Synopsis of a Contract Modification

[ContractingMichelle]

According to FAR 5.201(b)(1)(ii) a synopsis is needed, "For acquisitions of supplies and services, other than those covered by the exceptions in 5.202, and the special situation in 5.205, the KO must transmit a notice to the GPE, for each proposed---

(i) contraction action meeting the threshold in 5.101(a)(1)

(ii) Modification to an existing contract for additional supplies or services that meets the threshold in 5.101(a)(1)

 

FAR 5.202 lists exceptions...

The KO does not need to submit the notice required by 5.201 when-

(a) The KO determines that

(6) The proposed contract action is an order place under Subpart 16.5. 

 

Question- If I am adding additional services to a TO placed on an ID/IQ or GWAC (IAW FAR 16.5) do I need to synopsize the upcoming contract modification?  The way I was interpreting the above was that since the proposed contract action (modification) is being added to an order placed under Subpart 16.5 then a synopsis to the GPE would NOT be required.  I would however, still need to post the J&A (for the out of scope additional work) within 14 days of award.  My peers and I have differing opinions if a synopsis is needed or not, so I wanted to get some additional thoughts.

[formerfed]

Did you make a mistake asking under Contracting Workforce?  The better spot is Schedules, GWACS, MACS and IDIQs.  If that’s an error maybe Bob will move it.

[ji20874]

No pre-solicitation synopsis, because this is an order (or a modification to an order) under an IDIQ contract.

No J&A, because FAR part 6 doesn’t apply — instead, you will need a JEFO under FAR 16.505(b)(2), and posting as described in that same section.

[Jamaal Valentine]

@ContractingMichelle

Is the work 'out of scope' of the competition (base IDIQ and task order); and the contract (base IDIQ and task order)?

[ContractingMichelle]

@Jamaal Valentine Work is not out of scope for the IDIQ contract.  For the task order, in this particular case the work is not out of scope, however I was leaning towards that not affecting the answer based on the FAR.

 

@ji20874  That was my understanding as well.  However, the topic recently came up in conversation and other KO's did not agree so I was curious what others thought.