do not propose in this writing the details of this organization. This 

 Institute would best be formulated, NACOA believes, through the 

 legislative process. 



In brief: finding that the national purpose would be served by 

 the establishment of a modest organization to stimulate more fore- 

 sighted development of ocean technology than now occurs despite 

 accelerating national activity in the oceans, we recommend there be 

 established an Institute for Engineering Research in the Oceans 



Whose function it would be to: 



• Develop standards which presently, in ocean engineering, lag 

 other fields. 



• Fund good ideas in meeting basic engineering needs to the 

 point where they could generate support on their merit or 

 fade away on their lack of it. 



• Improve technical transfer and professional communications 

 in ocean engineering. 



• Oversee the no-man's land between performing in the oceans 

 . — rr and trying to describe and understand it. 



II^jJOaM, jtyv-"-^ ^ * /? * Provide seed money to develop good ideas (but not demon- 

 ^'v^Hrv^*^^^^^**^^®^^)^,^;^^^ stration projects) before a certain market exists. 



y^^^-o-'S^-^ We suggest a size of: 



Ctrv-vv^ • About 150 professionals with the technical competence to 



follow as well as lead, perform as well as monitor. 



And a budget of: 



• About $5, 1 1 5, and $25 million per year (at full strength), 

 more than half of which would be for outside grants and 

 contracts. 



Reporting to: 



• The Administrator of NOAA as focal agent for marine 

 affairs and Federal Coordinator for Marine Sciences and 

 Technology. 



This proposal is a step deeper into commitment to ocean engineer- 

 ing than was recommended in our Second Annual Report where it was 

 suggested that a Federal Coordinator of Marine Technology Develop- 

 ment be appointed who would at least assist in the transfer of informa- 

 tion from the Navy into the civilian sector. Having looked into the 

 matter with some care, the panel feels that minimum step would be 

 insufficient even though beneficial. Another alternative— to await the 

 effects of the stronger focus for marine affairs to be achieved by govern- 

 ment reorganization as NACOA recommended in its Annual Report- 

 would simply delay things, for ocean engineering efforts would have to 

 be concentrated even there in some similar fashion. 





