e Narrow missions lead to advocacy for narrow 
points of view. 
@ Divided responsibility can overlook some prob- 
lems; everybody’s business becomes nobody’s 
business. 
e Interdepartmental competition over jurisdictional 
matters reduces effectiveness. 
Duplication can result. 
Policies can be at cross-purposes. 
Negotiations to minimize interagency conflicts 
are time-consuming. 
© Originality and boldness are sometimes sacrificed 
in the quest for intra-governmental harmony. 
e Decisions are appealed to the White House, 
thereby centralizing decision-making, but caus- 
ing delays and consuming the time of the White 
House staff. 
e A layer of interagency bureaucracy has evolved 
to fill the need for interagency coordination. 
e Fragmentation of responsibility at the Federal 
level also affects the efficiency of State and local 
governments. 
Present Organization: A Point of Departure 
To some extent, the syndrome described by OMB 
with regard to fragmented responsibility is manifest 
in the administration of Federal ocean programs 
which are now dispersed among 9 departments, 8 
independent agencies, and 38 agencies or subagen- 
cies within Cabinet-level departments. Responsibility 
is shared by two or more agencies in most major 
ocean activities and roles assigned to the executive 
branch (table 9-2). Research is widely dispersed 
among the ocean agencies by virtue of the diverse 
nature and indefinite boundaries of research activities 
that are needed to support development and manage- 
ment, while the development and management roles 
for ocean activities tend to be more consistently 
assigned to a single lead agency. 
Regulatory activities are a patchwork quilt. Al- 
though regulatory decisions are often closely related 
and frequently affect decisions on the marine and 
coastal environment or on other resources, the 
ocean-related regulatory scheme is shared by a num- 
ber of agencies that make unique decisions on a 
case-by-case basis. The need for regulatory reform 
in ocean-related development is as obvious as it is 
for land-based development. The monitoring and 
other services provided by numerous ocean agencies 
generally are conductd in conjunction with responsi- 
bilities for regulation or management. 
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- 
tration (NOAA), within the Department of Com- 
merce, was intended by its proponents to provide a 
central focus for development of civil ocean-related 
affairs within the Federal Government, yet its budget 
is less than 10 percent of the total civilian “ocean 
budget.” 
NOAA was created pursuant to Reorganization 
Plan No. 4 of 1970 and Executive Order 11564. Its 
functions and role, as described in President Nixon’s 
message accompanying the reorganization plan, 
strongly suggested a lead role for NOAA in the 
administration of the Nation’s civilian ocean affairs. 
After defining the importance of ocean exploration 
and development to the United States, the President 
observed that: ** 
“Scattered through various Federal depart- 
ments and agencies, we already have the 
scientific, technological, and administra- 
tive resources to make an effective, unified 
approach possible. What we need is to 
bring them together. Establishment of 
NOAA would do so.” 
The consolidation of ocean programs into NOAA 
under Reorganization Plan No. 4, however, fell far 
short of the proposal for an independent ocean 
agency made by the Stratton Commission in its final 
report, Our Nation and The Sea, released in 1969. 
The plan was a compromise between Congressional 
supporters of a strong NOAA and a reluctant Ad- 
ministration. The components transferred to NOAA 
included: 
e The Environmental Science Services Administra- 
tion, already within the Department of Com- 
merce; 
@ The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries from the 
Department of the Interior; 
e Elements of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and 
Wildlife (the migratory marine sport fish pro- 
gram) from the Department of the Interior; 
© The Marine Minerals Technology Center of the 
Bureau of Mines from the Department of the 
Interior; 
e The Office of Sea Grant Programs from the 
National Science Foundation; 
e Elements of the U.S. Lake Survey from the 
Department of the Army; 
e The National Oceanographic Data Center from 
the Department of the Navy; and 
*%U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Government Opera- 
tions. Reorganization Plan No. 4. Hearings before a subcom- 
mittee of the House Committee on Government Operations. 91st 
Cong., 2d sess. 1970, p. 6. F 
IX-16 
