Mr. GRAY. It is really the General Services Administration's job to manage and handle the stockpile; but under the statute the policy responsibility for the acquisition and retention of the stockpile is an ODM responsibility. I believe that in answer to your question, by and large, however, the strategic and critical stockpile materials are not in protected sites.

Mrs. GRIFFITHS. Are they in usable places?

Mr. GRAY. In the program an effort has been made to store these stockpiled materials as near as possible to the points where they would be used without complicating and compounding the target. difficulty. In other words, an effort has been made to balance the geographical availability against considerations of absolute concen

trations.

So I think the answer to your question is that we think the stockpiles are in locations-at least these locations have been chosen-with regard to where they might be used.

Mrs. GRIFFITHS. I join with the chairman in the request that you produce a plan that does something-not just one that talks.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. One of our recommendations was that we envisage that new Department of Civil Defense-as we call it-to be authorized to execute all other measures necessary to establish an integrated nationwide civil defense system and to utilize toward this end such available resources and facilities of the Federal departments and agencies as are necessary.

I must address it to both of you because you both are becoming merged into an organization, and as there is no indication as to which shall be the superior, I must address these questions to both of you.

Is there any such plan? Have you talked between yourselves about any such plan to obtain a national program, a program into which the local areas will be fitted and will become a federally approved national program? Has there been anything along this line?

Mr. HOEGH. Mr. Chairman, I can answer that question. After becoming Administrator of the Federal Civil Defense, I read your committee hearings, the testimony of these hearings. I became thoroughly acquainted with H. R. 2125.

I immediately came to the conclusion that we should have a new national civil defense plan. Since August I have devoted considerable personal time, and my staff a great deal of time, in working up and preparing a national civil defense plan that gives national courses of action and defines the role of the Federal Government, the State, the local government, and the people.

I think that is important. You must have Federal leadership and direction. You must assign the mission to the respective governments. Let me assure you that each one of the points that you had in your H. R. 2125 are covered in this national plan.

We have worked diligently with governors, mayors, city, and State directors, with all Federal agencies, to the end that we could come up with a coordinated, a simple, practical, effective national civil defense plan. We don't hold it out as being foolproof, but certainly it is one that should be in time put into effect, thoroughly tested, and continuously improved and strengthened.

It is still in a working draft form because I think for it to be really effective, Mr. Chairman, it will be necessary for the Congress to pass

into law H. R. 7576, which would, as you know, create responsibility for civil defense not in just the States and local governments but in the Federal, State, and local governments.

It would additionally provide Federal funds to match the personnel and administrative expenses of civil defense functions at the State and the local level. That is needed. And third, it will provide additional money to obtain the necessary radiological devices and instruments so that the Federal Government can deliver them to the States and the local communities.

With that, and with this reorganization plan being put into effect, I think that the national civil defense plan will do a great deal in giving the leadership, the direction, the coordination that is needed for this Nation to have effective civil defense.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Your statement is refreshing as far as your personal attitude is concerned. We hope that it goes beyond some of the preparations which FCDA has made in the past. On page 45 of our report we have the following comment on FCDA's plan:

Although the Administrator is authorized among other things to prepare national plans and programs for the civil defense of the United States, he has never construed his statutory authority to develop a realistic national plan for civil defense. The FCDA has prepared a looseleaf booklet entitled "A National Plan for Civil Defense Against Enemy Attack," but as one witness observed, this is no national plan at all, but merely a compendium of general statements and appended texts of applicable laws, rules, and regulations, a "conglomeration of everything FCDA has put out in a book."

Then it goes on to show how you have distributed your planning responsibilities.

I am speaking now about the agency before you came into it. You did not do the job of national planning in the FCDA. You distributed and delegated planning responsibilities. This is quite different from preparing a national plan and coordinating it with the local planning. This is different, as I say, if you are actually planning and formulating a national plan.

Mr. HOEGH. I have it in working draft. It is ready for action. I would like to have you take a look at it. I would like to have your comments and your recommendations.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. We will be glad to. Then maybe you are giving us some hope now. Can this committee hope that, if this plan goes into effect, your next step will be in the field of operational planning?

Mr. HOEGH. With reference to that question, certainly what Federal civil defense is doing today and what Mr. Gray's agency is doing today would go to, of course, the President; and he in turn would then transmit it to this new director.

So all the planning that is now being undertaken, all functions that are now being done, would be there. And, of course, it would be the ultimate decision of the new director as to whether he would want to abandon it, revise it, update it-whatever he wanted to do. Certainly that would be his responsibility, if he is a good staff officer for the President of the United States.

You mentioned this plan. If you have the time, I would like to present it. I am very proud of this thing.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. This committee will surely take the time for any cooperation. We don't look upon ourselves as antagonists of the FCDA. We never have.

Mr. HOEGH. No, sir; I know you don't.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. We have looked upon ourselves as accomplices before the fact.

Mr. HOEGH. I consider you are some of the champions of civil defense. I really do.

Mr. RIEHLMAN. Could I ask, Mr. Chairman, if Mr. Hoegh is continued in this program as an official, if he is going to use every bit of influence he has to see that the program he has envisioned for an outline would be carried out?

Mr. HOEGH. Of course you are making a guess there that I might be in the new agency. Let's put it this way. If I am in it, of course I would make strong recommendations. And if I am not in it-I would still make strong recommendations.

Mr. GRAY. Mr. Chairman?

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Gray.

Mr. GRAY. There is, I think, no dissent that I know about in the executive branch of the Government and among those agencies who are concerned in these problems about the necessity-no dissent from the fact that it is necessary to have a national civil defense plan.

This, of course, is the responsibility of the Federal Civil Defense Administrator. But I can say to you that Governor Hoegh has worked very hard and I think has come up in a remarkably short time he has only been in this job since about August-with a plan which as far as I know is generally subscribed to by the agencies. And again, without making any assumptions as to who the people are who are going to be in the principal spots in the new organization if it becomes law, I think it is safe to say that all those people who are now working on it, principally in Governor Hoegh's agency and to the extent we have had anything to do with it, everybody is for it; and I see no reason for the committee to be apprehensive that this plan will not go forward.

It may have some adjustments, but the basic notion of a national civil defense plan, I believe, will certainly be a reality.

Mr. ROBACK. Mr. Gray, Governor Hoegh was apprehensive to the investigators of the McKinsey Co. that his plan would be disrupted by any reorganization changes at that time. Subsequently, Governor Hoegh has been persuaded persumably to change his mind.

Perhaps he might want to enlighten us on his feelings as to the relation of any reorganization move now to his national defense plan.

Mr. HOEGH. I find no obstacles at all. As a matter of fact, after working out this plan, I have come to the conclusion that one office, one agency, responsible for all nonmilitary defense policies and planning and functions is going to be tremendously helpful.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Do you think it will be in a position of more prestige and importance, this new agency, than the old agency?

Mr. HOEGH. Much more. I have been working as Administrator of an indepenent agency. It is my responsibility to coordinate civil defense functions within the Federal Government. I think it would be tremendously helpful for this new official to have this increased stature, because it will be necesary for him to see that certain delegations are not just delegated, but that they are executed, and with him serving as a staff officer directly under the President of the United States, I feel that he can more effectively accomplish

Mr. HOLIFIELD. You feel that this will be a concentrating of responsibility?

Mr. HOEGH. Yes.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. And that it will give additional prestige and put you, you might say, closer to the ear of the President and closer to obtaining Presidential support of such plans as are approved by the President.

Mr. HOEGH. Yes, sir. In addition it will give you unified guidance, too, of not only the Federal agencies but unified guidance to the States and the local communities.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. You would speak with one mouth to the States? Mr. HOEGH. Right. Then if there is something wrong he can get to the source and get it eliminated, or attempt to eliminate it.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Leaving this field for just a moment, you no doubt have studied the McKinsey report?

Mr. HOEGH. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Are you in basic agreement with the proposed organizational structure as set forth there?

Mr. HOEGH. I have looked at both. I haven't come to a definite conclusion, but the definite conclusion would have to be based upon what I would think would most effectively accomplish this mission that has been assigned to the Office of Defense Mobilization and to the Federal Civil Defense Administration. I want to remove as much as possible the redtape and unnecessary mechanism in the way of execution and in the way of making a totally effective civil defense and mobilization planning for this Nation.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Do you-or either of you-believe that the total number of personnel engaged in these two agencies will be enlarged or diminished?

Or can you say?

Mr. HOEGH. That is a difficult question. In this plan I am trying to look 10 years ahead instead of this 6 weeks or 6 months business. You have to look ahead.

If this Nation is to have a real, effective, nonmilitary defense, we are going to have to have a gradual improvement and strengthening of that effort and for that reason in the years ahead it may be necessary to have more people.

But in the long run, sir, it would eliminate duplication and therefore you would have less people doing the job than if you would keep two separate, distinct agencies.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Looking at it at the present time, will there be an elimination of any of the executive personnel, or will they just more or less be assimilated, and for the time being you will go forward with the same personnel as exists in FCDA and ODM-thinking in terms of numbers now.

Mr. HOEGH. I can speak only for Federal Civil Defense now, sir. We have approximately 1,300 in our agency. There are about 57 of us here in Washington, 750 roughly out in Battle Creek, Mich., and the balance are in our regional offices throughout the Nation.

We proposed in our budget request for fiscal year 1959 an increase in our personnel up to over 1,500 because we wanted to gradually strengthen our capabilities and gradually strengthen the overall civil defense planning of this Nation. The House has given us part of it.

They did not give us all that we feel we should have in order to make this gradual improvement and gradual strengthening of civil defense. Mr. HOLIFIELD. How many people do you have in ODM, Mr. Gray? Mr. GRAY. We are authorized at the present time, Mr. Chairman, 238 full-time positions. They are not all filled. In our budget request for the next fiscal year, we are asking for authorization for the same number of people.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Is it contemplated that your regional people and the regional people of both FCDA and ODM will be retained?

Mr. GRAY. Strictly speaking, ODM really has no regional people now, Mr. Chairman. The regional mobilization committees which are served by an executive officer and a secretary-these people-the executive officers and secretaries-are on loan from other agencies.

We had contemplated in our earlier planning to establish regional offices with full-time executive officers and secretaries who would be in the ODM organization. However, now that the President's plan has come before Congress and would provide for a unified regional structure, we have told the Senate Appropriations Committee that since the House cut out some of these funds, we do not wish them to restore the funds which would have supported the regional structure, because clearly one of the great advances in all of this area that we have been discussing would be to have a single voice of the Federal Government at the regional level, which would be accomplished in this plan.

We therefore are withdrawing any request for funds for that purpose, inasmuch as the Federal Civil Defense Administration already has regional offices, I think well staffed, and has funds to continue them as far as I know.

Mr. HOEGH. That is right.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. In the contemplation of a plan, there is a set of officers authorized. How does that compare with the present structural setup in FCDA?

Mr. HOEGH. In FCDA, sir, we have the Administrator and the Deputy Administrator. Then at Battle Creek, Mich., I have what I call a sort of chief of staff to look after all of the operations and planning in that office.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Then do you not have regional directors?

Mr. HOEGH. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. How many regional directors?

Mr. HOEGH. We have now, sir, 7 regions and 7 regional directors. We have seven deputies.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. The plan provides for not to exceed 10?

Mr. HOEGH. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. So this is quite close to the existing structure then as far as titled positions are concerned in the plan, the setting up of titled positions?

Mr. HOEGH. Yes, sir, except when you get down to the organization, you understand we have assistant administrators for various functions and planning activities.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Then it would be fair for me to say that you do not contemplate the elimination of any executive personnel at this time by virtue of the plan?

Mr. HOEGH. I would not want to give that as a definite "Yes." I would say that it appears so as of this time.