ML20128K106
Text
__
' 3%
(-
MEMOP.ANDUM FOR: File FROM:
Teresa McLearen, Contract Administrator-
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING HELD ON MAY 12, 1983, WITH TAYL0E ASSOCIATES REGARDING-NRC-17-83-399 ATTENDEES: Ann Riley, Tayloe Associates Joseph Gallo, Tayloe Associates Elva Leins, ASLBP, NRC Charles Fitti, ASLBP, NRC Patricia Smith, Contracting Officer, NRC Teresa McLearen, Contract Administrator, NRC This meeting was requested by the contractor to present their case to the Program Office (ASLBP) to amend the delivery requirements in the contract. Specifically, the requirement that daily delivery of transcripts taken in.New York be delivered to Headquarters, Bethesda, by 8:15 a.tn.
the second day after a hearing.
The contractor contends this delivery cannot be made using the type of delivery services mentioned in the contract (Express Mail).
In order to make timely delivery as called for in the contract, extraordinary delivery methods must be utilized (Air Courier @ $155 per delivery).
.The contractor contends that this is not reasonable and requests an additional day to effect delivery.
The Contracting Officer pointed out that this requirement was clearly spelled out in the solicitation and Tayloe had not objected to it, or
- even questioned it. Further, she pointed out that this delivery requirement may have prevented other firms from responding to NRC's request for proposals.
Mr. Fitti stated that he would have to check with the users of this service before he could corrrnent on the contractor's request. He will let the Contracting Officer know of his decision next week.
.Again, the Contract Administrator requested Ms. Riley to submit the
.necessary background information on subcontractor Pauline James and request that she be added to the list of approved subcontractors in the contract. Ms. Riley agreed.
At a meeting held on May 2, 1983 with the contractor, Ms. Riley was shown a copy of a March 22, 1983 transcript where words, sentences and entire paragraphs of text were missing. At that time Ms. Riley contended
~
that NRC's reproduction was at fault not Tayloe's " original" transcript.
At this meeting the " original" of the transcript in question was shown to the contractor and it too was missing words, sentences and entire paragraphs of text. Ms. Riley exp41ned that at the beginning of the contract Tayloe, using the Baron computer which produces an original and 8505310085 841115 j
l.'d '
q.
7,.,
g o
O 9.
1 File I-p p.
["f,
four copies, had run thel transcripts thru for. two. sets with the result that theisecond. set was' not clear and produced pa'ges with missing text,
~Ms.:Riley assured us that this procedure was no longer being used.. She p
agreed to furnish;a corrected copy of.the March 22,1983. transcript..
~
ll f ;f..
- 7.. ; - ?
in
.Date Toresa McLearen, Contract-. Administrator -
Administrative co'ntracts Branch
~
Division of Contracts -
Reviewed.and Approved:
///kT
/T <i S.Oh., j.n.W
.Dat C
Patricia A. Smith-
~~~
Contracting Officer C
- w e
F L
d
--'\\
1 3
\\.
- f; p
(
m.,
M c
.