Tim B.

Hi Joel! I'll go down your list in order: 1. The base ID/IQ specifies hourly ceiling rates for each labor category. In the TO I'm referring to, the instructions were to provide FFP labor CLIN level pricing, inclusive of any ODCs. As an example: CLIN 0001 FFP Service Support QTY (9.5) Unit (Month); no requirement to bid hourly rates. 2. In subsequent discussions, the contracting office explained that they would calculate the per hour cost based on the number of staff assigned to each CLIN to extrapolate an hourly rate. 3. See response to item 1. 4. See response to item 1.

Thanks everyone for the thoughtful replies! There is no language in the IDIQ that addresses fill rate; I think that's a great place to start negotiating - addressing the issue that the IDIQ ceiling rates were developed absent such a requirement. I also like the idea of asking for clarity on "reserves the right" - will you or won't you impose these penalties, it can't just be left up the whim of the day by whomever is currently administering the contract. It just seems so "conceptually wrong" to impose such a thing on an FFP contract - if you want T&M or Cost Plus Fixed Fee (bodies in seats) then solicit that way. Perhaps I'm wrong, but my (basic) understanding of an FFP-type solicitation is that it should be used when the requirements are generally well defined and the offerors bid a price to provide the required SERVICES at the required PERFORMANCE levels; the how isn't or shouldn't be part of the equation. If you're soliciting to mow a 1 acre lawn to 3 and 1/4 inch length twice a month - I can propose a cost for that. Whether or not I use one or five people/mowers is up to me. I do appreciate though, the latitude given by FAR 1.102(d) - that was really helpful for me to get my head around this.

Thanks Don - similarly, "It's allowable unless it's expressly prohibited." is a new one for me as well! I see you point then, that the fill rate is a term and must be met.

We recently responded to a solicitation that included FFP labor CLINs with the following caveat: During Q&A we asked how this deduction would be calculated and we received the following response: Is it common practice to impose "fill rate" requirements on a performance based FFP labor contract? Is that even allowable under the FAR? It seems as though the CO is attempting to benefit from an FFP pricing structure and at the same time, penalize offerors as though it was T&M. If the contractor adequately performs IAW the the terms of the contract, can they still be penalized for not filling FFP-based positions within a certain time-frame?