OCEAN SCIENCES AND NATIONAL SECURITY 99 



convened on Februaiy 24, 1959, by Secretary of the Navy Gates to 

 discuss the NASCO report, and the possibility of developing a more 

 formal interdepartmental mechanism to formulate and coordinate 

 Government management policies m oceanography. 



Results of the meeting were summarized by Rear Adm. Rawson 

 Bennett, Chief of Naval Research, in a letter of March 19, 1959, to 

 those who attended, as follows (made available by the Office of Naval 

 Research) : 



The results of the meeting are as foUov^s: 



1. The agencies agree that the XAS-XRC Committee on Oceanography has 

 issued a report of prime significance which must be carefully considered. Most 

 agencies are not yet prepared to commit themselves on the budgets presented in 

 Chapter 1, "Summary Report on Oceanography." 



2. In the discussion of the requirement for a formal interagency Committee on 

 Oceanograph}-, it developed that one was not required at this time. Committees 

 of this type require an Executive Order for their establishment, and are necessarily 

 very high level. The experience has been that they are not very successful. 



3. It was concluded that the functioning interagency informal Coordinating 

 Committee on Oceanography (CCO) should be enlarged, and retained. In 

 addition, another committee should be formed at the next higher level of govern- 

 ment to include representatives who are involved with initial budget formulation. 

 The new committee would meet once or twice a year to consider recommendations 

 of the CCO. 



4. It was agreed that the Department of the Navy would take the lead in 

 requesting the establishment of the new committee. Accordingly, each agency 

 was requested to suggest the names of possible members. 



Operating ^\^thin the framework of the FCST, the new mechanism 

 established for interdepartmental cooperation is an Interagency Com- 

 mittee on Oceanography (ICO). The CCO was expected to continue 

 to serve as an informal medium of communication, and in a staff 

 capacity to the ICO. Significantly, however, representatives ap- 

 pointed to ICO are at sufficiently high levels of responsibility that 

 decisions made by the group have a greater expectation of being im- 

 plemented mthout the attenuating effect that is often present when 

 the interagency decisions made at too low a level fail to meet the 

 approval or endorsement and support of individual agency heads. 



A clear exposition of the operation of the Interagency Committee 

 on Oceanography was furnished by Assistant Secretary of the Navy 

 James T. Wakelin in repl3^ing to questions of the House Committee 

 on Science and Astronautics : 



Q. (a) Could j'ou describe present mechanism for interdepartment cooperation? 



(b) Does the coordinating committee for oceanography control funds or 

 exercise any line responsibilitj' over oceanograpliio programs? 



(c) Does it plan any Government-wide programs jointly and, if so, are copies 

 of such a program available? 



(d) Can you give examples of how the Committee coordinates requests for 

 funds and uses of facilities? 



A. (a) The Interagency Committee on Oceanography is a permanent mecha- 

 nism of the Federal Council for Science and Technology with representation from 

 the Department of Defense, Department of Commerce, Department of Interior, 

 Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, National Science Foundation, 

 and the Atomic Energy Commission. The purpose of the Interagencj' Committee 

 is to implement, coordinate, and review the national program in oceanography. 

 The Committee meets periodicalh- to review the individual agency programs in 

 the context of the national effort and to consider special problems that may arise 

 in implementing the national program. The Committee has been enjoined by 

 the Federal Council to consider other matters it deems relevant and important 

 and to include additional agency representatives where this may be required or 

 helpful. 



