Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1914-06-25

! feFdam, Wnen Qeptn or ABOUT ~ IeeI
! had been obtained it was observe
| that there was a disturbance in the
! bottom strata. whereupon pumpin!
| was discontinued; after making Ger
tain examinations. including the Criv-
| ing of test piles, it Tas arranged by
supplemental agreement, executed
: August 5, 1911, that the dock should
be supported upon piling and that a
! certain amount OF concrete in the bot
, tom of the docck should be placed by
! the underwater method Work was
| continued, and in January, 1912, the
contractor again began pumping out a
section of the work; after UNIV lter-
ing and exposing the concrete in the
/ bottom it was found that on account
of unusual physical conditions. in
combination with difficulties involved
/ in the placing Of concrete under wa
| ter, the concrete was not of satisfac-
| tory quality. Further elaborate inves-
| legations and experiments were then
made, and in August, 1912, work Vas
| proceeded with. using a much richer
| mixture for the underwater concrete
On February 6. 1913. the contractor
q, began unwatering the second section,
and on February II, following, while
still unwatering, an upheaval Of the
bottom took place, which wrecked the
cofferdam and the construction Of this
section.
After this failure, on receiving ad-
vice as to the seriousness of it, the
department directed the chief Of the
bureau of yards and docks and Civil
Engineer F. r. Harris to go out there
and examine, the work and advise as
to the steps necessary to carry it out
to a successful completion, and at a
later date arranged with Mr.. Alfred
Noble, an eminent consulting civil en-
gineer of New York, to visit Pearl
Harbor and report on conditions and
suggest remedies. The gist of all of
these reports was that the depart
ment's plans for this dry dock could
probably be carried out, but would
involve great delay and serious hazard
and gave no great assurance of the
successful completion Of the work or
Of It's entire satisfaction after COM
pletion.
Following this the department
learned from the encouragement that
the contractors were required to
bring the dry dock contracted for to
completion if it were physically pos
sible to do so, but that they were not
required to guarantee that the dock
would endure and discharge its duty
successfully after completion. In view
Of this opinion and of the failure to
induce the contractors to open up any
negotiations looking to a change Of
plan or method of construction, the
department, in January, 1914, direct
ed them to proceed wit hthe work I'M
der the old plan and specifications
Later, however, in February. 1914, the
contractors communicated their VII
lingness to the department to take up
the question of changes in their con-
tract to secure a dock that would be
perfectly satisfactory and durable.
Pursuantly; a conference was held at
the department between Mr.. Noble,
the chief of the bureau of yards and
docks, and Civil Engineer Harris,
which was attended by the chairman
CT the House committee on naval af-
fairs, when all expressed the opinion
that the construction of the dock un-
;der the old plans and spec. fcations
was not alone fraught With the great
est hazard and probable delay in even
tual completion, if completed at all,
but was inadvisable as an engineering
work and was not based on satisfac-
tory assurance and factors of safety.
which are usually required in good
engineering practice. In short, that
it was impracticable.
These three engineers agreed that
a different design, depending upon the
use of floating caissops or boats, gave
every assurance of the successful and
early completion of this work, but
that it would involve an increase in
the authorization for this work of ap-
proximately, but not over, $1,500,000.
The contract obligation for the dry
dock now stands at $3,168, 461.61, of
which the sum of $1,036,33O01 has
been, paid the contractor on monthly
vouchers on account of work done.
There are sufficient funds remain
ing under the appropriation to defray
the cost of proceeding with this dry
dock on the new plans indicated dur
ing the next fiscal year, but to enable
the department to enter into an agree
ment with the contractors to proceed
Oh LlS Ne" plduS IL VIII U6 ucCcSSdIy
to increase the limit of authorized cost
for this structure.
Very sincerely,
FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT,
Acting Secretary of the Navy.
HON. B. R. TILLMAN,
Chairman Committee on Naval At
fairs, United States Senate, Wash
ington.
MIR. Vardaman-Is that the only e6-
innate that has been made?
Mr.. Lodge-lf the senator from Lou
isiana will permit me, this amendment
makes no appropriation.
Mr.. Thornton-No; there is no spe-
cific appropriation made.
Mr.. Lodge-There is no apprOpri-
ton made. This is simply an increase
of the limit of cost 1t requires no
estimate.
Mr.. Vardaman-I will ask the sena
tor from Massachusetts if the original
contract for this work was executed
by the man who had it?
Mr.. LOdge-NO; it was not, because