1042 
We don’t know whether or not it should be done on the basis of a 
regional coastal zone or regional laboratories, whether it would have 
to be done with an interstate compact approved by the Congress or 
just how. 
That is what we are trying to explore. . 
I want you to know again how much we appreciate your doing what 
you have oifered to do here today in the suggested language. 
You go right ahead. We have a few minutes. 
Mr. Miter. I can close here very quickly, Mr. Chairman. 
One of the administrative legal tools that I think would be very 
useful, if the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency were created, 
would be be explicit authorization to make grants, contracts, loans, 
and other arrangements for fundamental scientific technological and 
social research. 
With the exception of the National Sea Grant college program 
which has authority to initiate programs and make grants in various 
fields relating to the development of marine resources, each of the 
agencies proposed to be included in the NOAA has authority to 
make grants for basic scientific research under Public Law 85-934. 
But the authority under Public Law 85-934 is not sufficiently broad to 
cover an expanded range of concern that includes the advancement 
of fundamental studies of technology and social processes related 
to the marine and atmospheric environments, so that I would like to 
suggest adding a section to the bill to insure that the agency does have 
that authority, which might read something as follows: 
The Administrator is authorized and directed to initiate and support funda- 
mental scientific, technological, and social research related to the marine and 
atmospheric environments, and is authorized to make contracts and other ar- 
rangements (including grants, loans, and other forms of research assistance) to 
support such research. 
That is the end of my comments, Mr. Chairman. 
Thank you. 
Mr. Lennon. On page 242 of the report, and it is related, of course, 
to the testimony of the preceding witness, Dr. McElroy, the Com- 
mission has this to say: 
The transfer of the Sea Grant Program to NOAA would not impair the Na- 
tional Science Foundation’s (NSF) capabilities to perform its normal functions 
of research and science education support. However, it would enable NOAA in 
conjunction with its other functions to sponsor a wide range of highly useful 
applied marine science and training activities in cooperation with universities 
and industry. * * * i 
The Commission would place responsibility for institutional support of Uni- 
versity-National Laboratories in NOAA. This should free NSF to use its limited 
funds to support project research activities. 
Now, If don’t suppose you would be willing to comment on the first 
quote that I made from that report, or would you be willing to com- 
ment on it? 
You heard the testimony of Dr. McElroy. I have every reason to 
believe he is supported in this by Dr. Abel, although I didn’t pin him 
right down. 
Would you comment on that, or would you rather not comment on 
either of these two excerpts from the Commission report related to the 
transfer into NOAA of the Sea Grant college program? 
