100 



To: The Honorable Curt Weldon 



Subcommittee on Oceanography, Gulf of Mexico 



and Outer Continental Shelf 

 From: Dr. Paul J. Fox 



Chair, Deep Submergence Science Committee, UNOLS 



Graduate School of Oceanography, URI 

 Subject Answers to questions about the National Undersea Research Program (NURP) 



Question 1: Does NURP provide at least a step in the right direction for developing a 

 comprehensive undersea research plan? 



This is a question that touches upon a number of salient issues pertinent to the state of deep 

 submergence science in the U.S. First, the NURP centers do indeed offer an opportunity to carry 

 out important investigations relevant to deep submergence science. These centers, however, have 

 been set up for poUtical reasons and, therefore, the scientific agendas are not always as rigorously 

 defined as they could, or should be, to best serve the interests of the U.S. taxpayer. The way to 

 solve this problem is to give the National NURP office greater control in the scientific oversight 

 and management of the centers. A component of this oversight should be an external peer review 

 by appropriate scientists who would asses the merits of each NURP program and offer 

 recommendations for improvement; such a process would ensure that the NURP centers were 

 productive, effective, competitive and efficient This would make the program more national in 

 character, scope and organization. Second, as presently constituted, the majority of the NURP 

 effort is focused on relatively shallow water programs (< 1000 ft). The NOAA/NURP 

 contribution to deep submergence science comes largely through their contribution to the operation 

 of the National Deep Submergence Facility at Woods Hole Oceanographic that includes the 

 submersible ALVIN and the Jason/Medea ROV system. As I mentioned in my testimony before 

 the subcommittee, the funding profile outlined by the present three agency agreement (NOAA, 

 NSF, ONR) does not support the facility at a level that allows for full utilization of the systems,and 

 that insures engineering development and technology enhancement NOAA/NURP could 

 substantially improve our deep submergence science effort by increasing its contribution to the 

 National Deep Submergence Facility. 



Question 2: What constitutes peer-review of undersea programs? 



I think that in the initial definition of a national program, whether it be undersea research or 

 whatever, it is important to include in that dialogue contributions from industry, the research 

 community, federal agencies and policy makers. Once the program is defined and the mission 

 statements established, then the review process should only involve those parties best suited to 

 judge the program elements. In the case of undersea research, this review should be carried out by 

 scientists and engineers who would be drawn, based on excellence, from academia, industry and 

 federal agencies. 



