OCEANOGRAPHY 135 



We have put a considerable sum of money into oceanography and in 

 the survey business. As I told Mr. Miller when I was here on the 

 17th, in the 4 years I have been on this job we have come a long way 

 in oceanography. We started building up about 4 years ago. There 

 is no intent on our part to just build up the appropriation of the 

 Hydrographic Office. 



We have definitely put more money into oceanography out of the 

 Navj^'s budget, and we intend to. 



It may solve any nmnber of problems for us — the sonar prediction 

 system coming out of some of the oceanographic work will help in 

 finding convoys, and so on. With the deeper diving submarines we 

 have to know more about the business. 



We have to do this whether the Atomic Energy Commission or the 

 other people went along with it or not. We would have to do some- 

 thing of this nature. 



As a matter of fact, we feel it would come without this legislation, 

 the scientific and technical community who are agreeing with us and 

 going along with us would go along with making this the Data Center 

 whether this legislation were enacted or not. 



Mr. DiNGELL. I want you to know I am not being critical of the 

 Navy at this point. I want that very clear. 



Admiral Hayward. Yes, sir. 



Mr. DixGELL. I appreciate that perhaps your organization and the 

 Office of Naval Research have been perhaps the two cornerstones of 

 this entire operation of oceanography which has been conducted by 

 the Federal Government and perhaps by the country as a whole. 



I was getting around to a point which concerned me greatly, and 

 that was this : Scientific information is good only if it is available 

 to scientific communities for use. I am fearful there is a possibility 

 that a great deal of this may receive a classified stamp and be locked 

 away in vaults, and although we spent a substantial amount of funds 

 on it, it will never, because of national defense needs and requirements, 

 be disseminated to the various institutions which will require it. 



Admiral Hayward. I feel the security classification has been re- 

 solved and does not pose a problem. We have declassified all data 

 which really has no military significance. I am sure you speak to the 

 man who decides whether it has military significance and this could 

 keep the data out of the scientific community. 



I do not feel this will happen. Of course, with these people who 

 are participating as the policy group this is a policy question which 

 would have to be posed to them. You get both sides of the fence on 

 this. 



You know Senator Bridges said we were doing too much in this 

 field. We feel, however, that the classification problem has been 

 resolved and should not pose any problem. 



The military significance of some of these thmgs is quite obvious 

 and it would be clear cut. 



In the gray area, where some decisions are to be made, it should be 

 made by the policy group under Dr. Wakelin who has both responsi- 

 bilities. 



Mr. DixGELL. The reason I ask these questions is that it has been 

 my experience it is not only the Department of Defense which is re- 

 sponsible for this sort of thing but the Atomic Energy Commission 

 also has used the classified tag on information where I thought it 



