STATEMENT OF MR. THOMAS H. MacDONALD, CHIEF BUREAU OF PUBLIC ROADS, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREResumed

Mr. MACDONALD. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, at this point I wish to discuss the process of handling Federal-aid projects between the Bureau of Public Roads and the States. have placed in your hands an outline of the steps by which the cooperative work is carried on between the States and the Bureau of Roads.

Upon authorization by Congress the Secretary of Agriculture makes the apportionment of funds for the ensuing fiscal year and notifies the Secretary of the Treasury and each State highway department of the amount apportioned to each State.

I have brought the various forms which are used for that purpose and will leave them here for the information of any members of the committee who desire to look through these particular forms.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you desire them to be placed in the record as part of your statement?

Mr. MACDONALD. It is not necessary to place the forms in the\ record. But I am placing this brief statement in the record, because of the large number of inquiries that come from time to time as to the procedure or the processes through which Federal-aid projects pass.

The law requires that any State wishing to secure Federal aid for the improvement of a section of road shall file a project statement. This project statement is an application for aid and sets forth the proposed improvement. It is submitted by the State directly to a representative of the Bureau of Public Roads who has headquarters convenient to the State highway department. The road to be improved must lie on the Federal-aid highway system.

The bureau accepts from a State a project statement covering a rather long distance between termini, if the State so desires. If the State has submitted a project statement covering a route, we will say 50 miles long, between two important termini, we examine the whole route. The project statement may cover that whole route, but the State may take up the improvement in 10-mile, 5-mile, or shorter sections.

The examination of the application filed by the State is made first in the field by an engineer of the Bureau of Public Roads who goes over the route of the proposed improvement and makes a detailed. report to the bureau's district engineer. This report, with the recommendation of the district engineer, is forwarded to the Washington office and if the project is satisfactory, its approval is recommended to the Secretary of Agriculture. The State is formally notified after such approval.

Disapprovals are rare because if our engineers find that projects, as submitted by the State, are not satisfactory, they do everything possible to secure a satisfactory adjustment before submitting the project for action. In this way harmonious relations with the State are promoted. If, however, a project is not satisfactory and can not be made so, it is disapproved.

Mr. WARD. How many of these district engineers have you?
Mr. MACDONALD. We have 12 districts.

Mr. WARD. And one for each district?

Mr. MACDONALD. A district engineer has charge of each district. The CHAIRMAN. This project is approved before it comes your office?

to

Mr. MACDONALD. Yes, sir; it has the approval first of the field engineer and then of the district engineer.

Mr. DOUGHTON. Does your field engineer assist in laying out the road or only approve it after it has been laid out by the State engineer?

Mr. MACDONALD. The ordinary process is for the representative of the Bureau of Roads and the representative of the State highway department to go over the route together; and if there are questions as to relocation or realignment, elimination of grade crossingswhatever the general outstanding modifications which should be made appear to be these modifications are discussed in the field. in a preliminary way between these representatives. Frequently there are points of difference to be taken up by the district engineer and the State engineer and sometimes these questions come to the Washington office.

Mr. WARD. I presume you have very few frictions, if any, or conflicts with State authorities?

Mr. MACDONALD. There are very infrequent differences of opinion from a basic engineering standpoint. The differences that occur ordinarily are these: If the State feels it is necessary because of shortage of funds or other reasons to do something less that it appears is desirable

Mr. WARD (interposing). Mr. MacDonald, I imagine, if I may say so, politically speaking, as to what points the road must connect, the termini, ordinarily the initial step is with the State, and then the engineering project. I have distinguished between the two.

Mr. MACDONALD. Of course, we have no difficulty as to the large termini since the laying out of the Federal-aid highway system. But between two principal objectives there may be a choice of location, as to which towns or villages a road shall touch. Assuming there is no loss from the standpoint of the system as a whole, that is, a greater distance, or poorer topography over which to build the road-if there is no loss to the system, then we concede to the State the location so far as it is affected by local issues and local questions.

Mr. PEERY. I would like to ask a question. I do not know whether it comes in properly here or a little later on, that is, with reference to the elasticity of the regulations which your department adopts in respect to the building of these roads. As I understand it, under the law, there is a limit of the amount per mile that will be allowed by the Federal Government. Now, in mountainous sections are there any complaints on the part of State authorities that the roads can not be built within the limit?

Mr. MACDONALD. Yes, sir; there are. We are making some recommendations and I shall come to that a little later.

Mr. GARDNER. Just another question in relation to what Mr. Ward said. I think the Federal Government oftentimes requires relocation because of low ground or something of the kind. I know I had that experience in our State, where we thought we had a road located and the Federal Government would come along and show that because of low ground or something of that character the road should be relocated, and they often require the State to relocate

a road, or they do sometimes, I will say, require the State to relocate a road.

Mr. MACDONALD. We consider the greatest benefit that the Bureau of Roads can produce for the public as a whole is to get the roads in the best location possible. We consider that for hundreds of years these roads will be in these particular locations--and by "location" I mean not only the points served but the best supporting ground available.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Does your bureau have any rules and regulations with reference to relocating the read so as to avoid dangerous places and dangerous railroad crossings and things of that kind?

Mr. MACDONALD. Yes, sir. A very full statement of the policy along that line is contained in the Secretary's report this year.

It is a full statement of policy along that line, and if followed, will very soon, I believe, eliminate the most dangerous crossings from the Federal aid system. That particular statement is found on pages 31 and 32 of the report as filed.

After an application for a project has been approved, the State prepares at State expense plans and specifications and an estimate of the cost of the work. The plans are submitted to a field engineer of the Bureau for transmission to Washington with his recommendation for approval with or without necessary modifications.

A field engineer of the bureau keeps in touch with the development of the plans while they are being prepared by the State. În this way many changes which might otherwise be necessary are obviated. After the plans are finished they are carefully examined and if modifications are found to be necessary, this matter is taken up with the States for adjustment. Considering the large number of projects and the mileage involved there is relatively little modification required because most of the States are now using approved standard specifications and understand in general and in detail the grade of work required. The plans, specifications and estimates after a final review in the Washington office are recommended to the Secretary for approval if they are found satisfactory and formal notice is sent to the State of such approval.

In the meantime the State may proceed with the advertising and other necessary arrangements preliminary to letting contracts and a contract may actually be entered into for construction when the district engineer of the Bureau of Public Roads signifies to the State that the plans are satisfactory although the formal approval of the Secretary may not yet have been given. This arrangement makes it unnecessary to delay the award of contract unduly.

When the Secretary of Agriculture approves the plans, specifications and estimates for a project, a contract called a project agreement is drawn up in the Bureau of Public Roads for execution by the Secretary of Agriculture and the State highway department. This project agreement specifically describes the project and the funds to be contributed by the State and the Government, recites any special conditions affecting the project and insures that the State shall assume the proper obligations for integrity of construction, adequate inspection and future maintenance.

While construction is in progress, continuous and adequate inspection is required by representatives of the State and engineers of the bureau visit the project at such intervals as may be necessary to

insure that the work is progressing in a satisfactory manner and in accordance with the provisions of the specifications and plans.

Provision is made for the testing of materials both on the work and at the source of supply as may be most convenient and economic. The work of construction proceeds under the direct supervision of the State highway department in accordance with the State laws and is followed at every stage by periodic inspections of the bureau. When the project is finally completed an engineer of the bureau makes a final inspection to insure that all the work contemplated has been properly carried out and that the obligation of the State in its contract with the Secretary of Agriculture has been met.

Payment to the State of the aid allotted to a project is made either as the work progresses or on completion of the entire project, in accordance with the terms of the project agreement. In most cases payments are made monthly on vouchers prescribed by the comptroller and submitted by the States. On the voucher appears a detailed estimate of all the items of work on which the State bases its claim and payment is made on this voucher. The vouchers are cumulative and progressive so that with the submission of each new voucher a complete recheck of quantities is obtained. The final voucher shows the complete estimate of work on which the full amount of Federal aid is claimed by the State. Each voucher is supported by the specific recommendation of a field engineer of the bureau who is personally familiar with the work done and certified to by the district engineer of the bureau.

All inspections made by representatives of the Bureau of Public Roads are reported in writing to the construction division in the Washington office. Similarly all special inspections covering the voucher claims, final completion, and the condition of maintenance of a Federal aid project are in writing and filed in Washington. The report of final inspection summarizes the progress of the work and includes a specific statement as to its complete condition, its conformity with the specifications, and the proper nature of the claim for reimbursement by the State. Maintenance inspections are made of all completed projects at least twice yearly, in the fall and spring. Projects in an unsatisfactory condition of maintenance are at once called to the attention of the State highway department and the necessary steps taken to bring the project into satisfactory condition. Through all the stages of a project an orderly and expeditious procedure is maintained. The close working relations established with the State highway departments insure complete protection of both the Federal and State interests.

Mr. WARD. I have no fault to find with the statement that I know of, except the very arbitrary way in which they take private property. But that is not the fault of this bureau; that grows out of the State legislation, where the property is not properly inspected.

Mr. MACDONALD. That, of course, is one of the most difficult questions with which both the States and the bureau have to deal. Mr. ALMON. When I came in, Mr. MacDonald, were you discussing the amount of money per mile for maintenance?

Mr. MACDONALD. No, sir. But I said I would discuss that later. Mr. WARD. Do you not find a difference in States, in that respect, Mr. MacDonald? I think you do. I hope the States are not all like mine in that respect. It is an awful law they have in North Carolina.

There is absolutely nothing sacred against the appetite and the ambition of a road contractor. I hope the States are not all alike.

Mr. MACDONALD. I believe that any difficulties which may have arisen there is because of the large program which the State has been carrying forward in a limited time.

Mr. WARD. I did not want to divert you too far, because I know you can not handle that situation.

Mr. MACDONALD. Since the passage of the Federal aid road act in 1916 highways have been completed totaling 33,000 miles; 13,800 miles were under construction on the 1st of March of this year. The total of roads completed and under construction amounted, therefore, to 46,836 miles.

Mr. DOUGHTON. Right there, Mr. MacDonald. When you go to make up the record, would it be practical to give the number of miles in each State; could you do it by States when you make up your record, or would that be too much trouble?

Mr. MACDONALD. Yes, I can make it up that way, unless you publish the report which the Secretary has made. If this report is published, it has the details of our operations in each State set out in extended form.

Mr. DOUGHTON. If it is practical I would be glad to have that done. Mr. MACDONALD. That means that on the total system of approximately 170,000 miles of Federal aid highway system as it has been approved up to the present time, there have been completed that is, old construction and new construction-about 60,000 miles of surfaced roads, which leaves about 110,000 miles to be surfaced. You will recall, as I stated the other day, that it would mean to complete such a system a program extended over 10 years, consisting of about 11,000 miles per year, which is slightly more than we have done in any one year up to the present time.

The mileage completed has increased year by year since the beginning of Federal aid road construction, that for 1918 being but 12.5 miles while the mileages completed during the following years were: 1919, 177; 1920, 1,493; 1921, 5,787; 1922, 10,247; 1923, 8,820, and for the first eight months of the fiscal year 1924, 6,500 miles.

In addition to the work completed, on March 1, 1924, there were 14,136 miles under construction. The total estimated cost of both the completed work and the work under construction amounted to $844,489,300, of which $372,721,900 represented the Federal participation. The miles completed, the average cost per mile and the percentages of each by types, are as follows: