483 



Mr. Pollock. Well, in the particular areas that Dr. Wakelin talked 

 about, we have already begun research, they are stated on page 4 and 

 page 5 at the top of our testimony. I think I could state very briefly, 

 Mr. Rogers, that No. 1 is an area that is accomplished by our National 

 Marine Fisheries Service. The current fiscal year figure is $3,170,000, 

 and for the next fiscal year it is $4,170,000. 



In No. 2, the oceanographic studies of basic physical and chemical 

 processes, our Environmental Research Laboratories for tlie current 

 fiscal year are spendmg $1,471,000, and for the next fiscal year 

 $2,437,000. And the National Marine Fisheries Service is also engaged 

 in this work at a level of $100,000. 



In paragraph 3, the identification of toxic materials and their lethal, 

 sublethal, and chronic effects on marine life and No. 4 being the devel- 

 opment of effective monitoring systems, our National Marine Fish- 

 eries Service is spending $500,000 in the current fiscal year, and we 

 have budgeted $1,060,000 for the next fiscal year. 



Now you will note that on the middle of page 5 of our testimony we 

 talk about NOAA's National Oceanographic Data Center, and 

 Dr. Wakelin included also the National Oceanographic Instrumenta- 

 tion Center. The figures for the current fiscal year, I believe, are $1.8 

 million for the Instrumentation Center, and I believe it is $2,015 mil- 

 lion for the Data Center. 



Mr. Wakeliist. If I might just go on to comj)lete, Mr. Rogers, the 

 work at the Bureau of Standards on the pollution problem of detec- 

 tion and measurement, their particidar budget in NBS is $613 million 

 for fiscal year 1971, and $884 million for fiscal year 1972. That is, the 

 request for 1972. 



Our National Technical Information Service has a budget, but not 

 an appropriation — a budget of $5 million, of which I believe the budget 

 request is $1,477 million for fiscal year 1972. 



Other funds coming into NTIS come either from the Department 

 of Defense or from public sale of our technical reports. 



Mr. Rogers. I see. I was particularly concerned about the little 

 amount budgeted for toxic materials, lethal, sublethal and chronic 

 effects on marine life and human life, I would presume, too, that you 

 get into. Don't joii think this figTire is rather insufficient, with the 

 state of the knowledge? 



Mr. Pollock. Well, I think the answer to the question is that we 

 would certainly like to go a lot further than we have. As we have 

 indicated, we have more than doubled the budget for next year, over 

 what we presently have. I think this is an extremely important subject. 

 Most of the work here, as you might imagine, is being done in the area 

 of heavy metals in fi.sh, and we are moving along with it. There is a 

 lot more we could do. but we have to live at the present time within 

 the budget we have for doing the job. And I think we are doing an 

 effective job. 



Mr. Rogers. Also, we are somewhat concerned about the budget 

 limitations on the sea grant college programs. It is my understanding 

 that they are not able to really go into any new programs, but simply 

 to fund those that are ongoing, really because of the inflationary fac- 

 tor. Is that about correct ? 



Mr. Pollock. Yes, sir. We have a problem; I think all of us that 

 are concerned with the whole marine environment would certainly 



