5A 
The Commission’s proposal for a new organization has important implications 
for Federal organization for objectives other than marine science. The President 
has requested his Advisory Council on Executive Organization (the Ash Council) 
to consider the Commission’s proposal for a new agency in the context of broader 
Federal organization requirements. Pending the results of this review, I would 
recommend against enactment of H.R. 13247. 
The new Administration has devoted considerable thought to the wisest ways 
to employ the resources of the Federal Government to deal with the environ- 
mental problems. H.R. 13247 is concerned with Federal activities and capabilities 
in the marine and atmospheric environment, which are important but limited 
parts of our physical and biological environment. 
As I will explain in greater detail in my personal appearance before you, it is 
quite possible that the existence of a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency 
would limit the flexibility needed to pursue other kinds of regroupings of agency 
functions to pursue environmental objectives, or could adversely affect the capa- 
bilities of Federal agencies to carry out existing statutory responsibilities in other 
areas. 
Moreover, from a scientific standpoint, while there is a sound argument for 
linking together the oceans and the atmosphere, there is an equally sound argu- 
ment for linking the solid earth and the oceans together, or the solid earth and 
the atmosphere together. Weather is modified in equally important ways by the 
ocean-atmosphere interaction and by the accidents of locations of continental 
land masses and their topography. I think it would be unfortunate if in linking 
together the Federal scientific activities embracing the oceans and the atmosphere. 
they were to be placed in competition with those involving land based science. 
I would like to underscore my belief that the oceans represent a great oppor- 
tunity for this country. They are an important element in our national security 
and a vital part of our human environment. Thus, it is important that we make 
the most effective use of those monies spent on marine resources and development 
so that our marine science and technology activities move vigorously to enlarge 
our understanding of the marine environment. While there has been considerable 
growth in these activities in recent years, much remains to be done. I will con- 
tinue to direct my efforts toward supporting vigorous efforts in the marine 
sciences as an integral part of our general effort to improve the quality of the 
human environment. 
The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to the sub- 
mission of this report from the standpoint of the Administration’s program. 
Sincerely, 
LEE A. DuBRIDGE, Director. 
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 
Washington, D.C., October 1, 1969. 
Hon. Epwarp A. GARMATZ, 
Chairman, Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, 
U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. 
Deak, Mr. GaRMatTz: Thank you for your request to comment on H.R. 13247, 
a bill to amend the Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act of 1966 
to establish a comprehensive and long-range national program of research, de- 
velopment, technical services, exploration, and utilization with respect to our 
marine and atmospheric environment. To fulfill such a program, the bill would 
establish an independent National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency and a 
National Advisory Committee for Oceans and Atmosphere. 
The bill incorporates the reorganization recommendations of the Commission 
on Marine Science, Engineering and Resources, in whose report there is a call for 
“a new central focus of strength” for national marine programs. The Commis- 
sion’s report also singled out the Smithsonian as one of the establishments that 
“should maintain their identities and be strengthened further as essential con- 
tributors to the national marine effort.’”’ We agree fully with the Commission’s 
comments about the Smithsonian and have consistently attempted to strengthen 
our oceanic programs. 
Inasmuch as the Smithsonian is a scientific organization, we are not in a 
position to comment on the proposed agency reorganization, particularly in light 
of the pending review and recommendations of the Ash Council. 
