The controversy surrounding “The Retreat at Whiskey Creek” has taken a sharp turn as Bhegani Engineering publicly refutes recent allegations made by The Lynchburg Times. The publication’s inaugural investigative piece accused the firm of utilizing unlicensed personnel for critical engineering tasks, a claim that Kassam A. Bhegani Jr., the firm’s president, labels as harmful and entirely false. Bhegani clarifies that he operates as a certified engineer intern—a distinction he has never hidden—and stresses that all work performed by his firm is executed under the direct, legal supervision of Jonathan Clark, a seasoned professional engineer and architect licensed in the state of Tennessee.
The core of the frustration lies in a misunderstanding of how engineering firms function under state law. Bhegani explains that his firm, which operates as a DBA of Independent Consulting International LLC, maintains proper registrations with the state. By law, engineering projects can be managed by interns as long as they are overseen by a licensed professional, which is exactly the protocol followed during the Whiskey Creek assignment. Furthermore, Bhegani points out that the documents in question were preliminary reviews rather than final structural submittals, rendering the immediate demand for a professional “stamp and seal” legally premature and contrary to standard industry practice.
From the perspective of Chip Hayes, the developer behind the Whiskey Creek project, the Times report feels like an unfair escalation in a long-standing local dispute. Hayes notes that his project has been navigating a complex maze of requirements—ranging from traffic studies to floodplain assessments—for years. Frustrated by the county’s lack of engagement, Hayes asserts that he commissioned Bhegani Engineering to conduct bridge and traffic assessments specifically to address the county’s own stated concerns. He insists that these studies were offered to the Planning & Zoning Board as early as August 2025, but were met with a persistent lack of interest or review from local officials.
The handling of the journalism behind the story has also drawn scrutiny. Both Hayes and Bhegani expressed disappointment with the timeline, noting that the Times allowed only a few hours for a response before publishing their findings. Hayes emphasizes that he did not have the specific licensing details on hand when contacted, and by the time he consulted with the engineering firm to provide an accurate, informed answer, the article had already gone live. This rapid turnaround, they argue, prioritized sensationalism over the due diligence required to accurately report on technical and professional credentials.
In terms of regulatory blowback, Bhegani is confident that the administrative inquiry currently being handled by the Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance will be resolved quickly. He explains that the file opened regarding the firm’s trade name and his own licensing level is a routine administrative matter that will be cleared up entirely once the state reviews the documentation. Having spoken directly with the department, Bhegani anticipates that the complaint will be dropped in August, effectively neutralizing the allegations that have cast a shadow over his firm’s six-year track record.
Ultimately, this conflict appears to be a disconnect between the technical realities of engineering and public perception. By pivoting the focus back to the county’s refusal to review the traffic and bridge assessments already on file, the developers are signaling a desire to move past the finger-pointing and return to the project’s merits. For Bhegani and Hayes, the goal is clear: to correct the public record, emphasize their adherence to state-mandated supervision, and urge local authorities to stop sidelining the necessary data so that the Whiskey Creek project can finally find a path forward.