[Editors note- While copied from the original several editorial highlights have been added to enhance emphasis. It should also be noted that this was the LAST Presidential Directive/ National Security Directive issued to provide guidance on Civil Defense prior to limited portions of the Federal Civil Defense Act of 1950, as amended, Public Law 920 of the 81st Congress, being incorporated into the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act as a new Title VI. Essentially it mandates all-hazards preparedness and was reflected in a formal statutory amendment of the Federal Civil Defense Act of 1950 by Public Law 103-160 in 1993]
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 16, 1992
NATIONAL SECURITY DIRECTIVE 66
MEMORANDUM FOR THE VICE PRESIDENT
THE SECRETARY OF STATE
THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
THE SECRETARY OF COMMERCE
THE SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION
THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY
THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE PRESIDENT
ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT FOR NATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS
DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE
CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF
DIRECTOR OF THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
MANAGER, NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
SUBJECT: CIVIL DEFENSE (U)
POLICY
The United States will have a civil defense capability as an element of our overall national
security posture. The objective of the civil defense program is to develop the required capabilities common to all catastrophic emergencies and those unique to attack emergencies in order to protect the population and vital infrastructure. Civil defense can contribute to deterrence by denying an enemy any confidence that he could prevent a concerted national response to attack. (U)
The civil defense program will support all-hazard integrated emergency management at State and local levels. In so doing, the civil defense program will: (U)
1) Recognize and respect the primary responsibility of State and local governments to provide for the safety and well being of their citizens in emergencies other than national security emergencies. (U)
2) Provide a focal point within the Federal government to work with State and local governments on integrated multi-hazard response planning and operations to deal with the consequences of catastrophic emergencies. (U)
3) Continue to implement a policy of dual use of civil defense resources through the development and use of capabilities at Federal, State and local levels to perform emergency functions to respond to emergencies of all kinds including attack. (U)
4) Focus on the development, jointly with State and local governments, of the required capabilities common to all catastrophic emergencies and those unique to attack emergencies, thus ensuring that the use of civil defense funds is consistent with, contributes to, and does not detract from attack preparedness. (U)
5) Provide for the development of a civil defense infrastructure capable of expansion in a national security emergency involving the threat of all forms of attack on the United States which provide advanced warning. (U)
6) Utilize to the maximum extent the existing capabilities, facilities and resources of all appropriate departments and agencies of the Federal Government, in accordance with Executive Order 12656 and, with their consent, those of the States and political subdivisions thereof, and of private sector organizations and agencies. (U)
Disaster-specific programs such as hurricane or flood relief programs which may be incorporated into the civil defense program and which are currently funded within domestic discretionary accounts will continue to be budgeted in this manner. In addition, any equipment or programs not needed for the consequence management of national security emergencies will be funded within the domestic discretionary accounts.
IMPLEMENTATION
The program under the direction of the Federal Emergency Management Agency with the support of heads of the Federal Departments and agencies, and under the general policy guidance of the National Security Council, will include: (U)
1) Population protection capabilities, with the Federal Government providing guidance and assistance to enable State and local governments to effectively support the population in all catastrophic emergencies. (U)
2) State and local government crisis management capabilities to effectively
support the population in all catastrophic emergencies. (U)
3) Information to promote a clear understanding by the public of the civil defense program, all threats which may affect their localities and actions they should take to minimize their effects. (U)
4) Information to assist U.S. business and industry in taking measures to protect their work forces and physical assets in all catastrophic emergencies and encouragement of the private sector to make maximum use of private sector capabilities. (U)
5) Voluntary participation by citizens and institutions in community civil defense activities and emphasis on citizen protective actions. (U)
6) Plans for sustaining survivors, for restoration of critical life support capabilities, and to establish a basis for recovery. (U)
7) Definition of and an assessment of the base capability necessary to respond to emergencies that do not provide warning, and the development of those base capabilities which are common to all catastrophic emergencies and unique to attack. (U)
8) Plans for a civil defense surge from the base capability to the total required capability in a national security crisis involving the threat of attack. These plans should assume advanced warning, adequate time to conduct the surge, and the required base capability form which to surge. Total required capability is that operational capability necessary to protect the population and vital infrastructure through preparedness measures common to all catastrophic emergencies and unique to attack emergencies. (U)
The Department of Defense will support civil authorities in civil defense, to include facilitating the use of the National Guard in each state for response in both peacetime disasters and national security emergencies. Subject to the direction of the President and the Secretary of Defense, readiness of the armed forces for military contingencies will have precedence and civil authorities should not rely exclusively on military support. Federal military resources will be employed in civil defense missions only if State and Federal civil resources are not sufficient. Nothing in this directive alters or otherwise affects the chain of command for the armed forces established by the Constitution and laws of the United States. (U)
Nothing in this directive provides for any new Federal responsibilities which are now the responsibility of State and local governments. (U)
RECISSION
National Security Decision Directive 259, dated February 4, 1987, is rescinded. (U)
/signed/ George H.W. Bush
[Apparently some consideration was given to classification of this NSDD which is why each paragraph has a classification reference. FEMA argued that its state and local partners in Civil Defense would gain more understanding by the document remaining unclassified, as well as Congressional staffs and so it was. The issuance of this NSDD led Congress to mandate a report on civil defense capabilities never really addressed by FEMA. Instead it sent forth a report currently unavailable to this blogger that supported a rationale for better disaster response which oddly foreshadowed the failures of the federal response to Hurricane Andrew in August 1992. That report entitled Disaster Preparedness did however lead to the federal civil defense act becoming a statutory all-hazards statute in enactment of Public Law 103-160. Just about one year later that effort was made moot by the enactment of Public Law 103-337 largely repealing the FCDA of 1950] Thus, it is not true that NO legislative history exists of the wrap up in 1994 of the federal civil defense effort that began in 1950.
In a hurried meeting with a Presidential appointee I was given an opportunity to review the text of NSDD-66. I took the position that it was in fact and law weaker than the statute itself and should not be issued. Of course it was issued and its impact was to help end federal civil defense efforts.
