Source: Letter of June 5, 1951, from the Munitions Board to the Chairman, Senate Committee on Bank

ing and Currency.

Mr. PHILLIPS. May I ask as of what date that is supposed to be? Mr. FITZPATRICK. That was furnished in the course of hearings on the Defense Production Act, which would put that around April or May of this year, I believe.

Mr. PHILLIPS. There have been additions to it?

Mr. FITZPATRICK. There will be additions to it; yes.
Mr. THOMAS. Where did you get the other 200 areas?

Mr. FITZPATRICK. Areas come to the attention of the committee, Mr. Chairman, from agencies of the Government concerned with either the military or the industrial aspects of the defense program. They also come by requests from chambers of commerce or governing bodies of cities asking to be designated as a defense area and indicating what their problems are.

REQUESTS FOR CRITICAL-AREA DESIGNATION RECEIVED FROM LOCAL

OFFICIALS

Mr. THOMAS. Of course, in the final analysis, the people living in the town know more about the local problem than anybody sitting in Washington or anybody that is going to be sent out of Washington. How many requests have you had from mayors, city councils, and chambers of commerce?

Mr. CARSON. Out of 238 cases

Mr. THOMAS. Do you have a list of those requested by the mayors and city councils and chambers of commerce of the various localities? Mr. FITZPATRICK. We can supply that for the record. Do you have that list compiled now?

Mr. CARSON. We have a list of the areas which we can sort out as to the sources of requests.

Mr. THOMAS. We just want a list at this point in the record. (The list referred to is as follows:)

Of the 238 areas which have been suggested to the Interagency Critical Areas Committee for consideration, the Agency has information as to the sources of the recommendations on only 196 cases. Of these 196 cases, 179 were suggested by local government bodies of officials or by responsible local groups such as chambers of commerce, real estate boards, etc., as follows: