8 NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM—1965 
The Interagency Committee, incidentally, operates through a series 
of specialized panels, and the panel chairmen have been invited to 
appear as subsequent witnesses before your committee. They will be 
able to tell you how each spring they draw up a set of plans that repre- 
sent a combination of mission needs and scientific opportunities. These 
plans are first sifted and reviewed by the ICO and then evaluated both 
by OST staff and by a panel of outside consultants, convened by the 
Office of Science and Technology, and representing a variety of subject 
matter disciplines and institutional experience. They attempt to in- 
sure that these programs are not “more of the same,” that they reflect 
fully new opportunities in scientific research, and the full potential 
of engineering technology. 
Finally, the ICO proposals, together with the consultants’ critique 
are submitted to the Council, acting in plenary session. With Coun- 
cil review and endorsement, the program then adopted serves as a 
guide, both to the Bureau of the Budget and to individual agencies in 
the development of budget proposals which are finally reflected im the 
President’s annual budget message to the Congress. The national 
oceanographic program for fiscal 1965 was incorporated as special 
analysis H in the President’s budget message to the Congress. Full 
details were set forth in the Federal Council report that was trans- 
mitted by the President to the Congress, that is he pink one, on March 
19, 1964. Copies were sent to the committee. 
The document includes a summary description of the program and 
its interpretation, and a detailed account of the parts of the program 
-and its cost. 
It is important to recognize here that any field of science or any other 
field of Government activity undergoes an excruciating set of reviews. 
Tnevitably, the aggregate of budget proposals exceeds the funds avail- 
able. Choices have to be made, and in this competition for funds justi- 
fication must be based not only on the importance of the objectives but 
on the scientific resources available, particularly of skilled manpower, 
and the quality of the leadership. In his January 21 message on the 
fiscal 1965 budget, President Johnson enunciated a set of guidelines 
and principles expressing his determination to keep costs under tight 
control. It is in this framework that the $138 million oceanographic 
budget was submitted. 
The $138 million in this proposal represents an 11-percent increase 
over the fiscal 1964 appropriations. To sustain momentum in the 
developing program, the budget was carefully tailored to foster 
growth in research and training, providing $73 million in this category 
compared with $64 million last year and some $52 million for fiscal 
year 1963. To do this, ship construction was accordingly slowed. 
In transmitting this year’s oceanographic program to the Congress, 
President Johnson stated— 
this proposed growth is an absolute minimum if the country is to achieve its 
objectives in oceanic research which had been previously enunciated by both 
President Kennedy and the Congress. 
We are somewhat disappointed to find that some elements of this 
program, as was the case with the fiscal 1964 oceanography program, 
have not received support by the Congress and this illustrates a prob- 
lem which I especially wish to call to this committee’s attention. Dif- 
ferent parts of the oceanographic budget are considered separately 
