MINUTES OF THE AGENCY CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD 23 JUNE 1971

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP74B00535R000100200010-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 21, 2005
• Sequence Number: 10
• Publication Date: June 23, 1971
• Content Type: MIN

Approved Foreease 2006/02/0 i4- P74B0053.00100200010-1
Minutes of the Agency Contract Review Board
23 June 1971
Logistics on the following cases:
1. The Board met to hear and make recommendations to the Director of
2.
deferred tol
to brief 25X1
the negotiator 25X1
tion system. The selection of the contractor was based on (a) the best technical
opened the meeting by calling
the Board on the case.
of the case.
Gfiad? i
Declassification Review by NGA Excluddoym from anma;i:
E 533 a rd
Approved For Release 2006/02/4 D 74B6 ~Q~3SR00 100200010-1
 Approved For0ease 2006/02&DP74B0053jW00100200010-1
Minutes of the ACRB - 23 June 1971
proposal, (b) the lowest cost, and (c! the best delivery schedule. "had 25X1
originally proposed costs of f -1 Their final submission being a firm-
fixed price (FFP) proposal of This last proposal was negotiated down
to a round figure of I I and included an additional piece of equipment
valued at plus wiring diagrams and manuals which were not included in the
original proposal.
3. The Board was satisfied with the contracting officer's efforts and agreed
in a recommendation that the Director of Logistics approve the case for negotiation
and execution without further Board review.
4. 0 asked to be allowed to present the =case at this time as he 25X1
felt that it was rather cut-and-dryed. The Board concurred in his request. 25X1
stated that 15 requests for proposals had been issued and that 7 responses were re-
ceived. was chosen from the seven responses after a comparison evaluation
was completed by the technical representative. He noted further. that the choice was
ased or r price .,, repu t~" .,,...,tio .. of tractor, and available i n- h no se ni inm ent n5senti~1. 25X1
.,,,..,..... on co .,...,.. c,11-r-..,.._,. ....__,._~
to the efficient performance of the contract. The fact that has the equipment 25X1
on hand was a significant factor in the choice. complemented I 5X1
and on the detail analysis and methodical evaluation that had been made on
this case. I commented that he would like to see more cases supported
by an evaluation of competing contractors-
5. asked if the reasonableness of the number of labor hours
had been reviewed by the technical representative. Noting that the audit report
stated that the labor hours had not been evaluated and recommended that the techni-
cal representative should review the item.
with the contractor's labor hour proposal.
expressed concern that
25X1
25X1
there was no evidence in the docket or supporting documentation to substantiate the
fact that a review had been made of the labor hours. Opointed out that the 25X1
statement was a boiler-plate type paragraph and that there was continuing dialogue
-between the auditors and the technical representatives where serious difference
exists. I noted that the Business justification contains a statement to the
effect that the labor hours had been reviewed.
6. asked the Board members for their comments. They
expressed satisfaction with the case and recommended the Director of Logistics
approve the negotiation and execution of the contract without further Board review.
Approved For Release 2006/0
4RDP74B00535R000100200010-1
in
 Approved For ease 2006/02/06: ,I'f41300531000100200010-1
Minutes of the' ACRB - 23 June 1971
7. I lasked that the Procurement Policy Panel discuss and
review the procedures employed to verify that comments contained in the audit
reports are being reviewed and responded to by the appropriate persons.
8. The I case was also presented
by He informed the Board that this contract was for the purchase of
a prototype high capacity processor for E_ I
The contractor has 25X1
proposed a CPFF contract in the amount of He noted that we had pur- 25X1
chased three processors of a similar type several years ago on a fixed-price
contract. In addition we had a cost-sharing contract for the development of
1with this contractor. This effort however is based on
a different design concept and is substantially beyond the present state-of-the-art.
was questioned concerning the possibility of commercial value.
I responded noting that this effort would go beyond commercial needs
and that there would be no commercial market for the processor. Concerning the
possibility that there would be other Government agencies interested in the develop-
n1e11Ls 1ruill the cU11lracL, was unable to speculate on the use of the
equipment beyond our own Agency.
asked why it was necessary for the contract to be classified.
In response, it was noted that all our contracts in this area have been traditionally
classified. In addition, the material is made for us exclusively and that similar
contracts written by the Air Force are classified. noted that there 25X1
was a need for a "sensitivity" course for contracting officers and technical represen-
tatives.
10. When was asked if there would be any automatic follow-on he.
answered by stating that each requirement is individually handled on separate con-
tracts. I further remarked that he felt that the proposed cost of
was a little high and would be negotiated down if at all possible. In addition, consid-
eration would also be given to another form of contract.
11. I I asked the Board members for their opinions and comments.
The members were satisfied with the efforts and intent of the contracting officer and
recommended the Director of Logistics approve the case for negotiation and execution
without further Board review.
Approved For Release 2006/02/ ~E Il- DP74B00535R000100200010-1
 Approved For?lease 2006/02/06 : CIA- P74B0053000100200010-1
Minutes of the ACRB - 23 June 1971
12. requested to be allowed to present a case that had
just been approved by the Executive Director-Comptroller. He noted that the
case would be negotiated by the F- -1 and that it was
necessary to get.the material and the recommendations of the Board to the contracting
officer as soon as possible.
noted that the
amount of
units will be
continued with his briefing. He
had proposed a CPFF contract in the
These
The Board accepted
proposal and agreed in a recommendation that the Director of Logistics approve the
negotiation and execution of the proposed contractual action.
PMS/OL
25X1
25X1
25X1
4
Approved For Release 2006/02/OSE DP74B00535R000100200010-1