420 NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM LEGISLATION 



THE ORGANIZATION OF OCEAN AFFAIRS IN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT 



Leaving aside for the moment the high diversity, and lack of correlation, 

 ^mong agencies in the international field working on the international com- 

 mon of the high seas, let us turn to the organization of ocean affairs in the 

 U.S. Government. I think it goes Vv^ithout saying that the United States 

 cannot bring international aspects of these problems into better relationships 

 vpith each other until it has reduced its own house to somewhat better order. 



In the U.S. Government there are about 22 operating bureaus and offices, 

 located in 5 departments and 3 independent agencies, that condtict ocean 

 activities of greater or lesser nature under their statutory responsibilities. 

 They are accountable to about 32 substantive and appropriations conunittees 

 and subcommittees of the Congress. 



In those two sentences are summed up the prime trouble with our ocean 

 activities and why we have no national ocean strategy, no national ocean pro- 

 gram with which to implement it, and no national ocean budget with which to 

 finance it. There is no entity in the executive short of the President which has 

 the responsibility to prepare these things and there is no entity in the Congress 

 to review and approve them if they were prepared. 



In the Executive the nearest thing (there is to an entity for preparing these 

 things is the Interagency Committee on Oceanography of the Federal Council for 

 Science and Technology. I share with most of the rest of the ocean community 

 in the country the highest admiration for the Chairman of ICO, his staff, and the 

 members of ICO. They are diligent, competent, devoted public servants, vp'ho 

 know their business, and work hard at it. ICO has the general reputation of 

 being one of the most energetic and competent interagency committees in the 

 Government. The following comments reflect not at all on the men, but on the 

 incompetence of the institution to deal with the problems given it. 



1. The Federal Council for Science and Technology 



There is fundamental disagreement that FOST is the proper agency of Govern- 

 ment in which to house this ocean use function. FOST and its committees deal 

 primarily with scientific matters. The original membership of FCST were 

 chosen primarily for their ability in the application of science and technology 

 to the weaponry field. Although the membership has been broadened somewhat 

 recently it still retains the original flavor. 



If there is anything in this ocean fleld use in which there is a concensus of 

 opinion in the scientific community, the interested industry, and the executive 

 and legislative branches of the Government it is that the scope of what has been 

 heretofore called federally sponsored oceanography should be broadened to take 

 in all ocean research, exploration, harvesting, and all services and activities 

 connected therewith, sponsored or funded by the Federal Government at all 

 levels of activity within the United States and in the international field. 



To develop a national ocean program as outlined above requires participation 

 by the scientific community, industry, the State governments, and a far broader 

 cut of the Federal Government than just its scientific aspects. In the assault 

 upon the ocean designed to reduce this new environment to our occupation and 

 use there will be a very high scientific component but the Russians have showed 

 us that this requires to go hand in hand with application, and have dearly demon- 

 strated that that is where we are falling behind in the race. 



'The FCST is simply not constituted to toe fully competent to this task. The 

 ICO, as a part of FOST, cannot be broadened suflSciently to handle this task 

 iadequately because the parent organization has not the required breadth. 



2. The level of ICO 



None of the members of ICO is the policy head of the Department or Agency in 

 which he works, nOr does he represent total departmental policy as the surrogate 

 of its chief officer. Accordingly whatever decision is made by ICO is subject to 

 the independent and individual policy review of the several departmental and 

 agency heads. In each of these departments or agencies ocean activities are a 

 minor part of overall responsibilities. 



Accordingly so long as ICO is formed from working level, or middle manage- 

 ment, people it cannot originate the policy level decisions required for the formu- 

 lation of a national ocean policy. 



S. Channels to State governments 



The individual agencies doing ocean work in the Federal Government each 

 maintains its own liaison as needed with its counterpart in the State govern- 



