EVALUATION REVIEW OF ECP-2 UNDER CONTRACT AF33(657)-12846 AIRBORNE INSTRUMENTS LABORATORY DEAR PARK, NEW YORK

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP72B00464R000400010063-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 7
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 9, 2012
• Sequence Number: 63
• Publication Date: November 12, 1965
• Content Type: FORM

Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/01/09: CIA-RDP72B00464R000400010063-2
+IA-4300- 5
"LY TO;
Audit Li.i,on Office
P. 0. Box 8155
S. W. Station
W *,}hinZton, D. C,
ember i ,FE
Contra
In trumcnt- Laboratory
ion review of ECP- Under
AIL Proposal W,,F dated . October 19;i5
has been made, to the extent deemed necessary of the
On of th ; uta19aelyi.ng dat in upport of propose 1- bor r tev -
proposal for muitipii ier switeiiLs. Thi;,, revie r cc si,Lted
. overheu3 r4 test roateri-1 pricing, trIve1 and oth< r direct costs. The
direct labor hours, materi_a requires nts, the necessity for the proposed
travel, gad Overtime hours, are referred to for ev.1u,tjcn by a techni,-:,-,1,
repre;ent,tive,
am the au tar's recd rtendationv are ati follow-..
Per
Conti..etor' s
Direct Labor it er:6
Direct L8aar - Ksraufacturir
Engineering Burden 104%
Maaufweturir Burden 7-~1%
Raw b .teri..lc and Purchal. ed Part
Travel mead Subsistance
Overtime Fr=Jum
Paging and Shipping
Subtotal
G & A
7.5%
'otl Co-t
Pee Requested
3%
Total. Proposal
Proposal
x+5,68
`,7.7
it 918
140
=7
11 228
"sga
1_.875
Auditor's
Recommended
Ref.
R:duction
Note,
878
b
536
b
,209
c
-0-
d
-0-
e
Jo-
r
418
b
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/01/09: CIA-RDP72B00464R000400010063-2
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/01/09: CIA-RDP72B00464R000400010063-2
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/01/09: CIA-RDP72B00464R000400010063-2
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/01/09: CIA-RDP72B00464R000400010063-2
11W %"W
Ref `ote,N t
a Direct Labor:
ror the purpose of this report only; the auditor accepts
the hourly Libor Iates used to extend the e timated labor hours. A
ccoparison wa: made of th-,proposed composite rates used in each 1 bor
cross with the actu i.l incurred to date r ate,, of the 1941/194,2 pro
The *ubjeet effort will be performed by the some personnel. Thi. com-
parison a-cert~?4ined thf re?.onableness of the proposed hourly rate,::,
Att;ched a. Exhibit At is the contr.ictor's breakdown of the direct L-.bor
hours by class of labor and effort, which is offered as a guide for
err .ust n the e .tim::?.ted labor hours by a qualified t :chnic-:.1 represent.t
b, Barden..: and G & A:
The auditor questions the contractor's proposed burdens
and G & A rate,-, as excessive. Ba.:.ed on an analy-is of the current year
book rates (9 months 3nded 30 September 1965), the auditor is of the
opinion, th,zt the contractor ml-.y experience a le .ser rate than proposed
and therefore recommends the f ollowinr;
incering Ma.nuf eturi
den Burden
Rates Per Contr:etor' s Proposes.
Rates R+ cotended by the Auditor
Per cent off` Rate Qu":tioned
Burden Base Per Proposal
Per cent o R--te f ue:,tioned
Costs Que.=toned (B:,. c x Rate Reduction)
fat:. questioned
ned Ct.4%
Que,:tioned ($150 + $,268)
( . . R r :ud Pur ch I ec.`l `cter-IMLL_r
11
Th contractor's proposed purchaa;e parts were vee r3 e -- ---_
vendor's quotes and prior bury. of lilIe items. The extention.:s and addition
of the bill of msteria1; Ve re verified. No exception-- i re noted, but the
applicability of the proposed purchased p xt, to the prc used equipment -nd
the frequency of use, ,. iould be evaluated by a technically qualified repre _
vent: ti1TC ,
10#+%O
10%
71%
T 4%
50,
3
$149,yOL
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/01/09: CIA-RDP72B00464R000400010063-2
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/01/09: CIA-RDP72B00464R000400010063-2
w
cost questioned of $ a, 09 represent;. the auditor's
ion to ;a 10% uhrin a e factor applied to the total estimated cosh;
of raw 'ui phased material;:, (iion...recurrin; costs excluded,) Th.
contractor could not .=upport thi, factor with historical data or ud.eaaate
back-up and is therefore que-Lationed by the auditor.
Travel. and $ub,,istarzce:
The; contractor proposed two -titer trips to the West
oh-,t .t ~jUl each and two i-.ay triprb at $416 each for the pwpose of
visitin ; the us4oci .te contractor. I..i .cddition, three day trips are
included. for v sitaation: to 1 Wet Coast vendor ..t a cost of 331 each.
The costs- represent round-trip dir fare of $305, sub- ist:.nce of per
clay aad $6 for travel to the airport. The auditor considers these costs
aecepta ble, but recommends for further consideration of technical
repre: ent-tine the necessity for the number of trips,
e. Overtime Preamiu,,
The auditor recommends the overtime premium for the
consideration of a q~ lified technical represent .five. The
tractor's e:.~tim to i ba~; Qd on uppl.ication of 10% factor to the
priced at of the hourly rate.: for these cla jseu . The b . z4a for a 1
factor w. not supported by the contractor. The contractor's ecutti.on
of overtime pr ,u t i w; as follow