Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About RachelleR

  • Rank
  1. Appreciate your thoughtful and informative response.
  2. I'll remember that for the next award 😂
  3. No special statement was included. Is there a reason this clause would not apply to the option? Thanks for your time.
  4. That is exactly what the Contracting Officer did. Thanks for your input.
  5. Good Morning, Some in the office have the opinion that the Clause Prescription would not have permitted the Contracting Officer to exercise the option SAF since the Clause Prescription specifically referenced funds chargeable to a new fiscal year (FY20 in this case). The option was exercised SAF of current year funds (FY19 since it was 12 Oct 2018). The PR was certified but the Budget Officer had literal system issues that would not allow him to route the PR to the Contracting Officer on 12 Oct 2018 which is why the Contracting Officer chose to exercise Option Year 1 SAF rather than let the Contract expire. The Contractor was not authorized to perform the services and did not perform the services until the Contracting Officer modified the Contract on 15 Oct 2018 to add funding received from the Budget Officer after IT resolved their system issues. One other detail of note is 52.232-18 was properly included in the Contract at award. Thanks for your insight. Prescription is pasted below. 32.706-1 -- Clauses for Contracting in Advance of Funds. (a) Insert the clause at 52.232-18, Availability of Funds, in solicitations and contracts if the contract will be chargeable to funds of the new fiscal year and the contract action will be initiated before the funds are available.
  6. Yes. Unfortunately this has digressed to an academic discussion in my office. The Contracting Officer had an email from the Budget Officer stating funds were available but the PR could not be routed due to system issues.
  7. Yes it's all taken care of. The office discussion is whether this course of action taken by the Contracting Officer was permitted since the funds were chargeable to the current fiscal year vs new fiscal year. Some believe it was not permissible for this reason. I disagree and wanted to hear the perspectives of the WIFCON community. Thanks for your reply.
  8. Funded PR was received when system issues were resolved on 15 Oct 2018. Modification to add funding was issued by the Contracting Officer the same day funding was received.
  9. Scenario: Contract was awarded for base year and 2 option years that begin and end in October each year (Base Year, 12 Oct 2017 - 11 Oct 2018; Option Year 1, 12 Oct 2018 - 11 Oct 2019; Option Year 2, 12 Oct 2019 - 11 Oct 2020). Funding is O&M. Contracting Officer was prepared to exercise option year 1. Due to system issues Budget Officer was unable to route a PR to Contracting on the last day of the base year period of performance. 52.232-18 Availability of Funds was included in the Contract. Contracting Officer exercised the option SAF rather than let the Contract expire. Office discussion centers around if exercising option year 1 SAF was appropriate since funds were chargeable to current fiscal year vs new fiscal year since it was October. Any insight would be appreciated.
  • Create New...