LETTER TO ART FROM JIM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP66B00728R000400060050-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: February 28, 2002
• Sequence Number: 50
• Publication Date: October 22, 1964
• Content Type: LETTER

Approved For Release 2002/06/11 ,: CIA-RDP66B00728R000400060050-5
October 22, 1964
Enclosed are three signed copies of the contract which you left with me
on October 13 and on which I have inserted the date October 22, 1964.
The contract was signed byl with the understanding that ~Il\IIINIL
there are certain changes to be made in the basic contract, as you and
I discussed on October 13:
1. In order to accomplish what you require under Part II of the schedule,
it was decided that there should be certain Engineering service
STATINTL performed at Palo Alto. I have forwarded a separate quotation in
the amount of II covering that service.
2. Under Part III you asked how long the 0 mentioned in item c STATINTL
would last. It appears that this coverage might be enough until
about November 15. On the other hand, since we now have a contract
signed by both parties with the total cost inserted, it seems to me
that it would be most appropriate to delete all of paragraph c in
order to avoid confusion. However, if the purpose of paragraph c
is to spell out interim funding limitations, this is a different
matter.
3. I believe you are going to identify specific areas of sensitivity
as an addendum to Part VI.
4. The following comments, some of which we discussed previously, pertain
to the Air Force Basic Agreement, AF33(657)5176:
a. You asked whether Section D of the Basic Agreement covering pro-
visions for research and development contracts was appropriate for
incorporation in this contract. It is my impression that this
contract is more of a supply type than an R&D type and, therefore,
Section D does not seem to be appropriate.
b. With respect to the B Clauses, I would suggest the elimination
of paragraph B.29 because it is my understanding that this is
designed to be used only if there is no hardware involved. Clause
A.5 covers the situation more completely than Clause B.29.
c. In view of the method we discussed for making shipment of the
hardware, I wonder if you shouldn't delete Clause A.36 requiring
the use of Government bills of lading.
Approved For Release 2002/06/11: CIA-RDP66B00728R000400060050-5
 Approved For Release 2002/06/11: CIA-RDP66B00728R000400060050-5
-2-
Please let me know if there is any question about the modifications to
the contract outlined above.
Very truly yours,
Approved For Release 2002/06/11: CIA-RDP66B00728R000400060050-5