old51C

C Culham- 100% agree. Happy New Year to you as well.

Sorry if i intimated the RA was afoul here. We were not. The accessories were listed in an attachment to the need statement (see attached spreadsheet for a list of needed accessories) provided by the RA. The attachment was left out of the solicitation. I appreciate everyone's input. Happy New Year.

Retreadfed- By closed, i mean completion of the administrative actions necessary to end the contract after receiving evidence of its physical completion.

Dang Ya'll, its Christmas time! I took a little break. Please know, I am not new to the forum, but was gone for a long time... hence new ID. All of the feedback is appreciated. It is confirmational to my own understanding and beliefs on the matter. However, the supporting contracting office disagreed and mulled over an in scope determination for three months after the initial GSA order was awarded. The KO would not make the call independently and was, "waiting on legal." After three months, the requiring activity acquiesced to just make new award (GSA order) because they claimed the contract was closed. Few comments in response to the feedback. ji20874 & Don - I agree. FAR 4.804 is about files. Contracting office did not. Neil- All of the considerations mentioned where discussed. Ther was nothing preventing a modification. Joel & Gabe - How hard can it be? Should not be hard at all. But they made it really hard. The mod was the simplest way, IMHO. They couldn't get there. C Culham - The requiring activity identified the missing items during tech evaluation on 26 Sep 23. Award of the basic radio occurred at EofFY because there was "no time to resolicit." In the new FY, the contracting office didn't want to do the mod, but wanted another competition- the RA did not. FAR 8.405-6 is where their argument originated and why they need an in scope determination to do the mod. There was no material difference between the contract and requested modification: the purchase was ~ $500K, the mod was ~ $80K ; the items were in the additional accessories list that accompanied the radios. The government informed potential vendors of the possibility of changes in the solicitation and order through the inclusion of FAR Clause 52.243-1 Changes Fixed Price. They could have done a mod- but chose the more difficult (albeit slightly) path of doing a second order. One of you noticed I asked for a reference to the question of "when is a contract closed?" None was provided. I don't think there really is one. I think that is because the answer is simple: when the contracting officer (KO) closes it. The processes, systems, and forms may vary across our government, and complexity varies based on the contract; but at the end of the day, until the KO closes the contract, it isn't closed.

When is a contract closed? Basic facts: DoD SAP FFP GSA buy for handheld radios. Delivery is received. Contractor invoice is paid in full. Is this contract closed? If the requiring activity realizes they should have ordered an accessory item they missed, assuming it is in scope of the original requirement and was simply an oversight, can a mod be done to add the overlooked accessory? For the sake of simplicity, let's say it is an extra battery for a handheld radio. The radio was the initial purchase. Does the word SHOULD below open the door to do the mod? If yes or no, any precedent (GAO maybe) or other reference? (I checked DFARS and AFARS) FAR "4.804-1 Closeout by the office administering the contract. (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, time standards for closing out contract files are as follows: (1) Files for contracts using simplified acquisition procedures should be considered closed when the contracting officer receives evidence of receipt of property and final payment, unless otherwise specified by agency regulations." This general topic has been discussed here previously, but my recollection is that discussion revolved around a service contract. THANKS!