« PreviousContinue »
tures: The oceanographic fleet has doubled in size (and probably quadrupled in total effectiveness) and there have been substantial improvements qualitatively and quantitatively in instrumentation and new facilities. The college enrollment has more than tripled since 1958, and many new institutions are involved.
The National Oceanographic Data Center stands as an example to the new degree of coordination which has been achieved in data handling.
In short, there is, I believe, a new vitality in oceanography and the payoff from this is not easily measured today. Clearly the ICO cannot take credit for this, but it has been an effective force within the Government in promoting and coordinating such growth.
Mr. Chairman, the ICO as I described it may convey the impression only of committee work, panel meetings, review panels, and the like; but the most important point is that the Federal agencies involved in oceanography are working together, are coordinating their efforts, and are planning their own programs with a view toward meeting overall national needs. In the process, I believe the ICO has developed each year a balanced, coherent, and meaningful oceanographic program.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would be pleased to answer questions.
The CHAIRMAN. Well, I have some questions here that I wanted to ask you, but I think that-I wish I did not have to do this, but Senator Pearson and I have to be on the floor in a few minutes, and so I am going to have to submit these to you.
(Discussion off the record.)
Senator PEARSON. Just a couple short ones. You mentioned the participation of industry. Actually the work in this field is way beyond the scope of industry or universities or educational institutions, is it not?
Dr. MORSE. No, sir. I think first you have to recognize that if one defines, goes beyond a classical meaning of oceanography to really talk about the exploitation of the ocean which only partly depends on oceanography, but on many other technologies
Senator PEARSON. Such projects as the survey of the ocean.
Dr. MORSE. Then I think there are areas which only the Federal Government can do, such as the survey area. This is clearly something, which on a comprehensive worldwide basis American industry would not do on its own. It may well be that they could be involved in contract—you could contract for some of this activity; but in planning it and financing this, this is beyond the scope of industry.
Senator PEARSON. Where does our participation and the extent of our participation stand in relation to other nations, and particularly the Soviet Union and Japan, who I understand are doing very extensive work in the fishing industry particularly?
Dr. MORSE. I would hestitate to comment on the fishing industry particularly. I think there will probably be other witnesses that could get into that.
I would say in terms of scientific exploration-now that is for scientific purposes—I think we are probably doing more and a better job than other people.
The CHAIRMAN. Are we doing more survey?
Dr. MORSE. I can't answer that, sir. If you take all the other governments together we are not. I would say that the U.S. involvement in surveys is perhaps 30 percent of the total world effort.
The CHAIRMAN. Of course, we are doing more survey than we did before, but there again we were woefully lacking in surveys.
Dr. MORSE. Yes.
The CHAIRMAN. If the Senator from Kansas will permit me, I remember one time in World War II at the beginning when I was asked by the Navy to go up to the Aleutian Islands and find five fishermen that knew the islands, give them commissions so they could stand on the prow of a warship and hold their finger out and tell them where to go, and we did.
Dr. MORSE. They may still have to do that up here, I do not know.
The CHAIRMAN. The President and I went up there on that mission in World War II. But we are doing more. I did not want to interrupt.
Senator PEARSON. No, I just had one last question, and that is in relation to the work of the so-called big four agencies, and particularly with the reference made that each of these have to follow fields of research in accordance with their own missions and jobs, are we neglecting the pure science aspect of this entire field?
Dr. MORSE. No, sir; I would say that if you look at the spectrum from pure science in exploiting the ocean, I would say we are healthiest and doing the best job in pure science, that the agencies are supporting rather heavily in the pure sciences. Certainly all of the agencies mentioned, even the Navy which has a clear mission puts a very large effort into basic science and has traditionally been one of the main supporters of institutions such as Woods Hole and Scripps, and so on.
The CHAIRMAN. Put in the record how much you farm out in this program to industry. I know the Science Foundation farms out some of this in the oceanography field.
(A table of industry contracts is included in the appendix.) Dr. MORSE. Yes, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. And then, of course, I can answer the question of the Senator from Kansas on fisheries-we are way, way behind in this.
Dr. HORNIG. Mr. Chairman, may I say a word? In discussing industry participation one should not make light of the very large-scale offshore gas and oil drillings which are presently going on because this is the sort of natural participation of industry as things develop, and they are not only doing drilling but they are doing extensive work on extending drilling operations out in deeper water, and I have been informed by industry that they are planning to learn more from the Mohole project. As you know, there is drilling now going on in the North Sea. Industry is now devoting its own funds to investigating such matters as the effect of wave motion on structures because, of course, as they begin to drill in deeper and deeper water this becomes a very serious engineering problem.
The CHAIRMAN. Another field that has not been mentioned here that poses a great potential is the field of medicine, and we are learning a lot in that field.
The CHAIRMAN. Well, I am sorry to have to recess this hearing, but we will let you know well in advance when we come back again.
(Discussion off the record.)
(Whereupon, at 11:47 a.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at the call of the chairman.)
Two groups of questions were submitted to Dr. Morse, one during the hearing and the other at the conclusion of the hearing. The questions and answers in the first group as supplied by Dr. Morse on March 31 follow:
QUESTIONS (FROM THE FLOOR) AND ANSWERS; DR. ROBERT W. MORSE, ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF THE NAVY (RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT) AND CHAIRMAN, INTERAGENCY COMMITTEE ON OCEANOGRAPHY, FEBRUARY 19, 1965
1. Question. Mr. Secretary, how is the Interagency Committee on Oceanography (ICO) funded ?
Answer. The Interagency Committee on Oceanography is not a funded organization, as such. Its operations are supported by the member agencies through those of their employees who may be concerned in the operation. The staff is funded primarily by the Navy with contributions from various other agencies.
2. Question. Does this funding appear as a separate budget item?
Answer. No, only the Office of Naval Research support for the ICO staff is separately identified as “Navy budget item, RR-004-03-42--Interagency Committee on Oceanography.”
3. Question. Does the Federal Council for Science and Technology or the Office of Science and Technology contribute to funding of interagency committee operations, publications, or staff?
Answer. Neither the Federal Council for Science and Technology nor the Office of Science and Technology contributes to funding of ICO operations, publications, or staff.
4. Question. What authority determines department and agency representation on the Interagency Committee?
Answer. The original ICO membership was determined by the Chairman of the Federal Council for Science and Technology, Dr. James Killian. Since then, the ICO itself has increased its membership to include the Departments of Treasury and State and the Smithsonian Institution.
5. Question. Mr. Secretary, in the Federal Council's long-range plan published in July 1963, it is stated: “The staff should, in effect, work for and be responsible * * * for systematic analyses which will aid in planning * * * and assisting in the development and application of criteria for evaluating R. & D. projects.” Is sufficient staff now provided ICO to carry out this mission ?
Answer. The ICO staff is not sufficient at present to meet all of the demands placed on the ICO. We are currently exploring the possibilities of utilizing the services of one or more nongovernmental activities on a contractual basis for such systematic analyses as may be needed from time to time.
6. Question. The Council, in its report then stated: “Funds should also be provided for studies to draw on competence outside the Federal Government." Has this been done, or is it being done, and if so the extent of the funding and by whom funded ?
Answer. Studies have occasionally been contracted for outside the Federal Government. Examples include: (1) a study by Operations Research, Inc., of oceanographic surveys, sponsored by the Coast and Geodetic Survey ($286,000) (which study is not yet completed); (2) a study by the National Academy of Sciences on "How oceanography/ocean engineering could contribute to the peace time economy of the United States” funded as part of the normal operations of the National Academy. A copy of the report, submitted herewith for the record, includes a copy of the request for this study dated April 15, 1964 (p. 24).
7. Question. How are priorities determined when more individual agency plans are presented than can be included in the national program?
Answer. The ICO members sit in executive session (no observers present) once annually to determine priorities of programs. The ICO attempts to provide the Executive Office of the President with a comprehensive picture of the Federal activities in oceanography. The advice of the ICO is available directly to Dr. Hornig in his capacity as Chairman of FCST and as Director of OST. Oceanography is presented and discussed as a single Federal program, including determination of priorities, in the Executive Office of the President.
8. Question. Does the national program in oceanography as projected include all federally supported oceanographic research and development programs? Does it include Mohole or the shallow sedimentary coring incidental to the Mohole project? Does it include ocean engineering?
1 NOTE.-The report is available for reference in the committee files.
Answer. The National program in oceanography does not include the Navy's classified military programs. Mohole is not included. The shallow sediment coring program is included; the ICO does not consider this as being merely incidental to the Mohole project. Ocean engineering is included beginning with fiscal year 1966; it is expected that this particular aspect of the national oceanographic program will grow over the years ahead.
9. Question. Have coordinated plans been developed for oceanwide surveys?
Answer. ICO Pamphlet No. 7, submitted herewith for the record, outlines a coordinated plan for oceanwide surveys. Unfortunately, budget limitations have prevented the agencies from carrying out these surveys according to the plan.”
10. Question. Secretary Morse, what liaison is maintained by the Interagency Committee on Oceanography with industry?
Answer. The ICO attempts to maintain the closest possible liaison with industry, primarily through the National Security Industrial Association. In addiţion, about a dozen members or panelists of the ICO sit on the executive committee of the Marine Technology Society. At the present time, possibilities are being explored for liaison with the National Association of Manufacturers, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the Western Electronics Manufacturers Association. In April of 1964 a study was begun in ocean engineering with voluntary industrial participation. One hundred the largest contractors and about 300 smaller companies, or persons outside Government having an interest in ocean engineering, were contacted. This initial comprehensive industrial report on ocean engineering will be received by the ICO during early summer.
Questions submitted to Dr. Morse at the conclusion of the February 19 hearing, and Dr. Morse's answers received in April follow :
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS, DR. ROBERT W. MORSE, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE
Navy (RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT) AND CHAIRMAN, INTERAGENCY COMMITTEE ON OCEANOGRAPHY, FEBRUARY 19, 1965
1. Question. Are there fixed contributions in support of interagency committee operations by departments and agencies?
Answer. There are no fixed contributions assigned in support of ICO operations by any of the participating departments and agencies. The Navy funds for most of the ICO operations, including staff maintenance.
2. Question. Are supplemental contributions required from time to time, and, if so, are these solicited or on a voluntary basis?
Answer. Supplemental contributions are required from time to time particularly with regard to printing ICO publications. These are solicited by the ICO executive secretary from various member agencies. As of this date, no requested supplemental contribution for necessary functions has been refused. However, with regard to administrative costs, including travel, office supplies, and rental, the ICO staff is given almost unlimited support by the Office of Naval Research under the supervision of the Chairman, ICO.
3. Question. How is the official or individual representing a department or agency designated and by whom?
Answer. The individual representative to the ICO is nominated by the head of the department or agency to the ICO Chairman. The nomination has been invariably accepted by the ICO.
4. Question. What is the relationship of the ICO to the Federal Council for Science and Technology with respect to jurisdiction, guidance, or cooperative activity and programing?
Answer. The ICO is a committee of and receives guidance from the Federal Council for Science and Technology. This guidance takes the shape of recommendations regarding the national oceanographic program planning document or issues bearing on the prosecution of the program.
5. Question. Wha is your interpretation Execut Order 10807 of March 13, 1959, establishing a Federal Council for Science and Technology with relation to the Interagency Committee or to departments and agencies represented both on the Committee and the Council. Section 3 of this order applies to detailing employees to the Council or undertaking special studies for the Council.
Answer. Section 3 of the Executive Order 10807 states "Agency assistance to Council. (a) For the purpose of effectuating this order, each Federal agency represented on the Council shall furnish necessary assistance to the Council in consonance with section 214 of the act of May 3, 1945, 59 Stat. 134 (31 U.S.C.
ICO Pamphlet No. 7, issued in May 1963, is available for reference in the committee files.
691). Such assistance may include (1) detailing employees to the Council to perform such functions, consistent with the purposes of this order, as the Chairman may assign to them, and (2) undertaking, upon request of the Chairman, such special studies for the Council as come within the functions herein assigned to the Council. (b) Upon request of the Chairman, the heads of Federal agencies shall, so far as practicable, provide the Council with information and reports relating to the scientific and technological activities of the respective agencies."
Section 4. "Standing committees and panels. For the purpose of conducting studies and making reports as directed by the Chairman, standing committees and panels of the Council may be established in consonance with the provisions of section 214 of the act of May 3, 1945, 59 Stat. 134 (31 U.S.C. 691). At least one such standing committee shall be composed of scientist-administrators representing Federal agencies, shall provide a forum for consideration of common administrative policies and procedures relating to Federal research and development activities and for the formulation of recommendations thereon, and shall perform such other related functions as may be assigned to it by the Chairman of the Council.”
It is my understanding that the staffs of the Federal council committees are recognized by the Office of Science and Technology as extensions of their own staff. In the case of the ICO, both my assistant, Commander Snyder, and the ICO executive secretary, Mr. Abel, are frequently utilized in this capacity by the Office of Science and Technology. We find this to be an extremely convenient and effective arrangement, providing as it does a firm bridge between Council and Committee. This liaison makes for successful communications and a smooth flow of administration both up and down.
6. Question. Has the Interagency Committee been called upon for such assistance?
Answer. The ICO staff has been called upon frequently by the Office of Science and Technology, primarily in answering correspondence from the Congress and the public, less frequently in compiling studies on one or another issues as requested by the OST.
7. Question. What do you consider the secretariat of ICO, and how large it is? 8. Question. What agency or agencies supply this secretariat? 9. Question. How much staff support is provided the secretariat? 10. Question. What agencies provide this staffing?
Answers 7 through 10. The secretariat of the ICO consists of the executive secretary, Mr. Robert Abel, and his staff, which we expect to include eight persons by the end of this fiscal year. A list of the ICO staff members together with their agency of origin and the amount of staff support is submitted herewith for the record.
Estimated fiscal year 1966 ICO budget 1