Mr. BEODDY. We are voting in the fall. We will be using about 6 percent of it.

Senator GOLDWATER. Six percent of your total. What are you allowed to use by law?

Mr. BEODDY. Eight.

Senator GOLDWATER. That is the maximum you can go?

Mr. BEODDY. Yes.

Senator GOLDWATER. What was your school tax rate before AEC came?

Mr. BEODDY. $4,341,000.

Senator GOLDWATER. What was the rate?

Mr. BEODDY. $10.50 for school purposes.

Senator GOLDWATER. $10.50 a thousand or a hundred?

Mr. BEODDY. A thousand.

Senator GOLDWATER. What is the rate now?

Mr. BEODDY. It is $10.50.

Senator GOLDWATER. It remains the same?

Mr. BEODDY. That is right?

Senator GOLDWATER. What is your constitutional limit?

Mr. BEODDY. Ten mills.

Senator COOPER. Are you at your limit now?

Mr. BEODDY. Yes, we are over the limit. That is the constitutional limit.

Senator COOPER. Over the limit.

Mr. BEODDY. You see, anything we go beyond the 10 mills has to be voted special.

Senator GOLDWATER. Now, what about your property evaluation, has that gone up materially?

Mr. BEODDY. It has gone up from $3,400,000 to a little over $5 million, or $5,263,000, I believe.

Senator GOLDWATER. What is the population of your area?
Mr. BEODDY. Well, now, it is probably around 3,000 people.
Senator COOPER. Senator Upton.

Senator UPTON. Has there been some increase in population?

Mr. BEODDY. Oh, yes, quite. Our populatior has probably trebeled, but that is temporary population. We have in our area a public housing project, Federal housing project, that is PHA, and that has more people in it, twice as many people as our original town. Senator UPTON. You say this increase is temporary.

Mr. BEODDY. Yes, that will be largely temporary.

Senator UPTON. Why?

Mr. BEODDY. It seems as if there are no industries coming in, and we don't have any Federal housing projects of a permanent nature, outside of about 150 or 200 houses.

Senator UPTON. Well, is this increase due to the atomic energy plant?

Mr. BEODDY. Oh, yes, absolutely, yes, sir.

Senator UPTON. And do the people consider this employment permanent?

Mr. BEODDY. Well, there will be employment of about 4,000 people permanently; otherwise, no.

Senator UPTON. I am not quite clear as to why you expect that the present population will not be maintained.

Mr. BEODDY. Well, these people who are in our area are largely temporary. They are construction workers, you see. There are many of them living there in these trailer areas. This PHA project

has 750 trailers on it.

Senator COOPER. They are in the business of constructing the plant; aren't they?

Mr. BEODDY. Yes, sir.

Senator UPTON. That clears that atmosphere.
Mr. BEODDY. Thank you, sir.

Senator COOPER. Senator Clements' office.

STATEMENT OF FRANK FLURY, APPEARING FOR HON. EARLE C. CLEMENTS, A UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY

Mr. FLURY. Good morning, Mr. Chairman.

I am Frank Flury, legislative assistant to Senator Clements. appearing on behalf of Senator Clements, who introduced bill S. 3450, for the purpose of eliminating the 3-percent absorption clause from Public Law 874 of the 81st Congress.

Senator Clements, although very much interested in eliminating the absorption clause, was unable to attend the hearing this morning on such short notice. He introduced S. 3604 to alleviate conditions which were aggravated by the impact of Federal activities on schools. Many reports have been received from school officials in Kentucky and areas where the schools are suffering from additional pupil loads due to the Federal activities.

It is believed that this is not the time to throw a greater burden on schools that are already suffering as a result of Federal activities.

I am not able to as effectively pinch-hit for the Senator. I just am here to express his general interest and regret at not being able to attend the hearings in which he is so much interested.

Thank you, sir.

Senator COOPER. Thank you, Mr. Flury. I know Senator Clements has spoken to me about his interest in the bill, and I hope he will file a statement for the record.

Mr. FLURY. Thank you, sir.

(Senator Clements' prepared statement follows:)

STATEMENT BY SENATOR EARLE C. CLEMENTS IN SUPPORT OF CONTINUED FEDERAL AID FOR SCHOOLS IN AREAS AFFECTED BY FEDERAL ACTIVITIES Schools throughout the entire Nation are fighting desperately to provide facilities for rapidly increasing enrollments resulting from high birth rates during the past several years. There is also the problem of replacing obsolete facilities. During the years of the Korean and Second World Wars, many necessary replacements of school buildings were postponed because of materials scarcity and high cost.

Many schools have had the problem of increased enrollment and obsolete facilities further aggravated by the impact of Federal activities. Federal activities in numerous areas have thrust additional pupils upon schools already struggling to provide education to children in overcrowded and obsolete buildings. Although many school districts are making determined efforts to provide the greatly needed buildings, they have been unable to cope with the problem because its magnitude is too great for their financial circumstances.

Congress recognized this problem, and its obligation to alleviate the greater educational burdens imposed on those schools affected by Federal activities in

their areas.

Public laws 815 and 874, of the 81st Congress, provided special financial assistance to schools having additional pupil loads resulting from Federal activities. Unfortunately, the Congress last year amended Public Law 874, so that starting in the fall of 1954 these federally impacted schools would no longer receive financial assistance for the first 3 percent of their pupils resulting from Federal operations. Unless this law is changed, these schools will be required to absorb the first 3 percent of enrollment from Federal activities without any Federal assistance.

This is not the time to withdraw Federal assistance from schools fighting desperately to provide adequate school facilities for the education of our youth. It was for this reason that I introduced the initial legislation in the Senate this session, bill S. 3604, to eliminate the 3 percent absorption clause from Public Law 874. Since the introduction of my bill, other legislation has been introduced, which would also eliminate the absorption clause.

This is the time when the Government should fully recognize the serious difficulties faced by many of our schools, and provide all possible assistance to those schools suffering additional burdens from the impact of Federal activities in their areas. It is urged that the 3 percent absorption clause be eliminated from Public Law 874, and that Public Law 815, providing for school construction in federally impacted areas, be continued in the best interest of the youth of our country. Senator COOPER. Samuel Brownell, Commissioner of Education. STATEMENT OF HON. SAMUEL M. BROWNELL, COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION

Mr. BROWNELL. Mr. Chairman, I want to say at the outset that due to the pressure of time, it has been impossible to have a statement. cleared through the Bureau of the Budget, and I do not have at this time a prepared statement to put on file. That is now in the hands of the typist. So I will have to operate from my notes, if I may.

In discussing this extension of Public Law 815, I should like to note four points. First, that the problem of school construction is a very large one, and that this program is a piece of the total.

Second, that the total problem calls for work in a cooperative way with the States. We propose to work with and through the States. Pending the outcome of our studies and the information from the State conferences, we are not in a position to propose any long-range modification of the role undertaken by the Federal Government in 1950, in the original adoption of Public Law 815.

Third, that we are willing to recommend in principle the bill which proposes to extend the existing laws for the period of 1 or 2 years. Fourth, that we recommend amendments to make the conditions of eligibility and entitlement comparable to those now in operation. Testimony has been presented before this committee in connection with S. 2601, which pointed out in some detail the total need for school construction in this country. So I shall not repeat that. We have also filed with the committee formal statements in reference to S. 3628 and S. 3450, and I shall not repeat in detail what is in those reports. I would recall to your attention that in terms of the total picture, enrollments will continue to increase for a long time and the total financing for school construction will involve payments that run into the billions of dollars. So I note that, because our consideration of each proposal in reference to school construction is made in the light of the total picture. We note that Congress has already enacted at this session a bill which would encourage the States to study their education needs and develop an action program to speed up the provision of educational facilities.

There are other bills before you that propose temporary emergency school construction. Because the total pattern of the long-range program is in the state of development, we believe that at the most extension of this act should be for 1 or possibly 2 years. It is our further recommendation that if this act is extended for 1 or possibly 2 years, the eligibility requirement should be kept as nearly as possible comparable to those now in Public Law 815, as amended by Public Law 246, which has been in operation during the past 2 years.

Now, if I may, I would like to present a few facts relating to Public Law 815 as it is operated and an estimate of what it might cost to extend it. Public Law 815 was enacted in September 1950 to provide Federal assistance to meet school construction needs in communities impacted by Federal activities beginning with 1939 and extending through fiscal year 1952. The law was further extended in August 1953 by Public Law 246, to cover construction needs brought on by the defense buildup following Korea through the fiscal year 1954.

Now, the original law and the appropriations made under it went a long way toward meeting the needs of impacted districts. The extension to Public Law 246 went far toward meeting the additional needs brought on by Kroea. In general, the defense activities have leveled off or declined and the terminal date of June 1954 has met most of the situations where enrollment increases were being felt. There are, however, a number of communities with sizable impacts occurring beyond the terminal date in the existing legislation. For these relatively few districts, the termination date of June 30, 1954, presents a real problem. For example, the peak enrollments of federally connected pupils in southern Ohio counties surrounding the atomic energy plant will not be reached until the fall of 1954, but the cutoff date of June 30, 1954, excludes from Federal assistance a large number of children who must be housed this coming year.

There are Federal housing projects being completed at a number of bases, particularly Air Force bases, where none or only part of the impact can be claimed by the cutoff date of June 30, 1954. The housing will be occupied in the school year beginning September 1954 and school facilities must be provided for these children. The question is whether this is a continuing Federal responsibility.

There were 940 school districts aided by the original act, and school housing provided for 468,000 children-70 percent from Federal fundsout of 690,000 eligible children.

Now, under the extended law a total of approximately 140,000 children will be housed and in 620 approved projects built with Federal and local funds. An estimated total of 175,000 children were eligible for assistance under the extended act, which expired on June 30. I have tabulated these figures, which I will put in the record. The comparative statistical information on the original and extended programs are as follows:

These figures bear out the downward trend of local needs for additional school construction in all federally affected districts. However, in those few districts which have not yet experienced the end of the impact, the needs are still acute, and the law as written does not provide the full ways of meeting the post-Korean impact.

As a former school superintendent, I am fully aware that in districts where there is such an impact it is just as difficult to take care of the needs if there be only a few communities affected as if there

were many.

The office has not collected full information which will give exact data on the possible additional needs to be faced under any further extension of Public Law 815. Such estimates would have to take into account the specific provisions of any such proposed extension and the period of time that they were to be in effect.

We have gathered some information from over 1,450 districts which responded to a post-card survey, out of the 2,500 federally affected districts which are eligible for assistance under Public Law 874 for their maintenance and operation payments. These data show the reported increase in enrollments in 1955, but they do not reveal the situation as to unhoused children, which would have to be taken into consideration in approving funds for any district.

Out of these 1,450 districts, there were 265 districts there which showed an increase in their enrollment of 20 or more Federal pupils in the year 1955 over 1954. The law requires a school district to have at least a 2-year 5-percent increase in Federal pupils over their total pupils in 1952 to qualify for the funds.

Extension of this provision for a new Federal impact would suggest a percentage increase requirement of 21⁄2 percent in Federal pupils over the total pupils for a 1-year period to be comparable. If such restriction were applied to the 265 districts cited above, approximately 165 will qualify for the funds, and the estimated total number of pupils that would qualify under section 305 (a) (1) is about 10,570. That is those whose parents both live and work on Federal property. The number under section 305 (a) 2 is 24,720. That is those whose parents live or work on Federal property.

I have a tabulation by State which I will attach to my statement. (The tabulation referred to follows:)