The ICO performs an essential function, as a means whereby these many agencies of Government can develop a more inclusive and better coordinated program pursuant to their individual missions than would be possible.

But it seems to me that by its nature, there are certain things that it can't adequately deal with. Two of them have to do with the administrative branch, and one essentially has to do with the Congress.

Since the members represent the individual agencies, and since the staff of the ICO is seconded from the agencies, it is most difficult for it to establish relative importance of different programs that are proposed by different agencies or the relative merits of different components within each agency.

Secondly, the budget for the national oceanographic program is composed of the budgets for the individual agencies that are incorporated into the President's budget, as it comes to the Congress, and this is arrived at, of course, by each department head within the overall budget limitations for his department.

Fragments of the oceanographic program in each department have to compete with the other unrelated programs of the department. The ICO representing individual departments and agencies has to work within the limitations of the budget ceilings for the individual departments and this may not always properly reflect the relative desirability of these different elements in a broader frame of reference. This is simply the way the business operates.

Finally, another difficulty is the fact that these individual components come to the Congress not in a single package, but the components consisting of agency components are considered individually by some, I believe 14 different subcommittees of the Appropriations Committee. Each agency component is judged individually by different subcommittees in relation to the multiple missions of each agency rather than a unified program and budget.

Well, this has all been talked about for quite a few months, in fact, for the last 2 or 3 years, and I think the fact that there have been so many different bills introduced and so much debating going on, emphasizes the importance of establishing some new machinery to make it possible to do the job that is now needed since the program has expanded much beyond what it was when the ICO was first set up. It seems to me the necessity for this is particularly urgent for those elements of the program that involve the present missions of several different agencies.

Such, for example, as the study of air-sea interactions, or particularly research and development on the extractive resources of the sea, things like fisheries, minerals, and so forth.

Finally with this eminent rapid development of applied engineering in the ocean, which I mentioned earlier, there will certainly arise difficult problems concerning the proper balance between the application of knowledge that we have already attained for engineering puposes and acquisition of new knowledge on which to base future engineering developments.

Again these problems I believe will demand consideration in a broader contention than the individual missions of the individual agencies.

The bill, S. 944, which is primarily under consideration at this time, appeals to me as being an important means of improving the coordination of our expanded activities in research and development in the world ocean.

Firstly, by establishing the responsibility at the secretarial level, it should be possible to achieve a better balance of activities, both between and within agencies. I think perhaps the most important feature of your bill is the provision of a highly competent, independent staff that would have no other duties than staff work for the council. This should certainly be able to provide an improved basis of planing. I would hope also that under the authority of this bill, it might be possible to develop some means of obtaining better coordination in the review of the program and budget by the Congress.

I am not wise enough in this sphere to know how this could be worked, but I would hope that under this bill, it would be possible. Finally, I am very pleased to note that the bill recognizes the importance of international cooperation in research and development in the world ocean, in the context of our foreign policy.

As we all know, many of the underdeveloped countries are turning to the sea as an important source of the resources required to feed and otherwise support their people.

At the same time, many of the more advanced industrialized nations, both in the Eastern and Western Hemisphere, are rapidly increasing their uses of the ocean. As we all know, this great international common that used to be a fairly one-way, uninhabited place, has become pretty crowded, and I believe this trend is going to rapidly increase in the future.

There are going to be more people and more nations using the resources and opportunities of the ocean. I believe, therefore, that the developing of the resources of the sea equitably for the benefit of our own citizens, and all of the people of the world, presents one of the greatest challenges of our generation.

Therefore, I believe that this bill establishing the council is certainly a step in the right direction and should be very helpful in handling many of these problems.

The CHAIRMAN. It seems to me on page 9 of your prepared statement you point up what really has been bothering us a great deal, and why we want to proceed with something like this council. You say: further, with the imminent rapid development of applied engineering in the ocean, there will inevitably arise difficult problems concerning the proper balance between the application of knowledge already obtained and the acquisition of new knowledge on which future application must be based.

Now, leaving it as it is, with each agency in its individual mission, as you point out, you could lose a lot of your work, you could drop behind, or you couldn't do the kind of proper work that we hope to do in this field. Somebody may get lost over here, unless something like a council is to pull the agency activities together.

I presume that is what you are thinking about here?

Dr. SCHAEFER. Yes, that, and also the matter of the proper division between research funds and engineering development funds needs to be considered in a broader context within each agency.

You see, this always presents, as in the case of the space business, a very difficult problem because the amounts of money and the amounts

of people that you need for the engineering are inevitably much larger than you need for research.

And this is quite proper, in fact, it has to be. If you are going to build something in the ocean or send something up in the space, it costs a lot of money. So, inevitably you have a very large engineering program which peoplewise and fundwise becomes much larger than the research proper and tends to dominate, so it requires very careful planning to maintain the proper balance.

And I believe that it requires coordination on the highest level in a unified fashion rather than trying to make these decisions within each agency.

The CHAIRMAN. I presume from your statement, that you feel quite keenly about the necessity of an independent staff that would work on no other duties than the staff work for the council. I am glad you mentioned that in your statement because this is what we finally had to arrive at in the space council, in the space agency.

I think these two are pretty much the same, the problems are the same, particularly administrativewise, so I am glad you mentioned that and I appreciate your statement and I say we will leave the record open in case you want to add something because this record is going to be used by a great, great number of people.

We want to have everything in it we can that would be valuable

to us.

Now, the committee will have to recess until 2 o'clock, and I am sorry I didn't get to the other two witnesses, but it is just one of those days and it couldn't be helped.

(Dr. Schaefer's prepared statement submitted at the hearing appears in the appendix.)

The CHAIRMAN. This afternoon we will hear from Dr. Calhoun and Dr. F. Walton Smith.

(Whereupon, the meeting was recessed at 12 noon.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

Senator BARTLETT. The committee will be in order.

There will be inserted in the record a statement on S. 944, by Senator Daniel K. Inouye, of Hawaii.

(The statement follows:)

STATEMENT BY HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF HAWAII

Mr. Chairman, I request permission to submit the following statement in support of S. 944, establishing a Natioanl Oceanographic Council. This bill is, in my opinion, a most crucial one which will set the course of oceanographic research and development in future years in much the same way that the establishment of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration has done for research and development in those particular fields of scientific interest.

We in Hawaii are especially interested and concerned to see a well-directed and well-coordinated effort undertaken to probe the mysteries of the ocean depths. Being located almost dead center in the Pacific Ocean area, we are fully aware of the unknown, potentially useful, and potentially destructive seas around us. The location of the Geophysics Institute on the campus of the University of Hawaii, the holding of international scientific conferences on tsunami research at the same university, and the recent Mohole project launched by the National Science Foundation to find out more about the earth's core through undersea

drilling techniques are all reflective of a gathering momentum to push toward the frontiers of oceanographic knowledge.

I firmly believe that, on the basis of knowledge so far gained, we must undertake to broaden our scientific grasp of the elements which cover more than onehalf of our globe. This is vital not only in terms of basic scientific research but also in terms of our national defense and security. The advent of the Polaris missile and the increasingly numerous launchings of nuclear-powered submarines will require even more extensive and intensive knowledge of the behavior of ocean depths than we have ever had in the past.

We in the State of Hawaii, as well as those residing in the various land masses rimming the Pacific Basin area, also know the benefits which can accrue to all of us through more positive and predictable data on the behavior of the tsunami, the seismic ocean waves triggered off by undersea volcanic disturbances. Scientific knowledge of this dreaded oceanic phenomena has advanced greatly in recent years. But we still need to know more in order to be able to take the kind of precaution which will mean the saving of human lives.

The most effective instrument for the type of concerted scientific effort needed is a National Oceanographic Council. There are at present various governmental and private agencies fully cognizant of the need to know more about the ocean depths. These range from institutions like the National Science Foundation to academic bases such as the aforementioned Geophysics Institute of the University of Hawaii and the Scripps Oceanographic Institute of California.

A National Oceanographic Council will provide the policy guidelines and coordination of research effort so urgently needed in this area and so successfully demonstrated as vital when a similar concept was developed and used in the fields of aeronautics and space research and development.

I would like to record my full support of S. 944 and to request that serious consideration be given by the committee to a favorable report on it.

Senator BARTLETT. We are glad to have as our next witness Dr. John C. Calhoun, Jr., vice chancellor for programs, Texas A. & M. University.

It is a pleasure to have you here. We are gratified that you took the time and effort to make an appearance here.

STATEMENT OF DR. JOHN C. CALHOUN, JR., VICE CHANCELLOR FOR PROGRAMS, TEXAS A. & M. UNIVERSITY

Dr. CALHOUN. Thank you, Senator Bartlett. It is my privilege to be here in response to Senator Magnuson's invitation to state my views on coordination and advancement of the marine science program and to discuss broadly my views of international needs pertaining to exploration and research of the oceans. I do have a prepared statement which I left this morning. I understood from Senator Magnuson's comments that I would have an opportunity to revise it if I wanted to. I have a corrected version, which improves the grammar of the statement that I left with the secretary and he will see that gets in.

My name is John Calhoun. My home is College Station, Tex., and I simply want to state, although the chairman stated it this morning, that I do not appear here as a representative of my employer but as a person and individual.

Furthermore, I don't appear here as an oceanographer.

My field of specialty in education was in petroleum engineering and related earth sciences. I know most about the field of knowledge that is concerned with porous rocks, their natural fluids, and the behavior of fluids within the earth. Í appear here with a background of over 25 years of university teaching, research, administration, some industrial consulting and Government service, some of which has concerned other fields of the natural resources.

I am a member of the board of trustees and executive committee for University Corp. for Atmospheric Research, and as such, I have had opportunity to consider and discuss the national program in atmospheric sciences.

My background in petroleum engineering and affiliation in professional societies has given me an opportunity to become acquainted with the natural resources problems, the developing of the environment of the solid earth, and at Texas A. & M., I have had the opportunity to become acquainted with the Department of Oceanography and Meteorology which is also concerned with the subject we are discussing this morning.

Finally, I served as science adviser to Secretary Udall and had there the opportunity to view the national oceanographic program from the viewpoint of the agencies of the Bureau.

I simply want to make the point that I speak with this general subject of coordination and advancement of the marine science program as a generalist and not as an oceanographer, but as a generalist who has participated in and compared various program for research and development of natural resource systems.

This comparative view leads me to the first observation that I will leave with you, mainly, that I don't consider the oceanographic question a unique one. It is one of a number of problem areas that this Nation has met and will meet in the future with respect to the development and control of our environment.

So many of the comments that I make are really applicable to all environmental systems, the ocean, atmosphere, polar regions, and other identifiable units of our physical world.

The question of oceanography is unique only with respect to the timeliness that we now face for concerted action and with respect to the state of development which we are now in.

We are further along in oceanography than we are in some resource systems and we are not as far along as we are in some others.

There is a present need at this time in my view for adoption of a national policy on oceanography. And in this respect, I am completely in accord with the stated objectives of S. 944, mainly to set forth a policy and purpose for a national oceanographic program.

I view our national program to date as having evolved from an emphasis upon science, and particularly upon oceanography as a comprehensive subject concerning behavior of the oceans. Only recently has there been an increased recognition of oceanography as including applications or capabilities for performance as was expressed this morning by witnesses.

The term "ocean engineering" has been used to cover this field. I think that the deviation of our program from a science orientation has been one of the factors limiting the achievement of a broad national position. Our national policy and purpose, as I view the matter, should be evolved from the viewpoint of our use and management of the ocean rather than from the viewpoint of exploring and understanding the oceanographic and marine sciences.

Just as our own West was a geographical part of this globe to which we gave national efforts for development and effective use, so also the ocean is essentially a matter of geography which should be the object. of a national policy for development and utilization as rapidly as our technology will permit.