Evening star., 1950-08-14
Continued From First Page.)

Continued From First Page)
mite information from the Fed
eral government.
What has been emphasized re-
peatedly is that planning for
atomic attack is no "tin hat and
sand bucket" matter but involves
hundreds of problems unknown
to this country's World War II
civil defense setup.
To reporters seeking informa-
ton, to mayors, governors and
civil defense directors seeking
guidance beyond the stage Of pre-
liminary planning, the answer
for months has uniformly been:
"Wait till September"
Since the start of the Korean
War June Is, nothing has been
forthcoming from Federal sources
to indicate that cities and states
should speed up their civil de-
fense plans. But some cities and
states have gone ahead on trial
and-error basis for lack of more
specific information.
Queried By Mayors.
AS recently as May, Paul j
Larsen, director of NSRB's civil
defense Office, told the United
States Conference of Mayors that
state. and local authorities were
continually asking him:
why doesn't the Federal Gov
eminent tell us that something
must be done about civil defense
and what should be done?"
He quoted this question because
he said President Truman had
answered it once and for all at
the same conference with these
words:
"I urge that you, as municipal
leaders who will have primary re-
sponsibility for implementing civil
defense plans in the event of need,
proceed in your local civil defense
planning program and cooperate
in its development with State
authorities and the Federal Gov
ernment."
Mr.. Larsen insists that since
October, 1949, the Federal Gov
ernment has given the green light
on civil defense to State and mu-
nicipal officials "in many different
forms"
Here is what has actually beer
done so far:
The States have been urged tc
adopt legislation setting up civil
defense planning bodies. So far
according to NSRB, 81 States and
the District of Columbia have
civil defense agencies or councils
established by law.
The States have been sent the
300-page Hopley report as a use
full guide" in civil defense plan
ming although NSRB advised that
the report was never officially
adopted and the NSRB "doeS not
agree with all the recommended
tionS made in this report" The
report, spelling out what ought to
be done by cities, States and the
Federal Government for civil de-
fenSe, came out of the now-de-
funct Office of Civil Defense
Planning in the Defense Depart
ment in October, 1948.
Urged to Take Stock of Resources.
Cities and States have been
urged to take stock of their exist
ing resources in men and ma
terials. They have been told to
study their water supply systems;
their means of communication
when normal facilities have been
disrupted; their street and high
way systems, particularly alter
nate routes and highways out OF
town for evacuation; their trans
portation facilities; their means
for emergency shelter Of evacu-
ated persons; their hospital and
flrst-aid facilities, their fight
ing equipment and their man
power.
Cities and States have been ad-
vised repeatedly to make mutual
aid pacts with their neighbors.
These include what men and ma
terials one city could lend an
other in an emergency, whether
one city would take care Of an
other city's refugees, whether one
city'S fire hose fit another city's
hydrants and dozens of other
agreements. The theory behind
all this is to lower all barriers be-
tween cities and States so they
can count on help from each other.
According to NSRB, the North
eastern States have had mutual