Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1939-05-30

StOHeT MCIOQCH ana u. GfOOE
Moler in regard to a proposed
use OF lake asphalt In D. c.
paying tollo,Ds:
Law Of1ices
FAULKNER g. MOLER
Public Square
Martinsburg, w. Va.
April 20, 1899.
Honorable Jennings Randolph,
Chairman,
District Of Columbia Committee,
House Of Representatives,
Washington, D. c.
Dear Jennings:
Referring to your visit In company
with Messrs. Warden and Somerville
to Col. McCoach's ONCE yesterday
morning have, at the request OF
Mr.. Warden, examined the statutory
provisions of the District of Co.
lumbia Code which apply to the
bidding upon paving contracts.
The present organic act of the
District of Columbia covers the
question Of street improvements,
construction and requirements in
Section 5 thereof. Said Section S
is included in the District Of Colum-
bia Code. Title IL, Section II to IS
inclusive.
The Organic Act was passed in
1878 and there have been but few
amendments to it and correspond
ing code sections. All amendments
are included in the code of 1929
with the exception Of two amend
ments to inconsequential parts of
said Section 5 of the Organic Act.
These two amendments are con-
tanned in the United States Statutes
at Large in Volume Al, page 759,
Section 3, and Volume 48, page 1853,
respectively. They do not concern
the question which you and Mr..
Warden discussed with Mr.. Nc
Coach.
The pertinent code provisions are
Sections II and 70 of Chapter 3
in Title IL. Section II provides
when any repairs of streets, ave-
nues, alleys. or sewers within the
District of Columbia are to be made,
or when new pavements are to be
substituted in place of those worn
out, new ones laid. or new streets
opened, sewers built or any works
the total cost of which shall exceed
the sum of $1,000, notice shall be
given in one newspaper in WASH
ington and il the total cost shall
exceed $1,000, then in one news
paper in each of the cities Of New
York, Philadelphia and Baltimore
also for one week. for proposals with
full specifications as to material
for the whole or any portion of the
works proposed to be done; and
the lowest responsible proposal for
the kind and character of pavement
or other work which the Commits
sioners shall determine upon shall
in all cases be accepted: Provided,
however, that the Commissioners
shall have the right, in their dis
erection, to reject all such proposals.
- Section 70 contains the follow
ing pertinent language, mo pave
ments shall be accepted nor any
pavements laid except that Of the
best material of its kind known for
that purpose, laid in the most sub
stantial manner; -"
These two Code provisions clearly
indicate to my mind that the Com
missioners have the power to ask for
competitive bids upon any particu-
lar kind Of type of paving material
as differentiated from other type or
kinds OF paving material In the same
general classification. In other
words. pursuant to this statute, pro-
visions can and shall be drafted or
the present specifications amended
to provide for lake asphalt separate
and apart from petroleum asphalt
because these two products are rec
ogniZed as totally different kinds of
asphalt paving material by which
recognized authorities as the Federal
Bureau of Public Roads. The same
also applies in the standard specif-
cations for the District of Columbia.
Your attention is directed to section
80, title II of the Code wherein Ian
guage includes or refers to differ
ent materials such as sheet as
phalt, asphalt block" asphaltic or
bituminous macadam." etc. Upon
submission of bids on either of these
materials the Commissioners have
the right under this statute to
choose as they please between pave
ments constructed of petroleum or
oil asphalt and pavements construct
ed OF lake asphalt. The difference in
initial cost between lake asphalt and
oil asphalt is not problem of COM
petitive bidding because the bids are
on different kinds and types of ma
terials which are recognized by both
specifications and statutes in the
District of Columbia. Competitive
bids would be asked upon lake as
phalt or upon oil asphalt.
I refer again to section II which
gives the Commissioners discretion
airy power to reject all proposals.
implicitly this would give them the
right to accept higher priced mate
rails than those of the same kind
and character without competitive
bidding. This may not be desira-
BILE policy, Of course, but it demon
states the broad power vested in
the Commissioners.
Curiously enough, the statute then
argues in favor of lake asphalt.
Section s73, as quoted above, pro-
vides that no pavement shall be &C.
cepted and no pavement laid except
that Of the best material known for
that purpose. You will recall that
Both Col. McCoach and Capt.
Whitehurst readily agreed that lake
asphalt is the best available in this
country. Your attention is also d.
rected to the fact that many years
ago probably more sheet asphalt
(using lake asphalt paving was laid
on the streets of the city Of WASH
ington than any city of correspond
ing size in the country. These
streets stand today as monuments
to the quality Of this product. As
test stretches" or demonstrations"
they prove beyond all argument that
lake asphalt is better than oil as
nhalt in standing tho iproods ~