OCEAN SCIENCES AND NATIONAL SECURITY 



125 



Table 22. 



-NASCO recommendations for new oceanographic ships according to 

 sponsoring agency, function, and size 



Source: NASCO Report, ch. 1. tables 2 and 3. 



Such detailed projections are inclined to be hazardous. For one 

 thing, any single element of such a program may be difficult to justify 

 in its comparison with other elements; the amounts proposed for new 

 vehicles may be out of proportion to those for ships; that for disposal 

 of radioactive waste out of proportion to that for basic research. The 

 Committee, in making available the fruits of its study, intended only 

 that it be considered representative of theu- general viewpoint and, 

 in terms of size and scope, not to be interpreted too literally. For one 

 thing, it was recognized soon after the data were published that they 

 were available much too late for changes in program or funding to be 

 reflected in fiscal 1960, which was the first of the 10 years suggested 

 for operation of the plan. In addition, e.xact estimates for capital 

 equipment are open to question; the NASCO figures were based on 

 1958 dollars and it is certain some inflation has already developed 

 since that time which would make costs for new ships somewhat 

 greater than had been used in their estimates. Nevertheless, the 

 NASCO proposal is sufficiently explicit in terms of progi'am content, 

 rate of expansion in activity, approximate funding requked, and 

 sources of funding that then' results have been used as a basis for 

 study and planning both by the oceanographers themselves and by 

 the Government agencies that originally requested the report. 



The response to the NASCO report has been almost overwhelmingly 

 favorable. Those Government agencies requesting the study have 

 since evaluated the contents and recommendations and although no 

 official comment has been released, there appears to be widespread 

 satisfaction with the thoroughness, objectivity, and validity of the 

 findings. Rear Admiral Rawson Bennett, Cliief of Naval Research, 

 acting in accordance with the request from the then newly formed 

 Interagency Committee on Oceanography, asked the Coordinating 

 Committee serving in a staff capacity to prepare a formal evaluation. 

 Particular questions asked were: 



1. Ai'e the requirements realistic in terms of the value of oceano- 

 graphic research to the Government? 



2. Does the report recognize adequately the Government's existing 

 oceanographic program? 



3. How can the recommendations be coordinated with existing 

 programs? 



