Otherwise, I am afraid you will impose an intolerable burden on the Federal Civil Defense Administrator. Rather than require him to draft, interpret, and enforce rules and regulations, it seems to me we would expedite effective administration of the program by establishing statutory standards for his guidance.

I suppose it serves no real purpose to discuss the principle involved or the need for the legislation. Apparently, the principle already has the approval of the Federal Civil Defense Administration, Department of Defense, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, General Services Administration, and other Federal agencies concerned. Need for the legislation is apparent.

My file contains many letters from veterans' organizations, municipal officials, local civil-defense leaders and voluntary workers and other private citizens genuinely concerned about the progress of a meaningful civil-defense effort.

Something must be done to jar the American people out of the complacent apathy spawned by a shortsighted vision of the potential tragedy which exists in this thermonuclear age in which we live. The only practical, economical, effective way to do that is to vitalize and inspire our local civil-defense units to alert the people to the threat and train them for the emergency we hope never comes. You cannot vitalize this program, you cannot inspire these workers, unless you equip these units with the tools to do the job.

To buy new tools might be economically impossible, but to supply old tools in which the taxpayers already have a depreciated investment is not only possible but logical. Everyone knows that the average Government recovery on the sale of property declared surplus, regardless of its usable life expectancy, is somewhere in the neighborhood of only 10 cents on the dollar. It is simply poor business policy to sell Government property for such an uneconomic return on investment when it can be used by some other arm of Government for such a worthwhile purpose. In Government practice as in family practice, we should make it do, use it up, or wear it out. I am grateful for the opportunity of having a voice in urging the approval of such meritorious legislation.

Mr. BROOKS. At this point I would also like to recognize Robert F. Corley, the director of civil defense from New Haven, Conn., who is here in behalf of H. R. 7227, and we are pleased to recognize him and introduce him to the committee.

He is also region 1 vice president of the United States Civil Defense Council, that is the National Target City Directors Association, and he is representing in his capacity here before us Leo J. Mulcahy, civildefense director for the State of Connecticut, and they are in support of this legislation, 7227.

I would like to present Elliott R. Jackson, director of the Atlanta metropolitan area of civil defense, Atlanta, Ga., who presents a statement in behalf of the civil-defense program receiving surplus Government properties, and William H. Falcey, civil defense and disaster control director, Mercer County, N. J.

STATEMENT OF ELLIOTT R. JACKSON, DIRECTOR, ATLANTA METROPOLITAN AREA OF CIVIL DEFENSE, ATLANTA, GA.

Mr. JACKSON. The average civil-defense organization suffers from lack of funds to purchase essential equipment, materials, and supplies. The Federal matching-fund program is, of course, a great help in meeting half the cost. But the local government is very reluctant to meet the other half, either because of inadequate funds at its disposal or its policy of only token support to its civil-defense program. At present, I understand that the Federal Government may donate surplus property for education and public-health purposes. Also, that it may sell this property, usually at a small percentage of its original cost, to commercial firms or individuals, which or whom may resell to the public with a profit.

Certainly, civil defense, with its program of survival in the atomic era, and affecting the lives of every American, should be given a consideration in the disposal of federally owned surplus property. The cost or loss to the Federal Government would seem negligible in comparison to the overall gain in our national-defense preparedness.

Therefore, we urge upon the committee and the Congress your favorable consideration in placing civil-defense agencies in position to receive Federal surplus property.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. FALCEY, DIRECTOR, CIVIL DEFENSE AND DISASTER CONTROL OF MERCER COUNTY, N. J.

Mr. FALCEY. Mr. Chairman and members of the Special Government Activities Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations, as director of the Mercer County, N. J., civil defense and disaster control organization, I am well aware of the great need of a variety of property, supplies and equipment which might become available should H. R. 4660 become law.

Surplus property of no use to educational or health organizations, or the Veterans' Administration, would become available to local civildefense units such as the one of which I am director. It would seem only just to include civil-defense organizations among those eligible for surplus property. Presently, the people of Mercer County pay taxes to the Federal Government for the purchase of property for the military, and when it is declared surplus the people of my county are doubly taxed as this property is resold at high cost to its civildefense unit. This appears to be a rather inequitable practice which H. R. 4660 would serve to remedy.

Passage of H. R. 4660 would, in my opinion, constitute one of the finest contributions toward the development of a civil defense that this Congress can render the Nation.

Mr. BROOKS. I would like to present a letter we have received from United States Senator Strom Thurmond, who has long been interested in the civil-defense program, and the American Legion's interest in it, and says that he wishes he could have come over here himself.

We would like personally to have had him testify, and he submitted this letter with the hope that we would be interested in it, in which he supports, to paraphrase part of it: "I strongly urge appropriate legislation be enacted by this Congress, in view of the

uncertainties of the cold war, and the tremendous capacity of destruction that man has developed.

(The letter submitted by Senator Thurmond is as follows:)

Hon. JACK BROOKS,

UNITED STATES SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE,

July 19, 1955.

Chairman, Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Agencies, House Government Operations Committee, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN BROOKS: I should appreciate your having my statement in support of proposals to amend existing law to enable the Federal Civil Defense Administration to procure surplus goods directly from executive departments and agencies inserted at the appropriate place in the record of the hearings. I am grateful for the opportunity of presenting my views in support of the objectives of an enlightened civil-defense program by going on record as favoring legislation that will empower the Federal Civil Defense Administration to purchase surplus supplies and materials directly from other executive agencies. I am supporting this proposal as a United States Senator and as vice chairman of the American Legion national civil defense committee. Certainly, the Civil Defense Administration as an integral component of our Nation's defense establishment should have the full power and authority to purchase for stockpile or other use goods and materials that executive agencies have declared to be surplus. There have been suggestions made that this right may be exercised under existing legislation, but there are conflicting opinions on this; therefore to remove every doubt in the matter, I strongly urge that appropriate legislation be enacted by this Congress.

In view of the uncertainties of the cold war and in view of the tremendous capacity of destruction man has developed, there can be no questioning the high priority of the Civil Defense Administration to acquire these surplus goods for use in carrying out the Administration's civil-defense functions. The incredible destruction that will certainly be wrought should there be another all out war give a very high priority to the functions of the Civil Defense Administration. The right to acquire these materials directly will greatly facilitate the stockpiling program of the Administration and will result in great savings to the American taxpayers.

There is another matter that I should like to call to the attention of the committee in this same regard. I have been very much impressed by the great need for a single supply catalog for the armed services. I have made a careful study of this matter, and I am convinced that this objective is both advisable and practicable. The savings such a catalog would achieve would be very substantial in terms of dollars. Also, such a catalog would prevent much timeconsuming and money-consuming duplication of effort on the part of the armed services.

I want to thank the chairman, Mr. Brooks, for allowing me to put my views on record, and I wish to thank the committee for their consideration.

Sincerely,

STROM THURMOND.

Mr. BROOKS. We have a letter from the Honorable Frederick G. Payne, United States Senator from Maine, endorsing this legislation. and enclosing supporting letters from the Governor of Maine and others, indicating to me their belief that surplus Federal property should be available for civil-defense purposes.

Civil-defense units are a vital step in implementing our civil-defense activities. And he goes on in detail with his support, and submits a letter from the Governor of Maine, and a resolution by his civildefense agencies, endorsing such legislation.

(The letter submitted by Senator Payne, and accompanying documents, are as follows:)

'Hon. JACK BROOKS,

UNITED STATES SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE,

Chairman, Special Government Activities Subcommittee,
Committee on Government Operations,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

July 19, 1955.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: During my service as Governor of Maine and as a member of the National Advisory Committee on Civil Defense, I became greatly interested in civil-defense activities and the various methods of implementing civil-defense programs. While Governor, I secured enactment of one of the earliest State model civil-defense laws in the Nation.

The civil-defense leaders in Maine have indicated to me their belief that surplus Federal property should be made available to civil-defense units as a vital step in implementing our civil-defense activities. On January 10, 1955, Senator J. Glenn Beall, of Maryland, and I introduced a bill (S. 272) in the Senate to amend the Federal Civil Defense Act of 1950 to authorize the disposal of surplus Federal property to State and local civil-defense units.

It is my understanding that the Federal Civil Defense Administration favors the approach of S. 1527 and H. R. 4660, bills which would amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to authorize the disposal of surplus property for civil-defense purposes. Although the approach in these bills varies from the approach in S. 272, the purpose is identical.

Since the Federal Civil Defense Administration favors S. 1527 and H. R. 4660, I should like to strongly urge the approval of this legislation. It is believed imperative that the disposition of surplus Federal property for civil-defense purposes be authorized without delay. Such a step would give a much-needed boost to our civil-defense programs in a time when the dangers of nuclear or chemical attack are literally beyond human comprehension. The urgency of equipping our State and local civil-defense units should not be delayed.

It is requested that a copy of this letter together with a copy of a letter from the Honorable Edmund S. Muskie, Governor of Maine, and a resolution adopted by the Council on National Defense of the American Medical Association be made a part of your subcommittee's record on legislation for the disposal of surplus Federal property for civil-defense purposes.

It is my hope that there will be an opportunity for approval of this legislation before the Congress adjourns.

Sincerely yours,

FREDERICK G. PAYNE, U. S. S.

STATE OF MAINE,
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR,

Augusta, July 11, 1955.

Hon. FREDERICK G. PAYNE,

Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C.

DEAR FRED: I would like, briefly, to indicate my support of the position taken by Col. Harry A. Mapes, Maine's director of civil defense and public safety, relative to surplus Government equipment. He points out that much of this equipment is useful and badly needed in the civil-defense effort. He points out that, at the present time, auctions are being held wherein the equipment goes to a dealer at a very low figure and is then made available to the public, some of which eventually gets into civil-defense use but from 3 to 10 times higher in price than that paid by the successful bidder. Senate bill 1527 and House bill 4660

are designed to correct this situation.

I suspect that Harry has called your attention to this matter. However, I did want to add a word of my own.

With all good wishes, I am,

Sincerely yours,

EDMUND S. MUSKIE.

RESOLUTION APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL DEFENSE AND BY THE COUNCIL ON NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AND FORWARDED TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION Whereas certain essential medical, public health, special weapons, and other general civil-defense equipment and supplies are at present unobtainable through regular commercial channels or through the present matching funds program; and

Whereas aforementioned equipment and supplies are required for State and local civil-defense agencies in order for them to carry out the educational, training, and emergency operational mission assigned by them by law; and

Whereas substantial quantities of these vital medical, public health, and special-weapons training and operational supplies in Federal Government warehouses have been declared in excess of present needs of existing Federal agencies under terms of the Federal Properties and Administration Services Act of 1949, as amended; and

Whereas no way has yet been found under existing law for the Federal Government to sell, lease, lend, transfer or deliver surplus property and equipment to State or local government agencies: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That it is the consensus of this Committee on Civil Defense that proposed Federal legislation (S. 272) to amend section 201 of the Federal Civil Defense Act of 1950 by relettering clause (j) as clause "K" and by inserting the following new clause immediately after clause (i): "sell, lease, lend, transfer, or deliver materials and facilities which are surplus property under the Federal Properties and Administration Service Act of 1949 to State and local units of the United States Civil Defense Corps and Farm Emergency Civil Defense Corps for civil-defense purposes on such terms and conditions as the administrator shall prescribe and without regard to limitations of existing law," should be enacted.

Mr. BROOKS. I would like to present for the record a statement submitted by Congressman Wilson from the 30th district of California, in support of this legislation.

Also, a statement submitted by Congressman Harrison A. Williams, of New Jersey, incorporating a letter from Gov. Robert B. Meyner. Also, a statement submitted by Congressman H. A. Dixon, of Utah. Also a statement submitted by Congressman Hubert B. Scudder, of California.

Also, a letter from Congressman Lester Johnson, of Wisconsin, together with a telegram from the director of civil defense of that State.

(The statements referred to are as follows:)

STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT C. WILSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. Chairman and committee members, it is respectfully urged that your committee act favorably on legislation under consideration to amend the Federal Property and Administrative Act of 1949.

This proposed legislation will authorize the disposal of surplus property owned by the Federal Government to duly authorized civil defense organizations of the several States and the political subdivisions thereof.

You are aware of the restricted budget under which the Federal Civil Defense Administration operates. I need not tell you that the civil defense organizations of political subdivisions are even more limited. Without the contribution of exceedingly large quantities of volunteer time and effort, there would be no civil defense program in most parts of the country. Whether appropriations to these groups should be increased is a moot question. The fact of the matter is, these appropriations are extremely small and there is no indication of anticipated increases.

As I am sure you are further aware, the military departments of the executive branch of the Government are disposing, through established channels, large quantities of materiel which has become excess to the need of the department or has, through technological advances, become obsolete.