842 
TIMING OF ACTION BY THE ADMINISTRATION 
Mr. Mosuer. Well, Mr. Chairman, as usual Dr. Wenk is very artic- 
ulate in saying many of the things that need to be said. I must say 
that I, as one member of the committee—and I suspect I speak for 
many members of the committee—wish that he could come in here 
with a resounding affirmative statement which would propel us much 
more rapidly toward the goal that we seek in the reorganization that 
many of us consider to be necessary. 
Dr. Wenk, do I sense accurately that there isn’t any hope that the 
present administration will give us precise and decisive advice on this 
matter of reorganization, an urgent recommendation? There isn’t any 
hope of that in the next few months ahead ? 
Dr. Wenx. Well, Mr. Mosher, I don’t believe I can answer that 
with any precision—as to a forecast on the date at which the adminis- 
tration would have a position on this particular proposal. As your 
chairman noted, the Advisory Council was assigned this responsibility 
by the President and has it under review. I believe it is fair to say 
that it is being considered in the context of broader issues as, for 
example, the matter of organizing with regard to management of our 
entire environment, reorganizing with regard to the specific role of 
science and technology, and these take time. 
T really would not like to forecast, but in making no forecast I also 
don’t want to be completely pessimistic about a report or reaction 
to this proposal. 
Mr. Mosuer. Well, we won’t get any recommendation concerning 
NOAA out of the Ash Commission until it is ready with its complete 
recommendations. It that what you are suggesting? 
Dr. Wenxk. When the Vice President recommended to the President 
that the Ash Committee undertake this study, it was in the context 
of looking at this more broadly, more broadly than the Commission 
was able to do within its charge, I believe the wisdem of that pro- 
posal lies, first, in making sure that in organizing for one objective we 
do not inadvertently degrade another; secondly, I think those who 
might be opposed to NOAA might then use the failure to look at this 
in the broader context as an argument for delay. 
Therefore, I think there is really some merit, even from the point of 
view of support for this agency, in looking at it in a broader context. 
POSITION ON THE COMMISSION’S RECOMMENDATIONS 
Mr. Mosuer. I am assuming that this prepared statement—and it 
was an excellent statement that you presented this morning, even 
though it is somewhat disappointing; it sets some guidelines for us 
and raises some questions we have to answer—I am assuming this 
statement is one that represents the thinking of quite a few people, 
not only yourself, but the Bureau of the Budget, the White House, 
but I am assuming that it perhaps somewhat waters down your own— 
“waters down” shouldn’t be considered as a pun—but waters down 
your own thinking. 
Now, for instance, on pages 21 and 22, the questions you raised 
there, and they are questions that this committee has to consider, 
would your own personal answer to those be largely “yes”? Would 
your own personal answer to those be largely affirmative? 
