I am sorry that the president did not see fit to follow the Ash Committee recommendation, and do the whole job now because this is what we will have to do eventually. Instead, the President has chosen to take one short step-a somewhat unbalanced and lopsided step-in the direction which we must go.

The President's proposal-admirable as it is also falls short in another respect in my estimation. Instead of consolidating the Federal government into fewer agencies and fewer departments-it creates another independent agency to work its separate way. Surely this is not the most desirable way to proceed. But it will, admittedly, be helpful to have in one new agency all of the programs which deal with air and water pollution, solid waste disposal, radiation, and pesticides, just as it will be helpful to place all of the programs dealing with oceanography under one administrator.

No one can quarrel, for example, with the wisdom of pulling together in one place the study and regulation of pesticides, rather than having them scattered as they are now through (1) The Department of Interior, where the Fish and Wildlife Service works with the effects of insecticides, herbicides and pesticides on fish, (2) the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, which conducts studies on the human tolerance of chemicals in foods, and (3) The Department of Agriculture, which is dealing constantly with the wide use of chemicals and pesticides in farming.

It seems clear that coordinating all of these studies in one agency will insure balanced consideration of each of them, and certainly insure a more standardized administration of the regulations developed to govern their effect on the environ

ment.

Likewise, it will be helpful to have the enforcement of radiation standards placed in the agency concerned primarily with pollution and the enforcement of water quality standards and air quality standards, all under the jurisdiction of one administrator. And there are many other examples which could be listed as reasons to support the Administration proposal.

But how much more sensible it would if all of our resource development programs could be coordinated with our resource regulation programs.

For example, how much farther ahead we would be if at the time a license is granted to build a hydroelectric plant on a river or stream, the question of how much this plant will pollute the atmosphere, and how this pollution must be curbed could also be settled-within the same department.

Or how beneficial it would be if at the time Federal recreation facilities are built in new areas, it would also be determined that adequate methods of disposing solid wastes had been fully developed, and that the regulations on their disposal were uniform with those of other Federal recreation areas.

Or that watershed management and flood control and irrigation projects, and timber management and fish and wildlife programs, and desalination, and river and harbor improvements, and other Federal programs dealing with our natural resources were all conducted in the way best calculated to protect our environmental as a whole and to save our ecology.

Reorganization proposals Nos. 3 and 4 will not necessarily insure that this will be the case. They do only half of the job which must be done-maybe only a third. They are a start in the right direction-but only that. Pollutions are all pervasive, and they require all pervasive and all-embracive solutions.

So, though I will support the Administration reorganization proposals. I do with some reluctance, and a good measure of disappointment. And I shall most certainly continue my efforts to establish Department of Natural Resources and Environment which will assure that we do, in full measure, the job which must be done fully to control the quality of our environment. It won't be done by these proposals—and it must be done eventually—or we shall not survive on this planet.

EXHIBIT 9

STATEMENT OF MAURICE H. STANS, SECRETARY OF COMMERCE, ON REORGANIZATION PLAN NO. 4 of 1970

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee: I appreciate the opportunity to appear before your subcommittee in support of the President's Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970.

Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970 would place in a single agency within this Department the following:

a. The Environmental Science Services Administration, already a part of the Department of Commerce;

b. Most of the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, how in the Department of Interior;

c. The Marine Minerals Technology Program of the Bureau of Mines in the Department of Interior;

d. The marine sports fishing program of the Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wildlife in the Department of Interior;

e. The Office of Sea Grant Programs of the National Science Foundation; and f. Elements of the United States Lake Survey of the Department of the Army. This new agency would be known as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

If the Congress allows the plan to take effect, it is also planned by administrative action to transfer to this new agency, the National Oceanographic Data and Instrumentation Centers of the Department of the Navy and the National Data Buoy Program of the Department of Transportation.

The President has also directed that upon approval of the plan, there be established a National Advisory Committee for the Oceans and Atmosphere to provide advice on the progress of governmental and private programs in achieving the nation's oceanic and atmospheric objectives.

STUDIES LEADING TO REORGANIZATION PLAN NO. 4

The President's reorganization plan which would establish this new agency is the result of more than four years of study both within and outside the Government.

As this Committee well knows, the initial phase of this study was initiated in 1966 as a result of the Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act of 1966 which was introduced as bipartisan legislation.

This 1966 Act provided for a study of all aspects of marine science to be undertaken by a Commission on Marine Sciences, Engineering and Resources, and required the Commission to recommend an overall plan for a national oceanographic program that would meet the present and future national needs.

This Commission was chaired by Dr. Julius A. Stratton and its membership drew upon the best talents of the nation in marine affairs. The final report of the Commission, Our Nation and the Sea, which was issued in January, 1970, focused national attention on the marine environment and recommended that a comprehensive national program could only be achieved through the establishment of a new independent agency dealing with oceanography and the atmosphere. The establishment of such an independent agency has also been the subject of recent legislative proposals introduced in the House (H.R. 13247) and the Senate (S. 2841) and there have been intensive hearings on both of these bills. Reorganization Plan No. 4 contains the President's proposals for systematically investigating and understanding the seas and atmosphere. It differs organizationally from H.R. 13247 and S. 2841 only in that it would place the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the Department of Commerce and that, of the U.S. Coast Guard, only the National Data Buoy Program would be included.

NOAA IN THIS DEPARTMENT

For my part I have long regarded the establishment of NOAA in this Department as a logical extension of our scientific and technological activities. It should be remembered that the interest of this Department in the oceanographic and atmospheric sciences is not new. I am proud to state that in 1965 this Department had the foresightedness to recognize the nation's stake in these areas. It was in that year that Presidential Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1965 established the Environmental Science Services Administration (ESSA) to serve as a national focus on our efforts to describe, understand, and predict the state of the ocean, the state of the lower and upper atmosphere, and the size and shape of the earth. I am therefore especially partial to NOAA and we intend to give the utmost priority to our responsibilities to NOAA in the marine and atmospheric

areas.

Both the Stratton Report and H.R. 13247 and S. 2841 recognize that the nation's knowledge of the ocean and atmosphere is contingent and dependent on science and technology. In this respect the Stratton Report emphasizes that a "solid base of science and technology is the common denominator for accomplishment" in these areas. We already have in this Department the "solid base of

science and technology" which will buttress the foundation of an exciting and vigorous NOAA. We will be able to provide a climate of innovation and clear thinking which will enable such a new agency to flourish and to meet the nation's need for a comprehensive oceanic and atmospheric program.

In addition to ESSA, which comprises 73% of NOAA's budget and 83% of its personnel, the Department in fulfilling its technological role has the following activities and capabilities which would contribute to marine and atmospheric objectives:

a. The Maritime Administration of the Department has capabilities in ship design, port development, and marine transportation engineering-and a record of innovation in these areas that will be useful in tackling the problem of developing more efficient marine vehicles. In fact, second to the Department of Navy, the Maritime Administration possesses the strongest marine engineering capabilities in the Government.

b. Through its Clearinghouse for Scientific and Technical Information the Department has a unique national capability for the organized dissemination of technical information.

c. The Department's Economic Development Administration and Regional Planning Commissions will contribute to the development of marine industry through its planning and assistance activities aimed at bringing new economic opportunity to geographical areas with idle and under-used work forces. For example, we already have ongoing environmental projects in the marine and fisheries fields, including aquaculture.

d. The Department's Business and Defense Services Administration undertakes a variety of activities aimed at aiding industrial growth and development and will provide a wide range of survey, analytical, and interpretive data of value to the marine industry.

e. The capabilities of the National Bureau of Standards in developing and calibrating instruments for scientific and engineering needs will be especially useful for marine instrument development. It also has a strong competence in systems analysis which will be vital in planning and carrying through a national marine program.

f. The staff, programs, and overseas attaches of the Department's Bureau of International Commerce will be invaluable in affording knowledge of the complex international aspects relating to the utilization of the seas.

Thus the Department of Commerce, with the addition of NOAA, will have the competence to develop a broad and comprehensive national program in marine and atmospheric science, technology and technical services.

If Congress allows Reorganization Plan No. 4 to take effect, I would be proud to welcome NOAA to the Department.

NATIONAL BENEFITS FROM NOAA

I would now like to discuss the benefits to the nation which will result from the creation of NOAA by Reorganization Plan No. 4.

The President in his message to the Congress forwarding Reorganization Plan No. 4 made the following points:

a. NOAA will be a center of strength within the civilian sector of the Federal Government which will enable us to organize a unified approach to the problems of the oceans and atmosphere.

b. NOAA will improve our understanding of the resources of the sea and permit their development and use while guarding against the thoughtless exploitation that in the past laid waste to so many of our precious natural assets.

c. NOAA will make possible a consolidated program for achieving a more comprehensive understanding of oceanic and atmospheric phenomena as well as increasing our knowledge in the third major component of our environment, the solid earth.

d. NOAA by combining in a single administration the major Federal programs dealing with the seas and atmosphere will make possible a balanced Federal program to enable us more effectively to monitor and predict the environment, and in some cases to exercise some degree of influence over it.

Examples of the types of benefits which I foresee are:

1. The combined fleet of vessels from ESSA and from the other agencies being transferred into NOAA will provide this nation with a capability which will be available for work on a wide range of problems. It will allow greater joint utilization in the collection of data to meet needs of fisheries activities from the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries and mapping and charting activities from ESSA,

as well as provide the means for the National Oceanographic Instrumentation Center to conduct tests of equipment at sea and the Sea Grant Program to provide training facilities for the education of young people in this exciting and challenging field.

2. The Department of Commerce now operates the nation's only operational environmental satellite system. We have and are developing many satellite uses for weather and oceanic monitoring and prediction. It will be of interest to the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries in the application of remote sensing to marine resource problems. I believe that this will offer a new potential for them.

3. The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries needs for environmental information for fishery development can be significantly supported by present elements of ESSA. ESSA marine environmental predictions are a first step in the chain toward producing fishery forecasts. Close work between the program from the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries and that from ESSA can only lead to better utilization and assessment of our marine living resources.

4. By combining the environmental data centers we will be able to draw upon common experience and methods of operation to improve the efficiency of all of these centers.

5. Probably the most important benefit of all is that in NOAA we will have brought together in one organization an outstanding and competent group of people, including the scientifically trained ESSA Commissioned Officer Corps, which will provide a vital resource in developing a responsive national oceanic and atmospheric program. A force of some 13,000 people, with its impressive spectrum of talent, represents a formidable national capability to move forward.

ORGANIZATION OF NOAA

Reorganization Plan No. 4 reflects my views that NOAA should be headed by an Executive Level III Administrator who would be of Under Secretary rank. The Administrator of NOAA will report directly to me rather than to an Assistant Secretary. Additionally, we propose to establish NOAA with a single management and budget structure in order that it may achieve the most efficient and economical uses of its resources.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration will be organized on a program basis which we believe will best enable us to utilize its resources in a comprehensive and balanced manner. The main thrust of this organization will be as follows:

1. The mapping and charting of the global oceans and the Great Lakes.

2. Fish exploration and conservation, aquaculture development, marine biological research, fish technology, and industry services.

3. Technology for the air and sea, including data buoy and instrumentation activities.

4. The monitoring of the geophysical environment, including pollution, seismicity, climate and the earth's magnetic field, as well as data collection and dissemination.

5. The nation's weather service will be broadened to include ocean, river, and space forecasting warnings.

Among the new functions assigned to NOAA are most of those now exercised by the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries of the Department of Interior. However, the Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wildlife would remain with the Department of Interior. We are giving priority to the establishment of an interagency agreement which will provide an effective mechanism for continuing the coordination between the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries and the Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wildlife. We are confident that this coordination agreement will enable both agencies to share expertise and will prove mutually beneficial.

We also intend that the new administration will work in an innovative way with the nation's universities and industries and will do everything possible to encourage and assist the tremendous reservoir of creativity and vision that resides within them. In this connection there will be within NOAA a special role for the Sea Grant Program.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I believe that the new National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration will enable this nation in the decades ahead to fully and wisely utilize and understand the oceans and the atmosphere. This new initiative in the oceans and atmosphere will greatly enhance the quality of our environment, our security, our economy, and our ability to meet increased de

mands for food and raw materials. I regard the establishment of NOAA as an essential step forward and I believe that the President's Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970 should go into effect as proposed. Be assured that we in this Department will make it work.

EXHIBIT 10

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF SENATOR NELSON, PREPARED BY SOL MOSHER, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, AUGUST 26, 1970

Question No. 1. One of the problems which some foresee in placing marine resources responsibilities in Commerce is that ESSA, the Department of Commerce's principal claim to NOAA, consists almost entirely of physical, rather than biological, scientists and technicians. Yet, many of the most valuable resources of the sea or biological resources-including the fisheries. What role will biologists have in a NOAA in Commerce. Is it likely, for example, that the agency would be directed by an administrator with biological or ecological training?

Answer. The Department of Commerce admittedly has been concerned with the physical aspects of the marine environment as a result of its traditional responsibilities in mapping and charting and environmental forecasting. The establishment of NOAA will broaden this responsibility, especially with respect to the biological resources of the ocean and greater emphasis will definitely be given in the future to the biological and chemical aspects of the marine environment. The Marine Fishery Service, a separate unit, that the Secretary intends to establish in NOAA will be comparable with the traditional physical and geophysical activities and throughout our staffing activities we intend to insure that biological expertise is available. Such expertise will play an essential role in insuring that the living resources of the oceans are better understood and will be an integral part of all appropriate NOAA activities. With both biologists and physical scientists now being located within a single agency, it is expected that there will be an effective combined effort by these groups with recognition of the interaction between the environment and the living resources.

While a final decision has not yet been made, it is expected that one of the executive level positions in NOAA will be held by a marine biologist in addition to the marine biologists already in the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries.

Question No. 2. As I understand it, the Sea Grant Program which Plan 4 transfers to Commerce, is concerned with advancing knowledge of the resources of the estuaries and other portions of the coastal zone, as well as with deepwater oceanic research and development? Why shouldn't these aspects of the program be administered by whichever agency is given responsibility for the proposed coastal zone management program?

Answer. As the Secretary of Commerce has testified, the matter of management of the coastal zone is not covered in the reorganization plan establishing NOAA and requires separate legislation. Even if the coastal zone responsibility is not assigned to the Department of Commerce, the Sea Grant Program should remain within NOAA. That Program is concerned with training of personnel and the advancement of services that go well beyond the requirements and problems of the estuaries and coastal zone management. Many of the areas which the Sea Grant Program support are directly of concern to the elements within the NOAA organization.

Question No. 3. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife marine laboratory at Sandy Hook, New Jersey, has conducted the study of the environmental effects of 40 years or more of waste dumping into the oceans off New York City. This facility would be transferred to your department under Plan Number 4. Would such environmental pollution control studies continue to be the major assignment of the laboratory in Commerce?

Answer. The Sandy Hook Marine Laboratory is providing valuable knowledge to the studies of pollution in the area of the New York Bight. Such environmental and pollution control studies would continue to be the major assignment of that laboratory when transferred to this Department.

Question No. 4. As you know, the Bureau of Commercial Fischeries once was administered by the Department of Commerce. As I understand it, the reason this agency was transferred to the Interior Department was because Congress felt it has become a captive of the commercial fishing industry to the detriment of the fishery resource itself. Are there reasons today why these same kinds of