The Mr. SWIFT. No, sir. Our counties acquire the rights-of-way. local governing bodies of the counties acquire the rights-of-way. We have not gotten into the cities probably to the extent that the other States have, if I understood their discussions last week. We have never had any tie-ups on account of right-of-way troubles, even with the access-road program. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. I am sure that Alabama is well represented in the road department, and every other department, so far as we know. I think the next witness is from Arkansas. STATEMENT OF W. W. MITCHELL, DIRECTOR AND CHIEF ENGINEER, ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT The CHAIRMAN. Will you give the reporter your name and a little of your background, as to what your position is? Mr. MITCHELL. My name is W. W. Mitchell. I am director and chief engineer of the Arkansas State Highway Department. The CHAIRMAN. In Arkansas, do you have a road commission? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. We have an honorary commission, composed of seven members. The CHAIRMAN. By honorary, you mean men who are not on regular pay? Mr. MITCHELL. They serve without pay. They only get paid when they meet. There is one member from each congressional district. I am the executive officer of the highway commission, appointed by the Governor and serve during his tenure of office, at his pleasure. I would like to offer, with the permission of the committee, a number of exhibits, to give you a picture of our problem. The first is a map of the State highway system, showing in green our concrete highways, 1,375 miles; asphalt, in black, 2,121 miles; gravel and graded, 5,568 in red; unimproved, 76 miles. That, gentlemen, is our problem. Those red colors show what we have to contend with in Arkansas-mud and dust-on which we are hoping to get some relief under this bill. We will leave this map with the committee. The second map consists of the State highways and primary and secondary Federal-aid highways. We have the location of all the war plants shown thereon. This shows the bauxite area, where we are recovering aluminum for aircraft; the military camps; and also our cities and towns of over 10,000 population. Also on this map is designated the interregional highway system, shown in broad bands. There is some 500 miles of that. The third map we have predicated on the proposed post-war highway project. This is our tentative program. It is not completed yet. It is a proposal to close the gaps in important State highways and United States highways, with some 50 bridges and 2,011 miles of highway, which will cost $77,000,000. Our detailed statement will deal with that. Then we have a graph showing our financial set-up. You will recall that Arkansas has been coming up here for a number of years pleading for Federal aid. And we have been asked a number of times why we did not refund our heavy indebtedness. We refunded in 1941 and got our financial house in order. This graph will show you the condition of our finances at the present time. It will show you that our receipts are some 28.8 percent less than 1941, our banner year. We are obligated in our refunding to pay $7,175,000 annually. I would like to submit the maps to the committee for further study, along with the statement that is to be read to you now. With the permission of the chairman, I am going to ask Mr. Johnson to present our statement. The CHAIRMAN. He may proceed. STATEMENT OF A. E. JOHNSON, ASSISTANT CHIEF ENGINEER, ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, in deliberating on the provisions of H. R. 2426, which is now being considered by you, we of Arkansas are happy to have the privilege of bringing the following important facts concerning our State to your attention. The Arkansas State highway system consists of 9,530 miles, which may be broken down as follows: 1,360 miles of concrete pavement. 5 miles of brick pavement. A total of 4,896 miles of the State highway system are on the primary Federal-aid system; 2,374 miles on the secondary Federal-aid system; and 238 miles are in the national-forest reservations. The total mileage of the State highway system within towns or cities of over 2,500 inhabitants is 205 miles, of which 188 miles are on the Federal aid systems and paved. The Arkansas State highway system at the present time represents an investment of public funds in the total amount of $265,000,000, of which approximately $60,000,000 has been made possible by means of some form of Federal aid. The present bonded highway indebtedness of the State is $133,542,000 principal, against which interest charges to the date of final maturity, in 1972, will amount to $70,580,000. Amortization charges against this debt amount to $7,175,000 annually, plus an additional $750,000 by way of aid to bridge, municipal and county road improvement districts. This is in excess of 50 percent of our present highway revenues, as against a national average of approximately 1112 percent. In accordance with the provisions of the Refunding Act of 1941, the State must provide annually $3,075,000 for maintenance. In addition, provision is made in the act to establish a construction and maintenance fund in the amount of $2,500,000 each year. The full faith and credit of the State of Arkansas is pledged for the retirement of the highway debt. It is estimated that approximately $225,000,000 will be required to complete the present State highway system so as to satisfy current needs as revealed by recent traffic survey data and existing design standards. In view of the fact that many of our main line or trunk highways now have unpaved gaps, and further, since 2,001 miles of concrete and bituminous surfaces in the State are less than 20 feet in width, with 304 miles of concrete pavement and 290 miles of bituminous surfacing over 15 years old, all of which are either obsolete or seriously deteriorated, it is our considered judgment that an additional program of $60,000,000 or more, based on 75 percent Federal and 25 percent State funds, cannot only be used to good advantage, but is imperatively needed to complete critically needed replacements and improvements. The rate of obsolescence or deterioration of existing pavements on main highways will, in the near future, require practically all of our construction funds for replacements alone. This condition has been greatly accelerated by reason of traffic that has been generated incident to the war effort. The further important fact remains that inadequate maintenance as a result of our inability to obtain needed repair parts and materials, coupled with a shortage of personnel and equipment, have together brought about a problem of the first magnitude, if normal traffic facilities are to be maintained and the State's investment in its highways is to be preserved. During the emergency Arkansas has accumulated construction funds. and earmarked them for the post-war period. We anticipate no trouble in providing funds for matching purposes as soon as post-war Federal funds become available. It is perhaps academic to say that aside from financing, the two most important elements in highway construction are those of materials and labor. Arkansas possesses an abundance of road-building materials, including oil refineries for asphalt needs and a cement plant. And we are assured an adequate supply of all other types of needed materials. We quote no less an authority than the State war manpower director in advising that at the close of the war 140,000 men from the armed services and 60,000 civilians will return to the State, and will be available to industry and public works. He further advises that during the period of readjustment, public works alone should provide employment for a minimum of 25,000 of these men and that no less than 10,000 should be provided employment through highway construction. Arkansas is fundamentally an agricultural State. Our people have always welcomed highway construction as a means of providing emergency or short-term employment, especially during slack seasons on the farm. This type of employment has accordingly become a very important factor in our rural economy. The Arkansas State Highway Department has tentatively, to date, formulated a post-war construction program of 2,165 miles of highways, 20 major bridges, and 50 railroad grade-separation projects which are greatly needed. This program is well distributed over the entire State and is estimated to cost $77,000,000. More specifically, it involves only 285 miles which will replace existing pavements and 1,792 miles that will close unpaved gaps on 6,044 miles of major highways and feeder roads which now have no form of dustless surface. Approximately 1,515 miles of highways and 55 structures are now programed on the primary Federal-aid system at an estimated cost of $62,000,000. In addition, 650 miles of highways and 15 structures are programed on the Federal-aid secondary system, at an estimated cost of $15,000,000. If funds become available for additional work, or in case the need for revision of projects now contemplated for post-war construction become evident, appropriate changes can and will be made. Ninety-one programed items for post-war plans and surveys on 1,245 miles of highways, representing an estimated construction cost of $50,000,000, have been approved by the Public Roads Administration. Surveys have been made on 400 miles of this work and plans can be rapidly completed as soon as design standards are agreed upon. Arkansas has nine cities, widely separated over the State, with a population of over 10,000, and these cities make up only 12 percent of the population. Sixty-eight percent is purely rural. It is evident, therefore, that no serious urban congestion exists at the present time; nor is there any likelihood that there will be in the near future. May we, for emphasis, repeat that the building and surfacing of rural highways and constructing uncompleted gaps in primary roads constitute the primary needs of Arkansas. And that is no doubt true of numerous other States. It is accordingly recommended in the light of this condition that the immediate postwar program be made flexible or elastic enough to meet the needs of the individual States. In other words, it is our opinion that these funds should not be allocated on a predetermined basis for particular types of construction, such as superhighways through urban areas, except in those localities where there is a definite need or a public demand for this type of improvement. This arrangement will in no way jeopardize any efforts to take care of the employment needs immediately following the war or during the readjustment period. It will, on the other hand, however, be of material aid to our State in coping with the problem. Finally, we of Arkansas recommend that the regular Federal-aid formula for the apportionment of funds, viz, one-third, one-third. one-third, be used to allocate any post-war allotments made to the States. We strongly oppose any formula that does not give adequate consideration to area and post-road mileage. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for your statement. Personally, you favor this bill as is, with the exception of the formula that is written in the bill for the division of the funds. Is that correct? And on that question you want us to return to the Mr. MITCHELL. Well, the executive committee formula is satisfactory, or the Federal-aid formula, either one. The CHAIRMAN. You understand that the formula written in the bill is not the same as the one you are advocating in your statement, do you not? Mr. JOHNSON. We recommend the old formula, but we would be agreeable to any one that would give adequate consideration to area and mileage. The CHAIRMAN. And apparently Arkansas is prepared to go ahead with the work in the State, as soon as the war ends and funds are provided as indicated in this bill. Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. You have the plans ready? Mr. MITCHELL. On a 75-25 basis. It would be difficult for Arkansas if it were 50-50. We are poor folks down there, and have had difficulty with our financing. The CHAIRMAN. But if it is provided on a 75-25 matching basis, have plans all ready now to proceed, and you could put men to work building highways already planned and approved? you Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. Mr. WHITTINGTON. Do I understand-and I don't want to ask you to repeat that you favor the retention of the existing provision in the Federal Highway Acts based upon one-third population, onethird area, and one-third post roads, rather than one-half to the county local or feeder roads and municipalities, or municipal areas? Mr. MITCHELL. I don't quite understand you, Congressman Whittington. Our position on this is that we would like the old Federalaid formula, or the executive committee formula, as I have testified. Mr. WHITTINGTON. You mean, by executive committee formula, the formula in the bill we have under consideration? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. Mr. WHITTINGTON. That is satisfactory to you, but you prefer the old? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. There will be very little difference, but there have been so many formulas offered that it has become confusing. Mr. WHITTINGTON. I am glad to hear you say you favor a definite formula. There ought not be any exceptions to that formula; it ought to be as nearly applicable to all the States as possible. You are not asking any exceptions so far as the State of Arkansas is concerned? Mr. MITCHELL. None. Mr. WHITTINGTON. From the formula that may finally be adopted? Mr. MITCHELL. That is true. We are merely presenting our views on the matter. Mr. WHITTINGTON. Do you feel, from a Federal standpoint, we ought to make the same contribution to your local feeder roads as we do to your interregional or strategic highways? Mr. MITCHELL. I think there should be some assistance to the feeder roads. Mr. WHITTINGTON. I am not asking about that. We have been assisting the feeder roads. My thought was, should we have the same formula of Federal contribution to these roads as to your main thoroughfare, your main interregional strategic highways? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. Mr. WHITTINGTON. In other words, you think the Federal aid is just as justifiable for secondary roads as it is for primary roads? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. Mr. WHITTINGTON. That is all. The CHAIRMAN. I would like the record to show that of the Arkansas delegation we have Mr. Mills, Mr. Harris, and Mr. Cravens. I also notice Mr. Gathings is with us. Do any of you have any questions to ask? At a later point in the hearings we will hear from Congressmen as to their views. Mr. WHITTINGTON. Let me ask this one question: Is it your thought that the word "construction" here would embrace bridges? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. |