OSHA found ‘appalling’ safety lapses before hangar collapse. Could Boise be liable?

BOISE – In the months since a hangar collapsed at the Boise Airport, there’s been a question of blame.

Federal investigators in late July pinned the fault on Big D Builders, the contractor for the project. Occupational Safety and Health Administration inspectors accused the Meridian, Idaho-based company of showing an “appalling disregard” for safety standards at the Jackson Jet Center hangar before the structure caved in. Three men died.

But the hangar was being built on city-owned land, and like any project in the city, its plans had to go through city review before construction could begin.

So could the city be liable for the collapse?

The short answer, according to Boise development attorney Geoffrey Wardle, is no.

Generally speaking, he said, government entities in Idaho that issue permits or conduct inspections face limited liability, thanks to the Idaho Tort Claims Act. Government entities and employees are largely off the hook in claims resulting from a flawed inspection or wrongly issued permit, so long as they acted “without malice or criminal intent and without gross negligence or reckless, willful and wanton conduct,” according to the state law.

That’s a “really high burden, a really high threshold to cross,” Wardle told the Idaho Statesman.

Boise owns the land on which the Boise Airport sits, but the airport acts as a landlord with private businesses at the site, like the Jackson Jet Center, Shawna Samuelson, a spokesperson for the airport, told the Statesman in an email.

While every lease at the airport is unique, she said, tenants are responsible for managing their construction projects. They complete city-required design reviews and select their own construction vendors. The city did not select the contractor or pay for the project.

Were hangar plans modified without Boise approval?

In any private construction project in Boise, builders must get approval, permits and inspections from the city’s Planning and Development Services Building Division.

Enrique Serna, a lawyer representing the families of two workers killed in the collapse, sued the companies involved in the project – Big D Builders, Steel Building Systems, Inland Crane and Speck Steel – in July over the collapse.

In a May tort claim filed against the city and AHJ Engineers, a precursor to the lawsuit, Serna accused AHJ Engineers, a firm the city hires on contract to review structural plans, of approving flawed plans. But in the July lawsuit, Serna excluded the firm and the city as defendants. Serna said during a news conference that after reviewing public records, his firm decided no lawsuit against the company – or the city – was warranted.

Instead, he accused the construction companies involved of modifying the plans that had been reviewed without seeking the city’s approval for the changes.

David Haugland, president of AHJ Engineers, called the allegations in the tort claim “a premature engineer’s story that is filled with errors, guesses and false information.” He said in an email that his company “had no part in this tragic event.”

OSHA declined to say whether its own investigation found the construction firms had changed or failed to follow the approved plans, citing Serna’s ongoing lawsuit.

Hangar workers flagged problems – but not to city

In the days before the hangar collapsed, several workers at the site told their supervisor that they had noticed bending beams, snapped cables and other structural issues, the Statesman previously reported.

But no one reported these concerns to the city, said Maria Weeg, a spokesperson for the city, which meant there was little officials could do.

“Once a project has gone through the plan review process and the permit is issued, the city goes out on inspections when requested by the contractor or if a complaint is received,” she told the Statesman in an email.

Wardle said that’s typical. He added that the city’s code enforcement responds to complaints and conducts building code inspections that usually occur on a defined schedule, requested by the builders as they complete various phases of their project.

“I think there is this expectation and belief among people that there are building inspectors that are just running around, popping in and looking at things, and that’s not how it works,” he said. “When you get inspections done, it’s because you’re at a point of the work where you need to have approval. … You have to make appointments. You have to get the inspector out there to see certain things.”