360 NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM LEGISLATION 



STATEMENT OF JOHN H. CLOTWORTHY, GENERAL MANAGER, 

 UNDERSEAS DIVISION, VICE PRESIDENT, DEFENSE AND SPACE 

 CENTER, WESTINGHOTJSE ELECTRIC CO. 



Mr. Clotworthy. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, 

 I am John H. Clotworthy, vice president of the Westinghouse Defense 

 & Space Center in Baltimore, Md., and general manager of its under- 

 seas division. 



Westinghouse has long experience in the development and manu- 

 facture of underseas weaponry and electronics equipment and is a 

 major contractor to the Navy for the Polaris program. In recent 

 years, Westinghouse has embarked on a far-ranging ocean engineering 

 program that includes a family of manned submersibles — the first of 

 which will soon be commissioned — oceanographic sensing equipment, 

 advanced underwater breathing equipment, bottom-scanning sonar, 

 and commercial fishing systems. 



Westinghouse Electric Corp. is also a major builder of desaliniza- 

 tion plants throughout the world. I appreciate this opportunity to 

 appear before your subcommittee and to discuss a national ocean pro- 

 gram and its importance to industry and the Nation. 



I am speaking today not as a scientist, but as an engineer and a 

 businessman. My oceanographic affiliations consist of being a found- 

 ing member and currently chairman of the financial committee of the 

 Marine Technology Society. I have for 5 years been a member of the 

 National Security Industrial Association's Anti submarine Warfare 

 Advisory Committee, and was chairman of the ad hoc committee of 

 NSIA which last year prepared a study and a recommended program 

 titled "A National Ocean Program."' This was March 1964, and copies 

 of this report were distributed to the Congress. 



Several vital factors must weigh heavily in determining the Federal 

 role in a national ocean program. And each of these factors must, in 

 the end, support our national goals. World politics, the national 

 economy and public attitudes are prime considerations, but each and 

 all of these factors hinge upon our scientific and technical effort in 

 the ocean. 



No nation holds guaranteed dominion over the seas. Yesterday it 

 was Great Britain, today the TTnited States, and tomorrow perhaps 

 someone else, unless we are ever vigilant of our commitment to prog- 

 ress. The advent of Polaris and accelerated antisubmarine warfare 

 efforts have clearh^ marked the sea as an area of utmost strategic 

 importance and, because of shifting world politics, perhaps our only 

 long-term deterrent stronghold. But other nations are challenging 

 our leadership. 



As noted by Representative Rogers several weeks ago, the develop- 

 ment of new unmanned merchant marine vessels by the Soviets and 

 their supremacy over domestic fisheries offers lucid evidence of that 

 challenge. Our commitment to assist other nations in building gen- 

 eral tecluiological competence further binds us to maintaining a role 

 of leadership. 



The economic benefits of a national ocean program have been well 

 documented. For example, a recent report of the National Academy 

 of Sciences entitled "Economic Benefits From Oceanographic Re- 

 search" presents a detailed schedule of beneficial projects and their 



