Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'ecp'.
What is the appropriate way to allocate costs for proposal preparation in this instance? The RFP for the contract I have identified certain performance specifications as tradeable. We bid this competitive proposal without bidding one of the specifications identified as such. We won and at kick-off, the customer indicated that the particular specification should not have been identified as tradeable. My company is in the process of preparing a proposal for this portion of the spec which is also included in the contract's statement of work. I am confused about how the costs to prepare this proposal should be allocated. I know that typically when you receive an RFP you are not allowed to charge the government for proposal preparation and it's charged to B&P. Would this be handled in this manner? Would we submit as an ECP? Are ECP preparation costs chargeable to the program? Is this considered an unsolicited proposal? Is this an REA? Are those costs chargeable to the program? Please advise.
Let me start by stating the term modification will be used in a few different contexts in this posting, as follows: Modification-As defined associated in Army Regulations, not the Federal Acquisition Regulation, as a repair type procedure "within the current performance envelope" and a modification that "increases the current performance envelope." Important because the distinction has implications with respect to the type of appropriations used for the modification. Contract modification means any written change in the terms of a contract. Modifications are considered as one of the elements under the umbrella of Contractor Logistics Support services; however, modifications, which increase the performance envelope, are generally not known in advance and generally require appropriations other than O&M. Thus, limiting the ability to provide data necessary to include in a solicitation for offerrors to propose on for a CLS requirement. My question is can you contemplate the type of work associated with the modifications, that increase the performance envelope, without having them proposed on as a part of the original contract award and use an ECP type process to negotiate a price for these increased capabilities? The train of thought is yes, because modifications are contemplated under a CLS services effort or no because it would be considered new work and a J&A would have to be completed for each and every increase in capability. The second thought process does not make sense to me because the current contractor is already performing a baseline of maintenance services on X aircraft, vehicle, whatever with the resources on staff. To write a J&A for each and every effort associated with increased capability does not make sense. Nor does competing each and every increase in capability and potentially having a different contractor performing the associated work. The only sensible approach is using an ECP like process, and the reason I say like process, is as I understand only used on systems that are in production, while MWO's are used for out of production systems. If none, of these paths are correct please advise.