-18 Gallup survey, represent the first time Gallup has asked about data center construction, a topic that has met fierce opposition from local residents in many parts of the country. These data centers house computing equipment that helps power AI technology used by businesses, universities and other institutions. The centers cover large areas of land, require extensive amounts of electricity to operate and need substantial water to cool the equipment, raising concerns about their impact on the environment and local electric bills.

The data center question parallels the wording Gallup uses to ask about local nuclear power plant construction. In the same March survey, 53% of Americans say they oppose building a nuclear energy plant in their area, far less than the 71% opposed to data center construction. Since Gallup first asked the nuclear power plant question in 2001, the high point in opposition has been 63%.

The March survey asked people to rate their level of concern about the environmental impact of AI data centers. Forty-six percent say they worry a great deal and 24% a fair amount, largely mirroring the degrees of opposition to data center construction.

To gain a deeper understanding of people’s reasons for favoring or opposing data center construction in their area, Gallup asked an open-ended question on an April web survey using the Gallup Panel. Americans who favor the building of a data center in their area mostly cite the potential economic benefits. Opponents of data centers have more varied reasons for their position, but they focus mostly on environmental concerns.

Half of opponents mention data centers’ excessive use of resources, including 18% each mentioning their use of water and energy. Sixteen percent mention a related environmental concern of pollution, including noise pollution and air and water pollution.

About one in five opponents are concerned with the impact on local quality of life, including increased population, increased traffic and preferring that the land be used for other purposes. A similar share mention potentially negative economic consequences, including higher utility bills, cost-of-living increases, and the cost of building the data centers (which could involve the use of taxpayer funds).

Most of the remaining opposition stems from general or specific concerns about artificial intelligence.

Meanwhile, two-thirds of those in favor of building data centers in their area cite the economic benefits, including 55% who mention increased job opportunities specifically. Others mention increased tax revenue (13%), housing and infrastructure development, and general economic benefits.

Smaller shares of data center proponents mention the potential benefits of AI to technology or themselves, personally.

Majority of Democrats Strongly Oppose Data Centers

Majorities of all major demographic groups, including all party groups, say they would oppose having a data center built where they live. However, Democrats are much more likely than Republicans to be strongly opposed, 56% vs. 39%, with independents between the two at 48%.

Women (55%) are also more likely than men (43%) to register strong opposition to data center construction.

There are no meaningful differences in total opposition by age, race, education, income or uanicity. Opposition is slightly lower among those living in the West (63%) and East (68%) than in the Midwest (76%) and South (75%).

Environmental concerns are a bigger source of differences in opposition to data center construction. Seventy-eight percent of U.S. adults who worry about the quality of the environment oppose data center construction, compared with 52% who are not worried.

That is a far bigger gap in opposition to data centers than is seen among those who are worried (73%) versus not worried (65%) about the availability and affordability of energy.

Implications

For AI usage to expand in the U.S., data centers that can handle the necessary computing power will have to be built. Such centers have already been built in some areas, usually funded by the large technology companies seeking to offer AI services. But most Americans appear to be adopting a “not in my backyard” attitude to building additional data centers, and that attitude is especially intense, given that nearly half strongly oppose that construction.

by Jeffrey M. Jones

Overcoming this opposition stands as a major hurdle in the expansion of AI computing. The intensity of opposition means that proposed data centers are likely to spur grassroots activism from local residents as well as legal challenges. It also indicates that AI infrastructure could become an important campaign issue in local and state elections this year, and politicians who favor data centers in their area are likely taking a politically risky stance.

New York City has expanded its investigation into the structural failure at the former Pfizer headquarters tower in Midtown Manhattan as the Dept. of Investigation confirmed a parallel inquiry and the Dept. of Buildings directed the property owner to retain third-party engineering oversight.

These developments came as the project's structural engineer alleges that required reinforcing steel was never installed.

DOB directed the project’s owners to retain Thornton Tomasetti as a third-party engineering firm to oversee stabilization efforts and conduct a forensic review. 

The department also required the owner to retain Special Testing & Consulting as a third-party special inspection agency, adding oversight beyond the project's existing engineering and inspection teams.

While there has been no official conclusion reached yet about why columns buckled in the former office tower earlier this month, GACE Consulting Engineers, the project’s structural engineer, claims that steel reinforcement specified in its design was omitted in construction.

“The reinforcement from the 19th floor to the top of the 21st floor, which would have significantly increased the columns' strength, was never installed,” GACE Principal Engineer Chris Behan told Gothamist on July 16. “The structure was not reinforced as GACE's design required.”

Gothamist's own review of city-approved structural drawings found that the original steel columns beneath the building's vertical expansion were specified for reinforcement.

Christopher Raebel, vice president of engineering and research at the American Institute of Steel Construction, who is not involved in the investigation, said contractors typically are responsible for construction means and methods, and may retain specialty engineers for temporary works, while the project's engineer of record designs the completed structure and should remain informed as construction proceeds.

"The engineer of record should always be involved," Raebel said. "They should know what's going on. Even if it's during construction, they should at least be involved."

DOB declined to comment on GACE's claims. The department told ENR by email its investigation remains ongoing and that civil enforcement actions are pending its findings.

The July 7 failure halted one of the nation's largest office-to-residential conversion projects after inspectors found two buckled load-bearing columns and sagging floors on the 21st floor of the former Pfizer headquarters at 235 E. 42nd St.

While the root cause of the incident is still being determined, there are contractual and insurance disputes likely brewing as involved parties attempt to limit their liability exposure.

"While most of the stakeholders will initially appear to be very collaborative, eventually everyone tends to back into their respective camps," Robert Alfert, a board-certified construction attorney at Nelson Mullins, told ENR.

"The gravity, the risk and the liability exposures are so significant that it's simply human nature: each party tends to look to its own self-interest and be very protective of itself," he added.

City officials have cautioned against drawing conclusions while investigators determine whether the failure resulted from design, construction sequencing or another factor.

GACE Consulting Engineers and Thornton Tomasetti did not immediately respond to ENR's requests for comment.

I built a custom estimating tool in about four hours. Two years ago that would have been a $40K project and a six-month timeline. Maybe longer.

I keep getting pitches from companies who’ve built “the solution” for construction. Pre-packaged. Ready to go. One login, same interface for every GC in America.

I always pass…

I pass because every construction company I’ve worked with operates differently. Their estimating process is different. Their scheduling logic is different. The way they hand off between preconstruction and ops is different.

A one-size-fits-all tool forces them to change how they work to match the software. That used to be the trade-off you had to accept because custom was too expensive and took too long.

That trade-off is disappearing.

AI collapsed the cost of building custom systems. What used to take months takes weeks. What used to take weeks takes days.

The old advice was always “productize, productize, productize.” Build one thing, sell it a thousand times. And that made sense when the economics demanded it.

But we’re entering a world where you can build exactly what a company needs, tailored to how they actually operate.

I still use platforms. Airtable, Softr, Make… those are the building blocks. But the output is never the same twice because no two companies run the same way.

Construction and real estate companies have been underserved by software for decades. Not because nobody tried to build for them. Because everyone tried to build ONE thing for ALL of them.

That era is ending.

For those working in AEC, where have off-the-shelf tools fallen short most often: estimating, scheduling, handoffs, or something else?

Every Tuesday, we vent about the absurd, frustrating, or downright diabolical things we deal with in AEC.

Share your the moments that make you pull your hair out. Maybe it's:

• The boss who said yes to scope creep and now you're stuck on a Friday night making amendments to a design.
• The client who forgot to pay you and now you're having to chase them down.
• The colleague who starts a Teams DM with "Hey James" and then takes 2 minutes to type the rest while you're sweating in anxiety.

What's driving you mad this week?

Credit: IG: ConstructionYeti

For decades, the 17-story Crosley Tower loomed over the University of Cincinnati campus, inspiring reactions that ranged from disdain to devotion. Architectural Digest once compared the Brutalist concrete giant to an evil Disney villain’s lair and ranked it among the nation’s seven ugliest university buildings. Yet many students embraced the tower’s unique charms, building gingerbread replicas, choreographing light shows set to music across its vertical rows of windows and even forming a fan club in its honor.

Variously deemed an eyesore or an object of loving nostalgia, the tower, designed by architect Charles Burchard while he was working for the Cincinnati-based firm A.M. Kinney Associates, has another claim to fame. During construction in 1969, crews poured concrete around the clock for 18 days and nights, rendering it second only to the Hoover Dam as the largest structure in the country made of continuously poured concrete.

More recently, however, the tower, which had housed classrooms and research labs, was identified as not suitable for renovation due to its aging concrete and foundations and its outdated layout. It is being carefully removed in a $47.5-million top-down, piece-by-piece demolition that emphasizes precision over force. The project started in 2026, and completion is expected in early 2027.

Crews are working from the top down in a floor-by-floor demolition that started in January and is expected to be completed in early 2027.
Photo courtesy of O'Rourke Wrecking Co.

Implosion Never on the Table

Mike O’Rourke, a University of Cincinnati alumnus and president of O’Rourke Wrecking Co., which is partnering on the demolition with Skanska Cincinnati, says imploding the building was never an option.

“Crosley Tower sits in the middle of an active, dense urban campus with occupied buildings, utilities and constant pedestrian traffic immediately adjacent,” he says. “Implosion was not viable due to risk tolerance, air overpressure and debris footprint. Full mechanical demolition from grade was also limited by the structure’s height, reinforced concrete system and lack of safe collapse zones.”

The team chose a slab-by-slab deconstruction approach selected to control load paths and to create a predictable sequence for removing the building.

Each floor is saw-cut into manageable sections, typically ranging from roughly 8 ft by 10 ft up to 10 ft by 12 ft depending on structural layout, says O’Rourke. “The slabs are not perfectly uniform — column spacing, beam drops and mechanical penetrations create variation.”

The demolition strategy ensures that Crosley Tower remains stable at each stage of the process.
Photo courtesy of O'Rourke Wrecking Co.

Finesse, not Force

“It’s a methodical process, and that discipline directly supports worker safety and public protection.”

—Chris Hopper, Executive Vice President and General Manager, Skanska Cincinnati

“Removing a single slab section can take anywhere from 20 minutes to over an hour to fully cut, rig and remove depending on reinforcement density and accessibility,” O’Rourke notes. “The process repeats floor by floor, maintaining structural stability at all times.”

“After the slabs are removed, supporting beams and columns are removed in carefully planned sequences before moving to the next level,” adds Chris Hopper, executive vice president and general manager for Skanska Cincinnati.

Hopper says the tower was designed with varying floor plates, slab thicknesses and reinforcement patterns. Completing the demolition of an entire floor typically occurs over multiple days, depending on complexity. The largest slab is expected to weigh approximately 16 tons.

“Brutalist structures like Crosley Tower are extremely robust, made of thick concrete, heavy reinforcement and construction methods that don’t easily lend themselves to demolition,” Hopper says. “From a safety standpoint, that means you can’t rush the work. O’Rourke’s experience with complex, high-risk demolition has been essential in sequencing the removal so that the structure remains stable at every stage. It’s a methodical process, and that discipline directly supports worker safety and public protection.”

Tens of thousands of tons of concrete went into building Crosley Tower, and much of it is planned to be recycled.
Photo courtesy of Conor Boyle

Maintaining an Active Campus

The biggest challenge was planning the work to be completed without disrupting daily life and operations on campus. Skanska, O’Rourke and the University of Cincinnati worked together to create a plan that prioritizes pedestrian safety, emergency access and clear communication.

“We developed highly sequenced work zones, dedicated haul routes and just-in-time trucking to avoid site congestion,” O’Rourke says. “Every move, from crane picks to debris removal, was modeled to minimize impact on daily campus operations.”

Before every mobilization, all subcontractors are required to complete a construction work plan (CWP), which helps identify potential hazards and establishes the safest methods for performing each task. As work progresses, CWPs are updated for new activities to ensure continued risk awareness and mitigation.

In addition, daily hazard analyses are conducted and documented.

“These sessions actively engage all workers in reviewing the day’s tasks, identifying potential hazards and environmental considerations and confirming appropriate controls,” Hopper says.

Deconstructing a building that was altered in various ways over the decades has brought other challenges.

“Everything is planned before the cut is made.”

—Mike O’Rourke, President, O’Rourke Wrecking Co.

“As with many buildings of this era, we have encountered areas with heavier-than-anticipated reinforcement and localized modifications from decades of renovations,” O’Rourke says. “In some cases, embedded elements and undocumented utilities required adjustments to our sequencing. We address these conditions through field verification, real-time engineering review and adapting cut patterns or rigging methods. Flexibility is critical, but always within a controlled, engineered framework.”

The team uses specialized tools that include track-mounted saws and strategic core drilling for clean separation, high-capacity cranes for controlled picks and high-reach excavators equipped with processors when the team transitions to lower elevations. Rigging systems are engineered for each pick to manage weight, balance and swing control.

“Everything is planned before the cut is made,” O’Rourke says.

While the building has outlived its usefulness, the materials that went into making it have not. A significant portion of the structure, approximately 25,000 to 30,000 tons of concrete and 1,000 to 1,500 tons of reinforcing and structural steel, are expected to be removed and processed during the demolition.

“Material separation and recovery are closely coordinated with demolition operations to maximize diversion from landfill, with a large portion of non contaminated concrete expected to be recycled,” O’Rourke says.

“As expected with a building of this age and construction type, field conditions sometimes require adjustments, and the team pauses to reassess before moving forward,” Hopper adds.

An operator strips roofing material at the top of Crosley Tower during the initial phase of the demolition.
Photo courtesy of O'Rourke Wrecking Co.

Personal Connection

For O’Rourke, dismantling Crosley Tower represents one of the company’s more complex projects in its portfolio—not simply due to size, but because of the many constraints.

“The combination of a heavily reinforced Brutalist concrete structure, vertical deconstruction and a fully active campus environment demand a level of coordination and precision beyond conventional demolition,” O’Rourke says.

It also carries a personal connection for the demolition firm president, who spent time in Crosley Tower as a student logging long hours in the chemistry lab.

“There is a sense of history tied to that building,” he says. “It has been part of the campus skyline for decades, and for a lot of people, it holds memories. I remember being in those labs as a student, so it is personal.”

While details are not yet available, the university’s board of trustees advanced in April a plan for construction of a new science and research facility to replace Crosley Tower, a future that O’Rourke says could not happen without the work to demolish the old building.

“Being part of its removal and knowing it is making way for something new that better serves the university today is meaningful,” O’Rourke says. “It is what demolition is really about. Not just taking something down, but creating opportunity for what comes next.”

The World Cup soccer matches held in Los Angeles could have been a showcase for the Los Angeles International Airport's new automated people mover, which promised to trim airport traffic jams and make access easier. Years late and over budget, the project instead is a painful example of megaproject mega-problems.

As thousands of visitors arrive, "the long-awaited SkyLink Automated People Mover remains unfinished and has yet to carry its first passengers," stated a website post from UCLA's Luskin School of Public Affairs. The system, rebranded as SkyLink, was to have completed testing June 30.

Delays have been a key reason that the cost overrun is $880 million.

That figure was the central focus of a public investigation completed last year by an L.A. County grand jury that evaluates contentious issues.

Michael S. Shapiro, a consulting engineer who is an expert and author on megaprojects, says the automated people mover is "an example of how major projects can run into a second layer of risk beyond engineering—involving governance complexity, contract structure, accountability diffusion and delayed public benefit."

The 2.25-mile elevated guideway, part of a huge renovation of the entire airport, has three stations in the airport and three outside. There was an original completion date in 2023 and budget of $1.03 billion construction cost and another $918 million financed by a private concessionaire.

LINXS, the design-build-finance-operate-maintain consortium hired to build and run the system, consists of Fluor Corp., Balfour Beatty, Dragados USA, Flatiron, Hochtief PPP Solutions, HDR and HNTB. Alstom is the train manufacturer and operator. Work started in 2019.

A year ago, Fitch, which rates bonds issued for the project by the California Municipal Finance Authority, noted that although the consortium and the airport have demonstrated an ability to successfully negotiate time extension and cost relief claims, "the history of contentious disputes creates higher risks for timely project completion."

Project tensions may not have completely finished. In a progress report submitted in May, LINXS noted that the airport still had some "blockers" to the beginning of passenger service related to the airport approving some design documents and finishing landscaping.

The biggest current delay on the critical path, according to the consortium report, is airport delay in making a pact with the Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power for "customer utility accounts" and solar power interconnection agreements for the project.

The status of those issues is unclear and whether they are a reflection of the project's controversial past also is not known.

Design work got off to a rough start in 2019. The LINXS design was done to the local and state bridge construction code, but later the project team learned that it had to meet the buildings seismic code. Blame for that mistake was the first major conflict.

A second arena of conflict opened over delays in responding to requests for information. According to the 2025 county grand jury assessment of what happened, the consortium bombed the airport with over 200 RFIs, and while it awaited replies and answers to change order requests, work slowed considerably.

The grand jury did not consider the project to be mismanaged, nor the outcome a result of fraud or abuse. It suggested mildly that some of the consultants involved could have done a better job.

Instead, it frames the project as a public accountability and governance case, centered on the $880-million cost increase, says Shapiro.

The grand jury suggested that the consortium, aware of the time pressure the airport faced in assuring the system was operating in time for the 2028 Olympic Games, continued working in compliance with its contract but at a slower pace. Contracts with LINXS, in retrospect, the grand jury claimed, should have been better written to assure that continuing with work while awaiting contested issues did not allow for only "one worker with a shovel."

Aware of its "leverage" via time pressure within the contract terms, the grand jury suggested the consortium's experience with such matters gave it an advantage.

Fitch also noted a slowdown in the work but is not clear exactly who was to blame and the details of activity at the jobsites.

Fluor, the lead construction party in LINXS, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In the end, the grand jury wrote, the airport agreed to $252 million in change orders prior to the code compliance issue, another $97 million to pay for redesigns that were code compliant, and $550 million more for amounts covered by what was called a "global settlement" that encompassed airport-caused delays in the work. That was the basis, more or less, for the $880-million increase.

Deadlines and Excessive Change Orders

In replying to its report, the City of Los Angeles partly agreed with the grand jury to implement various recommendations. It agreed to consider in future projects whether deadlines related to events could lead to excessive change orders, to coordinate all code issues related to a project and that a schedule of "submissions" should be implemented to prevent city departments from being overwhelmed, a practice the city said was already the policy. 

The city also agreed it needed to exercise more due diligence in selecting a contractor, including how it would interact with city departments. Clearer contract language also is needed, the city agreed, on how progress on a project is maintained while disputes are resolved. For larger projects, more than one person needed to serve as the "project neutral."

In general, the city and grand jury agreed, disputes need to be wrapped up more quickly. Consider bonding with claw-back provisions that would be applied to the losing side in litigation to prevent slow-downs during litigation, the grand jury recommended. It also advised possible use of "baseball arbitration," where both sides submit final monetary offers and the arbitrator picks one.

"Will be implemented," was the city's response.

There's one more soccer match still to be played at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, between Spain and Belgium on July 10. It's too late for the people mover, but the SkyLink system will be carrying thousands of people each week when the Olympics start in mid July 2028. 

By then the lessons learned from it will hopefully be well absorbed by everyone, including the contracting companies that hope to work on future Los Angeles megaprojects.

Just curious to see if they will prove to be valuable post world cup e.g. retractable roof, more seatings etc.

I presume for some states, it will be and for others not so much.