383 



Mr. Lennon. Wlien you say the level of funding, the level of fund- 

 ing related to oceanography and the several agencies which would 

 ultimately come into NOAA ? 



Mr. Pierce. Eight. 



Perhaps I did not state it as I meant it, but the appropriations and 

 spending would be accomplished after the organization is set to go 

 and those agencies that are going to be transferred are transferred. 



Mr. Lennon. Let us go back to 1961, in June again, if we might. 



I don't know whether you recall or not the hearings that were then 

 conducted by the chairman of this committee, George Miller of Cali- 

 fornia, and how we ran into a stalemate even on the moderate recom- 

 mendations of that Commission study. We ran into a roadblock with 

 the Executive. Then, of course, thereafter we tried to make a deter- 

 mination of bringing into being this Commission and at the same time 

 bringing into being the National Council of Marine Resources and En- 

 gineering Development which would be a coordinating body at the top 

 policymaking level headed by the Vice President and some six Cabinet 

 officers, as well as other individuals in high places in Government. 



Now, we are inclined to the opinion that this Commission made a 

 study, and we mandated it to make a study in depth and to try to 

 relate all the factors before they made a recommendation to the Con- 

 gress as to what type, if any, governmental structure we should have 

 and what agency should go into this particular new governmental 

 structure referred to as NOAA. 



Now, some of us are inclined to believe that we would be delayed 

 another 2 or 3 years on the part of NOAA making its recommenda- 

 tion as to what agencies would go into NOAA, and I think that is 

 more than a possibility. It is a very strong likelihood. We have been 

 waiting now all these years. 



What I want to get your judgment about — the National Council, as 

 you know, has been mandated by the administration to make a study in 

 depth of the Commission's report. I think the record should reflect 

 the fact that the same staff today headed by Dr. Ed Wenk, whose staff 

 formulated the action of the Council under the former administration, 

 is now staffing the National Council under the present administration. 



That was done through the very splendid cooperation of Mr. Mosher 

 of Ohio, a member of this committee. I was happy to join in that 

 request. 



Now they have been mandated to make a study in depth, keeping in 

 mind that we have actually been working with the Commission since 

 its conception back in June 1966, up until today. They have been man- 

 dated to make a study and they have indicated their intention to appear 

 before this committee some time after approximately the 16th of June 

 and I assume then the National Council will make its recommenda- 

 tions, either pro or con, on the Commission's report. 



I assume, too, tliat they will give the position of the national adminis- 

 tration. 



I can appreciate your thinking about it, but it gives me a little 

 concern to have it suggested that we bring into being a new govern- 

 mental independent agency, just a shell, or a paper organization, but 

 with no transfer into that agency of any of the agencies or departments 

 or bureaus that are now engaged in any of the fields of marine sciences 

 or oceanography. 



