very point and say here we have a statute that has been on the books 20 years or 15 years and maybe we better not disturb it if it is sufficient. However, if you have considered it and still think it's insufficient, I certainly think that should be very persuasive with the committee. Mr. SOURWINE. General, you said you had the Attorney General's comments. Do you have this in the form that you could give it to the committee?

General DUPLANTIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. SOURWINE. Off the record. (Discussion off the record.)

Senator JOHNSTON. On the record.

You have not had any trouble in the past, but it is just what you are expecting that which might happen in the future?

General DUPLANTIS. That is correct, sir.

I have here a statement made by Mr. Malcolm R. Wilkey, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, to Mr. Lawrence E. Walsh, Deputy Attorney General, commenting on House bill 8138, a bill to amend section 1362 of title 18, United States Code, to provide penalties for malicious damage to certain private communication facilities.

Mr. SOURWINE. This came to you through Government channels? General DUPLANTIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. SOURWINE. You know it is authentic?

General DUPLANTIS. I am not positive, sir, because while certainly the context leads us to believe this is true, this is labeled a draft and it is photostated and I have not seen the original.

Mr. SOURWINE. Could you let us have it for insertion in the record? General DUPLANTIS. Yes.

Senator JOHNSTON. That will be placed into the record at this point. I will request counsel for the committee to check with the Department of Justice to see that this is authentic.

General DUPLANTIS. This outlines the problems in bringing a suit as I mentioned to you, under the law, as written, and the problem in getting a conviction which I have also mentioned.

(The document referred to is as follows:)

[Draft]

FEBRUARY 29, 1960.

To: Lawrence E. Walsh, Deputy Attorney General. From: Malcolm R. Wilkey, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division. Subject: H.R. 8138, a bill to amend section 1362 of title 18, United States Code, to provide penalties for malicious damage to certain private communication facilities.

As requested in your memorandum dated February 3, 1960, a summary of the above bill and its effect on existing law, together with our views on its merits, are submitted below.

Section 1362 of title 18, United States Code, which this bill would amend, is as follows:

"Whoever, etc. etc."

(Type in full.) *

Sec. 1362. Communication lines, stations or systems: "Whoever willfully or maliciously injures or destroys any of the works, property, or material of any radio, telegraph, telephone, or cable, line, station, or system, or other means of communication, operated or controlled by the United States, whether constructed or in process of construction, or willfully or maliciously interferes in any way with the working or use of any such line, or system, or willfully or maliciously obstructs, hinders, or delays the transmission of any communication over any such line, or system, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both."

H.R. 8138 would amend this section by adding after the words "operated or controlled by the United States" the words "or used or useful to the military or civil defense functions of the United States."

The effect of the amendment would be to have the section apply to privately owned telephone, telegraph, and radio facilities not directly operated or controlled by the United States, but which are "used or useful" to the Government in the defense of the United States.

In March 1957 a bill was introduced by Senator Bricker (S. 1571, 85th Cong., 1st sess.) to accomplish the same purpose, though its phrasing was different. On April 9, 1957, we sent you our comment on the Bricker bill, strongly recommending its enactment but suggesting some slight changes in its phraseology. On June 3, 1957, in a letter to the chairman of the Senate Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, Mr. Rogers, then the Deputy Attorney General, endorsed the purpose of the bill and recommended the changes we had suggested. The comment in our 1957 memorandum is equally applicable to H.R. 8138. In that memorandum it was pointed out that we had successfully prosecuted a case where the defendants had conspired to destroy certain coaxial repeater stations and microwave towers owned by the Southern Bell Telephone & Tele graph Co., which carrier circuits on full time to various Government agencies, including the Strategic Air Command. Since that memorandum the conviction of two of these defendants was affirmed in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and by the Supreme Court in Abbate, et al. v. United States, 359 U.S. 187. (A new trial was granted the other two defendants by the court of appeals because of the improper admission of certain testimony).

However, in that case the facilities and installations covered by 18 U.S.C. 1362 were limited to those where the Government had terminal-to-terminal direct communication services 24 hours a day, the terminals were owned by the Government, and they were operated by Government personnel. The Government's charges did not extend to any other type of facilities for telephonic communication for the reason that we did not believe section 1362 would apply to other leases where both the lines and the terminals were under direct control of the telephone company. Furthermore, the burden of proof upon the Government to show which particular cables carried Government lines, the contracts with the telephone company for their use by Government agencies, and the operation of the terminals by Government personnel was extremely heavy, requiring us to bring Army, Navy, and Air Force witnesses from remote stations. (One witness had to be brought from Saudi Arabia.)

It was also found in the development of this case that these terminal-toterminal full-time leases are infrequent, in fact, rare. The usual way the Government takes services is under tariffs approved by Federal or State regulatory bodies and under these contracts the entire service (lines and terminating equipment) are furnished by the telephone company. We have grave doubt that section 1362 would apply to such installations and we declined to assert that they were "operated or controlled by the United States" in that prosecution. If section 1362 was amended as proposed by H.R. 8138 all lines and equipment used by the Government would be protected and the burden of proof substantially reduced.

The extent to which the defense of the United States is dependent upon the use of privately owned commercial communication systems can be seen from the comments of the Department of Defense on the Bricker bill, which was quoted by Congressman Dowdy in his remarks to the House when he introduced H.R. 8138 (Daily Congressional Record, July 8, 1958, pp. 11857-11858). In addition to the basic military communication systems of the Department of Defense, to which we referred in our 1957 memorandum on the Bricker bill, there are two other Government programs concerned in the defense of the United States which are also dependent for their successful operation upon privately owned communication systems. These are: (1) Conelrad, and (2) the Federal civil agencies communication system.

The program known as conelrad has been organized by the Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization with the cooperation of the radio, television, and communication industries for the purpose of preventing the use of radio and television broadcast stations as possible navigational aids to enemy aircraft and to disseminate information to the public during the course of any emergency. Briefly, the plan is to provide an emergency alert for civilian mobilization by broadcasts from key radio stations which are notified of the alert and which in turn notify other stations by local and long-distance telephone calls, paid by

them at the usual applicable tariffs for such services. (In the New York Times of Feb. 27, 1960, it was announced that Operation Alert, scheduled for May 5, 1960, will have 1,200 privately owned radio stations participating).

The system known as the Federal civil agencies communication system was recommended by the Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization after the test of conelrad in 1958, which disclosed certain deficiencies. This system is presently in process for operation and when completed will be operated by the General Services Administration. Basically, the system is intended to correct the vulnerability of present interagency communications, because these circuits and facilities are routed through, or located in, target areas, by establishing switching centers in nontarget areas, with a grid system for interconnection of these centers.

Department file No. 82-03 will give you full information about both these programs, and their dependence upon commercial communication systems. It seems clear that conelrad is not a communication system "operated or controlled by the United States" to which section 1362 would apply. We do not have enough information about the Federal civil agencies communication system to form an opinion whether section 1362 would cover it, but that the system should be given maximum protection is obvious.

The foregoing comment explains our reasons for recommending that the Department should stringently endorse the purposes of H.R. 8138. We do not believe, however, that these purposes are adequately met by the amendment proposed in that bill. It is true that the words "used or useful" are used in many State regulatory statutes for fixing the bases on which public utility rates are determined (art. 78, sec. 62, of the Annotated Code of Maryland, 1956 supp., is an example), but we are of the opinion that the word "useful" is too vague and indefinite for a criminal statute. Instead of the word "useful" we recommend the words "intended to be used." (This follows the phrasing in 18 U.S.C. 22, "used or intended to be used"). With this insertion section 1362 would read: "Whoever willfully or maliciously injures or destroys any of the works, property, or material of any radio, telegraph, telephone, or cable line, station, or system, or other means of communication, operated or controlled by the United States, or used or intended to be used for military or civil defense functions of the United States, whether constructed or in process of construction, or willfully or maliciously interferes in any way with the working of any such line or system, or willfully or maliciously obstructs, hinders, or delays the transmission of any communication over any such line or system, shall be fined not more than $1,000, or imprisoned not more than three years, or both." (Added words italicized.) We believe that the addition of these words in section 1362 would make the section apply to the communication systems now used or planned for use by both the military and civil defense agencies of the United States. It is also our opinion that the added phrase is sufficiently specific and definite to avoid any implication of vagueness or uncertainty of what the section protects.

General DUPLANTIS. I also have copies of the Executive orders which I mentioned which outline the authority and responsibilities of the Director, OCDM for ready reference if you wish to have them.

Mr. SOURWINE. The chairman might wish to have those orders as an appendix to this hearing record.

Senator JOHNSTON. That will be made a part of the appendix of the record.

The orders referred to were marked "App. I" and are printed at p. 19 of this hearing.)

General DUPLANTIS. I also have annex 15, "Communications," to the national plan. This has been promulgated as you may know.

The national plan was promulgated over the signature of the President, has the full force and effect of an order and this is an annex to that plan and states the general responsibilities in the field of communications, the Federal Government versus the State and local governments and various other aspects that pertain to the problem. Mr. SOURWINE. Might that go in the appendix, Mr. Chairman?

54438 0-60- -3

Senator JOHNSTON. Yes, it will be placed in the appendix. (The document referred to was marked "App. II" and is printed at p. 23 of this hearing.)

General DUPLANTIS. The defense mobilization order which I referred to, IX-4, outlines how the priorities of allocations will be made in an emergency and this, I think, may be helpful to you.

Mr. SOURWINE. May that also go into the appendix?

Senator JOHNSTON. It may.

(The document referred to was designated "App. III” and is printed at p. 59 of this document.)

Senator JOHNSTON. Do you have anything else that should be put into the record?

General DUPLANTIS. I believe that is all, sir.

I have indicated we work very closely with the common carriers. They are spending a lot of money to harden their systems so that they will be in being after an attack.

Mr. SOURWINE. By "common carriers" you mean the various telephone and telegraph companies?

General DUPLANTIS. That is correct.

Mr. SOURWINE. There is only one telegraph company.
General DUPLANTIS. Yes, Western Union.

Mr. SOURWINE. Yes.

General DUPLANTIS. And I work very closely with them.

My personal feeling is that the Federal Government should exhibit its interest in providing protection just as they are exhibiting other interest.

I certainly wouldn't consider myself competent to recommend the phraseology of the law. Certainly, they need our protection.

Mr. SOURWINE. Sir, the committee is grateful to you for coming here today.

Senator JOHNSTON. Yes, and we certainly thank you.

Mr. SOURWINE. Mr. Chairman, before this hearing is concluded, I'd like to make a somewhat unusual request. We had expected the testimony here today also of Brig. Gen. John B. Bestic, Deputy Director of Communications, Electronics, Headquarters USAF.

General Bestic is unable to be here this morning. However, I have a statement from General Bestic with an indication that certain portions of it have not been cleared, but that he anticipated by the time he got here, they would be cleared.

I would like to ask the Chair to order, if this clearance is given or has been obtained, that this be put into our record.

Senator JOHNSTON. I order this manuscript to be placed in the record and become a part of the record when it is cleared.

Mr. SOURWINE. Then if we want further testimony from General Bestic we can give him a call when he is again available. (The statement referred to is as follows:)

PRESENTATION BY BRIG. GEN. JOHN B. BESTIC, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS, HEADQUARTERS, USAF

I am Brig. Gen. John B. Bestic, Deputy Director of Communications-Electronics, Headquarters, USAF, and I am pleased to appear before you today.

I understand that the Internal Security Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary is concerned today with the security of the Nation's industrial plants particularly those which pertain to communications.

The Air Force is probably the largest single user of commercial communications in the United States. In addition to the normal local and toll facilities familiar to all of us, the Air Force also leases a large number of full period circuits from the American Telephone & Telegraph Co., Western Union Telegraph Co., subsidiaries of the Bell Telephone System, and various independent telephone companies. We also have made arrangements with these companies for what we refer to as "engineered military circuits." These are circuits which are called up in case of emergency. Our reasons for this extensive use of commercial communications involves both matters of national policy and economics. Because of our extensive use of commercial communications facilities, we are vitally interested in their security.

Let me describe to you some of our most important communications systems which are currently in operation both within the boundaries. of the continental United States and outside these boundaries. Before describing them I might add that in addition to these major systems that we are considering in some detail, we also have many other networks; for example, military air traffic control systems, weather reporting systems, and logistical systems, as well as a large general purpose system.

The SAC primary alerting system is the first choice of the Strategic Air Command to alert their retaliatory force. The numbered Air Force headquarters can initiate an alert within their commands by merely lifting the red alert telephone handset and speaking. SAC Headquarters is the only point that can alert the entire command. Bases located outside the United States are connected to the system by military and commercial means. Approximately 70 SAC bases are in a position to receive alerts from SAC Headquarters immediately. They may also be alerted from their respective numbered Air Force Headquarters.

SAC Headquarters and the respective numbered Air Force controllers are given visual indications that each base has received the alert message. These indications appear as extinguishing lamps that "go out" rather than "on" since one might have burned out; this philosophy of eliminating possible trouble is inherent throughout the system. A continuously operating continuity checking device is included to indicate alert circuit outages. Complete diversification of circuit routes associated with this alert system, other alert systems, and operational circuits are provided. These facilities are owned by and maintained by the commercial communications companies.

Next let us discuss the SAC operational control system. This telephone network is used by the Strategic Air Command to control the operation of the worldwide SAC force. By the use of a priority system it is available for administrative traffic when not occupied with operational traffic.

There are about 350 so-called full period circuits connecting 62 locations with 7 switching centers. These circuits terminate on switchboards at each location, thereby permitting connection to designated stations at each location. The switching centers are located at SAC