Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Recommended Posts

I have a CO who is citing FAR 5.202(a)(11) as a reason she doesn't need to synopsize this her FAR 15 requirement because it's a "follow-on" to the current contract in place. It is a sole source and that document will need to be posted but she says she doesn't need to synopsize it first before awarding. There's no change in the PWS at all, it's just that we need more of this requirement. I've read the language in the FAR, definitions in FAR 5.001 and 2.1, and it seems permissible. It just doesn't pass the sniff test to me, seems like an easy way to try to sneak through multiple sole sources for the same requirement and only post the justification. Is this really one of the purposes of (a)(11)? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has she read FAR 5.202(a)(11)?

The exception at FAR 5.202(a)(11) applies to a contract action that is "made under the terms of an existing contract that was previously synopsized in sufficient detail to cover the current proposed action." It says nothing about "follow-on" -- nothing.  Did you find "follow-on" in FAR 5.202(a)(11)?

Follow-on is wholly irrelevant -- forget it.

Here is the question chain for the cited exception: 

  1. Is the proposed contract action being made under the terms of an existing contract?  This is a YES or NO question.  Something like an option exercise would probably be a YES.  An equitable adjustment under a clause in that contract would probably be a YES.  Needing more of the requirement would probably be a NO.
  2. Did the previous synopsis cover both the "current contract in place" and the new "FAR 15 requirement?" This is a YES or NO question.  Since you are talking about a new "FAR 15 requirement," I tend to think the answer is NO -- but I haven't read the previous synopsis -- I suppose it could have covered two part 15 contracts.

A YES to both 1. and 2. are necessary to cite this exception.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lazy Contracting:

FAR 5.202(a)(11) - "The proposed contract action is made under the terms of an existing contract that was previously synopsized in sufficient detail to comply with the requirements of 5.207 with respect to the current proposed contract action;"

As @ji20874 pointed out and I will add, examples include options, equitable adjustments, DO/TOs, in-scope MODs and economic price adjustments. They would have to be called out in the current contract's synopsis and are within the scope of the award. 

FAR 5.001 - "Contract action, as used in this part, means an action resulting in a contract, as defined in subpart  2.1, including actions for additional supplies or services outside the existing contract scope, but not including actions that are within the scope and under the terms of the existing contract, such as contract modifications issued pursuant to the Changes clause, or funding and other administrative changes."

I highly doubt that the original synopsis had language in it that stated, "the government intends to issue two contracts, back-to-back resulting from this synopsis."

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

×
×
  • Create New...