ML20138B065

Advises That Erco/Energy Resources Co,Inc,Unsuccessful Offeror Under Rf RS-NMS-81-030 Entitled, Analysis of Safeguards Needs for Transport of High Level Waste

ML20138B065
Person / Time
Issue date:	03/30/1981
From:	Mattia M NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
To:	Rosen R ENERGY RESOURCES CO., INC.
Shared Package
ML20136E458	List: IA-84-682, Request for Procurement Action NRC-02-81-030,Rev 3,Mod 6, Extending Performance to 861026,to Analysis of Safeguards Needs for Transport of High Level Waste ML20136E451 ML20136E629 ML20136E727 ML20136E735 ML20136E805 ML20136E856 ML20138A351 ML20138A356 ML20138A362 ML20138A367 ML20138A371 ML20138A374 ML20138A383 ML20138A388 ML20138A396 ML20138A404 ML20138A418 ML20138A424 ML20138A434 ML20138A438 ML20138A453 ML20138A460 ML20138A471 ML20138A482 ML20138A492 ML20138A502 ML20138A508 ML20138A513 ML20138A595 ML20138A601 ML20138A624 ML20138A645 ML20138A667 ML20138A676 ML20138A693 ML20138A711 ML20138A720 ML20138A727 ML20138A760 ML20138A832 ML20138A844 ML20138A854 ML20138A868 ML20138A874 ML20138A888 ML20138A905 ML20138A917 ML20138A922 ML20138A934 ... further results
References
FOIA-84-682 NUDOCS 8512120196
Download: ML20138B065 (2)

Text

.g a

.-2 4

. a

. ~ -

m

.m_

_.._..-,u..A..._._s.

- 2

/

,3

~

'~

s 1

.s i

• NAR 3 0 1991 i

i ERC0/ Energy Resources Co., Inc.

185 Alewife Brook Parkway ATTN: Mr. Richard W. Rosen Cambridge, HASS 02138

Subject:

Request for Proposal (RFP) No. RS-fMS-81-030 Entitled,

" Analysis of Safeguards Needs for Transport of High Level Wa ste"

Dear Mr. Rosen:

This letter is to advise you that your company is an unsuccessful of feror under the subject RFP.

While award has not yet been nade, it has been determined that ERC0/

Energy Resources Co., Inc. has been eliminated from any further consideration for contract award based upon a comprehensive review and analysis of all proposals received.

Following is a discussion of your proposal's major d4ficiencies as found by the Source Evaluation Panel (SEP). Such discussion is general in nature and should not be construed to be all inclusive with respect to your proposal weaknesses.

i l

There appeared to be inadequate company and key personnel experience in the radiological consequence estimation and in physical protection safeguards areas.

In the case of safeguards, the contract examples cited were concerned with non-nuclear activities. Additionally, the l

resumes of key personnel did not reveal strong, recent experience in the area of safeguards for licensed nuclear materials.

The company experience 1

for radiological consequence was determined to be weak. Also, the current working experience with comon computer codes for radiological consequence calculations was not explicit.

The technical approach generally did not reflect detailed familiarity 1

with NRC safeguards policies and regulations.

I As further negotiations with your firm concerning this procurement are not contemplated, a revision to your proposal will not be considered.

At such time as an award is made under the RFP, you will be advised of j

the successful offeror and related information.

l

- -] -- - - ~8512120196 851112 7

- T-~

~~

~

.[. [ [,' ' ]

h '^

se2

. {M

.,,,]l,

..e..

i i

l 4

...f

./

o O

~

.e ERC0/ Energy Resources Co., Inc. We appreciate your continued interest in the Comission's programs, as well as the time and effort expended in responding to this RFP.

Sincerely, Mary Jo Mattia Acting Chief Technical Assistance Contracts Branch Division of Contracts l

c., w :

ADM:DC l

ADM: C, 4

1 l

3 3..i..

.. e,.

.i.

...i.

~ :ch MJM ft l a... ;..

l 8

.I EB M..il

c. r ;

3/Jo/81....

.l...6..t/8f l

3 1

.*cc-

. o. c

,,-. :c t,. L 6 E C O F< D C O PY j

e