from a non-Department of Defense organization if 
this is judged to be the best course.' 
The Navy is proud of the role it played in leading 
the revolution in oceanography and of the indis- 
pensable support it has given so many of the 
programs directed by other federal and private 
agencies. The Navy believes that a vigorous, well 
defined, and multifaceted oceanographic program 
is clearly in the national interest. It, therefore, is 
prepared and expects to participate in all areas 
where Navy experience and facilities may be of 
value to the nation.” 
In my mind these programs (undersea technology 
programs) can best be described as the develop- 
ment of technology leading toward the occupation 
and exploitation of the ocean bottom and the 
deep ocean. Although our primary objectives are 
military exploitation, the technological knowhow 
developed by these programs is identical for all 
types of exploitation.* 
The above statements were used to guide the 
Navy Deep Submergence/Ocean Engineering Pro- 
gram Planning Group. This group recommended a 
substantial increase in the Navy undersea efforts. 
It is also apparent that a more fully responsive 
Navy contribution to the national effort in the 
oceans requires: 
—Establishment within the Department of Defense 
of a strong primary military mission in undersea 
technology to meet present and future threats. 
—A clearly-stated Navy mission to support na- 
tional marine programs which will evoke the 
support of the Congress, responsible civilian lead- 
ers, and the general public. 
—A recognition of the contribution which can be 
made by the use of Navy capabilities in inter- 
national, economic, political, scientific, and tech- 
nological fields. 
—A definition of security requirements that will 
enable the civilian sector to derive maximum 
Statement of the Honorable John S. Foster, Jr., Di- 
rector of Defense Research and Engineering, Feb. 24, 
1967. 
Statement of the Honorable Paul R. Ignatius, Secre- 
tary of the Navy, to the Navy League Convention, 
Honolulu, April 26, 1968. 
3Statement of the Honorable Robert H. B. Baldwin, 
Under Secretary of the Navy, at the Fourth U.S. Navy 
Symposium on Military Oceanography, Washington, D.C., 
May 11, 1967. 
VI-26 
advantage of Navy programs in technology with 
realistic concern for national security needs. 
Therefore, to capitalize on the assets of the 
Navy, selected national missions should be as- 
signed and adequate funds should be allocated to 
the Navy. 
IV. FOCAL POINT 
BRANCH 
The U.S. Government’s ocean program is within 
the scope of numerous committees and subcom- 
mittees of the Congress,* each concerned with a 
portion of the oceanographic program. Thus, 
oceanography and ocean engineering have lacked a 
clear cut channel of effective communication with 
the Congress. Many committees of the Congress 
receive fragmentary information on the ocean 
program, usually small parts of the presentations 
of the many departments and agencies having 
some ocean responsibilities and missions in addi- 
tion to other large responsibilities. 
The situation is even worse regarding Congres- 
sional consideration of ocean appropriations. 
Ocean appropriations are a very small part of 
Defense, Commerce, Interior, AEC, and other 
department budget requirements. Usually, no spec- 
ific ocean program is presented to the Appropria- 
tions Committee, but when it is, the description is 
disjointed. 
The unsatisfactory Congressional overviews of 
the ocean program probably will become worse 
unless changes are made. It is necessary to create a 
Congressional committee or a Joint House-Senate 
Committee for Marine Affairs to hear the entire 
national program—including the parts of the 
States, industry, and the academic community—as 
well as the total U.S. Government program with 
emphasis on its role in the national program. The 
Congress should be asked to authorize the Govern- 
ment program and endorse the total national 
program. Presentations should be made to a new 
oceanic sub-committee of the House Appropria- 
tions Committee. 
The reports and advice made available by the 
proposed National Advisory Committee for the 
Oceans should assist in the development of a 
clearer focus in the Congress. 
IN| THE LEGISLATIVE 
4For details, see chart between pages 32 and 33 of 
hearings of House Subcommittee on Oceanography— 
National Oceanographic Program, 1965, Serial No. 82-83. 
