Evening star., 1948-05-02
No Punishment Asked
For D. {. Employees in
Empire Crash Report

Engineer Commissioner Gordon r.
Young has prepared a report on the
December Is collapse Of the Empire
Apartment Building in which he
recommends to the other two Com
miSsionerS that no punitive action
be taken against employees of the
Building Inspectors Office for in
spection errors which contributed
to the collapse.
The report, which Gen. Young
completed yesterday, makes two rec
concentrations which he said might
help prevent recurrence Of such
accidents He proposed improve
ment of the inspection departments
filing system and formation of plans
for better handling of such emer-
gencies in the future.
Gen. Young said the special in
vestigating boards recommendation
regarding registration of structural
engineers is covered by, a bill now
before Congress. He recommended
that the corporation counsel's Office
study the possibilities of the in
vestigating boards recommendation
that general contractors also be
licensed.
New System Developed.
He said new system has been
evolved for issuance Of building
and alteration permits which will
permit an applicant to go to only
one place. At present. to obtain an
ordinary building permit, Gen.
Young said, IL visits must be made
to city government Offices, including
four repeated visits.
Money has been requested from
Congress to install the new system
and the employees it will require,
Gen. Young said.
He reported that the handling of
alterations at the Empire Building
in 1882 by Hugh Dollins and Oscar
Estep-both still employees of the
Building Inspectors Office-involved
highly regrettable slips but added
that there is no justification for
punitive action against them.
The investigation revealed that
the collapSe-in which four were
killed and II were injured-was due
to failure of a first-f1oor bearing
wall which had been progressively
cut by occupants of the building in
1909 and again in 1882.
Architects Drawing Erred.
"The fact that the wall extended
above the second floor was not
known to the Department of Build
ing Inspection" Gen. Young's re-
port said, when the permit was is
sued for the 1882 alteration.
The architects drawing for the
alterations was completely in
error" Gen. Young declared, and
"the answer Is, and probably will
forever remain. unknown since the
architect is dead and the records
of his office apparently no longer
exist"
Gen. Young said it was incon-
ceivable that the architect inten-
tionally misstated the facts in the
plans. He said that Mr.. Dollins had
no reason to suppose the drawings
were wrong when they indicated the
wall did not extend above the first
floor. Mr.. Dollins, however, to make
absolutely sure, called the architect
and was assured the wall did not
extend any higher.
Both Found Responsible.
1t was not District policy to
make an advance inspection. Gen.
young said. Mr.. Dollins could not
know. Gen. Young said, that the
remaining section of wall was hold
ing up double the weight it safely
could support. But he did know the
remainder of the wall had been cut
on both ends until it became, in
effect, pier.
At this point, Gen. Young said.
there occurred a failure to achieve
a meeting of minds" between Mr.
Dollins in the Office and Mr.. Estep.
the field inspector. In an effort to
convey to Mr.. Estep that the pier
should be constructed of kiln-burned
brick, Mr.. Dollins used a rubber
stamp on the permit.
But clearly there was not con-
veyed to his mind (Mr. Estep's) the
concept which Mr.. Dollins wished
to convey; namely, that he should
check the existing brickwork for its
conformity to specifications for
pier" Gen. Young said. Each man
shared in the error. Any such slip
is highly regrettable. But I do not
consider it a case calling for dis