Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Recommended Posts

If an IDIQ (single award) has a 5 year ordering period (no Option Years), can the initial task orders issued in CY 1 just be modified to fund CY 2  and extend the work (i.e., and each time a new CY begins) or is it better practice, to issue new task orders each year (let's say  the task order work remains the same each year). How does  41 U.S.C.3902 factor in (if at all)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Assume you have no constraints or nuance of any type, can do whatever you like here, and are simply choosing between 

a) New order for CY2, or

b) Mod existing order to add funds for CY2.

Then I think a) is the better practice.  Its simpler. The documentation is cleaner and easier to follow.  Doing a mod, perhaps to avoid the paperwork involved in issuing a new order, is adding complexity.   And that's something to avoid. 

 

Of course, there is no such thing as "no constraints."  The most obvious one is what you referenced - Severable services contracts obligating appropriated funds cannot have a PoP exceeding one year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Vern Edwards said:

Just add an additional line item to the order for the follow-on year.

Yes, this is correct.  Even easier than a new (but functionally identical) order is adding a line item to an existing order via option exercise.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct. No options to be exercised, just one 5 year ordering period. Contract is mainly for services.  There are actually 2 IDIQS and the CO in both cases is planning to mod the task orders to extend for  CY 2, add funding etc.  It doesn't seem clean to me but the Program folks prefer it this way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/26/2022 at 12:05 PM, Pathforward said:

No options to be exercised, just one 5 year ordering period

It is possible to have just a five year ordering period for the IDIQ and options (to be exercised via modification) in the individual task orders. The original question says the IDIQ doesn't have options but never fully clarifies whether the task orders might. If the actual work to be performed is negotiated at the task order level then negotiating an entirely new task order each year may be impractical compared to putting options in the task order for future years of the requirement defined and priced in the task order. Alternately if the IDIQ has a fully defined requirement and unit prices then maybe issuing a new task order each year isn't much of a burden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...