Sign In
  • Question

    1) What is the appropriate authority for issuing this modification? I believe it is 52.212-4, as this would be clearly covered under the Christian doctrine. The services are commercial, awarded to an 8(a), under FAR Part 19 and FAR Part 12 procedures (total contract value is over the $3.1M for a base and 4 option years). 2) Is it ever possible to cite the originally awarded contract and SOW as the regulatory authority to award the modification? I ask because I was told that the authority to use on the SF-30 for this modification action is the contract terms and conditions, including the SOW. I disagree with this completely as I think if you are going to cite the contract terms and conditions, there should be regulatory authority for which those terms and conditions were generated and that is the correct authority to be used. I would not ever consider the SOW an actual authority for completing a modification action. More precisely, my question is this - is it acceptable that we simply cite the mutually agree upon contract and SOW as the authority for issuing a contract modification action?


    This response is based on the information provided.  We suggest you discuss with your contracting team, program manager and/or legal department as appropriate. 


    Leaving FAR 52.212-4 out is not captured by Christian doctrine as leaving it out does not harm a compelling public interest as does human trafficking or labor laws etc.  It is a recoverable error by the contracting officer.

    We must always cite some aspect, preferably a clause or special term or condition as the basis for the change.  As your contract apparently does not have an appropriate clause to cite, you may be left with only "By Mutual Agreement of the Parties".  You would cover in the description (Block 14 of the SF 30), the details of the amendment to the performance or other contract terms and conditions.

    Open full Question Details
Chat with DAU Assistant
Bot Image