317 



its diligence in bringing the whole oceanographic community this far 

 along the track. 



I introduced the first legislation, I think the chronology will show, 

 5 years ago, to set up an agency to be known as the National Oceano- 

 graphic Agency. In doing so I realized that there was little likelihood 

 the bill wouUrbecome law because the complexity of taking the vari- 

 ous oceanographic functions from other agencies and putting them into 

 one agency is so great and prone to inciting strong resistance from tlie 

 agencies involved. 



Obviously I believe the steps this committee took in its wisdom of 

 first setting up a council and a commission as a prelude to eventually, 

 and I am positive it will come about, having a full-flerlged agency 

 was the right step to take. 



There is no doubt that we have a parallel in what happened in 

 NASA. 



I recall sitting in and participating in hearings on the formation of 

 NASA and, believe me, the agencies and departments involved 

 screamed just as loudly over taking functions away from them as our 

 agencies engaged in oceanography are now screaming about this pro- 

 posal of the Commission. 



The Navy swore up and down it couldn't survive without its missile 

 effort. The Air Force of course said that everything it was doing was 

 directly related to space and therefore it couldn't give up even its non- 

 military roles. It took the Presidential order, so to speak, to set up 

 NASA, and it is going to take, in my opinion, a similar reorganization 

 plan to set up NOAA. 



I remember when I introduced my bill I asked the various agencies 

 for reports on the bill. We got 15 reports, and they were the saddest 

 reix)rts you can imagine. The tears were running through every page 

 of each of these agency reports. They just couldn't give up a most 

 important function of their department to some other department. 



Even though the word may come down from on high to these various 

 departments to cooperate in the agency formation. I believe we are 

 going to need the enthusiastic support of the administration tlirough 

 a reorganization plan to effect the recommendations of the Commission. 



I heartily subscribe to the recommendations of the Commission. The 

 agency that would be set up would be one of the biggest and most im- 

 portant agencies in Government with 55,000 employees and a navy of 

 320 vessels, and obviously a Department commanding the attention 

 and the respect that oceanogi-aphy deserves. 



Also, previously, I think the counsel will remember and some of the 

 committee members may remember that I suggested that even the name 

 of your committee might be changed to the Comittee on Oceanography. 

 I think it would clearly cover the responsibilities of the committee, 

 and I think the committee would grow in responsibility and respect 

 when it had jurisdiction over the legislation of the newly created 

 agency. 



Of course, you now have legislative jurisdiction over the Coast Guard 

 and many of the other ocean-related activities, but to bring all of them 

 into one agency that would champion the total cause of oceanography 

 would be a more worthwhile endeavor for us in Congress and a more 

 worthwhile endeavor for the administration. 



