can only speak for the Detroit area in stating that the existing facilities aren't able to cope with any type of disaster which would cut off the water supply, or force the evacuations of large segments of our population. This metropolitan center would be forced to draw its water supply from outside its boundaries. There is plenty of water available, but there is a sad lack of pumping facilities to handle a large influx of new residents or to even supply the cooking and drinking needs of those who evacuate their mother city. Most of our really up-to-date fire-fighting and disaster equipment is concentrated in our central cities, the area most vulnerable to enemy attack and the area most likely to be cut off in case of a natural disaster which blocks streets and highways. We are faced with the possibility that some of this equipment would be unable to reach other sections of the city where it is badly needed.

In my opinion, supplying volunteer fire-fighting organizations with surplus. equipment would help to solve this problem with the least possible expenditure of Federal funds. The equipment would be far enough away from the scene of a disaster to a central city so that it still would be maneuverable. In many cases, the areas served by volunteer fire-fighting departments would be the natural evacuation areas. The sudden influx of those evacuated into these largely rural areas would mean that the danger of fire would increase.

Water-pumping equipment ordinarily used in fighting fires could be quickly converted into supplying the water needs of a large influx of new residents on a temporary basis.

For these reasons, I urge the Special Subcommittee on Donable Property of the House Committee on Government Operations to report H. R. 10377 favorably. In my opinion, it is in the best interests of our Nation and its people. Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Chairman, may I say one other word before I leave?

Mr. McCORMACK. Certainly.

Mr. FOGARTY. Because there is something I had on my mind when I came in here.

I want to say publicly that I thank you for the leadership that you have provided in the field of legislation in allowing this surplus property to be donated for educational purposes and for public health purposes.

I do not know of anything that we are doing in Government today that is providing more help for education and public health than the legislation that provided the leadership for the early days of the administration of this act.

Also, I see in the room, Mr. Lund, over here, who I have been listening to for 8 or 10 years on the Appropriations Committee, who has had charge of the Surplus Property Act of the Health, Education, and Welfare Department, and I did want to say that I think he has been doing a splendid job.

I think he can point to the record where he has returned into the Treasury of the United States many millions of dollars over the course of the administration of this program.

I think it has been well handled, and he should be given a great deal of credit for the way that the act has been handled as far as the donation of this property for public health purposes and educational purposes are concerned.

Mr. McCORMACK. Thank you, Congressman Nimtz, and also again, Congressman Fogarty.

I think at this time it might be well that we heard from Mr. Lund and then we will call the other witnesses so you will get an idea as to the position of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and so that we know what their thinking is.

Mr. Lund, will you come forward where we can get chummy?

With the very fine compliment paid you by Congressman Fogarty, you are going to have a lot of difficulty, I can see, because you have got to appear before his committee next year, you know.

Will you give us your full name, Mr. Lund?

STATEMENT OF CHESTER B. LUND, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF FIELD ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND

WELFARE

Mr. LUND. My name is Chester B. Lund. I am Director of the Office of Field Administration for the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

I have no formal prepared statement. We did state our position, Mr. Chairman, in a letter to you, which probably certain excerpts from would help to clarify our position.

We, as you will recall, last year, had a study committee to try to ascertain what was the best procedure for the general disposition of this property throughout.

Certain recommendations were made; and the Department then, primarily for the reason that civil defense had been added to this listing, thought it advisable to gain further experience in relation to that large program.

One of the problems in considering the total disposition of surplus property is that there are so many items that are in short supply and in long demand. By that, I mean there are not quantities to go around; that it was our feeling that it was more important to serve for the time being, as long as so many needs were unmet, the educational institutions of this country, the health institutions, and civil defense. When the Congress enacted the civil-defense law, it placed a heavy administrative responsibility on us, which required a new procedure, and we were fearful that, in relation to the total responsibility, administratively we could not do a satisfactory job.

We have at all times attempted

Mr. McCORMACK. Is that because of lack of help or what?

Mr. LUND. No; that thing was so large, for one thing, and we had not had the procedure.

It would have been a lack of help; yes, sir, if we had taken the total expansion.

Mr. McCORMACK. I am talking about the fire fighters.

Mr. LUND. The fire fighters? No.

Mr. McCORMACK. Confine it if you will to

Mr. LUND. To the fire fighting?

Mr. McCORMACK. Not necessarily, but we would each bill ought to be considered on its own merits, of course, now.

Mr. LUND. One of the problems as we see it in this program again relates to civil defense. Currently under existing procedures voluntary fire departments may get equipment if they have a training program under the civil defense procedure.

That is a fact generally not known. We have given considerable equipment to volunteer fire departments under that program.

The other problem that we do not have the answer to, however, we are going to undertake to try to get a survey so we know what is available, generally speaking there is a feeling that there is a great deal

of fire-fighting surplus equipment throughout Government, and the inquiries that we have made to various defense units and other governmental agencies, we are unable to locate that which we feel would be any substantial quantity, and that probably we would disappoint a good many people if we took a position of supporting it and then could not deliver.

We do not know the answer at this time, and therefore we have taken the position, until the needs of the schools and the hospitals and civil defense of this country are met, that it is the better choice for the Department to make to attempt to meet that need before expansion.

We are totally sympathetic to the purposes but we are not as yet prepared, we do not believe, to go further.

Does that help you?

Mr. McCORMACK. Well, I am not answering questions.

Mr. LUND. I mean does that answer your question?

Mr. McCORMACK. I will weigh your evidence.

Mr. LUND. Thank you.

Mr. MAY. Mr. Lund, there is now, as you say, quite a bit of equipment that goes through the civil defense operation in the State to the volunteer firemen today.

Mr. LUND. Yes, sir.

Mr. MAY. You say they have to qualify, they have to have a unit, established training unit, in the volunteer fire-fighting organization to qualify for that.

Mr. LUND. They have to be established under the State regulation so that they are a legal entity under the State's jurisdiction and have a program of training for civil defense.

Mr. MAY. All these volunteer fire-fighting units, when there is a catastrophe, are usually called on right away whether they are actually a recognized part of civilian defense or any other organization at the time; aren't they?

Mr. LUND. That is true.

Now there is one other aspect of that that might be helpful to the group, and that is when there is such a catastrophe, by a certification of the civil defense, any available material in warehouse and even others in reserve can be called into use. But it then must go back onto that reserve for use at another time.

Mr. MAY. Of course I have seen that happen recently in New England with our floods and hurricanes and so forth where the volunteer firemen have been called upon immediately along with the National Guard.

In other words, the problem in your mind is that it is too difficult to proceed to allow that extra step beyond civilian defense to let every volunteer fire-fighting organization into this program because you are afraid you would not have enough material and equipment and manpower to handle the bookkeeping of it to extend it to that group; is that correct?

Mr. LUND. That is, I think, the chief factor in it.

I think there are other auxiliary things that could be considered. For example, where we assign any equipment to a school or to a defense unit for utilization, that material is there available in the community for use in an emergency also, so there is that supplemental assistance that can come into play.

But the facts are, we really do not have enough information to know what the backlog or potential in this area is, and we felt we should try to ascertain that before we take a different position.

Mr. MAY. From what you have said you would probably, though, put the volunteer fire-fighting units perhaps next in priority as far as being included in this program?

Mr. LUND. The question that you raise, as it deals with priorities, again gives us some pause.

In 1944 through 1948, when there was a priority system in vogue, that system was found to be both costly and expensive to government because of the fact that you had to allow all groups to come into your warehouses and areas of storage to review the material to see whether they wanted it. The cost of housing, storing for long periods of time, became so high that the Congress at that time determined there should be no priority system, and we are concerned about the reestablishment of a priority system.

I do not say that it is insurmountable, but I say it is a real administrative headache to find a way to get equitable distribution, but I think I would have to go back to the original statement that basically I think we should make an effort to do a review to ascertain the possible quantity in this area.

I think it would be in error to build up in the minds of the people that there is a large quantity of this equipment, only to disappoint them.

Mr. McCORMACK. Any further questions, Mr. May?

Mr. MAY. I guess not, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Fogarty, do you want to ask any questions of Mr. Lund?

Mr. FOGARTY. No. The only observation I would like to make is when you compare the local units of civilian defense of any State in the country today to any volunteer fire departments there is not any comparison because we do not have good local civilian defense units in any State that I know of or any city or any town.

I do not know of a State that has a good program. Even the Federal Government has been attempting to bring this to the attention of the States, and the local communities. There just is not that interest.

There certainly is more interest and more activity in the field of volunteer firemen than there is in civilian defense, and I would hope if any priorities are to be established or if your thinking is in that direction that you would give that some consideration.

Mr. McCORMACK. Well, it is not a question of priority, Mr. Lund. It is a question of being covered. We have no priority now except the Defense Department has given a priority to certain groups that has caused them a headache; is that right?

Mr. LUND. That is correct.

Mr. McCORMACK. In other words, if the volunteer firemen go over and convince the Secretary of Defense that they are at least on a comparable status to the Boy Scouts, they can get a real priority.

Mr. LUND. That is correct.

Mr. McCORMACK. They do not have to go through the whoever the State director on surplus property might be in a particular State, but they can go directly themselves and if they are recognized by the Secretary of Defense as having military aspects and placed upon

declared eligible by him under that provision of the law which is in the Donable Property Act, which, of course, was a very extreme stretching, I am sure you will agree to that, they had to do a lot of stretching to get some of those organizations under that, and they, probably there is not any of these organizations if the Secretary of Defense declares them under that provision of law, but what would be eligible for donable property and for a preferential status. Mr. LUND. That is the way we understand it.

Mr. McCORMACK. Even above schools, colleges, charities, they could go in and take the donable property even over the colleges and hospitals and schools and the other beneficiaries of-the direct beneficiaries of-the Donable Property Act; is that correct?

Mr. LUND. That is correct, as we understand it.

Mr. McCORMACK. However, you say that through the civilian defense they can get-if they comply with certain civilian-defense training programs, they are eligible to get property through the civilian defense?

Mr. LUND. Yes, sir

Mr. McCORMACK. But, on the other hand, would that not put them subject to the civilian defense now?

Let's explore that just a little.

Would that not put them-these are men; now we can get a look at the other side, my mind is open. I know the position taken by your Department and the Bureau of the Budget, and the General Services Administration.

On the other hand, if that took place, then you are losing the identity, submerging the identity of the fire fighters throughout the Nation as an organization to the civilian defense; are you not?

Mr. LUND. I would think there would be that element in it, yes.

Mr. McCORMACK. But the result would be that, yes, in part, anway? Mr. LUND. Yes, sir.

Mr. McCORMACK. In part?

Mr. LUND. Yes, sir.

Mr. McCORMACK. What is your personal opinion about the fire fighters are they an eligible group?

Mr. LUND. I would certainly feel that all units that serve the public interest where there is Government surplus should have its opportunity to have its fair share when the needs that are the most basic are first met, and in my judgment, the most basic need is still to health and education.

The major thing again that bothers me as an individual in this is the fact that we have not been able to find reserve enough so that we think we could make a contribution to the fire fighters but we are continuing our study of this thing.

Mr. McCORMACK. It is a long study; is it not?

Mr. LUND. No; you see this only came up now in recent months on this particular fire-fighting item.

The study previously made related to other areas of the surplus property program, and not the fire-fighting equipment.

Mr. McCORMACK. Well, you say one of your principal difficulties would be that administrative aspect and that involves the money to employ the necessary people?

Mr. LUND. That is right.