Hello all,

I am looking to re-compete a FAR 16 IDIQ, most likely a "requirements contract." It is for supplies, Firm-Fixed Price, and after competing, will be a single-award IDIQ.

I have a question for input regarding the Period of Performance (POP) limitations. Is there any reason why the IDIQ cannot have a five-year straight period of performance with an overall ceiling?

The FAR references that task/delivery orders are generally five-years with options but I found no reference regarding direction when setting up the POP for the over-arching IDIQ.

Has anyone had experience with these? I'd prefer a straight POP avoiding the need to exercise options when we know we will be using this particular supply.

3 minutes ago, ICE-CO said:

I am looking to re-compete a FAR 16 IDIQ, most likely a "requirements contract."

That doesn't make sense. It's either an IDIQ contract OR a requirements contract.

There are three types of indefinite-delivery contracts:

1. indefinite-delivery definite-quanity,

2. indefinite-delivery indefinite-quantity, or

3. requirements.

So which are you going to do? 

Thanks. Right now, it's looking like it will be #3, Requirements. Would that have an effect on the POP limitations?

You have to think in terms of two contract periods:

1. the ordering period (the period within which you can place orders up to the estimated or maximum quantity and are bound to order from only the contractor during that period until the estimated or maximum quantity is reached), see FAR 52.216-18(a), and

2. the delivery period (the period in which you can require the contractor to make deliveries), see FAR 52.216-21(f).

I cannot think of any reason why you cannot stipulate a five-year ordering period for a requirements contract for supplies, with a delivery period  that extends to some date beyond its end. However, remember that a five-year ordering period would bind you to order the supplies from only the contractor for that period of time. Is that really something you want to do? Also, can you make a reasonable estimate of your requirements five-years out?

Thank you for your response!

I understand those requirements under 52.216-18(a) and FAR 52.216-21(f).

Per this specific supply, a reasonable estimate of requirements is possible. And it is highly likely, if there are options, that they will just be exercised anyway. But that is a good thing to consider if we want to be held to that single vendor or not. (worth re-hashing with the program)

Thank you again!

ICE-CO,

Recommend you take some time to think about Vern's point that without options, your office would be bound to order the supplies from only that one contractor for that, presumably, five year period of time.  When used properly, options can be a powerful incentive when it comes to contractor performance and they can also protect the Government's interests if the contractor performs poorly.

That's a great point. Thanks for your input!

ICE-CO,

I would also add that options give you the flexibility to revisit the potential availability of competition; and also, changes to market conditions.  

I have quite a bit of experience with this type of approach for an IDIQ, but not a Requirements contract.  I would recommend that you reconsider the Requirement  approach.  I also define Periods of Performance and set up the price schedule in this manner for the solicitation.  This will allow the contractor to increase prices each year and still allows future years programming on costs of the contract. 

Admittedly, I don't much like Requirements contracts; issuing it as an IDIQ takes care of the concern that the contractor won't perform, or won't perform well.  Three years in, if the performance fails, the Government can easily move on.  

I understand Option Years in basic and defined Contracts, but I find them administratively burdensome in Indefinite Delivery efforts.   

It serves no useful purpose to have options in IDIQ contracts. They are a needless complication.

If you have an order lined up, or reasonable expectation of one, I'd steer clear of the Requirements contracts. 

Also, seconding Vern, the whole contract (past the minimum) is optional.  Unless you find the process at FAR 17.207 enjoyable, options in these contracts serve no purpose.  If you are cursed with a management which thinks options are a budget control tool as I am, you may be stuck with it, though.