4:6 



The response that we had in some instances was good ; in some in- 

 stances there were very few bidders, and in one or two cases there 

 were none. Some of the contracts not yet awarded, as a matter of 

 fact, result from this problem. In any event, virtually all of these were 

 done on a competitive basis. 



We then had a selection team made up of representatives from those 

 agencies that would be obliged to implement whatever findings occur 

 from the contracts so that we wanted to make sure they were partners 

 in this enterprise from the beginning. 



Mr. Rogers. So selection was not made only by the staff of the 

 Council ? 



Dr. Wenk. Not at all. 



Mr. Rogers. This is the point I wanted to determine. You might 

 give us some examples of this for the record, not now, as to who made 

 the selections on the various contracts. I think this might be interest- 

 ing for the committee. 



(Information follows:) 



The Awaed of Maeine Sciences Council Conteacts : A Case Study 



Contract : A Comprehensive Study on a National Data Program for the Marine 



Environment, Phase I. 

 Contractor: System Development Corporation, Santa Monica, California. 

 Period : June 28-November 15, 1967. 

 Cost: $75,000. 



Traces of concern for the effective management of marine sciences data, 

 although detectable several years ago, were first brought into focus by the Panel 

 on Oceanography of the President's Science Advisory Committee. The Panel's 

 report in June 1966, noted that "despite determined efforts of the NODC staff, 

 quite clearly the Center falls far short in meeting demands of users" and rec- 

 ommended "a study — to determine means for improving existing services and 

 for broadening and extending the scope and versatility of services in response to a 

 wide spectrum of user requests." 



In response to the Panel's recommendation and in consultation with agency 

 representatives and Council consultants, a proposal for a comprehensive marine 

 data management study was presented to the Marine Sciences Council at its third 

 meeting, October 27, 1966. The Council accepted the proposal, with the Vice 

 President requesting Council staff to develop details, taking into account the 

 activities and interests of the agencies concerned. 



Thereafter, a Data Management Advisory Panel was formed with representa- 

 tives of ten agencies as members and Dr. F. J. Weyl, Special Assistant to the 

 President of the National Academy of Sciences, as Chairman. During the next 

 six months the Panel met seven times to review a complex set of agency require- 

 ments and to draft comprehensive study specifications which were forwarded to 

 167 private companies and corporations on May 15th. A bidder's conference was 

 held in Washington, D.C. on May 24th for purposes of thorough analysis and 

 explanation of the specifications. 



Subsequently, proposals were received from 23 firms. During the period June 

 6-14 the Interagency Data Management Advisory Panel, augmented by additional 

 specialists from those agencies having major oceanographic data functions, for- 

 mally evaluated the proposals in a screening and scoring process involving 74 

 questions. This process narrowed the choice to two firms with proposals of high 

 but essentially equal merit. 



In the final stage of the decision-making process, technical presentations were 

 made by representatives of each of the two firms to members of the Interagency 

 Data Management Advisory Committee and Council staff on June 20th. Based on 

 a secret ballot taken following these presentations and a review of decisions 

 at each step by the Executive Secretary of the Council, the study contract was 

 awarded to System Development Corporation on June 28, 1967. 



Mr. Rogers. Give us the time element, if you could, for the record 

 on these studies, when they have been done and when they are due and 

 so forth. 



