Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'multiyear contracts'.
Found 1 result
First Question: I've been a little confused for some time about what consitutes a multiyear contract. In general terms, I understand that buying more than one year's requirements without the use of options is considered multiyear contracting. However, how does that apply to multiple-year appropriations or no-year funds? In other words, if I award a contract for severable services and fund it with no-year funds or a multiple-year appropriation (such as two-year funds) with an 18 month period of performance (or even a 24-month POP), does this meet the definition of a multiyear contract and does it require establishing a cancellation ceiling? I know that the example contract I just described, if awarded with an annual appropriation, would meet the definition of a multiyear contract and thus be subject to the required approvals and the requirement for a cancellation ceiling. But does this apply to contracts funded with no-year appropriations or multiple-year appropriations? Keep in mind that I'm only discussing contracts for severable services. I ask this question because I've encountered conflicting information. I distincltly recall reading (either in GAO Redbook or the FAR) that an agency can have authority to enter into multiyear contracts by authority granted to it (or perhaps agency policy?) or it can have multiyear contracting authority by the type of appropriation it receives (multiple-year or no-year). Futher, if using the authority provided by the type of appropriation, the agency must obtain the same approvals required by multiyear contracting on the basis of authority granted to the agency. Second question: There is a statutory exception allowing contracts funded with annual appropriations to cross fiscal years, provided that the total period of performance does not exceed 12 months. This limits our ability to use annual funds remaining on contracts to extend those contracts using the the option to extend services clause, when doing so would result in a total period of performance that exceeds the 12-month statutory limit. But does this restriction apply to contracts funded with no-year funds or multiple-year appropriations? In other words, if I awarded a contract with a one-year period of performance, and funded it with no-year funds or a multiple-year appropriation, assuming that at the end of month 12 I have excess funds on the contract, can I exercise the option to extend services clause and fund the extension with the unused funds? Or do I need to de-obligate the funds and reobligate them for the extension? I'm not inquiring about scope issues here. I'm interested only in understanding the correct method of using these funds without consideration of scope issues for the moment. Third Question: Can I exercise an option in August (FY13) that begins next year (October FY14) using this year's (FY13) no-year appropriation? All the research that I've done states that the Bona Fide Needs rule does not apply to no-year funds, so the timing of the obligation does not matter. But I'm getting a lot of push-back on my interpretation from individuals who are in positions to know this better than I do. Have I misinterpreted the Redbook and the numerous decisions I've read? If this is an appropriate use of no-year funds, can anyone provide a link or a citation to a decision or text that would support taking this action?