262. Memorandum of Discussion at the 458th NSC Meeting1
SUBJECT
- Discussion at the 458th Meeting of the National Security Council, Wednesday, September 7, 1960
Present at the 458th NSC Meeting were the President of the United States, presiding; the Secretary of State; the Acting Secretary of Defense (Douglas); and the Director, Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization. Also present at the meeting and participating in the Council actions [Typeset Page 1093] below were the Secretary of the Treasury; the Acting Director, Bureau of the Budget; and the Secretary of Commerce (attending for Items 3 and 4 and participating in action on Item 5). Also attending the meeting were the Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission; the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff; the Director of Central Intelligence; the Acting Director, U.S. Information Agency (Washburn); the Assistant to the President; the Special Assistants to the President for National Security Affairs, for Science and Technology, and for Security Operations Coordination; Assistant Secretary of State Gerard C. Smith; Assistant Secretary of Defense John N. Irwin, II; the Assistant White House Staff Secretary; the Acting Executive Secretary (Boggs), NSC; and Mr. Robert H. Johnson, NSC.2
There follows a summary of the discussion at the meeting and the main points taken.
[Omitted here are pages 2–7.]
[Facsimile Page 2]4. CIVILIAN READINESS BASE
(NSC Action No. 2114–c; NSC 5906/1, paragraph 59; NSC Actions Nos. 2131–c and 2254; NSC 5912, Part 4)
Governor Hoegh began his presentation by summarizing the provisions of Paragraph 59–b of NSC 5906/1 (Basic National Security Policy) and then took up each of the elements mentioned in that paragraph in turn. In his discussion Governor Hoegh also referred to the national plan for civil defense and defense mobilization which is supported by fifty state plans, 2400 community and county plans, and 240 metropolitan area plans. He said that the national plan had served as a model for many NATO countries. He pointed out [Facsimile Page 3] that Congressional approval of administrative matching funds for civil defense will make available $1 million per month and will materially improve civil defense at the state and local level.
Turning first to the civil defense program, Governor Hoegh displayed a chart showing some of the conclusions of WSEG (Weapons Systems Evaluation Group) Study No. 45. In particular he called the Council’s attention to the conclusion that, with an assumed 2000-megaton attack on the U.S. and assuming no shelters and no anti-ICBM system, 97 million casualties would occur. With the best possible anti-ICBM system but no shelters, casualties would be 68 million. However, with fallout shelters and no anti-ICBM system, casualties would be 14 million. The report concluded that the effect of fallout shelters in protecting the U.S. population was far more significant than active defense alone, while the two combined would be still better.
[Typeset Page 1094]Governor Hoegh described the steps that had been taken to implement the present fallout shelter policy. He noted that the information and training program had been accelerated and that $60 million worth of television and radio time had been provided at a cost of only $900,000 to the Government. He briefly described the adult education program. He pointed out that sample surveys indicate that 25 per cent of the population can be adequately protected against fallout in existing buildings without structural modification. He noted that research had been accelerated. He stated that over 200 prototype dual-use shelters are being constructed and that the FY 1961 budget provided funds to complete this prototype program. Governor Hoegh said that incorporation of fallout shelters in federal buildings was an essential aspect of federal leadership and example under existing policy but Congress has failed to support this aspect of the program. He noted that federal loan and grant programs, such as those of the Veterans Administration and the Federal Housing Administration (and a number of others), can now be used to assist shelter construction.
Governor Hoegh stated that a Gallup Poll had shown that 71 per cent of the American people favor fallout shelters and 38 per cent had indicated that they would be willing to construct fallout shelters at their own expense up to a cost of $500. Since fallout shelters can be built for $100–$300, this percentage could be increased to 50–60 per cent. Governor Hoegh stated that the construction materials industry had been helpful in promoting the shelter program.
Governor Hoegh emphasized that without federal leadership and example, the national shelter policy would not succeed. Congressional support for the program has been less than expected at the time the policy was adopted; Congress had approved less than one-third of the [Facsimile Page 4] funds requested. However, Governor Hoegh believed that the policy will eventually produce the desired results. It might be necessary, however, to stimulate action by more funds for education and by more incentives.
Governor Hoegh pointed out that when an enemy attack is detected, we can today warn 376 critical points in the U.S. within fifteen seconds. This was being expanded to 460 points. Our goal in radiological defense is at least one federal monitoring station in each of the three thousand counties by the end of 1963. We now have more than 1500 such stations.
Turning next to support of the military logistics base, Governor Hoegh stated that while the goals of the military logistics program had not yet been translated into detailed industrial requirements, it was clear that overall industrial capacity was sufficient to meet military demands in all situations short of general nuclear war.
Governor Hoegh then briefly discussed the status of the stockpile and manpower programs and stated that he would deal with [Typeset Page 1095] that aspect of the mobilization program relating to support for foreign economic policies in connection with the last item on the Council’s agenda. He then turned to survival and recovery planning. [text not declassified] This program, however, is presently being restudied. The $3.8 million in the FY 1961 budget to begin the protection program was not appropriated. Reliance, meanwhile, is being placed on the [text not declassified]. Governor Hoegh noted that construction would begin in December on the first of the underground regional control centers. He stated that $212 million in medical supplies were dispersed in 43 federal warehouses or pre-positioned in the states and local communities. Studies indicated that these supplies had a high probability of survival. He referred to the President’s approval of a new plan covering requirements for medical supplies estimated at $723 million.
Concluding his presentation, Governor Hoegh returned to the fallout shelter program. He stated that the basic elements underlying our present policy were sound and workable. It was too early to demonstrate their success or failure. He again emphasized the importance of federal example. Without it, he stated, a more forceful policy and one involving a greater degree of federal financial responsibility would be required.
The President referred to Governor Hoegh’s description of the stockpiling program and asked whether the stockpiles, in particular those of strategic metals, were located outside the population centers. Governor Hoegh stated they were located in 240 communities. Much of [Facsimile Page 5] the materiel, he said, was in the area in which it would be processed; much, of it was in or adjoining a city. The President expressed the view that the stockpiles ought to be away from the cities and that they did not constitute much of a reserve if they were in the cities.
Mr. Gray pointed out that existing policy called for construction of fallout shelters in new federal buildings but that it excluded military buildings. It was not clear, Mr. Gray stated, whether we had plans for inclusion of such shelters in military construction. In response, Governor Hoegh said that Secretary Gates had on July 28 issued a policy which was in line with the policy on non-military construction. It provides for surveys and for incorporation of shelters in military buildings as funds are available. Secretary Douglas observed that no funds have been available for this purpose although they had been requested. Governor Hoegh said that the new DoD policy was helpful and could be quoted in dealings with Congress.
The President inquired as to whether Governor Hoegh thought it would be helpful if he were to build a shelter in his own home. He referred to previous discussion of this question and to the possibility that such action might just scare the American people. Governor Hoegh expressed the view that such action would be helpful in stimulating the people to take action. He noted that Prime Minister Diefenbaker is building himself a shelter and so are twenty-five governors. Secretary [Typeset Page 1096] Douglas noted that the President had on other occasions raised questions as to the effect of the U.S. adoption of a major shelter program on our allies. This, Secretary Douglas observed, was a difficult question to answer. The President stated that if the program were on a compulsory basis, the effects would be bad but that as long as it was on the basis of federal leadership and example, with the people taking responsibility for shelter construction, the effects would not be adverse. He asked whether Sweden did not have a large shelter program. Governor Hoegh said that seven countries require that shelters be included in all multiple-family dwellings.
Secretary Douglas asked whether we could really expect much progress in the shelter program without some federal assistance. Governor Hoegh expressed the view that we could. If Congress provided funds for fallout shelters in new federal buildings, it would be the signal to the American people to go to work. Many were building shelters already. As industry gets at this problem and gets its sales force out all over the country selling shelters, there would be a considerable increase in shelter construction.
Mr. McCone inquired whether there was not a Bureau of the Budget policy which prevented construction of shelters in federal buildings. [Facsimile Page 6] Mr. Staats pointed out that the House Committee had written into legislation a prohibition of shelter construction in federal buildings. Thus, even where the Government had funds available, it could not use them for this purpose. In response to an inquiry from Mr. McCone, Mr. Staats indicated that this prohibition applied not just to 1961 money but to all federal funds. The President observed that if we had a real scare, it would be interesting to see what these same Congressmen would say about shelters. Governor Hoegh observed that the Senate always went along with the Administration on these matters but that the House had been very arbitrary. Mr. Gray noted that Congress had not neglected to construct shelters in new Congressional buildings. Secretary Douglas stated that there was a wider acceptance of the idea of shelters in the military services today than one, two or three years ago. What worried the military was the credibility of our deterrent when the U.S. had done little to protect its own population.
There was some discussion of Governor Hoegh’s reference to the fact that surveys indicated that 25 per cent of the population could be protected from fallout in existing buildings. Mr. McCone asked if these buildings were properly sealed. Governor Hoegh said that they were adequate. In the course of this discussion, Governor Hoegh stated that if Congress would provide funds for surveys of existing structures, local governments would provide supplies to stock them. Governor Hoegh noted that General Mills had developed a processed food, a gallon can of which would cost $2.50 and would provide one person sufficient food for two weeks. He also noted that the best examples of fallout shelters were in Kansas and Oklahoma where people [Typeset Page 1097] had suffered from cyclones and where they were constructing cyclone shelters that were also good fallout shelters. In response to a question from the President, Governor Hoegh indicated that 18 inches of concrete or two feet of earth were now considered adequate protection from fallout. Previously two feet of concrete or three feet of earth were considered to be necessary. This difference arose from the fact that earlier studies had indicated that a dosage of 75 roentgens would cause illness whereas recent tests indicated that it took 200 roentgens to produce illness.
The National Security Council:
Discussed the subject, in the light of an oral presentation by the Director, Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization, based upon a report prepared pursuant to NSC Action No. 2131–c and the forthcoming annual report on the status of the civil and defense mobilization program as of June 30, 1960.
5. U.S. IMPORT COMPETITION AS EXEMPLIFIED BY CASES UNDER SECTION 8 OF THE TRADE AGREEMENTS EXTENSION ACT OF 1958
(NSC Action No. 2166–b–(14); Memo for NSC from Executive Secretary, same subject, dated July 12, 1960)
Governor Hoegh’s presentation was based upon the reference memorandum of July 12, 1960. When Governor Hoegh had concluded his presentation, Secretary Herter observed that the guidelines developed by OCDM were very good and that extraordinary good sense had been shown in the examination of these cases. Secretary Mueller stated that he agreed completely with Governor Hoegh’s report and noted that a few of the cases that had been brought under Section 8 should have been brought as escape clause actions. In fact, they had been brought as escape clause cases at the same time that they were brought under Section 8 as a device for getting action in one area or the other.
The National Security Council:
a. Discussed the subject, in the light of an oral presentation by the Director, Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization, based on the enclosures to the reference memorandum of July 12, 1960.
b. Concurred generally in the guidelines which the Director, Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization, has applied in making determinations under Section 8 of the Trade Agreements Extension Act of 1958.