NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM LEGISLATION 461 



within the ICO which takes each agency's plans in this area and indi- 

 cates where they feel the agency should do more and sets some goals 

 on what they believe the agencies can do with the hardware the agency 

 has or the technical manpower that they have available, so we do 

 criticize our own programs. However, in order to implement them it 

 becomes a budgetary process and sometimes they fall out, but we are 

 also criticized by the Federal council which has direct contact with 

 the President. 



Mr. Casey. After the ICO meets and they decide you are not dupli- 

 cating and they decide which agency is going to take on what particu- 

 lar activity, then these agencies have to go back with their regular 

 budget to tiy to get sufficient money for that ? 



Admiral Childress. That is right. 



Mr. Casey. In this report on page 27 it talks about the new undersea 

 vehicle for oceanography. One of the things we feel, and I think I 

 speak for most of the committee, which generates these bills, is the 

 new projects which need to be undertaken, the new studies, and so 

 forth, which are lost in the overall agency budget. 



I think the wording of this particular report points that up, because 

 the report states the member agencies of the ICO are eager to operate 

 URV's in research and engineering projects. They are, however, re- 

 luctant in fiscal year 1966 to embark upon costly programs of develop- 

 ment. 



Well, it will be a costly program. 



Admiral Childress. That is right. 



Mr. Cx\SEY. Who is going to have nerve enough among these agen- 

 cies to say "Well, which one of you have nerve enough to put it in 

 your budget and see it through ? " 



Admiral Childress. That is right. 



Mr. Casey. If you take the Defense Department, the Navy Depart- 

 ment might say "We will take it on but we need another aircraft. We 

 certainly can't take it on with the situation we have now in Vietnam. 

 We are charged not with more research in this new field but we are 

 charged more with defense entirely at the moment. We cannot put 

 in any new programs or items." 



Admiral Childress. You are correct. That is the situation. 



Mr, Casey. We have no criticism of the dedication of the men on the 

 ICO or their ability, but we are critical of the mechanics by which 

 these programs are outlined. It is a good coordinating agency to see 

 that the taxpayers' money is not wasted through duplication, and it is 

 a good coordinating agency in other ways, to see that there is an ex- 

 change of data and ideas. 



"What we recognize, and more people are recognizing all the time, is 

 that we are just concerned with slow development of necessary func- 

 tions, each agency's necessary functions in the field of oceanography. 

 We want to see more impetus on expansion, overall expansion, develop- 

 ment, and use of the ocean resources. 



As I gather, you gentlemen are not here to be critical particularly of 

 the objectives of the bill, but you do not feel we are quite ready for 

 some of these bills at this time. Is that correct ? 



Admiral Childress. We are in favor of H.K. 2218. 



Mr. Casey. Yes. 



