dlgsharp Posted May 28, 2009 Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 What are the consequences of not extending the Period of Performance before it expires? Likewise, what are the consequences of not moving out a delivery date before it passes? Is there a critical distinction between level of effort services and supplies? Background: I am working on a modification to a CPAF delivery order for the purchase of a system. The bilateral modification will change a specification, requiring additional effort to be performed. Both the contractor and the government realize that this will take more time, and thus the delivery date needs to be pushed out. My questions... 1. If the current delivery date is 1 June 2009, is it a problem if the modification is not put on contract until 8 June 2009? 2. Assuming that the contractor has plenty of funding, does he need to stop work after 1 June? 3. Can the parties agree that the modification?s effective date is 1 June 2009 (my reading of FAR 43.101(a) says they can, but Vern taught me never to trust the FAR at face value)? 3. a. Is that even necessary? 4. Can the Government direct the contractor to continue working from June 2 through June 7? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Vern Edwards Posted May 28, 2009 Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 1. No, not as long as neither of the parties has a problem with it and the contractor will work around the affected part(s) of the specification so as not to waste money. 2. Not if the modification is issued with an effective date of June 1 or June 2 for cost allowability purposes and the contractor is willing to take the risk that the government will go ahead with the mod. 3. Yes. 3.a. Yes, for cost allowability purposes. 4. Is there a clause in the contract that permits the government to issue such direction and requires the contractor to comply? If yes, then yes. If no, then no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlgsharp Posted May 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 Thanks Vern for such a speedy reply! Would the answers change if it was a level of effort service? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Vern Edwards Posted May 29, 2009 Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 Would the answers change if it was a level of effort service? When you say "level of effort" I presume you mean a contract that requires the contractor to provide some ongoing service throughout some period of time, i.e., a severable services contract. I can't think of any reason why the answers should be different. However, the extension of such a contract other than through the exercise of a priced and evaluated option to extend its term raises a question of contract scope. Generally, the extension of the performance period other than through the exercise of an option would be considered out of scope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incentivize Me Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 Agree with Vern's last comment as far as a contract itself. However, with regards to an order under a indefinite delivery contract, the answer would be the same regardless of supplies or level-of-effort services. However, be certain to that any modification to the order itself complies with the basic contract...including any limitations on a length of an order. Hope this makes sense and hope this works fine (meaning this is my first post to WIFCON). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Vern Edwards Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 However, with regards to an order under a indefinite delivery contract, the answer would be the same regardless of supplies or level-of-effort services. You generalized too far. The answer would not be the same if the contract is a multiple-award IDIQ. The extension of a level-of-effort order under a multiple award contract would be out-of-scope and subject to protest. See FAR 16.505(a)(9)(i)(A). Also, the extension of an order under a single-award IDIQ contract might be out-of-scope of the underlying contract and subject to protest under some circumstances, such as if it results in obligations in excess of the contract maximum value or extension beyond the contract period of performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incentivize Me Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 Hi Vern-- Concede on your first 3 sentences. I was thinking in terms of a single IDIQ award only. I believe your last sentence is congruent with my 2nd sentence, with your statement containing more information, especially the crucial protest issue. I only gave one example in my statement -- including any limitations on the length of an order -- and that was because the question involved extending the order's performance period among other things. I guess this forum demands exacting specificity, which is what we would expect to see in our contractual documents... Honored to have my first reply come from you. Your reputation precedes you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlgsharp Posted June 1, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 Thank you both for thoroughly answering my questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.gif)
Recommended Posts