56 EFFECTIVENESS OF THE COMMITTEE ON OCEANOGRAPHY 



We were aware of the great success that the Defense Department 

 has had, and NASA as well, in using or contracting out to various 

 specialized industries instrument systems of various kinds. So we 

 held an instrumention symposium — in a sense a preliminary, rather 

 broad one — to discuss the needs in the field of oceanography and to 

 discuss the possibilities of what these companies contribute. 



There were about 700 people attending this symposium, representing 

 a great number of companies throughout the United States. I 

 believe the meeting was very successful. It has been followed by a 

 more specialized meeting in the Navy, since that time, and there is 

 now under consideration by our panel and by the Panel on Instru- 

 mentation of the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Ocea- 

 nography a special biological meeting, to discuss with industry and 

 Government and non-Government scientists the needs and possible 

 developments for instruments in biological oceanography. 



I believe that most of us in the panel believe — I may be biased 

 here, Mr. Chairman, because I am a biologist myself — -but many of us 

 believe that the biological instruments that we are using on our ships, 

 oceanographic ships and fishery research ships, are really further be- 

 hind modern instrumentation than probably any other field. 



I believe that the general meeting we held last September bore 

 this out, that we are pretty much in the neighborhood of a hundred 

 years behind knowledge in physics, and chemistry and electronics in 

 developing more systematic and more automatic instruments in 

 biological oceanography. 



As a result of this, we are developing a master instrumentation pro- 

 posal and capability file at the National Oceanographic Data Center. 

 Now the advantage of this is, to me, that all of the agencies of Govern- 

 ment know what other departments are doing. We have one central 

 filing system where all of the proposals that are brought before in- 

 dividual Government agencies are available for examination. One 

 central file where we can see what industry capabilities are. 



All of us don't have to, in a sense, talk to literally hundreds of agents 

 of these companies ourselves. Wlien these proposals can come in, 

 they can be considered and filed, and they can be available to all, to 

 any Government agent who has a need for any particular instrument 

 or system of instruments. 



Another task that we have undertaken has been to study the need 

 for an instrument test and calibration center, and recommendations 

 have been made to the ICO for two such facilities. We are now con- 

 sidering the proper timing of funding for these facilities. Informal 

 conversation has led me to believe that the Navy Hydrographic 

 Office is going to start such an instrumentation center, even without 

 special funding, by bringing together some of their own specialists, 

 over here at the Weapons Center. So in a sense, we are gaining some 

 leadtime now in this very important field. 



We are thinking ultimately of an instrumentation test and calibra- 

 tion center on the Atlantic coast, perhaps, to be located here in 

 Washington, and another one on the west coast eventually. 



We believe, by the way, that this kind of cooperation exemplifies 

 the efforts and the success of the Interagency Committee on Oceanog- 

 raphy. I would call to your attention that the National Oceano- 

 graphic Data Center is another example of this coordination and the 

 success of it. 



