304 



Weather Bureau in ocean science, since understanding weather sys- 

 tems requires it, and because of the obvious relationship of the Coast 

 and Geodetic Survey to the activities of 'NOAA. 



It has been argued that removal of E'SSA will dimish the Depart- 

 ment of Commerce, perhaps even end its life, and thereiby, hurt the 

 business community which it represents. 



First, in response to this concern, I do not believe ESS A's activities 

 in any way relate to representation of business, and second, I think the 

 business community is not impressed by the size of the Department of 

 Commerce's payroll or its budget but rather by the quality of the 

 services performed and the caliber of its leadership. 



The National Sea Grant program, U.S. Lake Survey, and National 

 Oceanographic Data Center belong in NCAA, 



In the case of each of these organizations, the following can be said : 

 Their services will be improved by presence in NOAA, NOAA will 

 benefit from their participation — and the national interest will be 

 served. 



Of course, affected departments are going to file objections to the 

 formation of NOAA because they will lose personnel, budget and, they 

 think, stature. In this connection, the comment on a National Oceanog- 

 raphy Association questionnaire from an employee in one of the agen- 

 cies suggested for transfer sums it up : 



Reorganization is needed and wanted by people at the working bureau level, 

 but opposed by the existing departments. This has been historically true and 

 clearly illustrates why reorganization is needed. The existing departments are 

 just not marine oriented * * * 



We then come to another suggestion about NOAA — that no action 

 should be taken until decisions are made on other possible major re- 

 organization within the Government. A Department of Science has 

 been suggested, a Department of Natural Resources, a Department 

 of Environmental Affairs, and so on. Whether any of these or other 

 alterations come about, w^e still will need the grouping of ocean and 

 atmospheric activities that is NOAA. Furthermore, the new agency 

 could fit into almost any of the suggested departments as a unit and is, 

 in fact, a logical first step toward more fundamental restructuring. 

 Taking this step now could well enhance such future action. 



An additional point is — no matter what other reorganizations come, 

 we need NOAA now to set our ocean affairs in order and no additional 

 amount of study of reorganization could possibly improve on the work 

 of the Stratton Commission. 



To me, one of the most convincing comments about NOAA came 

 from Dr. Stratton at his appearance on April 30 before you. 



He told you that personally he was "appalled" at the idea of another 

 Federal independent agency when he first heard the suggestion. We 

 can understand this reaction, given the proliferation of Federal agen- 

 cies and programs and the sometimes chaotic condition of governmental 

 structuring in this country today. Now, as you know, Dr. Stratton is a 

 vigorous advocate of NOAA. iFrom his background in science and 

 major organizations, he is convinced of the logic of taking this action 

 now. 



It is in spite of our reluctance to add to the number of independent 

 agencies in Washington and not because we think a Federal agency 



