118 NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM—1965 
(0) In support of the above, develop data on ship requirements and operating 
costs for the several agencies involved. 
(c¢) Review proposals for oceanographic surveys requiring across-the-board 
support by Federal agencies. Hstablish ad hoe subpanels for coordination of 
interagency participation. 
(d) Coordinate U.S. participation in international oceanographic surveys and 
reports. 
It may be of interest to describe how the Ocean Surveys Advisory Panel ful- 
fills its responsibilities to insure the best possible scientific return for the expendi- 
ture of resources and funds. The programs are developed upon the general 
guidelines provided in the NASCO report. These, of course, require interpreta- 
tion and revisions based on the progress of the surveys and technology in general. 
The individual agencies’ programs reflect primarily the missions of the agencies, 
and the scientific competency of their staffs. 
One of the specific accomplishments of the Panel since 1962 is represented by 
ICO Pamphlet No. 7, National Plan for Ocean Surveys, issued in May 1963. 
This plan was prepared as a framework within which the specific survey pro- 
gram for each year could be formulated. It describes the purpose and objectives 
of the plan, facilities and personnel to be required, scope of the work, types 
of investigations and disposition of the data. It also describes the data to be 
eollected, and includes a tentative ship construction schedule. This plan is 
reviewed and revised by the Panel whenever necessary. 
In any national program it is essential that the requirements as well as 
advice of the nongovernmental oceanographic centers be effectively considered 
in making up the annual national program. Communications from without the 
Government are effected by a combination of formal and informal means: 
On a formal basis, the Panel meets with the NASCO Panel on Ocean-Wide 
Surveys at least once a year, usually in connection with the preparation of the 
annual national program. More directly the ICO Panel includes NASCO 
representation. 
In recent months, this representation was recommended for increase from one 
to three scientists, and from the class of observer to member, representing three 
major centers for oceanographic research in the United States. You may recall 
from the list of Survey Panel participants that the executive secretary of 
NASCO, with offices in Washington, D.C., is an alternate member. Owing to 
his proximity and rapport with the NASCO Panel, he is in day-by-day communi- 
eation with the ICO group. 
At one of the recent joint meetings, the NASCO.Ocean-Wide Survey Panel 
heard statements from each agency on its current survey operations, funding, 
and accomplishments, and is presently considering a detailed study of the tech- 
nical data. NASCO has now agreed to reexamine its recommendation for 
oceanwide surveys in the light of these recent. survey accomplishments. . They 
will also evaluate our performance in response to their plan. The Ocean Surveys 
Advisory Panel is accumulating performance and cost data for their use in 
making this evaluation. 
Through the ONR and NSF representatives on the Panel, these two activities, 
which together fund a very large percentage of the oceanography conducted by 
academic institutions, bring to the Panel a detailed knowledge of the plans and 
works in progress carried on outside the Federal agencies. Of course, the bene- 
fit is extended both ways—numerous cases arise in which the institutions can 
conduct work aboard Federal agencies’ survey ships, thus avoiding costly 
duplication. For example, on the recent Hqualant I cruise, conducted under the 
International Cooperative Investigations of the Tropical Atlantic (ICITA), 
ONR-supported scientists from New York University were able to conduct de 
tailed studies of a recently discovered equatorial undercurrent when the U.S.C. 
& G.S. ship Hx#plorer transited the Equator on an oceanographie cruise. Costs to 
ONR for the shipboard accommodations for the four scientists embarked was the 
nominal messing bill. 
In another ocean, at this moment, University of Hawaii biologists and geol- 
ogists and geophysicists from the Universities of California and Southern Cali- 
fornia, and the U.S. Navy, as well as meteorologists from the Weather Bureau 
using equipment from the Universities of Michigan and Wisconsin, and biologists 
