National Electric Light Association and the larger telephone interests. I believe that we can see a light ahead as far as getting some tangible way that can be outlined for the Commission's engineers. The Commission's engineers are hampered in that we do not have the funds to make the proper research investigations, and, if this "co-operation" works out "efficiently," we feel that there is a light ahead in this matter. It certainly has been, as the former speaker brought out, a very hard proposition for the Commission and the engineers of the Commission. A. B. CAMPBELL: Iowa has one inductive interference problem that has not been mentioned here yet. As you all know, Iowa is largely an agricultural state and we have many farm telephone lines. In many counties there are from ten to thirty-five separate telephone companies, so it is easy for you to realize something of the difficulties involved in securing a transmission line right of way, especially if the line is built in more than one county. We have had very little difficulty in dealing with the A. T. & T. Co., the Northwestern Bell, or with the majority of the independent companies. Much of our trouble does arise, however, with the farmers' mutual companies, most of which are small but, whose lines, running along the highway cross from one side to the other in order to dodge hedges, trees, etc. We have also experienced difficulty in dealing with some contractors who are building rural transmission lines. Some of these have disregarded specifications that they have promised to follow, without any good reason for doing so. This, however, is not general among the contracting firms in the state who are building rural transmission lines. I believe some benefit would follow in solving our inductive interference problems, if the local N.E.L.A. organization would establish a contact with the State Farm Bureau and the State Electrical Contractors Association, with a view to laying before each of these organizations the necessity for cooperation in building transmission lines, for both rural and city service. THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any other Commissioners here present? A. E. KNOWLTON: It does not seem to me that there is any occasion for drafting, on the part of Commissions, definite detailed comprehensive rules at this time. In other words, my opinion is that the problem of Inductive Interference should be recognized only to the extent of some general statement which will provide the basis for the interests who are primarily concerned to make their solutions. The public is not concerned till the service is impaired, and certainly the Commissions are not concerned until the public is concerned. The Committee of Utility representatives now acting with the Connecticut Commission in the settlement of these matters, have the very able and welcome assistance of Mr. Canada, as well as the engineers of the major communication companies. The Committee and the Commission hope to produce a small, simple paragraph which will provide the basis for equitably taking care of the situation until more experience and the result of co-operative action point to something more definite. We never have had a dispute in Connecticut and certainly do not want to have anything happen which will hamper the continuance of those pleasant relations. E. H. MORRIS: I want to speak just briefly about a different kind of co-operation which was received from both you and the telephone people. In 1919 the North Dakota Legislature passed a bill which was fathered by the telephone interests, requiring the Commission to, within one year, establish a set of rules covering Hazard and Inductive Interference. About that time I was either fortunate or unfortunate enough to go to North Dakota to take charge of the Engineering Department of that Commission, and I found that there had been a committee formed in some manner-I don't know how-but it had proceeded, however, to lay down a series of rules. Now, while I am not entirely familiar with the telephone companies' troubles, being a Civil Engineer by profession, the rules did not meet with either my approval nor the approval of the Commission. In the first place, their scope was too great, as we looked at it at that time, and they were not equitable, so we tore them down and attempted to set them up again, following our own ideas as to what the rules should be. We did not think at that time, the rules being in tentative form, that they would meet with everybody's approval. The fact is we hoped they would not, and we accomplished our desire. We brought about a very efficient co-operation. between the people involved and especially the Engineering Department of the A. T. & T. Company, and of your Association, and at a conference between all parties involved we were able to agree upon the rules which have now been promulgated by the North Dakota Commission. The Commission wished me at this time to extend to your Association, and especially to the Engineering Department, their thanks for the co-operation that was given us in complying with our law. THE CHAIRMAN: The time is now moving along and I am afraid my persuasive eloquence will no longer hold you, so I will now bring this thing to a close. The last speaker, whom I take great pleasure in introducing to you, has come here at a great inconvenience to himself, as I know personally, and it is a great pleasure to me to introduce to you now Mr. Bancroft Gherardi, Vice-President and Chief Engineer of the American Telephone & Telegraph Company. BANCROFT GHERARDI: I cannot tell you how much I appreciate this very cordial welcome from you and this opportunity that I have to be with you today. I feel somewhat like a man invited to address a Quaker meeting on a subject of the evils of warfare or dancing. I had thought to say a few words here on the subject of co-operation and the part that co-operation ought to play in the solution of this problem, but what I had to say, however, and much more, has already been said by previous speakers, so I am not going to say anything more about co-operation or, in plainer language, "getting together," except to say that I believe that the greatest progress that could be made on this subject would be to have every man in the telephone business know personally the corresponding man in the electric light business. If we had such contacts through the whole working forces of the two systems, I believe that many of the differences which finally become troublesome would not become troublesome. We are always going to have differences. We are always going to have questions to settle as long as any company operates wires that are sources of inductive disturbances and another company operates wires which receive those inductive disturbances, but questions to settle are quite a different matter from disputes and controversies. We never will get rid of all of our troubles until we are dead, but what we want to do here is to get our troubles out of the controversial stage, and I feel certain from what I have observed at this meeting that we are well on the way to accomplishng that, because if we get together the controversial features of our troubles will disappear. I want to take this opportunity to read a letter which I wrote to the Presidents of all the associated Bell Telephone Companies soon after the first meeting of the Joint Committee consisting of members of the National Electric Light Association and representatives of the Bell Telephone System. This particular letter was addressed to Mr. J. T. Moran, President of the Southern New England Telephone Company, New Haven, Conn., and an identical letter sent to each of the other Presidents. "DEAR MR. MORAN: I am writing to all of the Presidents to advise them of the most important development which has recently taken place in regard to our relations with high-tension wire companies. Some time ago, it was suggested to Mr. Hall by a representative of the light and power interests that if a group of their executives could meet with some of the VicePresidents of this company, we should be able to work out some arrangement to avoid or minimize the controversies which arise from time to time between these large groups of wire companies. Mr. Hall cheerfully accepted the suggestion, and on March 26th the first meeting was held. "The representatives of the National Electric Light Association present were: Mr. O. D. Young, Vice-President, General Electric Company. Mr. R. H. Ballard, Vice-President and General Manager, Southern California Edison Company. Mr. R. F. Pack, Vice-President and General Man ager, Northern States Power Co. (personal representative of W. H. Byllesby). Mr. M. H. Aylesworth, Executive Manager, N.E.L.A. Representing the Bell System, there were present Mr. E. K. Hall, Colonel Carty and myself. The members of the Joint Committee who were unable to be present are: Mr. Martin J. Insull, Vice-President, MiddleWest Utilities Company. Mr. W. W. Freeman, President, Union Gas and Electric Company. Gen. Guy E. Tripp, Chairman of the Board, Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Company. Mr. B. S. Reed, President, Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Company. "The members of the Joint Committee approached each other in a most friendly and co-operative spirit and recognized from the start that such an attitude of mind was not only essential to the successful working out of the problem, but would in itself contribute in a great measure to the avoiding of difficulties and controversies in specific cases. Another point of great importance that was agreed to was that, in specific cases where either company was contemplating work which might, as executed, interfere with the lines or service of the other party, the interests concerned should get together at an early stage of the plans (and well in advance of construction); because adjustments, if any, could be made at that time with the least cost and without interference to the service. "Arrangements were made by the Committee for the study of all existing statutes, commission rules and regulations and court decisions which would cover the question of interference, so that the Committee might have before it the points on which the two interests were in agreement and their differences. A similar arrangement was made with reference to the general engineering phases of the problem. Mr. Pack and I were appointed a subcommittee of the Joint Committee to be associated with technical representatives from the two interests, and we will undertake, as to the physical and engineering questions, to classify them and to determine for each class the points upon which we are at the present time in agreement and the points on which we do not agree. "As you will see from the foregoing, the plan contemplates approaching the problem in a co-operative spirit and with a determination to arrive at a solution which will be fair to both parties and permit the giving of both services in a satisfactory manner. Mr. Hall, Colonel Carty and I feel that this is a great step toward a constructive solution, and they have asked me to write this letter expressing our united view on this matter. "In the past it has been the general attitude and desire of the N.E.L.A. companies to meet us in a co-operative spirit and to settle our difficulties fairly, taking into account all of the circumstances of the case. This also has been the general spirit of the Bell System. Obviously, during the work of the Joint Committee, which has been described above, that Committee cannot undertake to deal with specific cases which may now be in controversy or which may, during the work of the Committee, give rise to controversy; because if the Committee were to undertake this it would constantly be diverted from its prime objective. In this connection, therefore, you will, no doubt, want your people to continue the policy to reach, without sacrificing our interest, a harmonious understanding with the electric light and power people in any specific case that may come up. "Mr. Aylesworth, Executive Manager of the N.E.L.A., is writing to all of their member companies, advising them of the work of the Joint Committee and making similar suggestions for cooperative work, "As the Chief Engineers of the companies have been so much concerned in this problem, it would be well, I think, to see that they are specially advised in regard to this co-operative work which we are now doing, in addition, of course, to advising all of the operating officials concerned. "With best regards, I am, Yours sincerely, B. GHERARDI, Now, that letter describes to you the situation as it now stands in my mind. The public needs both services. There is undoubtedly a fair basis upon which we can get together and render the public both services without imposing on either utility and without imposing on the public, who must finally pay the bills in any event. We want to find out how to do this, and to do it as cheaply as it can be done, consistent with the rendering of good service by both companies. I know that the representatives of the telephone companies who are on the Joint Committee are determined to bring this work to a successful conclusion, and I think you will find them ready to meet you in a spirit-I won't say in a spirit of co-operation, because that word has been worked a little hard-in a spirit of getting together and not in a controversial spirit. On the other hand, we must remember that each party has interests to protect and that while we want to get together, it is essential to the services of both parties that we get together on a basis which will protect those interests. In conclusion, I want to thank you again, and thank the officers of the National Electric Light Association for giving me this opportunity to be with you today, and to be able to say these few words to you. THE CHAIRMAN: The meeting will now stand. adjourned. (Adjournment) Thursday, June 2, 1921, 2:30 P. M. The meeting was called to order at 2:30 P. M. by the Chairman, Mr. I. E. Moultrop. CHAIRMAN MOULTROP: The first item of busi ness on the program is the report of the Hydraulic Report of Hydraulic Power Committee Prior to the present year technical discussions upon water power have formed a part of the reports of the Prime Movers Committee. In view, however, of the rapidly growing importance of water power it was decided at the last Convention at Pasadena to organize a new committee named the Hydraulic Power Committee, to give especial consideration to the various technical problems of water power development and operation. During this first year of its existence much of the Committee's time has been required in the work of organization and in the preparation of a comprehensive outline to form a basis for the continuing activities of the Committee. This has precluded any extensive consideration of technical problems, but the Committee feels that it now has a good working basis which will facilitate greatly its future activities regardless of changing personnel, and will enable the collection and dissemination of information of considerable value to Association members and the industry in general. Importance of Water Power Study A few statistical figures compiled by the Committee in its work of organization may be of interest. Of the total energy generated in public utility power plants in the United States during the year 1920, 62 per cent was produced by steam power and 38 per per cent by water power. In Canada approximately 14 per cent of the total energy is produced by steam power and 86 per cent by water power. In five of the thirteen Geographic Divisions of the Association water power predominates in the generation of electrical energy. Water power resources of the United States were most ably presented in last year's report of the Water Power Development Committee, and no attempt will be made here to quote detailed figures except to call attention to the fact that less than 17 per cent of the total potential power is now developed. In Canada the percentage is even less. It is a significant fact that applications for permits under the Federal Water Power Law, enacted less than a year ago, now amount to considerably more horsepower than the total developed at present. In view of the present importance of water power in the industry and the great impetus which is now being given to future development, the Committee feels that it has a large and useful field of endeavor. The water wheel is one of the oldest forms of prime Review of the Proceedings of the Technical As the initial point of its work, the Hydraulic Power Committee has reviewed the work done by the Technical Section in previous years and has prepared a synopsis showing the consideration given to water power. The Prime Movers Committee considered water power for the first time during the 1910-11 season and reported thereon at the New York Convention in 1911. Since that time more or less attention has been given to water power by the Prime Movers Committee. The first two reports were very brief. Commencing with the 1913 report, it became the policy to treat in a general way the progress of development in hydraulic equipment and to take up only a few subjects of special interest in each report. This procedure seems to have been followed consistently to date. In the following synopsis no particular attempt will be made to refer to the general progress reports, since these were of special interest only as of the date when made. The purpose of the synopsis is to outline important contributions in the way of papers, descriptions of new equipment, studies and discussions. It is thought that problems covered in the past, leading to conclusions which hold good today, should not be taken up again, except for review and the adding of such information and discussion as may seem advisable in the light of progress. A number of excellent general papers have been presented during the past ten years. The following list gives year by year the principal papers and subjects treated: 1914 "Water Power Plant Economics," by O. B. Coldwell. SUBJECTS TREATED Stream and water shed; a short discussion of the study of hydrographs and storage as applied to the proposed load. A discussion of the various types of plants as applied to economical operation on different loads. A discussion of the economical features of head works and intakes. Economical features of various types of conduits. Discussion of penstocks as applied to economical operation of plants. Discussion of main units and auxiliaries. Draft tubes and tail races. SUBJECTS TREATED Problems of the combined system. Problems of the steam plant. Problems of the hydraulic plant. Combined operation of hydraulic and steam units. Principal Subjects Treated in the Annual Reports in Turbines Throughout the various reports will be found discussions of vertical vs. horizontal units and the constant tendency toward vertical, single runner, high specific speed turbines. The problem which has received most attention. is that of runner wear and material. This was covered very thoroughly in the 1913 report, which contained discussions by many water wheel manufacturers and some consulting and operating engineers. Thrust Bearings The Kingsbury thrust bearing was discussed in the 1913 report by Lieutenant W. W. Smith, of the U. S. N. A paper by Mr. Albert Kingsbury was presented at the same convention, describing his bearing. In several subsequent reports brief references have been made to the success of the Kingsbury bearing. Governors Governor problems received more attention in the earlier reports than during recent years. The main problem considered was that of the use of open vs. closed oil systems. It was first discussed by Mr. Allen V. Garratt at the 1911 Convention. The problem was again taken up with great thoroughness at the 1915 Convention. Since 1915 the subject has not been specifically considered. Valves In the 1913 report the Wellman-Seaver-Morgan Company gave a thorough description of the Johnson type penstock valve. Reliability of Hydraulic Prime Movers This subject was taken up in the 1916 report and |