Federal Programs 
Neither CETA nor EDA plans its programs in 
terms of providing a given amount of manpower for 
a given field, such as marine and maritime. Instead, 
it is left to the individual CETA “sponsors” or ap- 
plicants to EDA to decide which types of persons 
are employed or trained. As a result ,it is difficult 
to obtain statistics on the number of marine-related 
people and projects supported by the programs. For 
instance, EDA is funding a number of aquaculture 
projects, but details are not readily available. How- 
ever, presumably these programs could be directed 
to focus more on the marine field, if this were to be 
a principle of national policy. 
The Office of Education does look at the person- 
nel needs for specific sectors of the economy, but 
usually only on a selective basis, examining special 
problem areas. This appears to reflect a general feel- 
ing in the vocational field that most manpower needs 
can be met through a combination of private efforts, 
State programs, and some general financial assistance 
from the Federal Government. 
Certainly, this is true in the marine area. For 
instance, while there are special Federal programs 
for training merchant marine sailors, training in 
other fields, such as the offshore oil-drilling industry, 
operates without direct Federal involvement. In the 
offshore. drilling area, training is provided through 
Private schools and through a network of special pro- 
grams sponsored by the industry trade association 
and operated by college extension programs. Further- 
more, the industry considers these training courses— 
usually 2 days to 4 weeks—to be supplements, not 
replacements, for the more important on-the-job 
training. However, it is also true that a recent survey 
of the industry indicated that most would cooperate 
and participate in a joint Government-industry pro- 
gram to help deal with the shortage of well-trained 
drilling hands.°*® 
The drilling company executives, who traditionally 
have been content to run their own programs, but 
now may ask for Federal help, reflect a general atti- 
tude in the vocational field: That special Federal 
programs to meet the training needs of a particular 
industry usually are requested only when the indus- 
try feels it cannot perform the training on its own. 
It is in such circumstances that the Office of Educa- 
tion pays special attention to the manpower needs 
of a particular sector of the economy. A marine 
example comes from the shipbuilding industry, which 
was hit by a major labor shortage in the early 1970s, 
largely due to simultaneous expansion of both com- 
mercial and Navy shipbuilding. The increase was 
complicated by unusually high employee turnover.*® 
® The Oil and Gas Journal, September 19, 1977, pp. 149 ff. 
*® Edward F. Mackin and Roger D. Anderson. op. cit. note 1, 
p. 34. 
The vocational bureau of the Office of Education 
began to work on the problem, as did MarAd and 
the Department of Labor. Even here, though, the 
Federal agencies did not begin any new special train- 
ing programs; instead, they gathered detailed infor- 
mation and distributed it to State directors of voca- 
tional education in order to notify them about the 
job opportunities and personnel needs in this field.*” 
Apparently this position reflected the attitude that 
actual training is best left to the States and in- 
dustry and that the appropriate Federal role in ship 
construction personnel is to assist these efforts.°* 
And, indeed, the ship construction industry has ex- 
panded its own network of training schools. 
This pattern of industry meeting its own man- 
power needs—often with help from the States, some- 
times with special help from Federal agencies—is 
repeated throughout marine industries. One other 
example is the commercial diving industry. Some 
years ago the need for trained divers became acute, 
largely because of expanded offshore oil operations. 
In response, existing schools expanded and new 
programs were started, and the industry’s manpower 
situation is better today.°° 
All of this notwithstanding, there have been cases 
where Congress has established special Federal pro- 
grams to meet the perceived special training needs of 
particular fields. In the marine area, the largest are 
those of the Navy and Coast Guard where special 
training commands were established to meet the 
service’s manpower needs. The main civilian Federal 
program training vocational personnel is Sea Grant. 
Sea Grant\ has two vocational training efforts, in 
the broad sense of that term. One helps support the 
training of technicians, most of whom receive 2 years 
of training in community colleges. During fiscal year 
1976 and the transition quarter, Sea Grant supported 
23 projects in technician training with about 
$400,000 in Federal funds; matching funds from 
States and private sources totaled more than $1 
million. Two projects produced oceanographic tech- 
nicians for research vessels, two trained commercial 
divers, and others emphasized commercial fishing, 
marine applications, welding, marine electricity and 
electronics, and repair and maintenance of diesel 
and gasoline engines. The National Sea Grant Office 
encourages the schools involved to maintain close 
* Wm. Paul Gray, Memorandum to Regional Office Personnel 
on “Needed Information on Manpower for the Shipbuilding 
Industry,”’ Office of Education, March 31, 1976. 
58 However, for many years the Federal Government has sup- 
ported apprenticeship programs which train workers at the 
public shipyards. 
°° Glen H. Egstrom. “Industry Programs for Marine Education 
and Manpower,” in Marine Technology Society and Institute of 
Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Oceans '77 Conference Re- 
port |: p. 37A-1. 
VIIl-24 
