COLLAPSE OF TEXAS TOWER NO. 4 7 
would, in Mr. Anderson’s contemplation at least, remain the responsi- 
- bility of his firm. However, since the design of the footings was 
most directly concerned with such oceanographic considerations as 
ocean floor composition, soil-bearing intensities, velocities of under- 
water tidal currents, bottom scour, bathymetry profiles, and the like, 
it was agreed on June 1, 1954, that the studies of these factors would 
be undertaken by the Moran, Proctor firm, including the determina- 
tion of probable maximum wind velocities and wave heights likely to 
be encountered at the various sites. 
On the other hand, on July 22, 1954, then Comdr., now Capt. J. J. 
Albers (CEC), USN, assigned to the Moran, Proctor firm the investi- 
gation of factors leading to the design of all the heavy structural 
components of the five towers, including the footings, the legs, the 
braces, if any, and the structural frame of the platform as its responsi- 
bility under the joint venture with the Anderson-Nichols Co., the 
latter being relegated to the architectural layout of the interior of the 
platforms and engineering for the utilities systems. Captain Albers 
testified that the reasons for dictating this division of responsibility 
were— 
1. That the entire structure functions as a unit through all 
these components and they should, therefore, be designed by one 
organization ; 
2. That the Navy wanted to utilize the experience of the 
Moran, Proctor firm in the designing of heavy marine structures; 
and 
3. That this was the most feasible maner in which to expedite 
the work. 
It is uncontroverted, however, that Moran, Proctor’s participation 
in the project was, in fact, brought about through the invitation of 
Mr. Anderson; that the Navy had neither approached the Moran, 
Proctor firm nor solicited their participation prior to the invitation 
extended by Mr. Anderson; and that the Navy initially left the de- 
termination of the division of responsibility for the work up to the 
two firms comprising the joint venture. While the edict by the 
Navy, on July 22, 1954, specifying the division of work applied at 
the time it was made, only to the feasibility study and report, it fol- 
lowed through in the design and preparation of the specifications 
under the contract for design when awarded later to the two firms. 
2. The feasibility study 
On recommendation of the Moran, Proctor firm, the First Naval 
District awarded a contract to the Woods Hole Oceanographic In- 
stitution of Woods Hole, Mass., a nongovernmental, nonprofit. re- 
search organization, for the purpose of aiding in the determination 
of the environmental forces of wind velocities and wave heights to 
which the towers would be exposed during their 20-year anticipated 
life and thus arrive at some criteria of forces to be incorporated into 
the design. The Woods Hole Institution also had the responsibility 
for positioning the towers and determining the water depths at the 
various sites. In the case of Texas tower No. 4: 
(a) Loran type A navigation equipment, accurate to within 
half a mile, was used for position determination. It was found 
several years later through a survey conducted in October 1960 by 
the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey that the tower was actually 
