276 COLLAPSE OF TEXAS TOWER NO. 4 



Mr. Kendall. If the forces of Donna were considerably in excess of 

 tlie design criteria, then it necessarily follows, does it not, that the de- 

 sign criteria was inadequate? 



Mr, EuTLEDGE. The design criteria were studied very carefully in 

 terms of the information available at the time of the design. It is 

 apparent that the storm did exceed those anticipated. 



Mr. Kendall. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman. 



Senator Stennis. Thank you very much, Mr. Counsel. 



Gentlemen, I have just a few questions here. 



Mr. Kuss, may I go back to a statement you made a few minutes ago ? 

 You said that you were surprised that the tower stood up, and that is 

 when you were testifying with reference to either November 16 or the 

 November 14 discussion, as I understood it. 



Mr. Kuss. No, sir. 



Senator Stennis. No ? When was it, then ? 



Mr. Kuss. This was after they discovered the bottom-most bracing, 

 when all three panels were gone. 



Senator Stennis. When did that happen ? 



Mr. Kuss. When did tliey discover that these three bottom braces 

 were gone ? 



Senator Stennis. Yes. 



Mr. Kuss. They discovered tliat when they were going down to 

 begin to make the installation of the rope bracing. They discovered 

 that the lower panel was gone. 



Senator Stennis. Could you give an approximate date of when this 

 was? 



Mr. Kuss. Yes, that was January 8. 



Senator Stennis. Januarys? 



:Mr. Kuss. Yes. 



Senator Stennis. So after you learned that those facts were true, 

 not knowing how long they had been true, then it was a surprise to you 

 that it had been able to stand at all ? 



Mr. Kuss. That is right, but we do not know when this last brace 

 broke. 



Senator Stennis. I know you don't. ]\Iy question covered that. 

 But whenever it happened, it was a matter of surprise to you that the 

 tower could stand any further? 



Mr. Kuss. Yes, sir, and you see, that is a good example of why I 

 didn't want to give any estimates back in November, because that 

 could have been broken then. That is typical of something you don't 

 know. 



completeness of examination questioned 



Senator Stennis. You did get certain information in November 

 1960, but you understood then that that was a complete examination 

 of the tower, is that correct? 



Mr. Kuss. I understood then that it was. 



Senator Stennis. You understood then that it was a complete 

 examination? 



Mr. Kuss. Yes. 



Senator Stennis. With great deference to you, I thought you gave 

 as the reason just a few minutes ago for withholding a firmer estimate 

 was the fact that j'ou did not think that was a complete examination. 



