Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

ms_kish

Members
  • Content count

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About ms_kish

  • Rank
    Copper Member
  1. All, I am wondering if anyone knows if there is an official answer somewhere to whether the 15 day notice of intent to sole source is required when using Part 13. I know that Part 6 does not apply to sole source acquisitions using Part 13 but I am not clear if a 15 day notice of intent is required or if a notice of intent for a lesser period of time would suffice? I see many notices of intent on FBO that are only for 3 or 5 days but I don't know how they are getting around the FAR 5.203 requirement to publish the notice of intent for 15 days. The only thing that I thought maybe makes this possible is using the authority in 5.203 (a) for the acquisition of commercial items, that allows a shorter period for issuance of the solicitation and wondering if that somehow means that the 15 days could be less but that only applies to commercial. Any thoughts?
  2. Ji20874 - Thank you. No trust me I don't want to terminate them. I don't believe that CICA applies here because FASA was issued to supplement CICA for multiple award contracts (which this is). In addition, based on my research CICA does not apply to option exercise if it was priced as a part of the original competition (which this was). My challenge is getting others to see the logic in what I am stating and that I in fact have a valid contract and that there is no violation of CICA since it doesn't apply.
  3. I found a few cases that support what you said but they were all prior to CICA and they are saying that it is a CICA violation which has to be corrected. The method on the table right now is terminating the orders. I'm trying to find a more sensible solution than issuing sole source contracts to continue performance on ones terminated for violating CICA. Doesn't seem to meet the intent of CICA.
  4. I wasn't the Contracting Officer at the time or it would not have happened. The problem I am facing now is explaining to those that believe that I now have to terminate over 100 task orders issued since 2011 and that I can't award any new task orders. Thanks so much for a different outlook!
  5. Yes the problem is that the option was exercised late and yes the contractor has been performing on task orders issued against the base where the options were exercised late for the past two years. If I understand your response, I should not have to terminate all task orders and should be able to continue to use the contract because it is still an enforceable contract. Did I interpret that correctly?
  6. I have a contract that was awarded on August 11, 2010 for a base year and 4 one-year options. The first Option had an effective date of 7 August 2011 but a signed date of 13 August 2011. The second option had an effective date of 11 August 2012 but was signed on 12 August 2012. I am now being told that when the first option year was signed two days late in 2011 then it made the contract invalid and now every task order issued after 11 August 2011 has to be terminated. It seems that I could instead do a ratification for the 2 days late in 2011 and 1 day late in 2012. Any opinions or ideas on other solutions? Terminating two years back just doesn't seem like the best course of action.
  7. When does a contract actually end?

    Thank you all, I thought we had to do a modification before the POP ended to keep the contract valid in order to be able to mod it. I appreciate the clarification. napolik - I am not familiar with the term "open and inspect" task. The line item is for vessel repair and requires final acceptance if that is what you mean.
  8. When does a contract actually end?

    The situation is as follows: We have a contract for ship repairs with a period of performance that ends on 15 March. The repairs are expected to take an additional two months and a modification was not done to extend the period of performance. On 16 April, the contractor detected a repair that requires more material and a modification is needed in order to complete the ship repair. Can we do a modification on 16 April to add more money for a within scope change to a contract with a period of performance that ended on 15 March?
  9. When does a contract actually end?

    Vern, Would you please clarify a little further? Does that mean that if the work is not complete and therefore not discharged then we can still issue modifications against it to add more money or within scope changes or does it just mean that we can still receive what we originally contracted for?
  10. I am faced with what I once thought was a simple question, which is when does a contract end? We are having a difference of opinions on this topic in my office. Some believe that if you have a contract for a specific period of time and you don't get what you paid for then the contract is still valid and can be modified. I believe that the contract ends when the period of performance ends and any modifications to the period of performance have to occur prior to the period of performance ending. Here is an example, a contract for repair of a boat has a period of performance of 12 months and the repair is not complete at 12 months and at month 15 it is discovered that more parts are needed to complete the repair and therefore more money is needed on the contract, can you do a mod to the contract to add more money at month 15 when the period of performance ended at month 12? I would think that the period of performance is part of the scope and therefore any work outside of the period of performance unless modified before hand is out of scope and would require a J&A but that may not be correct. I have searched extensively to get a definitive answer on this, can anyone help?
  11. Yes 217-9 was included for a 6 month period as the contract was for a 6 month base and one - 6 month option.
  12. A contract was awarded for a base period of 6 months and an option period of 6 months for severable services. The 52.217-8 clause was included. After the base period ended, the 52.217-8 clause was used for an extension of 3 months with no other changes to the contract, the -8 clause was used again to extend for an additional month with no other changes to the contract. The 6 month option was exercised and five months into the performance period of the option, a scope change was required which caused the contractor to purchase additional supplies and required additional lead time and so the Changes Clause (52.243-1 Alternate II) was used for the within scope change and the contractor was granted an extension of 3 months. The 3 month extension has ended and we would like to use the -8 clause again for 2 months (the -8 clause was previously used as an authority for a total of 4 months out of the 6 allowed). Did the use of the Changes clause negate any time being left on the -8 clause or is an extension of 2 months still permitted using the -8 clause?
×