Sign In
  • Question

    Is the clause 52.217-8 required to extend a contract by 6 mos to up 10 years without the prior mentioned clause? Is there anything protestable (i.e., GOA sustained judgments) for extending the contract if there essentially no change in-scope?


    Answer

    A phone call with the question submitter revealed more information about the background. This MATOC is a competitive construction acquisition based on a general statement of work which will be further defined within each individual task order. Typical project task orders will consist of multiple construction trades and design (up to 35%) and construction to include maintenance, repair, alteration, and new construction of real property facilities.  Additionally; the contract is up for recompete so the question is purely academic as they were considering adding an option for an additional ordering period but are currently not putting one in.

    If evaluated during the source selection; FAR 52.217-8 could be used to extend the ordering period up to six months unilaterally. It could only extend it to 10 years if your Ordering Clause, FAR 52.216-18(a), had 9.5 years as the original ordering period.

    Because this is an indefinite-quantity contract (not a requirements contract or a definite quantity); FAR 16.504(a)(4) reads: A solicitation and contract for an indefinite quantity must-

    (i) Specify the period of the contract, including the number of options and the period for which the Government may extend the contract under each option;

    (ii) Specify the total minimum and maximum quantity of supplies or services the Government will acquire under the contract;

    The only limitation on the length of the ordering period is found at FAR 16.505(c) is a normal five (5) year limit when for task-order contracts for advisory and assistance services (not applicable to this scenario).

    Typically limitations on the period of performance for construction contracts are dictated by statutory and fiscal law requirements (e.g. use of MILCON funding or O&M funding); they would related to the individual task-order level but not the length of the ordering period.

    Without an option or any other clause in the contract; a contracting officer could only modify the contract to extend the ordering period via a bilateral contract modification. Prior to doing that the a scope determination test would need to be done to determine if the change was within the general scope of the contract in order to comply with CICA and FAR part 6.

     

     

    Open full Question Details
Chat with DAU Assistant
Bot Image