Can a severable service CLIN be funded with a one-year appropriation and the Option CLIN also funded with the same one-year appropriation as long as there is an option CLIN? The PR identies a need for 3 years of recurring maintenance on AF network servers starting 1 DEC 18. The contract CLIN structure was establised as follows: CLIN 0001 Period of Performance is 1 DEC 18 - 31 AUG 19 funded with FY 18 3400 appopriations. CLIN 1001 Period of Performance is 1 SEP 19 - 31 AUG 20 funded with FY 18 appropriations which is the exact same funds cite/LLOA. It appears the Contracting Officer shortened the basic POP so they could fund the first option period with the same year funds. This tactic equates to a performance period of 21 months, after the option has been exercised, all funded with one-year appropriations. Has the Contracting Officer circumvented fiscal law constraints with a new stategy or does this constructively create a POP that exceeds 12 months funded with the same year appropriations and is subject to a potential ADA violation?
We get similar "severable services crossing fiscal year boundaries" often in AAP.
Excellent summary of how the CLINS were structured and funded!
I'll caveat my answer by saying I'd really need to look at the contract file and the D&F associated with including the option and the D&F associated with exercising the option. On the surface there does not appear to be anything wrong with this strategy assuming the base period of performance (1 December 2018 to 31 August 2019) was valid.
The guidance (including the statutory references) can be found at:
a) FAR 32.703-3 Contracts crossing fiscal years and DFARS 232.703-3(b).
b) AFMAN 65-605v1 Budget Guidance and Technical Procedures (see Chapter 4, section 4b, para 4.4.1)