NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM LEGISLATION 191 



program and in assigning responsibilities to help him develop and 

 carry out such a program. 



While I see two main areas of responsibility in oceanography — 

 physical oceanography and ocean resources — I am aware that a num- 

 ber of Federal departments and agencies have activities of one sort or 

 another relating to the oceans. This dispersal of activities always 

 raises the question of how the various departments and agencies talk 

 to each other, of how they coordinate their activities to prevent dupli- 

 cation and to prevent gaps. 



Many of the bills now before this committee proceed on the assump- 

 tion that the present interagency coordination in the field of oceanog- 

 raphy is relatively poor and that a fresh coordinating body is needed. 

 I would disagree. For oceanography, we already have an effective 

 coordinating group — the Interagency Committee on Oceanography 

 (ICO). ICO was established in 1959 by the Federal Council for 

 Science and Technology, which is an advisory committee made up of 

 the science heads of the major Federal departments and agencies under 

 the chairmanship of the President's Special Assistant for Science and 

 Technology. 



My own experience is that ICO works well — that Federal activities 

 relating to the oceans are well coordinated. If anything, I would go 

 the other way — ^that these activities may become overcoordinated if 

 there is a proliferation of coordinating committees. 



ICO is not only a good coordinating body. It also provides us each 

 year with a valuable preview of the total Federal effort in oceano- 

 graphy — of the direction in which it is moving and of the areas on 

 which it is laying emphasis. For several years now, ICO has been 

 publishing an annual document entitled "National Oceanographic 

 Program". It outlines the Federal programs in oceanography for the 

 fiscal year ahead. 



The document is reviewed and approved by the Federal Council for 

 Science and Technology, and the task of preparing it gives the execu- 

 tive branch a valuable opportunity to reevaluate priorities and to 

 refine programs. I think the Congress would find this sort of Federal 

 plan for oceanography extremely useful in reviewing the authorization 

 and appropriation requests of the Federal departments and agencies 

 involved in oceanographic activities. 



I would, in fact, recommend that the Congress require that such a 

 plan be submitted to it each year, as provided under H.R. 2218. "With 

 a Federal plan for oceanography before it, the Congress would be 

 better able to determine whether the executive branch is moving ahead 

 in oceanography with proper speed, wisdom, and effectiveness. 



Some of the bills now before this committee would establish a high- 

 level commission or committee to advise the President on Federal 

 programs in oceanography. I do not think such a commission or 

 committee is necessary. These programs are already under high- 

 level study. ICO has them under review, and the President's Science 

 Advisory Committee, which is composed of eminent scientists outside 

 the Federal Government, has recently established a panel on 

 oceanography. 



If Congress believes legislation is necessary, we think that action 

 along the lines of H.R. 2218 would be desirable. 



