tional Crime Information System which is being financed currently under the Law Enforcement Assistance Act. Under this, the Federal Bueau of Investigation is providing help to each and every one of the States to provide a central registration of stolen vehicles throughout the Nation. This system is linked together by a federally financed system that ties at one point into each State. The State networks then continue on down to provide coverage throughout the entire State, and interties into a Federal system.

(Chart 5, referred to above, follows:)

NATIONAL CRIME INFORMATION SYSTEM CONCEPT

Colonel JOHNSON. So what happens is that there has to be some coordination, some coordinated planning, between the State networks and Federal systems of the nature of this one shown here.

Mr. O'CONNELL. Mr. Chairman, this is covered on page 38.

Mr. RANDALL. You are coming to it subsequently, all right. I hope this won't interfere with the orderly presentation of your statement. Proceed, sir.

Mr. O'CONNELL. This office needs to improve financial planning and program review procedures, on a continuing basis, extending our review capabilities as we do so.

In the requirements study ahead, we must reach an agreed position as to the extent the NCS should complement or interconnect with communications facilities operated by the States.

FEDERAL-STATE COMMUNICATIONS PLANNING ACTIVITIES

During the period 1957-67, Federal assistance to State and local governments will have risen from $4.1 billion to about $14.6 billion. These funds are provided in support of increasing legislation by the

Congress in such areas as health, education, welfare, highway construction, law enforcement, disaster assistance, and others.

About 6 months ago, my office began a small in-house trends study designed to provide a basis upon which to direct future communications planning in this field. These bills, many of them, contain assistance to the States, funded assistance to the States, in terms of communications, particularly the highway bills, education bills, and by and large, the States do not have a central office of telecommunications. These funds go directly to one of the agencies in the State. So the problem that exists in the State is to pull together the various federally supported programs at the State level into a coordinated State telecommunications program, and then a coordination, of these State programs, with the Federal programs, so that the FTS, for example, or the NCS systems can be interconnected with the State systems.

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question in that connection?

Mr. RANDALL. Yes.

Mr. WRIGHT. You have given us one illustration as to the purpose or usefulness of a State system, the information concerning stolen vehicles. Is there any other function that a State gridwork of this type would perform in connection with the Federal systems, local disaster programs, for example, as suggested a moment ago by the chairman?

Mr. LATHEY. Sir, the Director was approached by the Office of Civil Defense for guidance in providing communications for the State of Nebraska. Nebraska decided about a year ago to try to combine all of their communications into one statewide system in an effort to economize.

They found that they had 29 different agencies in the State budgeting and procuring their own individual communications without coordination, and that there were 8 separate statewide systems, none of them interfacing or interconnecting with each other in the State of Nebraska.

In designing the system, they stated that the system would be used for emergency purposes, so they applied to the Office of Civil Defense for 50 percent matching funds to cover the development of the system. That was referred to Mr. O'Connell.

We have not yet answered the Office of Civil Defense in this area, but it has launched us into an area of looking at many States in which you will find similar problems.

The systems in these States really will be used as an extension of the NCS, and the FTS, and in the FTS area, the General Services Administration could provide considerable savings, which we have identified so far in our study.

Other systems of national import across the Nation have been studied by the office, and they are required to be connected one way or another with State systems.

I think Colonel Johnson could mention a few of the statewide systems where we need some interface.

Colonel JOHNSON. I mentioned the educational TV program which is funded under the Educational Facilities Act of 1962.

(Chart 6, referred to at this point, follows:)

Colonel JOHNSON. Under this act, the Federal Government will provide some matching funds, both for the construction of the television stations and for the interconnection of them, and there is a developing trend to interconect these stations with conventional ground microwave systems. Overall, it is beginning to take on national importance. Now, this trend has further been accentuated by the proposals advanced by the Ford Foundation and others to use communication satellites for this purpose.

Mr. WRIGHT. What specifically does this mean now, from the standpoint of an educational TV station, which I find a very commendable thing, how will this interconnection you are talking about improve the services of educational TV?

Colonel JOHNSON. What it does, sir, and I have shown here chart 6 the so-called eastern educational network, which is planned to come into operation in 1967-you may observe that the local station, channel 26, is currently interconnected in a network arrangement with Philadelphia, New York, and Boston; it also extends on up into Maine, 8 hours a day.

Mr. WRIGHT. This means that a program may originate in one of these other communities and be fed into the other outlets live? Colonel JOHNSON. Be available, that is right.

Mr. WRIGHT. On educational TV?

Colonel JOHNSON. It provides a continuous 8-hour-a-day network supporting programing structure for all of these educational stations. It provides them with an external program source so that they do not have to create one themselves.

Mr. O'CONNELL. They can all tie into it.

Mr. WRIGHT. Good. That is what I wanted.
Colonel JOHNSON. Yes.

Mr. O'CONNELL. I might say this was prior to the Ford Foundation recommendations which came out recently for a satellite system to do this same sort of thing. That is, to tie together the educational TV systems of the country.

Mr. WRIGHT. I am sorry to interupt, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. RANDALL. There is no reason to be. I just think we should pinpoint here and point out that right now they are using cables, are they not; isn't that the point, and this is simply a proposal 'way down the road? That is what we are talking about here?

Mr. O'CONNELL. That is right.

Mr. RANDALL. And is this part of some of the proposals that were made by Ford Foundation?

Mr. O'CONNELL. No. No, these exist now.

Mr. RANDALL. These are your-they exist so far as cables are concerned.

Mr. O'CONNELL. And microwave-mostly microwave.

Mr. RANDALL. And microwave.

Thank you very much. You may proceed, please.

Mr. O'CONNELL. Soon after its initiation, the current trend in development of State communications systems was brought to my attention. At about this same time, the Office of Civil Defense, Department of the Army, requested policy guidance as to which department or agency should take the lead in Federal-State assistance communications matters. The Office of Civil Defense action stemmed from a request by the State of Nebraska for matching funds in its development of a statewide system for normal day-to-day and emergency use. To provide this guidance, we need to determine the following: How shall the national communications system and the State communications networks complement one another and serve the best interests of the Nation?

How shall the assistance provided by many Federal agencies to States for telecommunications purposes be funneled through a focal point in each State for coordinated development of State systems? How shall State communications facilities be financed, wholly or in part, by the Federal Government when two or more States are involved or national interests are present?

How shall Federal and State communications programs and objectives be kept in phase?

How shall we create an effective Federal-State partnership to guide telecommunications policy formulation on the domestic scene?

Chart No. 4 shows the States which now have operational communications systems, wholly or partly financed by the Federal Government and those which have systems in the planning stage. Some systems are taking on a national perspective. See charts No. 5 and No. 6.

During periods of natural disaster (29 alone in 1965) and civil disturbances, there is an urgent need to use the Federal Government's, State governments', and the common carriers' facilities on an interconnected basis for the preservation of life and property.

A need for better coordination in this area has been demonstrated in Hurricane Betsy, the Watts riots, the Alaskan earthquake, the Northeast United States power blackout, and other past crises.

We have not yet obtained enough of a data base of information upon which to proceed rapidly in this area, but we are working closely with State officials, particularly those in Nebraska and Colorado. This Office and the Office of Civil Defense appear to be the agencies primarily concerned with this matter, although many agencies of Government are involved in the provision of Federal assistance and are aware of the problems involved.

I will skip over to satellite communications.

Obviously, this committee has had a continuing interest in this field, and here, of course, we have had substantial progress. Perhaps the best way to indicate progress is to review the space communications capabilities as they exist today and as they will exist within the next few years. This chart (chart 7) shows the present operational capability both in terms of the space segment and earth terminal capability. (Chart 7, referred to above, follows:)

COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE
GLOBAL SYSTEM PROGRAM

Mr. O'CONNELL. 240 voice channels are available between Europ and the United States in the space segment.

Six earth terminals have been constructed and are ready for service Mr. RANDALL. Does your statement, or do the charts, point out thos six?

Colonel JOHNSON. Yes. These are the ones in Europe, on up her in Italy, in France, United Kingdom [indicating].

Mr. RANDALL. In other words, four over there [indicating]. Colonel JOHNSON. One operating in Maine, and one ready for opera tion in Japan.

Mr. RANDALL. Four in Europe, one in America, and one in th Orient?

Colonel JOHNSON. That is right.
Mr. RANDALL. Thank you.