now available, and by planning for space in new construction adaptable to shelter use.

The heart of the President's program is the identification, marking and stocking of available community shelter space in existing buildings throughout the United States. Our best estimate by extrapolation from pilot surveys made in the past is that this program will identify some 50 million usable shelter spaces, and will provide a minimum of shelter for approximately one-fourth of our population. This does not mean that the program will save 50 million lives. Again, as the 1959 study pointed out, nearly 75 percent of the deaths from the hypothetical attack would have resulted from blast and thermal effects combined with immediate radiation effects. Other patterns of attack might increase or decrease the proportion of the population exposed to fallout alone, and thus increase or decrease the number of lives that could be saved by fallout shelter. But it is probably a reasonable estimate that the identification and marking of existing fallout shelter space could, without additional effort, save at least 10 to 15 million lives in the event of a thermonuclear attack.

The survey of existing shelter space is not only a means to utilize the greatest amount of protection that can be made available in a reasonably short time. It is also a prerequisite for future planning. We cannot work out a program to modify existing shelter space in order to increase its capacity; and we cannot decide whether to include provisions for shelter in new buildings until we know how much shelter is already available in relation to the distribution of the population and proximity to possible targets. In other words, we can't decide what we need until we find out what we have already.

MODIFICATION OF EXISTING SHELTER SPACE

It is not necessary, however, to await completion of the shelter survey before beginning work on shelter modification and on plans for dual purpose shelter space in new buildings. The survey itself, which is to be completed by December 1962, at a cost of $93 million, will concentrate first on metropolitan areas, which are also likely to have the largest number of available shelter spaces. At the same time, we propose to initiate a $10 million pilot program to test in actual practice a number of ways of modifying shelter space, primarily to increase capacity. We are particularly interested in the possibilities of forced draft ventilation, operating from standby emergency power sources, in order to multiply capacity. This pilot modification program will be confined to existing Federal buildings in order to avoid problems of ownership and control.

We propose also to provide $7.5 million to cover the additional cost of planning and construction to include fallout shelters in new Federal buildings. Out of this program we hope to develop architectural plans that will substantially reduce the actual incremental cost of shelter in new buildings considerably below present estimates. These programs will also serve as an incentive for State and local governments and as a model for other public buildings, schools, and offices.

STOCKING AND EQUIPPING SHELTERS

As you are well aware, a shelter is of little value until it is stocked and equipped with the minimum essentials for survival during the 1or 2-week period that it may be continuously occupied. Since the spaces that we identify will be public shelters-and we will not mark them unless they can be made available to the general public, although they may be located in privately owned buildings, I believe it is our responsibility to provide survival stocks and equipment. Also, the Federal Government is in a position to procure these stocks in quantities that make it possible to bring their cost down to a minimum. We are proposing to equip the shelters with 5-day austere emergency rations. Consumption of this ration by some persons may involve some discomfort. But in areas of highest fallout contamination, its ready availability will be essential to survival.

The ration to be procured is to be packaged so as to have a shelf life of at least 5 years. It will be inexpensive, easily prepared, and consistent with the restricted water and heat available in shelters. A ration of this type has been developed by the Department of Agriculture. Although not comparable to the diet of our citizens today, it is similar to the regular diet in certain areas of the world. The basic ration need not be exhausted in 5 days. As you know, the duration of shelter confinement can be estimated from radiation measurements. If the fallout is extremely high, no food at all should be eaten for the first day or two, and shelter occupants must stretch out their consumption. In some instances occupants may bring some food with them to the shelter.

Water is more essential for survival than food. In our planning we have allowed a 2 week's supply at the rate of 1 quart per person, per day, packaged in special containers. Some first-aid medical supplies are necessary. Their ready availability will eliminate the need for healthy occupants of the shelter to expose themselves to radiation in order to search for first-aid supplies and assistance.

To use a fallout shelter effectively, the occupants must have meters to determine the radiation dose rates, and accumulated doses inside, and the dose rates outside the shelter. Instruments are available that meet requirements recommended by a National Academy of Sciences committee. Lastly, shelter equipment includes essential sanitation supplies, and simple tools in the event that the shelter should be on the fringe of the blast area and the exits become blocked with debris. The program also includes some funds for secure storage of supplies in those shelters in which secure storage is not already available.

HOME WARNING SYSTEM

Available shelters can be more effectively used if there is an adequate, dependable warning system to tell people when to use them. In taking shelter from fallout, time is not, as you know, critical, since the fallout travels with the wind and will not fall back to the ground outside the immediate circle of blast damage for a half hour or more. Nevertheless, the present siren warning system has serious drawbacks. These are considerable time delays in some areas, and the sirens may be inaudible indoors under some circumstances.

The President's program, therefore, includes a good start on the installation of a home warning system, the National Emergency Alarm Repeater (NEAR) system. The NEAR system does not tell the citizen what to do it alerts him to turn on his radio in order to receive instructions.

If an extensive system test in Michigan proves successful, it is proposed to begin national installation of this household warning system, which operates on electrical impulses imposed on regular power lines. Federal funds would be used to cover the cost of the signal generators. The receivers would be sold to the general public. A marketing survey has already indicated a high acceptance rate at the anticipated retail price of $5 to $10.

RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING EQUIPMENT

Any operation depends upon intelligence; defense against fallout depends on information on the nature of the fallout pattern and its intensity in particular locations. The President's program, therefore, contains funds for radiological detection equipment, to cover the cost of detection kits for some 90,000 monitoring stations, in addition to the 50,000 already equipped with kits; aerial monitoring equipment; and individual meters. These meters would be used by workers who may have to expose themselves to fallout when they undertake decontamination operations, rescue work, and emergency distribution of food and essential supplies from outside stockpiles.

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Lastly, the President's program proposed to increase funds for research and development more than threefold. The program of identification, marking, and modification of shelter space in existing structures is designed to buy all the shelter protection we can at the least cost, in the shortest possible time. To assure that any additional units of protection purchased at a later date are also obtained at lowest cost, a vigorous program of research and development is required. Similarly, we believe that research and development can reduce the cost and increase the effectiveness of warning and emergency communication systems. The experience and facilities of the Department of Defense in research and development work should be particularly helpful in pointing out paths that civil defense research and development ought to explore.

EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS

Another element in the program is funding to begin to provide fallout protection and standby power for the approximately 1,300 broadcasting stations cooperating in the emergency broadcast system. The program also contains funds to provide backup communications for vulnerable wire line links between these stations and local and regional civil defense headquarters by providing simple radio communications equipment. It contains funds to improve the national warning system (NAWAS) which runs from North American Air Defense Headquarters to some 450 warning points throughout the country. NAWAS is manned around the clock. It is tested daily, and it

works. It is the spreading of the warning signal from the warning points to the siren points or other notification points throughout the country that requires attention, including improvement in the siren system, which is still necessary to warn people out of doors.

ISSUE OF CIVILIAN CONTROL

Many people, including previous Defense officials, have been apprehensive about the consequences of bringing civil defense under what has been described as "military control," as well as the dangers of degrading military capabilities. As I indicated earlier in my statement, we propose to organize the civil defense function under civilian control, as a separate unit attached to the Office of the Secretary of Defense. There are a number of ways, however, in which the civil defense organization can take advantage of the competence and capabilities of other units within the Department, without in any way detracting from the Armed Forces primary military obligations. For example, the district offices of the Army Corps of Engineers and of the Navy Bureau of Yards and Docks can be called upon to contract with civilian architects and engineers for the proposed shelter survey. The civil defense warning system becomes most effective when it is considered as an extension of the North American Air Defense (NORAD) warning system.

FUNCTIONS DELEGATED TO OTHER AGENCIES

While responsibility for civil defense is focused in the Department of Defense under the new Executive order, certain specific civil defense functions are delegated to other agencies. Responsibility for maintaining stockpiles of food and medical supplies are specifically excepted from the Executive order, and it is expected that these responsibilities will be delegated respectively to the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Under a series of Emergency Preparedness Orders, the Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization has delegated a number of specific functions to other Federal agencies. These delegations continue in effect, although they are now subject to coordination by the Department of Defense to the extent that they affect the new civil defense responsibilities of the Department.

It may be useful for me to summarize some of these civil defense delegations briefly :

The Department of Agriculture, in addition to its expected food stockpiling responsibilities, is responsible for rural fire control and for protection of plants and animals against radiological, chemical, and bacteriological hazards.

The Department of Commerce is responsible for developing plans to restore streets and highways, for the emergency use of civil air transport and for the use of shipping in emergency.

The Federal Aviation Agency is responsible for emergency plans for civil airports and airways.

The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, in addition to its expected medical stockpile responsibilities, is responsible for planning care of refugees from an attack, including provision of location services. It conducts adult education programs to acquaint

the general public with these duties and responsibilities in emergency, and it is responsible for introduction of information on civil defense into school and college curricula.

The Department of Interior is responsible for emergency plans for the power and petroleum industries.

The Department of Labor is responsible for planning for use of emergency manpower, except medical manpower, in the immediate postattack period.

The Post Office Department is responsible for establishing a registration service for individuals and families.

The Housing and Home Finance Agency is responsible for developing plans and programs for emergency housing and community services in the postattack period.

The Interstate Commerce Commission is responsible for developing plans and programs for use of domestic service transportation in emergency.

It is apparent from this exposition that the relations of the Department of Defense with other Federal departments and agencies in administering the civil defense program are quite complex. The transfer of civil defense responsibilities to the Department requires the establishment of new lines of communication, which are going to have to be worked out over the coming weeks and months.

RELATIONS WITH STATE AND LOCAL UNITS

I am well aware that the Federal responsibilities which I have just described are complementary to the responsibilities of the States as prescribed in the Federal Civil Defense Act. The Department of Defense has for some time been in touch with State and local civil defense organizations through its representatives on the regional civil and defense mobilization boards. As you know, the Department of the Army has designated the principal Defense representatives on each regional board and the Navy and Air Force designate an assistant to the Department of the Army representative. These representatives have participated in all of the deliberations of the regional boards, including the review of the State and local survival plans, and the Department participates in test exercises of the State and local units.

I am also aware of the fragmentary nature of most State and local civil defense planning. A few States have made extraordinary efforts. As of June 30 of this year, only 7 States, 9 counties, and 8 cities possessed protected emergency operating centers, and another 7 States, 22 counties, and 12 cities had centers under construction. In more than two-thirds of the States, there is no operating center now available and equipped to function in a civil defense emergency.

We have not yet determined what form of regional organization would be most appropriate to carry out our responsibilities to assist State and local governments in planning to protect themselves and to provide emergency survival services.

State and local governments have available to them vast resources of trained manpower and equipment in their police and fire departments, civil engineering offices and public utility services. These resources must be organized for emergency operation, however, and