The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1897-01-23
RAFqER ENDORSED. !
Engineering News Gives the
Narrow Expert Praise on
Narrow Grounds. i
From the Engineering News Q
January q.

Another interesting contribution to thf
waterworks controversy in which Jersey
City has been engaged for SO many years
has just been made in the form of a re-
port by Mr.. George w. Rafter, M. Am,
Soc. C. e. This report was made to
the Jersey City Board of Trade, which
body engaged Mr.. Rafter to examine the
specifications for a new water supply
under which bids were received on Aug.
"a, 1895; to report on the several bids
submitted under those specifications, es-
pecially the bid of the East Jersey Water
Company, accepted by the Board of
Street and Water Commissioners on De
cember 4; and incidentally to examine
the Passaic River, at the Belleville pump
ing station of the Jersey water works,
with a view of expressing an opinion as
to filtering the present supply.
Mr.. Rafter first takes up the specifical
tons, which, in brief, were for ~ q
gravity water supply from a new source.
to be furnished at stated prices per 1000.
900 gallons, in quantities from $1,000. 600 to
$4,000, 600 gallons per day, the city to have
the option of buying the plant and choos-
ing between works with capacities of
s., 10000 0 and 50,00o, 600 gallons per day,
respectively; (2) for a filtered supply from
the. Passaic River.
h specifications gave as a standard for
testing the capacity of proposed drainage
areas certain tables in the Report on
Water Supply published by the New Jer-
sey State Geological Survey. Mr.. Rafter,
while p~raising the report as a whole,
thinks the tables cited give somewhat too
high a yield for the particular drainage
areas in question. The East Jersey Wa
per drainage area of the Rockaway River,
as sufficient for a daily supply of $4,000. 900
gallons.
h clauses of the specifications relating
to the number of conduits Mr.. Rafter pro-
nounces
not only incomplete, but so indefinite as
to render it absolutely imposs4b BILE to OBJ
tain bids which are in any degree com
parable.
The report states that the specifications
call for either two or three conduits. where
metal is used for the same. and makes nu-
merous citations from the specifications
in support of this claim.
We pointed out in our issue of December
10, that the whole intent of the specifica-
tons seemed to Indicate that more than
one conduit was required, and that there
fore the accepted bid was informal. We
did not discuss the relative d~esirability of
one as against two supply mains, but Mr..
Rafter strongly expresses himself as in
favor of two, as a matter of safety.
Regarding the general character of the
conduit, Mr.. Rafter says
Those clauses of the conduit specifica-
ton relating to design, material. workman
ship and strength are not, in my opinion.
IN line with current engineering practice.
1t is further pointed out that whereas
the specifications demand that bids must
state the character of the proposed con-
duits, and fully describe them, the accept
ed bid is silent on this point. Very inter
esting in this connection are some state
ments which Mr.. Rafter applies to the
specifications and the award, as follows
The inspection clause provides that the
contractor shall furnish the city with all
plans, details and working drawings, the
city reserving the right, through its en-
girseeT. to supervise the work, inspect
the material and labor, and reject if not
in accordance with the specifications, and
The plans accompanying the accepted
bid.
Inasmuch as the specifications are alb
solutely silent as to. the quality of ma
ferial and work to be used in the con-
struction of the said works. cannot but
think hat this clause is superfluous, ali
though a proper inspection CLAUSE would
be of very great Importance in properly
drawn specifications. T
The dimensions of the onduit offered
in the various bid Of the East Jersey
Water Co, Mr.. Rafter deems sufficient
TO meet the contract requirements for ca
pacity, but the conduits offered by the
Rockaway & Hudson Water Co. are con-
sidered less liberal, while one of them is
thought to be SO deficient in capacity as
TO rule out that bid of that
Another important point brought out in
the report is that while the specifications
demand tina the location, ;scharacter and
capacity of each proposed storage rescr-
voir shall be clearly indicated in the bid,
neither Of the bids are sufficient in this
particular. Further, the bid of the East
Jersey Water Co. contains the follow
ing:-
AS the time for making these bids has
been too short to make borings ana ex-
amine the foundation of the PROPOSED
reservoir dams we suggest that h CON
tract should provide that IN case expior1
the subsoil is unfit for the construction
Of safe and practical dams, other reser-
yoir sites of equal value and efficiency in
furnishing water may be substitutedSfor
those now offered.
This quotation substantiates the argu-
ments advanced by this Journal last
spring to the effect that the time al
lowed for submitting bids was altogether
inadequate for the preparation of proper
plans and estimates.
Mr.. Rafter points how the bids might
be, and doubtless were, increased through
basing estimates on both indefinite speci-
fcations and uncertainties regarding the
natural conditions to be encountered in
construction. AT the close, he16sums up
his conclusions as follows 81
l.. The specifications prepared by the
Jersey City Board of Street and Water
Commissioners are so contradictory, in
def1nit and incomplete as to render RAJ
tional bidding inaccessible.
sew and d 4hs Kockaway and Hndson Wa
er4tOombanies, under the specifications,
dssss1hcenaplete and informal. and should
s. The watersheds PROPOSED by both
satisfactory as regards purity. of water;
but the. area proposed by the East Jersey
Water Company appears somewhat too
small t2s abs9l4lely insure 9 fgll supply
/. II The cost t5 Jerssy 4esitfs y' Of water,
works ard purchased. or for supply under
the rental clause, is apparently Somewhat
more busineSsiikep procedu Is o a. Is t bs
preparations ofHtgeneral plans by the city,
and the submisAon to the proposing COM
panies ct 9 ratl8nal specification.