52.216-22(d)... Not to beat a dead horse

[Chris M]

I posted this to another thread a few weeks ago (http://www.wifcon.co...?showtopic=1735) but never received a response so I thought I would give it another shot, two questions.

(1) Views on the practice of not entering a date (i.e. 15 June 2014) or a period of time (90 days after the end of the ordering period) in 52.216-22(d) but entering something along the lines of, "end of the final task order's period of performance”?

I'm not a big fan of using language similar to the above as I feel there should be a definitive end to the period of time of a contractor's obligations under a basic contract; setting scope of the contract with regard to time.

(2) (contract admin question) What about modifying the date in 52.216-22(d) subsequent to the ordering period's expiration? For instance, ordering period ended 01 July 2012, task order was issued for 180 days on 30 June, 52.216-22(d) states 180 days, but on 21 August 2012 a KO tries to modify 52.216-22(d) date to 365 days to issue a subsequent mod to the aformentioned task order to extend it to 365 days. Contract was via full and open competition. My thought is sole source extension? Dynamics Corp. of America v. United States, 389 F.2d 424, 430-33 (Ct. Cl. 1968) (treat orders like options) in combination with Major Contracting Services Inc. B-401472 (option is a sole source if it wasn't evaluated at the contract award, requires J&A).

[Guest Vern Edwards]

1. The clause says "insert date." Inserting "end of the final task order's period of performance" is not inserting a date. See FAR 1.401( c) and 52.101(a).

2. If the CO inserted "180 days" in the clause the clause won't make sense. Read it. Besides, 180 days from when?

If we assume that the CO did what he was supposed to do and entered a date instead of "180 days" and then wants to modify the clause to extend the date, the question of full and open competition depends of the nature of the task and the reason for the extension. If the task is for continuing services and the CO wants to extend the performance period for those services such a change would be out of scope, which means the CO must either get full and open competition or justify a sole source acquisition. If the task is for a completion type service and the CO wants to extend the date in order to give the contractor more time to complete the work you won't need full and open competition or a sole source justification. It's handled like any other within scope extension.

[Chris M]

Thanks Vern, I appreciate it.