1096 
of the Navy to fund the specialized and general ocean research and 
engineering work that it required for its own particular needs. 
This could be a serious problem. In my view, the Navy must be able 
to fund scientific and engineering ocean research and development on 
a substantial scale, of a nature not quite that required for civilian ap- 
plications, if it is to fulfill rts mission effectively. 
I think that is a quite general view, and it might be well to state that 
in this bill, to reassure the Navy, as was done in 1 Senator Muskie’s 1965 
bill. 
The one thing that has changed steadily in favor of NOAA in these 
recent years has been opinion at the working level in the affected Gov- 
ernment agencies. 
This is not an opinion which the Congress can get in open testimony, 
because working level people in government cannot testify contrary to 
departmental position without fear of disciplinary action, Neverthe- 
less, the working level opinion on the need for this consolidation has 
strengthened sharply during the past 5 years, as Professor Clingan 
and ie who circulate around amongst these circles, know very well, 
People tell us one thing, and they cannot tell that to you. 
The same is true of positions in the academic scientific community, 
although ordinarily no two scientists ever agree on precisely how such 
a reorganization should be done. 
I know of no objection to the concept of a new agency on ocean 
affairs in the scientific community. The backing and filling 1s concerned 
with what functions should go into it. 
My view on what components should go into NOAA, and how the 
congressional committee assignments should reflect this, is also differ- 
ent than expressed in H.R. 18247. Tt still remains what I told the com- 
mittee in 1965, and as was subsequently expressed more cogently than I 
did by Senator Muskie in his bill of that year. 
I do not consider those differences, however, to be consequential, or 
even very pertinent. NOAA, as expressed by the National Commission, 
and as incorporated in H. R. 18247, is, in my view, the most important 
step the Congress can take in enhancing the posture of the United 
States in respect of the ocean, and I support its adoption unequivocally. 
I find no fault with either the rationale, the analysis, or the recom- 
mendations the Commission made in this aspect of its work. : 
The elements included in NOAA by the Commission’s recommenda- 
tions, and in H.R. 13247, encompass the key agencies and functions to 
provide a viable and desirable core to which other activities could be 
added from time to time, if further consideration showed such addi- 
tions to have merit. 
T think, myself, and have for a long time, that the merchant marine 
functions ‘of government, at least, should be added to NOAA, and as 
soon as politics permit. As a matter of fact, | am surprised that the 
maritime unions are not demanding this action, and expect that in due 
course they will. 
IT am aware that large sections of the Federal structure are under 
serious study from the standpoint of reorganization, and I am sure 
that the whole structure lel benefit from substantial stirring up and 
modernization. 
This, however, will take a considerable amount of time, and we are 
already SO delayed in getting a suitable Federal ocean structure that 
