EFFECTIVENESS OF THE COMMITTEE ON OCEANOGRAPHY 129 



Now, if there remain differences of opinion which cannot be re- 

 solved by talking it out, or eventually by voting 



Mr. Dingell. Excepting you indicated that these were advisory, 

 and were instruments for communication, as opposed to superintend- 

 ents and making of policy decisions. 



Mr. Abel. The panels are advisory; that is correct. 



Mr. Dingell. That is right. So in the event there is a dichotomy 

 between two Government agencies, how are they resolved within 

 ICO, or within the Coordinating Committee? Who resolves them'.' 



Mr. Abel. Who resolves differences of opinion between two 

 agencies? 



Mr. Dingell. Yes, differences of policy between two agencies. 



Mr. Abel. There will be normally an attempt to resolve differences 

 of opinion at almost any level by discussion. Now I simply do not 

 consider myself qualified to comment on how authority is, or should 

 be, leveled at the agency level. 



Mr. Dingell. We are not asking you for a policy statement on 

 this, we are asking you merely to enunciate whatever policy may 

 have been already set up by this organism. Is there a policy deter- 

 mination, either by ICO or the Coordinating Committee as to how 

 disputes and differences between agencies with regard to policy in 

 the general field of oceanography shall be resolved? 



Mr. Abel. No, sir; I honestly do not remember any single event 

 ever arising that would necessitate it. 



Mr. Dingell. I asked you about a policy statement 



Mr. Pelly. If the Chairman would yield; Mr. Abel, you indicated 

 that you either decided one of these differences of opinion one way or 

 the other? 



Mr. Abel. Yes, sir; I am trying to 



Mr. Pelly. Is there not a third alternative where one agency would 

 just simply back off and not want to tread on the toes of another 

 agencv; and there would be no resolution or solution of the problem 

 at all? 



Mr. Abel. Yes, sir; I am just trying to think back to such a situa- 

 tion. I cannot remember any. 



Mr. Pelly. It seemed to me yesterday when the Director of the 

 Bureau of Commercial Fisheries was here, there was every indication 

 that they just backed away from a problem of duplication when it 

 existed; they would just not want to oppose some other agency of the 

 Government, and as a result of that, we have duplication. 



Mr. Abel. I am not sufficiently conversant, if you are speaking of 

 the fisheries problem. 



Mr. Pelly. We have in some manner a basis of authority, so that 

 there would be a definite decision on a policy basis, then you would 

 not have one agency backing away from another. Either it conies 

 under the jurisdiction of one agency or another. 



We have the same thing between committees in the Congress, and 

 there is an authority, there is a Speaker to decide which committee 

 shall have jurisdiction. And I think you do not have that under the 

 informal setup which you describe. 



Mr. Abel. To the extent that you stated, that is true, sir. I am 

 wondering, just as a personal opinion, what happens when you do 

 have a difference of opinion between departments. 



