Vien 
‘ ~~ 
The report then presented two basic principles key to oceanic 
progress : 
First, a mechanism must be established to provide national perspective and 
guidance to the Nation’s engineering and technology efforts. Second, recognition 
must be made of the necessity of continual additions to fundamental technology. 
This latter principle leads to the importance of assuring that funds to support 
fundamental technology development ‘are adequately distinguished from agency 
general operating funds so that a steady ‘and continuing fundamental technology 
program can be assured without interruption. 
The response to the first principle, and one element of safeguard, 
should be the formation of the National Advisory Committee for the 
Oceans (NACO). I emphasized a second safeguard in my statement, 
and it is also the panel’s second principle. Because mission manage- 
ment will inevitably sacrifice long-range engineering research and 
advanced technology development to short-term needs, “the fundamen- 
tal technology program should be budgetarily independent. Also, the 
major portion of the work should be done on a contract basis outside of 
Federal laboratories. The fundamental technology program then will 
provide assistance to the private sphere while enhancing the effective- 
ness of Federal operational capabilities within its functional missions 
such as exploration and survey. 
A third safeguard is for the Congress to assure that ‘ne oceanic 
missions to be performed by the U.S. ~ Government and the principles 
presented in the testimony of myself and others are clearly spelled 
out in the legislative charter given the executive branch as a result 
of these hearings. A final safeouard is to assure that there remains 
sn open door for independent “advisory groups not attached to the 
U.S. Government nor appointed by Government officials. 
Mr. Lennon. Should NACO be created along with and tied to 
NOAA, or can it exist with a life of its own? If NACO can be inde- 
pendently established, whom should it advise? What powers should it 
be given, assuming that it is independently established, to assure that 
it can carry out coordination of Federal efforts effectively ? UY 
Mr. Wuraron. I believe NACO definitely could be created independ- 
ently of NOAA. It should advise the President, through his science 
advisor, the Congress, and each of the executive agencies with ocean 
missions. NACO’s powers should include (1) the publication, review, 
and updating of 10-year objectives for the national ocean program, 
(2) the publication of an annual review and assessment of the progress 
of the United States toward meeting the national goals, (3) assign- 
ment of lead agencies for programs “of multiagency interest. (4) re- 
view of plans and. budget requests of U.S. Government agencies, taking 
into account efforts outside the U.S. Government, to a void uninten- 
tional duplication of engineering development, and (5) perhaps most 
important, NACO could be given the responsibility to carry out the 
technology development and data dissemination functions, A technol- 
ogy development group could be attached to NACO and be assigned 
the task of providing new technology to meet the U.S. Government's 
missions in the oceans in accordance with national priorities. Since 
each of these five powers would benefit all the Government agencies 
with ocean roles, very close coordination and cooperation among them 
would be assured. 
“Mr. Lennon. At the close: of your statement, you reflect that Gov- 
ernment ought to organize along functional lines. As far as engineer- 
