CIVIL DEFENSE-1961 TUESDAY, AUGUST 1, 1961 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY OPERATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m., in room 362, the caucus room, Old House Office Building, Hon. Chet Holifield (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Representatives Chet Holifield, Joe M. Kilgore, Martha W. Griffiths, R. Walter Riehlman, and F. Bradford Morse. Also present: Herbert Roback, staff administrator; Douglas Dahlin, staff attorney; Earl Morgan, chief investigator; and Paul Ridgely, investigator. Mr. HOLIFIELD. The subcommittee will be in order. OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN HOLIFIELD We have called these hearings on civil defense for the following broad purposes: (1) To understand more fully the new civil defense program promulgated by President Kennedy; (2) To update technical findings of importance and interest to civil defense; (3) To take a forward look at the shape of the civil defense program 5 years hence; and (4) To take a backward look at what, if anything, civil defense has accomplished to date, so that pitfalls and errors of the past may be avoided. The Military Operations Subcommittee, under my chairmanship, has been a sharp critic of civil defense. We have tried, I suppose, to be its conscience. We have been critical because we seek achievement. There has been no lack of words. There has been a great lack of deeds. I, for one, find it encouraging and fortunate that President Kennedy understands the importance of an effective civil defense program, and has declared it a key element in his recommendations to strengthen our defenses and our capability to resist Communist aggression. Our committee has been calling for an effective civil defense program for at least 6 years. Our broad-scale investigations into this field commenced in 1955. Our first basic report was issued in 1956. Altogether this subcommittee has held hearings in 4 separate years and has issued six separate reports. As chairman of the Special Subcommittee on Radiation of the Senate and House Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, I have also held two series of hearings on the related subject of bomb test radiation and the biological and environmental effects of a nuclear war attack on the United States. As far as this subcommittee, and certainly this chairman, is concerned, we have devoted long hours and great effort to this task for no idle reasons. We consider this matter with the utmost concern. This is serious business. Civil defense is a program for protection of the American people in case of a nuclear attack. It is a program for the very survival of our national life. I would like to interject at this point a rather personal note. I have felt so deeply about the importance of an effective civil defense program that I undertook to write to the President and talk to him on several occasions about it. I would guess that the very first letter that President Kennedy received from a congressional source came from me and dealt with civil defense. I say this because the letter was mailed in time to reach the President on Inauguration Day. The President has promised cooperation in helping us to have an informative and successful hearing. We, in turn, I may say, have cooperated by giving the departments and agencies concerned with preparing the outlines of the new civil defense program and preparing the necessary instructions and executive orders, time to do their work. We have deferred the hearings several times to accommodate the executive branch. Of course there are some, I suppose, who would never be finished with their paperwork unless they had deadlines. This hearing is a deadline in a certain sense. We had proposed, before this session ended, to provide a public forum for the President's new civil defense program in the interest of better understanding on the part of the Congress and the public. I dare say, after we have evaluated the testimony and presented our report, there will be a better understanding on the part of the executive departments and agencies. We intend, as a subcommittee, so long as I am chairman, to maintain our friendly and sympathetic but critical eye on civil defense. Our witnesses today will be Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer. Under Executive Order 10952, promulgated by President Kennedy on July 20, 1961, Secretary McNamara becomes the President's chief deputy for civil defense. We will want to know how Secretary McNamara proposes to go about his new job. What kind of an orgazination he intends to set up. How it will be funded. What military agencies and resources will be drawn up for civil defense tasks. His concept of relationships with civil agencies, both Federal and State and local. In other words, we want to know more about Secretary McNamara's concept of his new responsibilities in the civil defense field. He has a new job and a big one and we don't expect he will have all the answers at once. However, I believe that the Congress and the American people want assurance that the civil defense program under Defense auspices will retain its essentially civilian nature, will be seriously undertaken, and will be supported at a sufficiently high level in terms of money and effort. Tomorrow, Wednesday, August 2, we will have before us Frank B. Ellis, Director of the Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization. This office is marked out for a new career under the President's Executive order. Mr. Ellis becomes, as I understand it, the President's chief adviser in civil defense and related fields while Secretary McNamara becomes the chief operator. At any rate, we will expect to learn more about the relationships between the Department of Defense and the Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization, whose name will soon be changed to the Office of Emergency Planning. We will ask Mr. Ellis to explain his concept of the new civil defense program, the interagency relationships, the continuing functions of his office, and the dimensions of the civil defense job. We will set aside Thursday, August 3, for supporting witnesses from both the Department of Defense and the OCDM. Our inquiries will be partly on policy matters and details of organization, and partly on technical aspects of civil defense of interest to the committee. On Friday, August 4, we will hear representatives of the Atomic Energy Commission. Dr. Charles Dunham and Robert L. Corsbie, of the Division of Biology and Medicine will present testimony on recent findings in biological and environmental aspects of nuclear weapon effects. On Monday, August 7, we will hear a panel of civil defense experts from the RAND Corp. This panel will be headed by Herman Kahn, the author of a brilliant and much-quoted book "On Thermonuclear War." Mr. Kahn and his associates will discuss the following subjects: (1) The strategic role of civil defense; (2) Consequences of different levels of hypothetical nuclear attack; (3) Recuperation and recovery after nuclear attack; (4) Problems relating to fires and firestorms caused by nuclear explosions; (5) Ecological effects of thermonuclear war; and, (6) Recent developments in Soviet civil defense. Following the RAND presentation, on Tuesday, August 8, we will have an account of experimental group shelter manning and operations and matters of related interest presented by representatives of the Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory. Walmer E. Strope, Associate Scientific Director, will be the primary witness from the laboratory. This hearing schedule is flexible and may have to be adjusted in accord with time taken by witnesses. We have not planned at this time to call outside witnesses or organizations other than those named, but the subcommittee will receive prepared statements and may want to call additional witnesses at a later date. I will instruct the staff to assemble for the hearing record the pertinent statements and documents by the President and other officials concerned with the civil defense program. That concludes my rather lengthy opening statement. But, before we proceed to hear our principal witnesses today, I want to pay a personal tribute for the cooperation and assistance over the past 5 or 6 years from the Republican side of our committee. Congressman Walter Riehlman and his associates have been hard-working 73266-61--2 and loyal supporters of this civil defense program. This has not been a partisan program, this has been a bipartisan program for the good of the Nation. And, at this time, I am going to ask my colleague if he would like to say a few words. STATEMENT OF RANKING MINORITY MEMBER Mr. RIEHLMAN. Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Secretary, and General Lemnitzer, I do have a statement that I would like to make at this time. Mr. Secretary, I join with my distinguished Chairman in welcoming you before this subcommittee today. I am confident that this will mark the beginning of a fruitful association between yourself and the subcommittee. I am hopeful that this will mark the beginning of an enlightened era of civil defense; both in the administration and in the Congress. I appreciate the complexity and the magnitude of the responsibilities which you bear, and I commend you for the manner in which those responsibilities have been carried out. I fully realize that in civil defense you are inheriting a problem child. You are acquiring responsibility for a program which is at best unpopular. But in my humble opinion, although there have been few programs so closely linked to the security of this country which have been so dismally supported and which have excited so little interest, there have been few programs of such compelling importance. I am particularly glad to see you here today, because I have been convinced for the last 7 years or so that civil defense operations logically should be the responsibility of the Defense Department, and that from a standpoint of practicality we simply would never get the job done until the Department took over. Your presence here today represents a start in the right direction. It indicates that the real problems facing us in the civil defense field are beginning to be appreciated and it makes me, as well as the committee, feel that our past efforts have not been in vain. However, the great need for civil defense and the welcome realization that the wheels are slowly beginning to turn must not obscure what is surely the most important consideration at this point, and that is that this essential program be placed on a solid footing from the very outset. We cannot afford to tolerate the continuation of our present level of effort, but neither can we afford to give vastly increased support to civil defense unless we can be certain that we have a program which will bring home to the American people the vital importance of civil defense, a program which will fully reflect an understanding of the task ahead, and one which is backed up by people who have the authority and who are willing to commit the resources to do what needs to be done. I trust, Mr. Secretary, that we shall have a program of the kind that I have outlined. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Do any of the other members have anything to say at this point? Mr. Kilgore? |