1) Does the reference at PGI 204.7103-2(c), "Once a contract line item number has been assigned, it shall not be assigned to another, different, contract line item in the same contract" mean that we have to match the CLIN number to the basic, and there is no flexibility to customize CLIN structure at the TO level? Or, is the intent of this reference just to ensure we don't have CLINs that are numbered the same?
2) Are exhibit line items only to be used for deliverables, meaning they should not be used in an informational way to denote funding on a subclin? The definition of an exhibit is very clear at 204.7101, in that is establishes a requirement for a deliverable.
Sorry for the delay in answering this question. I needed to go to the particular line item expert at Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy for advice on this question. You should feel comfortable showing this advice to your management.
Open full Question Details
The task order CLINs do not have to match the basic contract, though that is definitely preferable for ease of traceability. There is no regulatory requirement to do so, and both DoD and federal data standards allow for it. To the extent the line item numbers on the basic contract are not used for the same effort in the order, the relationship between the line items on the ordering instrument and the line items on the order must be maintained explicitly in the order by citing on each order line item the contract line item to which it pertains. There is no regulatory cite here, but the only way you can ensure you stay within scope and do not exceed order limits is to document the relationship.
For the next time the organization builds a basic IDIQ contract, try to build line item for all the tasks instead of just using one line item per contract type.
You are correct in your understanding of exhibit line items. Exhibit line items may not be used to identify sources of funding for a non-severable deliverable. Exhibit line items are only used for deliverable line items.