WSPC12864 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

j ,-~ e e fs0306 CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Hykan Gene Jencsok Ruth Yeager ~ March 7, 1986 FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: National Forests Reserved Rights Technical Studies: Interview with Simons, Li & Associates On March 7, 1986, we met with Ruh-Ming Li, Daryl Simons, Bob Macarthur, Bob Musetter, and Brad Anderson of Simons, Li & Associates. This interview was part of the selection process for hiring experts to perform technical studies for the State of Colorado. General Both Simons & Li and Stanley Schumm (for KKBNA's team) are far ahead of Bishop, Brogden & Rumph in terms of technical sophistication and national reputation. Simons & Li came into the interview with two main advantages over KKBNA: 1) all aspects of the study can be handled in-house by a team with a proven track record for efficient and competent work, and 2) their written proposal was far more detailed and thorough. While the interview is important, our final selection needs to be based on the written submissions as well. Simons & Li gave a thorough and detailed presentation, and there is no doubt about their ability to perform our study. If their presentation is to be faulted, it is for a certain amount of heavy-handedness - at times it sounded more like a sales pitch than a technical discussion. Other factors that we discussed briefly after the interview were a possible language problem in using Li as an expert witness, and how amenable they might be to any changes suggested by us or by the other expert we are planning to hire. Suitability as Expert Witness The firm as a whole has excellent credentials in courtroom experience. Simons is lucid and eloquent, and his international reputation is upheld by his authoratative demeanor. His testimony should stand up well in court. Ruh-Ming Li would be less impressive on the witness stand simply because his English is not always easy to understand. It will be up to Bob to decide whether this poses a serious problem. Administration Simons & Li's reputation is based not only on technical competence, but also on their ability to get work done smoothly and efficiently. My only concern would be that their great degree of self-confidence may make them less responsive to our needs, or to any changes we wish to make in their contract. (This may not be the case at all; the recommendations that Bob received said that they were easy to work with.)