I currently have a service contract for which the contractor is failing to meet the requirements of their contract.  We have tried to work with them however they have proven they don't care or they are not going to put in the effort to fix their performance.  We cannot go without service for this requirement.  Can FAR 52.217-8 be used on a stand alone contract (not an IDIQ, task order, bpa, or call) when there are two options remaining on the contract?  We would like to extend the current contract for 6 months while we re-compete the requirement.  

I have reviewed DAU and wifcon and I've seen two interpretations of this clause.  It looks like in some cases FAR 52.217-8 can be used even if there are options still available but it also looks like it can't be. I'm curious what others have encountered.  

56 minutes ago, ContractNewbie said:

Can FAR 52.217-8 be used on a stand alone contract (not an IDIQ, task order, bpa, or call) when there are two options remaining on the contract?  

I think the answer is yes. See Nash, "Option to Extend Services: A Broad Clause," The Nash & Cibinic Report (November 2013), in which he discussed the use of 52.217-8. See also, Arko Executive Services, Inc. v. U.S., 553 F.3d 1375, 1377-79 (Fed. Cir. 2009).

Here is an old discussion that supports a yes to your question.

Using some of the same rational in that thread, the contracting officer is not authorized to exercise the 52.217-9 option due to contactor performance (FAR 17.207(c)(7)), so to allow for further time to re-procure the services using the authority of FAR 52.217-8 is an appropriate course of action.