|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. 
June 20, 1997 Mr. Douglas C. Bauer National Research Council 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. HA-280 Washington, D.C. 20418 Dear Doug: This letter is to clarify the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicle's position on how we would like the Peers to treat the issue of ''resources". We want the focus of the 4th Review to be on the technical issues (Are we looking on the right technologies? Do we have the right technical program goals and plans? etc.) and on our rate of progress on these technology issues. We do not want the Peers to judge the PNGV effort as a conventional project where resources are the prime influence on rate of progress. Therefore, we are not specifically asking the Peers to evaluate "resources" throughout the PNGV. When the Peers feel the rate of progress is inadequate in a particular technology area, we expect the Peers to investigate why and to recommend changes, as they have previously. It would be appropriate for the Peers to investigate the range of potential causes of inadequate progress, including but not limited to, the type and adequacy of the resources. I trust this helps clarify our views on "resources" and we look forward to a good discussion of the rate of progress of our various technical programs. 
|
|
|||||||||||||||
