Page images
PDF
EPUB

plucked and dyed, three are sheared, and one is dressed and dyed without plucking or shearing.

We appreciate the opportunity to inspect and comment on these skins. Although we feel that they are not of as high quality as the sealskins which are currently being processed and sold for the U.S. Government, we recognize that the skins which you have sent to us are not directly comparable to those. However, the workmanship does indicate considerable capability in the processing of sealskins.

We understand that you have established offices in Anchorage, Alaska, as well as in British Columbia. We are encouraged to know that profitable use is being made of the hair seal resources in these areas. We have urged the utilization of both the hair seal and sea lion resources of Alaska, and as you are undoubtedly aware, have done considerable work in surveying the extent of the sea lion resource and development of harvesting techniques.

You have already been provided with a copy of the invitation issued March 31, 1965, for experimental processing of Alaska sealskins. We are enclosing herein another copy of this document. Although you will recognize that we have only a limited number of sealskins available for experimental processing, we will be pleased to consider any proposal you may wish to make together with others which we anticipate receiving.

Sincerely yours,

Enclosure.

(Signed) DONALD L. MCKERNAN,

Director.

VAN DAAL & MEIJER N.V., Groningen, Netherlands, May 15, 1965.

THE DIRECTOR,

Bureau of Commercial Fisheries,
Washington, D.C.,

U.S.A.

DEAR MR. MCKERNAN: Your kind letter-dated April 14, 1965-was forwarded to me to Carbonear, Newfoundland, where, for the past 6 weeks, I supervised the initial processing of some 20,000 harp seals I bought from Canadian seal hunters.

I want to assure you of the fact that we are definitely interested in participating in your research and development program with the intention of incorporating and erecting a processing plant in Alaska. However, because of the delay caused by my absence from Europe, and because of the present selling season for most of the $1 million worth of sealskins we purchased last year in Alaska, besides our other skins, and because of the increased promotional work we are doing on sea lion pups at this time, I feel that we will not be able to provide you with precise and responsible information within May 17.

In case this makes it impossible for us to participate in this year's program I would like to announce our participation for the following years. However, in order not to lose too much time and to gain some more experience with the superior-type Pribilof seal I would like to purchase from the U.S. Government a few hundred raw skins at an average price of $30, which we will process at our own expense under the provision that the outcoming product will be made available to your experts for full inspection.

The plant we intend to erect in Alaska, in case the fur seal contract will be allotted to us at a later time, shall be of a size and volume, that besides fur seals also other seals from Alaska such as hair seals, sea lions and perhaps otter, beaver, etc., can be processed. In this way, both the Alaskan people and our industry will benefit from this project.

Your comments to this idea will be very much appreciated. Thank you again for your kind and understanding letter.

Sincerely yours,

[blocks in formation]

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE,
BUREAU OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES,
Washington, D.C., June 8, 1965.

Mr. FRED MEYER,

Van Daal and Meijer N.V.,
Herestraat 70,

Groningen, Netherlands.

DEAR MR. MEYER: Your letter of May 15, which was received on May 19, indicated your continuing interest in research and development work on Alaska sealskins. You pointed out your inability to meet the requirements of our invitation for proposals (CF-8-35) dated March 31, 1965, but inquired about the possibilities of purchasing from the U.S. Government a few hundred skins at an average price of $30 per skin. You propose to make the finished sealskins available to us for inspection.

I am sorry that you were unable to submit a proposal to us pursuant to our invitation (CF-8-35). Perhaps you will be in a position to respond to future invitations for proposals which may be issued. In the meantime we will give further consideration to your request to purchase a few hundred sealskins after we have made a determination of the quantity of sealskins required for research and development in connection with our March 31, 1965, invitation. In the event sealskins are available for sale, the price would be subject to negotiation and we would require in the terms of sale some provision for your making available to us the results of the sale of the finished goods as well as an opportunity to inspect the product. We would sell the sealskins also with the understanding that if such experimental processing should lead eventually to a contract for production processing of sealskins, they would be processed in the United States. You, of course, have indicated your interest in locating a processing plant in Alaska.

As mentioned in our April 14 letter, Senator Gruening made available to us for inspection six sealskins which you had provided to him. We have asked Senator Gruening for instructions concerning the disposition of these skins but have not received these as yet.

We appreciate your interest in this matter.
Sincerely yours,

(Signed) H. E. CROWTHER,
Acting Director
(For Donald L. McKernan, Director).

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE,
BUREAU OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES,
Washington, D.C., April 19, 1965.

Mr. LESTER SHAPIRO,

President, Superior Seal, Inc.,

Chicago, Ill.

DEAR MR. SHAPIRO: This will confirm my telephone conversation with you on Friday, April 16, concerning our invitation for proposals for sealskin processing research and development work dated March 31. We are today issuing an addendum to that invitation extending the time limit for proposals from May 1 to May 17, 1965.

You may be interested in the attached copy of a brief summary of the abovementioned invitation for proposals that I have drafted for my own use. This emphasizes the importance of cost estimates to be included with each proposal. Should there be additional detail required from you following a review of your proposal, we will be glad to contact you for supplemental information. Sincerely yours,

(Signed) RALPH C. BAKER,

Assistant Director for Resource Development.

OUTLINE FOR INVITATION FOR PROPOSALS

Invitation CF-8-35. Seeking contracts with several contractors for research and development work on Alaska sealskins.

Scope of work required for proposer:

(a) Improve tannage.

(b) Develop colors.

(c) Improve shearing and other processing techniques.

(d) Develop new luxury fur products.

Time schedule: 1 year from date of award.

Essential elements of proposal:

1. Cost estimates, by categories, per skin, males and females and totals, complete with "Certificate of Current Cost Data" (including similar data for subcontractor).

2. Proposed incentive factors, such as percentage share in sale proceeds in excess of costs.

3. Separate price proposals for the experimental processing of:

1,000 sealskins.

2,000 sealskins.

3,000 sealskins.

4,000 sealskins.

5,000 sealskins.

4. Demonstrate that proposer is a responsible prospective contractor who meets applicable Federal procurement requirements. (Satisfy itemized re

quirements (9) pp. 4 and 5 of invitation.)

5. Indicate willingness to provide:

(a) Insurance coverage of the sealskins.

(b) Performance bond.

6. Acknowledge preparedness to negotiate a contract with provisions itemized in schedule A of invitation:

(a) Bond.

(b) Patent requirements.

(c) Disputes clause.

(d) Records, audits, and inspection.

(e) Excusable delays provision.

(f) Work Hours Act of 1962.

(g) Convict labor stipulation.

(h) Nondiscrimination in employment.

(i) Officials not to benefit.

(j) Covenant against contingent fees.

(k) Utilization of small business concerns.

(7) Utilization of concerns in labor surplus areas.

(m) Compliance with Buy American Act.

SUPERIOR SEAL, INC., CHICAGO, ILL., May 11, 1965.

Re invitation for proposals regarding research and development in processing sealskins.

Mr. RALPH C. BAKER,

Assistant Director for Research Development,

U.S. Department of the Interior,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. BAKER: I do not think it would serve any useful purpose for us to respond in detail to the invitation as I assume that the final contract will be the result of further negotiations, and because we agree, in substance, with most of your conditions.

We assume that your primary motive is not so much the mere processing of skins but rather the researching and development of sealskins to create a better texture in a variety of new colors to make Alaska seals into a more luxurious garment.

In line with the foregoing, we suggest a schedule of charges as follows: $85 per skin if we receive 1,000 skins, $67.50 per skin if we receive 2,000 skins, $61.75 per skin if we receive 3,000 skins, $58.75 per skin if we receive 4,000 skins, $57 per skin if we receive 5,000 skins.

We would be very much interested in discusing any incentive plan that you may have in mind.

Obviously, I am sure that you realize that nobody can afford to set up a plant for processing skins which are both limited and uncertain in number. Fortunately, we are in a unique position to meet this requirement because National Superior Fur Dressing & Dyeing Co. has adequate facilities for the dressing

portion of this work, and we have made satisfactory arrangements with Superior Lab of New York for the dyeing processes. Your Department is familiar with our financial ability and our extensive experience in this field. Should you need further information on either score, we will be glad to supply it.

[blocks in formation]

DEAR MR. SHAPIRO: Thank you for your letter of proposal dated May 11, 1965, in response to our invitation CF-8-35 for research and development in processing Alaska sealskins. Your assumption that our proposed work program is primarily for research and development toward product improvement is correct. You offer a cost-per-skin proposal but there is additional information required before we can evaluate your proposal.

We have in mind an initial program of research and development as set forth in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) of the invitation. The research accomplishments on sample skins would be submitted to us for evaluation, after which production processing of skins could be initiated. The production run would serve to demonstrate the acceptability of the new product by the industry and

consumers.

It will be necessary for you to furnish a plan of work outlining, first, under research, the work which will be performed, by whom, the number of skins expected to be used for this purpose, and the supporting details of the cost estimate. As a second part of this proposal, please indicate the number of skins that could be processed using the new developments during the remaining term of the contract. It is possible that the research part might require as much as 6 months for the development of the new product or for improvement of existing processes and techniques. A month or possibly more may be required by us in evaluating the results of this research and experimental processing. Such time factors should be considered in your estimate of the work which could be performed and its cost. Our objective and yours is to secure for the Government the maximum benefits from the research on new fur products, processes, and techniques.

In addition to the foregoing plan of work and related cost breakdown, we shall need current information as follows:

1. A certificate that all cost data furnished is accurate and complete. tificate format is set forth on p. 3 of the invitation.)

(Cer

2. The cost data and certificate of same for all subcontractors who are committed in the performance of the work.

3. Provide current references to demonstrate adequate financial and credit resources for performance of the work.

4. A demonstration of the key personnel to be used in the research and development work plan, including their background and qualifications. (This information is equally applicable to subcontractors.)

5. Include appropriate statement regarding your willingness and ability to conform to the requirements of the standard nondiscrimination clauses as prescribed in Executive Order No. 10925 of March 6, 1961, as amended.

We assume that various requirements of the proposal (such as plant facilities, business affiliation, etc.) are provided in your proposal dated April 1, 1964, which was in response to a previous request. If such is the case, you should make a statement to include such part of that proposal which is still current, correct, and applicable to our invitation CF-8-35.

If you desire, we shall be happy to provide you with a copy of a typical work plan which you may use as a guide in setting forth the research work to be performed, and the type of proposal we require for evaluation.

We have in mind a two-part contract where the cost of the research and processing work would be reimbursable and would be paid from the proceeds of sale of the processed sealskins. Your comments on such a program will be appreciated. If we can be of further assistance to you in this matter, please advise. In the meantime, we look forward to your early submission of the additional information we need. Sincerely yours,

(Signed) H. E. CROWTHER,

Acting Director

(For Donald L. McKernan, Director).

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE,
BUREAU OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES,
Washington, D.C., June 11, 1965.

Mr. LESTER SHAPIRO,

President, Superior Seal, Inc.,
Chicago, Ill.

DEAR MR. SHAPIRO: Supplementing our letter of June 7, 1965, we are enclosing two samples of research proposals. Because of the confidential classification of this type of proposal, we have deleted from the samples identification of the proposer and the cost figures. Also enclosed is a sample work plan for a research project. This is not a proposal for contract but rather an outline of work from which a research proposal is prepared. We trust that this material will assist you in the modification of your May 11 proposal.

Sincerely yours,

(Signed) DONALD L. MCKERNAN, Director.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE,
BUREAU OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES,
Washington, D.C. June 30, 1965.

Mr. NORTON SHAPIRO,
Superior Seal, Inc.,

Chicago, Ill.

DEAR MR. SHAPIRO: I am arranging for the immediate shipment to you of three sealskins as requested in your telephone call to me today. One of these is the demonstration skin showing the various stages of processing, one is a brown-dyed DDM&F processed by Supara, and one of the natural, sheared skin processed by Supara.

We would appreciate your return of the demonstration skin as soon as possible since we have occasion to use it from time to time as a visual aid in our program activities. This is quite an old skin which we have had in this office You will note that it does have a tear in it which has been

for about 16 years. covered with scotch tape.

The other two furs were among those submitted to us by Supara in the fall of 1962. We have none of the skins submitted to us by Superior Seal readily available in this office, so I am sending these two in order to expedite receipt of the skins by you. If it is important for you to have samples of the more recent submission by Superior Seal, please let me know and I will arrange for this.

The masking tape which you will find on the Supara-processed skins was placed on all the skins received from each of the companies that submitted proposals. It was intended to cover, in a like manner, the marks which had been placed on the skins by the various companies. The tape can be removed from the skins if you so desire.

Sincerely yours,

(Signed) JOHN I. HODGES, Deputy Assistant Director for Resource Development. P.S.-Am also sending in two separate packages the remains of two blackdyed skins which Supara sent to us in July 1963 for testing by NBS.

« PreviousContinue »