Airline airports which do not have 3,000 enplaned passengers or 30 based aircraft or equivalent combination-Continued

Certificated stops not served in 1953 which qualify on 30 or more based aircraft

The CHAIRMAN. Mrs. Bowring.

Senator BowRING. No. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. I have here an analysis of the amendments to the original act, sort of a history and review of it, that I want to make a part of the record at this time.

(The analysis referred to is as follows:)

BILL IN 81ST CONGRESS TO RAISE AIRPORT DISCRETIONARY FUND TO 60 PERCENT

During the 81st Congress, S. 1284 was introduced to amend section 6 of the Federal Airport Act, to strike out the figure "75" in the first sentence of subsection (a) and insert in lieu thereof the figure "60."

On July 20, 1949, Senator Edwin Johnson, for the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, filed a favorable report on S. 1284. The committee reported an amendment to the bill which did not affect the percentage ratio of the "discretionary fund."

This bill, S. 1284, was brought up on the Senate Consent Calendar and put over several times until finally, on October 17, 1949, an amendment in the nature of a substitute was proposed by Senator Cordon. This substitute was the result of an effort to work out a compromise. The substitute provided that the percentage of the discretionary fund should not be changed from the existing 25 percent. The substitute made provision for reapportionment of funds that were not used by the several States. Senator Cordon filed a statement in explanation of the substitute, which is found on page 14774 of the Congressional Record of October 17, 1949. The substitute was approved by the Senate on October 17; later, perfecting amendments were incorporated, and the bill eventually became Public Law 382 of the 81st Congress, approved October 25, 1949 (63 Stat. 903).

STATEMENT OF SENATOR CORDON RE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO S. 1284

I would like to point out that the proposed amendment to S. 1284, which I introduced on October 12, 1949, for myself, the junior Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Hendrickson), and the junior Senator from Kansas (Mr. Schoeppel), would not change the present ratio governing the distribution of appropriated funds between the discretionary fund and the apportioned funds. Instead, it would amend the Federal Airport Act to provide that once funds have been apportioned for use within particular States, they shall remain available for such use only during the fiscal year for which they were appropriated, rather than during the entire life of the Federal-aid airport program as is now provided. Under my amendment, at the expiration of each fiscal year all apportioned moneys remaining unexpended or unobligated would be redistributed and reapportioned on the existing 75-25 percent basis exactly in the same manner in which appropriations have been distributed and apportioned in the past. In other words, 25 percent of any unused balance of a State apportionment would go into the discretionary fund and the remaining 75 percent of such balance would be reapportioned among all of the States, including, of course, the State which has an unexpended or unobligated balance.

I would like to emphasize that the amendment contains a provision which provides that any funds apportioned for a State out of the appropriations previously made for the fiscal years 1947, 1948, and 1949, which remain unexpended or unobligated for projects at the expiration of 90 days after the effective date of the proposed act, shall be redistributed and reapportioned on the 75-25 percent basis.

I would like to call the Senate's attention to exhibit A, which has been prepared by the Civil Aeronautics Administration and follows this statement. It shows the fiscal effects of my amendment to S. 1284. Column 1 shows the total amount of apportionment to each State from the appropriations made for fiscal years 1947, 1948, and 1949, or a total of $77,947,750. Column 2 shows the amounts which have been placed under grant agreement in each of the States as of June 30, 1949, amounting to $76,667,742. In column 2A are shown the amounts in dollars of the grant agreements in column 2 which were made from State-apportioned funds. The total of these figures is $60,860,800. Since all available apportioned funds in a State are obligated prior to obligating any discretionary fund in that State, column 2A is equal to the corresponding item in column 1 or column 2, whichever is smaller. In column 3 are shown the unobligated balances, which is the difference between the total State apportionment shown in column 1 and the amount of the State apportionment under grant agreement as shown in column 2A. This unobligated total balance for all States amounts to $17,086,950 as of June 30, 1949.

Column 4 shows the portion of the unobligated balance from each State which would be made available for discretionary use in accordance with the provisions of the amendment, that is, 25 percent of the balance will become available for discretionary use.

In column 5 is shown the portion of the unobligated balance for each State which would be made available for reapportionment and is equal to 75 percent

of the amount shown in column 3. In column 6 is shown the share for each State of the reapportioned portion of the total unobligated balance for all States. This is computed by applying the population-area formula, as specified in the Federal Airport Act, to the total amount available for reapportionment as shown in column 5. In columns 7 and 8 are shown the loss or gain in apportioned funds for each State based on the reapportionment of 75 percent of the total unobligated balance as of June 30, 1949. These figures are determined by comparing column 3 and column 6, since column 3 shows the amount derived from each State for redistribution and column 6 shows the amount which is reapportioned to each State.

Column 10 shows the total amount of State-apportioned funds which would be available for each State during fiscal year 1950. This is computed by adding the State's share of the reapportioned funds as shown in column 6 of the State's regular apportionment (column 9) from $36 million ($27 million State apportionment; $9 million discretionary) appropriated for projects within the States during the fiscal year 1950.

An examination of this procedure, you will observe, reveals that States which are making less than average progress in placing the available fund under grant agreement will lose State-apportioned funds and those States which are showing progress better than average will gain in State apportioned funds.

Generally speaking, those States which gain in State apportionments are the same States which have required the use of discretionary funds. It will be noted that 23 States gain in State apportionment and 26 States, including the District of Columbia, will have their balance of State apportionment reduced.

A careful examination of column 3 of the tabulation shows that a total of 18 States had no unobligated balance of State apportioned funds as of June 30, 1949. These 18 States are: California, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. All of these States will gain in State apportioned funds upon the enactment of the bill, as amended, the total amount varying from approximately $37,000 for Vermont up to approximately $700,000 each for California and New York.

Four other States, Arkansas, Florida, Michigan, and Texas, which had unobligated balances will receive a greater amount from the reapportionment under the amendment. These amounts vary from approximately $29,000 for Florida to more than $700,000 for Texas.

Twenty-six States and the District of Columbia will have a reduction in the amount of State-apportioned funds, ranging from a loss of $33,000 for Oklahoma to a maximum of $1,294,000 for Montana. Thirteen of these States and the District of Columbia will still have available for the fiscal year 1950 total State-apportioned funds exceeding the entire amount which was placed under grant agreement in that State during the first 3 years of the program. Of the remaining 13 States, all will have an amount of State-apportioned funds available for this fiscal year totaling more than 60 percent of that which they obligated during the first 3 years of the program. It is apparent that this will result in no hardship in those States unless the rate of expenditure on airport projects in such State is sharply increased during this year. This situation is possible in a few States such as Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Delaware, where the largest potential projects in the State have not been undertaken during the past 3 years. There will, however, be ample funds available in the additional $4,271,000 of discretionary fund to take care of these situations.

I would like to emphasize that this amendment provides more funds for the urgently needed projects than the original bill because it takes away more of the unobligated balance in those States having unusually high balances. For example, under the original bill, Wyoming's State apportionment would have been reduced from $1,792,585 to $1,434,068, while under the proposed amendment the State apportionment of $1,792,585 will be reduced to $667,356, a gain of approximately $750,000 to be applied to projects in other States. Thus, the proposed amendment is considered by persons and organizations which have a vital stake in this legislation to be far more effective than the original bill without jeopardizing the State's right to its share of any appropriation as specified in the Federal Airport Act.

In conclusion, I would like to state once more: this amendment has been endorsed by the Civil Aeronautics Administration and by the aviation associations which have an interest in this bill because it appears to represent a satisfactory solution to the problem of the redistribution to the several States of unobligated Federal funds to further the Federal airport program.