Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs
traipse

Contract Abeyance

Recommended Posts

Guest carl r culham

Vern - Just sitting here wondering - If multiple or no year funds were used in the original contract and intent to start the project is within the period of the funds availability is there even a bona fide needs question as it relates to a bona fide needs question as it relates to suspension. Seems the funding availability question is the first to answer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vern - Just sitting here wondering - If multiple or no year funds were used in the original contract and intent to start the project is within the period of the funds availability is there even a bona fide needs question as it relates to a bona fide needs question as it relates to suspension. Seems the funding availability question is the first to answer?

Carl: I think the best way to address the issue is to quote the Redbook, pp. 5-14 and 5-15:

The bona fide needs rule applies to multiple year as well as fiscal year appropriations. 55 Comp. Gen. 768, 773?74 (1976); B-235678, July 30, 1990. See also 64 Comp. Gen. 163, 166 (1984). In other words, an agency may use a multiple year appropriation for needs arising at any time during the period of availability.

An argument can be made, not wholly without logic, that a multiple year appropriation can be obligated at any time during its availability, but only to meet a bona fide need of the year in which the funds were appropriated. Suppose, for example, that an agency receives a 2-year appropriation every year. For fiscal year 1989, it receives an appropriation available through fiscal year 1990; for fiscal year 1990, it receives an appropriation available through fiscal year 1991, and so on. It is possible to apply the bona fide needs rule to require that the fiscal year 1990 appropriation be used only for needs arising in fiscal year 1990, although obligation may occur any time prior to the end of fiscal year 1991. The Comptroller General specifically rejected this approach in 68 Comp. Gen. 170 (1989), holding that the Defense Logistics Agency could use its fiscal year 1987 2-year Research and Development appropriation for a need arising in fiscal year 1988. ?There is no requirement that 2-year funds be used only for the needs of the first year of their availability.? Id. at 172.

It follows that the bona fide needs rule does not apply to no-year funds. 43 Comp. Gen. 657, 661 (1964). See also B-279886, Apr. 28, 1998. Without a prescribed period of availability, there is no fixed period during which the bona fide need must arise, and thus no fixed period in which the funds must be obligated and expended.

Emphasis added. I simply do not think that suspension of performance pending a review gives rise to a bona fide needs issue. I know of no GAO decision which supports a concern that suspension beyond the year in which the need first arose gives rise to a bona fide needs issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest carl r culham

Vern - Thanks and I agree with your statement - "I simply do not think that suspension of performance pending a review gives rise to a bona fide needs issue."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×