COLLAPSE OF TEXAS TOWER NO. 4 281 



ports that you had before or after it fell, what have you learned about 

 this original construction being in accord with your specifications? 



Mr. EuTLEDGE. I think the major thing that we have learned is that 

 the sea conditions in an extreme storm or hurricane can be much 

 greater than anyone thought they could be at the time of the original 

 design. 



Senator Stennis. M}^ question, though, was, Mr. Sutledge — maybe 

 I didn't make it clear. What have j^ou learned about whether or not 

 the construction came up to your specifications? That is the ques- 

 tion. 



Mr. RuTLEDGE. The thin^gs we have learned specifically were that, 

 first, the two braces were lost ; that they had to be replaced ; that in 

 the replacement, the installation resulted in motion of the collars, 

 which had to be corrected ; that the upper minus 25 — that the pin at 

 the upper minus 25-foot level, that pin clearance in the holes was 

 either larger or had increased to something larger than specified. 



Does that answer the question, sir ? 



Senator Stennis. Well, I think that is getting down to it. Based 

 upon that information and your professional knowledge, do you think 

 that probably the construction was not up to your specifications with 

 reference to pin tolerances and related matters ? 



Mr. Etttledge. As far as I know, sir, at the time Mr, Crockett ex- 

 amined this tower in, I believe it was, June 1959, everytliing was re- 

 ported by him to be apparently within the design tolerances. 



Senator Stennis. I know, and I am not trying to get you to say 

 anything. You are under oath. "Wliat I have asked is whether, based 

 on your information, do you think the probabilities are, after all, that 

 this construction did not come up to your specifications originally as 

 to pin tolerances ? 



Mr. Eutledge. With only those exceptions, sir, I think that the 

 tower was constructed properly and in accordance with specifications, 

 and that when these, I w^ould class, rather small deficiencies were cor- 

 rected by 1959, that it was, in fact, in accordance with the design. 



Senator Stennis. So, if the construction was all right so far as 

 these pin connections are concerned, then the deterioration was the 

 result of wear? Is that correct? 



Mr. Eutledge. That is a point we do not know definitely, but ac- 

 cording to the evidence, if the e^ndence is correct, that would be true ; 

 that the increase from one-eighth to three-eighths would be wear. 



Senator Stennis. And is it your opinion that that is what caused it? 



Mr. Eutledge. My opinion, sir, would be that we don't know defi- 

 nitely ; that it could be wear or could be small changes in the original. 

 In fact, there is no way of knowing. 



I might mention, of course, that these pins are designed with quite 

 low stresses in anticipation of some wear. 



Senator Stennis. Well, we are about back where we started now 

 with reference to the two alternatives. But, of course, the other tes- 

 timony, Mr. Eutledge, as to the deterioration in the pin connections, 

 shows a greater figure than you think is the correct figure as to the in- 

 crease in tolerances. 



Mr. Eutledge. I believe, sir, that the figures contained in our re- 

 port and shown by the photogi'aphs were very carefully taken and 

 from what we can see of the figures, they look reliable. 



