128 EFFECTIVENESS OF THE COMMITTEE ON OCEANOGRAPHY 



ward their contributions by functional area to me. My assistant 

 and I compile these contributions into a first draft of the national 

 program. 



We originate and introduce such other topics as would be relevant 

 within the structure of the national program as it is finally reported , 

 and a conclusion, with added fiscal data; and then, of course, since the 

 plan must be in form technologically satisfactory to the panels, the 

 panel chairmen are called together to review this. 



I will send out copies of the draft to the panel chairmen, with the 

 request that they review them, they come together, and in session, put 

 together in better fashion another draft of the program preliminary 

 to its being issued to the ICO members themselves for review. 



Mr. Drewry. One of the points that I am trying to raise, or just 

 what has been concerning the chairman and perhaps all of us, is that 

 there is a tremendous amount of ability and goodwill and conscientious 

 effort being exerted; and yet the fashion of the exertion seems to be 

 upon a very loose basis, with no really direct lines of force that could 

 assure an implementation of some of these things that are thought to 

 be desirable goals for the programs. 



Mr. Abel. Mr. Drewry, I would suggest that there are three well- 

 established sections. It is a poor way of putting it, but within the 

 ICO, there is the ICO Committee membership itself, there are the 

 panel structures, and there is the ICO staff. 



There is a fairly well-formulated interchange of administration be- 

 tween these three branches. 



Mr. Drewry. I think that is all, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Dingell. Mr. Abel, appropos of the questions our committee 

 counsel was asking you, in the event that there is a difference of 

 opinion — -let me change that. Has there ever been a difference of 

 opinion in the ICO or the Coordinating Committee that you know 

 of which was substantial? 



Mr. Abel. Between two members? 



Mr. Dingell. Between two members or between two agencies? 



Mr. Abel. Oh, I suspect there must have been any number of 

 differences of opinion. 



Mr. Dingell. Can you recall any specific one? 



Mr.' Abel. Well, that is a little difficult to describe. There are so 

 many questions which will come up before the ICO in its panels, and 

 since each one of these organizations consists of at least a half a dozen 

 to -a dozen members, I do not think you can expect to achieve unanim- 

 ity on the first go-around; there are going to be differences, yes. 



Mr. Dingell. I am sure there are. The question is: How do we 

 achieve a resolution of these problems? Who enforces, when we 

 achieve a substantial difference of opinion, a resolution and a coordi- 

 nation of differences of opinion which exist within ICO and within the 

 Coordinating Committee? 



Mr. Abel. Oh, there are 



Mr. Dingell. Who has the responsibility to do it? Does ICO 

 have the authority to do it? Does the Coordinating Committee have 

 the authority to do it? 



Mr. Abel. Well, at first stage, when there is disagreement as there 

 is anywhere, it is talked out. Then, of course, one of two things 

 happens : Either someone is convinced contrary to his original opinion , 

 or he is not. 



