Mr. FLEMING. I might say, for the workhouse, at the time we changed from 44 hours to 40 hours our population was going down all the time, and we absorbed that without taking on any additional people. We also dropped a man or two from year to year on lapses because our population was down. The increase has been coming so fast and so steady until it is a little bit faster than we can take care of. Our population movement is terrific. They are just coming down. Monday we had four loads down. Wednesday we had three loads. Mr. YATES. Are there any reasons behind that that you know of? Mr. FLEMING. Nothing except that there is an apparent crime wave causing it.

Mr. SARD. There are more police officers on the street. You have created additional judgeships. There are additional prosecutors. Mr. YATES. Is that the reason for it?

Mr. SARD. Our population is going up because there are more arrests.

PUBLIC WORKS

OPERATING EXPENSES, OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF DISTRICT BUILDINGS

Mr. WILDING. Mr. Chairman, the next item is under the head of "Public works" and is an additional amount of $15,000 for the fiscal year 1951 for the Office of the Superintendent of District Buildings, and is an item which is submitted in accordance with the direction of this committee in its report on the 1950 deficiency bill.

This item was carefully considered by your committee. Six and one-half pages of testimony were adduced before the committee and were considered, and as a result the committee recommended that the item be submitted for the fiscal year 1951. It is now being submitted and there is the justification here, which, together with the testimony adduced before the committee before on this same item, I believe will adequately inform the committee.

Mr. BATES. You would not make a statement like that with any intent of putting us on the spot, or anything like that?

Mr. WILDING. No, sir. I am merely following the direction of the committee, sir.

DEPARTMENT OF INSPECTIONS

On page 33 of the justifications is another small item of $9,000 for an additional amount for the Department of Inspections in order to permit us to print the building and electrical codes of regulations which are greatly in demand right now and which are completely out of print. These codes are sold to the public and they are in great demand at the present time. They are sold to the public at a rate which reimburses the District for the total cost of the printing.

Mr. BATES. Why did you not put this in the budget?

Mr. WILDING. This revision of this code was caused by changes which were beyond the control of the Commissioners subsequent to the submission of the budget and subsequent to our last opportunity to present an item to this committee.

Mr. BATES. What would you think if we put it off until 1952? Mr. WILDING. We think that a dire consequence might arise, sir, inasmuch as the need for these codes is very insistent.

The electrical contractors and the building contractors are daily inquiring as to when the codes will be available. They are now in the course of printing. We have found most fortuitously $5,000 which was available in the appropriation for the Department of Inspections.

Mr. YATES. That you never knew about?

Mr. WILDING. That we knew about, but it was a saving which we could apply. We did have some money for printing, but did not have enough for this entire amount.

I ask your most kind and considerate sympathy for this item, because we are really up against it if we do not get it. I mean, the entire building and electrical industry in this area will be up against it, because they cannot comply with the law unless they know what it is.

PAY INCREASES, WAGE-SCALE EMPLOYEES

WITNESSES

WILLIAM A. XANTEN, SUPERINTENDENT, DIVISION OF SANITATION, ENGINEER DEPARTMENT

FRANCIS L. TIMMONS, JR., CHIEF CLERK, ENGINEER DEPARTMENT

GENERAL STATEMENT

Mr. BATES. The next item we have to consider is for the pay increases for the wage-scale employees, in the amount of $325,000. Mr. Xanten, do you have a statement to make?

Mr. XANTEN. Mr. Chairman, I am here as the Chairman of the District of Columbia Wage-Scale Board to speak for this wage increase which was granted by administrative action pursuant to law, to be allocated by the Commissioners of the District to the appropriations for this fiscal year to which such increases are properly chargeable. The amount involved is $325,000.

The item will cover the wage increases not only for those per diem employees in the Engineer Department, which department employs the greatest number, but for the entire District of Columbia service. The increase recommended to the Commissioners was 5 cents across the board.

Mr. BATES. Based on the employees you now have, I assume?
Mr. XANTEN. Yes, sir.

Mr. YATES. This is just a leveling process, is it not?

Mr. XANTEN. Practically so, sir.

I might say this from the standpoint of the employees themselves: It is well deserved. From the standpoint of the District and from the managerial standpoint I think it is a conservative action. I say that because if you will accept this justification you will note that the 5-cents-per-hour rate will bring the starting rate of the laborers of the District in line with the existing starting rate for laborers in other agencies. We have always been behind, and this will bring our group of laborers who I am sure, Mr. Chairman, perform pretty strongly, in their respective tasks, on a level with others performing similar work. They are hard workers-they are collectors of garbage, most of them, and street cleaners, and men who should, at least, get the prevailing wage for laborers.

Mr. YATES. What do they get?

Mr. XANTEN. They are now starting at 95 cents an hour.

That

wage is below the existing wage for most of the other agencies of Government.

Mr. BATES. That is fixed by wage boards?

Mr. XANTEN. Yes, sir.

Mr. Chairman, I might make this one comment: I would like to be sure the money that is appropriated here is available so that this wage increase can be granted on and after the first pay period after July 1.

Mr. BATES. We will do our part.

Mr. XANTEN. That may require special legislation, and may not. It may require special language.

As a matter of fact, the Commissioners, in approving the increase, approved the recommendation of the Wage Board subject to the availability of funds. That means the recommendation of the Wage Board was for this increase to be made effective as of July 1. The money will carry it for the entire year.

MONDAY, JULY 17, 1950.

RECONSIDERATION OF ITEM FOR GOLF COURSES

Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Chairman, in the Commissioners' last meeting with representatives of the Recreation Board concerning the operation of the golf courses was the day before our items were forwarded to the Bureau of the Budget.

At that time we were not entirely satisfied and reserved the right to withdraw the item if satisfactory evidence was not produced at the hearing before your committee.

In view of what appears to us to have been an inadequate presentation in reference to the proposed contract with the Interior Department, more definite plans of operation and financial control, the Commissioners request leave to withdraw the item for further consideration when the 1952 budget is considered in September.

OFFICE OF CIVILIAN DEFENSE

WITNESSES

JOHN RUSSELL YOUNG, COMMISSIONER;

HON. GUY MASON, COMMISSIONER;

BRIG. GEN. GORDON R. YOUNG, U.S.A., ENGINEER COMMISSIONER; WALTER L. FOWLER, BUDGET OFFICER;

WILLIAM G. WILDING, DEPUTY BUDGET OFFICER;

LT. COL. THOMAS J. HAYES 3d, U.S.A., ASSISTANT TO ENGINEER COMMISSIONER; AND

HERBERT A. FRIEDE, SUPERINTENDENT OF COMMUNICATIONS, ELECTRICAL DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Mr. BATES. Mr. Fowler, we are ready to proceed with the estimate of civil defense in the amount of $290,000.

Mr. FOWLER. Mr. Chairman, I think General Young is the one to make a brief presentation on this subject.

GENERAL STATEMENT

Mr. BATES. General Young, do you have a statement you desire to make?

General YOUNG. Mr. Chairman, I would ge glad to go through the detailed justification. I might make a short preliminary statement for the record, to show the background for the request.

The Commissioners received a green light for a civil defense plan last fall from NSRB, based on the President's directive, and addressed to the Governors of the various States and the District Commissioners, to start working on it. We did not have, and we still don't have, any specific appropriation for the carrying on of that work, or for personnel that can be assigned to this project on a full-time basis. We have necessarily been feeling our way.

At the time that we prepared and submitted our 1951 budget, it was our feeling that the most progress we could make in fiscal year 1951. was to complete the planning, on which a start has been made already. We therefore recommended and asked for a $30,000 item in the 1951 appropriation bill so that we could get a Director of Civil Defense and a staff.

We also asked for a $10,000 item in the deficiency bill (which we had hoped to pass much earlier) in order that we could expedite the work that much sooner, and expedite the hiring of the Director at the proper time following that.

However, the $10,000 item was thrown out of the deficiency bill, and the $30,000 item was thrown out of the appropriation bill, upon a point of order in each case; which made it necessary for us at once to draft enabling legislation.

in.

Concurrently, we have progressed with our civil defense planning, and about 6 weeks ago we had a very elaborate check up of our civildefense plan, conducted by NSRB with the help of the Department of Defense, the Atomic Energy Commission, and other groups sitting The upshot of that was that we found we had made enough progress, so that we could ask for funds in 1951 not only to complete a civil-defense plan, but to make a start toward its implementation. We therefore submitted a revised authorization enabling act, which permitted us not only to plan but to implement it. That enabling act has passed the House. It is in the hands of the Senate committee, and there will be a hearing this afternoon. I hope it will be reported out promptly, and I hope it will pass the Senate without amendment. If that is done, we hope the bill will become law before the deficiency appropriation is reported out by the House committee. It is on the assumption that there will be this enabling legislation, that I am testifying here this morning. That is the background of this request in general terms.

As to what we hope to do with the $290,000, it is set forth in the specifications, which I will go through if the committee desires.

In most general terms, it provides first for a Director of Civil Defense, with a staff normally enough to complete and keep up-to-date the plan and to start the implementation.

The implementation involves primarily two things: First, the establishment of the civil defense headquarters, and what is called a command net-that is, a headquarters which will be in touch with all key personnel who will be needed in emergency, and which will receive

and send out air raid warnings. In connection therewith, will be the establishment of a civil defense warning net. This will eventually involve, I imagine, a large number of sirens and other devices in different parts of the city, controlled from central headquarters. Then there will be a great number of minor items, which I will discuss later. The amount of $290,000 is not by any means all that will be necessary to put the city in a complete posture of defense against a maximum emergency. For one thing, and a very big item involved this amount of money will not enable us to buy more than, perhaps, three or four air raid sirens. I do not know yet how many we will need. In World War II we had 85. Those, unfortunately, have been disposed of, and we are going to have to buy some more. That could not be covered within this amount of money.

Also, the building where we contemplate establishing the headquarters, subject to approval of the existing bill, is an existing building 'and not ideal. An ideal building should be fairly strong, reasonably safe against air raids, although not bomb proof; and it should be located a long distance from the most probable site of attack (the center of the city). The existing building is not ideal from this viewpoint. I think it is probable that it will be desirable later to set up another and better headquarters, and then use the present one for a stand-by. I am not sure, and I cannot make estimates about the cost of that. There will be a number of miscellaneous expenses connected with a complete civil defense plan. For example, I think it probable that storage centers or depots will be established around the perimeter of the city, where will be stored certain key supplies, spare parts, foodstuffs, perhaps blankets, mattresses and the like, things that can be used in connection with emergency attacks or in connection with evacuation. It will be necessary also to store some medical supplies.

So we make no estimate of the full cost of the complete civil defense plan, but it will no doubt be way in excess of $290,000. However, this is all we can justify now, so now in the absence of any immediate emergency this is all we ask for.

As you well know, the Department of Defense is also very much interested. Moreover, we are considering the cities and counties in the adjacent area in Maryland and Virginia who are also particularly interested in civil defense and form a part of the metropolitan area, so that all taken together is one unit.

It is obvious that the plan for Washington will be, in effect, a model for the rest of the country.

Those are the only comments I have to make, Mr. Chairman, and if you desire to cover the details of the specifications I will be glad to do so.

COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS ESTIMATE

Mr. BATES. General Young, my recollection is that some 2 or 3 months ago when we had hearings you had a request for $30,000. General YOUNG. That is correct.

Mr. BATES. Why is it that the request has jumped from $30,000 2 or 3 months ago to $290,000? Can you explain that?

General YOUNG. At the time we made that $30,000 estimate we had not proceeded very far with the preliminary plans, and it was our impression that the most we could expect to do in the year 1951 was to make paper plans. It does not cost much money to make