ML20149K077
| ML20149K077 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/26/1996 |
| From: | Barrett R NRC OFFICE FOR ANALYSIS & EVALUATION OF OPERATIONAL DATA (AEOD) |
| To: | Deborah Neff NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20148N835 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9707290235 | |
| Download: ML20149K077 (2) | |
Text
p fpn Ctc%
4 UNITED STATES
- y " ) '*
E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- I WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001
%, '... /
August 26, 1996 MEMORANDUM TO: Deborah A. Neff, Contracting Officer Division of Contracts i
Office of Administration k
FROM:
Richard J. Barrett, Acting Chief Reactor Analysis Branch
,/
/
Safety Programs Division c/
Office for Analysis and Evaluatir of Operational Data
SUBJECT:
CONTRACT EVALUATION OF REQUEST FOR QUOTATION NO.82678033, PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR WATCH LIST PLANTS The evaluation of the proposals in response to the subject request for quotation (RFO) is provided below.
(1) Evaluation for Arthur Andersen & Company (AA).
Personnel Qualifications /Exoerience. The quoter provided resumes of key personnel, in addition, five of the personnel proposed participated in the oral presentation and NRC question session. The individuals proposed meet or exceed the qualification requirements stated in the RFO. Specifically the individuals proposed meet the number of years of experience and education requirements. In addition, the individuals proposed all have relevant and significant work experiences. Further, the individuals have sufficient knowledge of the utility industry, experience in concepts of performance assessment, and j
breadth of experience in applying concepts. The participat;un of the key personnel proposed was less than expected; however, the quoter increased their hours of participation. There was a chortcoming in specific technical skills of some individuals; this was addressed by subsequently supplying additional resumes of individuals who can participate as required.
Oraanizational Exoerience and Past Performance. The quoter provided a sufficient number of relevant work experiences during their oral presentation to demonstrate the necessary organizational experience and capabilities in both the government and private sectors. The quoter stated they have been a consultant to the utility industry since 1917. Their past performance was evaluated by contacting two references. The persons contacted provided only positive responses to questions about the adequacy of the quoter's personnel, demonstrated organization performance, understanding of scopc, the results meeting the objectiva and being useful, and meeting original scope, schedule and budget.
CONTACT:
William S. Raughley, AEOD/SPD/RAB (301) 415-7577 9707290235 970624 PDR ORG NEXD PDR
i 4F D. Neff !
1
!)n),derstaidina of Contract Objectives. The quoter demonstrated an understanding of the 2
requirements, the task objective, the scope and schedule, and the magnitude and complexity of the effort.
Proposed Price. $264,157 was low in comparison to the independent government cost
)
i estimate of $481,260. However, the difference is because the quoter provided an
$80,000 discount and used a different and acceptable labor mix. Therefore, the proposed price of $264,157 is reasonable.
j Summarv: The, quoter has provided sufficient information to evaluate personnel 1
qualifications and experience, organizational experience and past performance, and their understanding of the contract objectives. Concerns relative to the availability of the senior personnel and team leaders have been resolved. The proposed cost was reasonable.
1 Decision: The quoter is acceptable without requiring a major rewrite of the proposal.
(2) A request for quotation was also sent to two other firms, Booz-Allen & Hamilton, Inc.
j and Coopers & Lybrand, LLP. Neither of these firms submitted a bid.
l The bid from AA was evaluated by William S. Raughley and Richard J. Barrett.
cc:
E. Halman, ADM 3
T. Hagan, ADM G. Thompson, AEOD t
1 l
a 4
I 1
+
4 1
J h
-