Ch. 7— Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data • 277 



sion among civilian officials that it can maintain 

 its control by not sharing important information 

 germane to the issue, such as technical limits of its 

 requirements. At the same time, the Navy appears 

 to be skeptical about the scope of claims made by 

 civilians on their need to access multi-beam data. 

 Whether facts or perceptions, the current debate 

 is rife with concerns that must be overcome if a 

 mutual solution is to be reached. 



While much of the current debate has centered 

 on Sea Beam data because of NOAA'a plans to ex- 

 tensively map the EEZ, the Navy has proposed to 

 restrict other multi-beam surveys and geophysical 

 monitoring as well, e.g., magnetic and gravity data. 

 Proposals have been made that NOAA collect geo- 

 physical data concurrendy with bathymetric data.^^ 

 Such multiple sensing could enhance the scientific 

 usefulness of bathymetric surveys, and it also could 

 increase the usefulness of data for positioning sub- 

 marines. 



Thus far, scientific and commercial interests have 

 resisted the proposed use of mathematical filters to 

 distort the shape and location of subterranean fea- 

 tures. One option they have discussed is the estab- 

 lishment of secure processing centers to archive 

 bathymetric and geophysical data. Appropriately 



'^National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Report of the 

 NOAA Exclusive Economic Zone Batiiymetric and Geopiiysical Survey 

 Worlisiiop, Dec. 11-12, 1984, p. 2. 



cleared researchers could then have access to clas- 

 sified data and secure processing equipment to meet 

 scientific and commercial needs. A similar option 

 would be to allow secure facilities to be located at 

 user installations. A significant amount of classi- 

 fied material is handled by civilian contractors un- 

 der supervision of DOD. Similar arrangements 

 may be possible with appropriately cleared users 

 of bathymetric/ geophysical data. However, a ma- 

 jor problem exists in that we are now in a "digital 

 world," and secure processing of digital data is both 

 expensive (site security) and restrictive (no network- 

 ing of computers). Universities and firms typically 

 have linked computers and may have to submit to 

 the added expense of additional systems to handle 

 these data. Other innovative means to manage the 

 difficult problems of balancing national security 

 with data access may be possible. 



Acceptable resolution of the debate over classify- 

 ing multi-beam bathymetric data will require more 

 candor and a better exchange of information on all 

 sides of the issue. The Navy appears to have done 

 an insufficient job of communicating its needs and 

 reasons for classification. On the other hand, the 

 scientific community also has had difficulty in ar- 

 ticulating its reasons for needing high-resolution 

 bathymetry and in backing them with solid exam- 

 ples. Satisfactory solutions will only come by in- 

 cluding in the classification debate those with a stake 

 in the academic and commercial use of bathymet- 

 ric and geophysical data. 



