HOME  |  CONTENTS  |  DISCUSSIONS  |  BLOG  |  QUICK-KITs|  STATES

Google

       Search WWW Search wifcon.com

To Contents

Ceiling Increase to Multiple Award IDIQ 8(a)

By Jeanie on Tuesday, August 1, 2000 - 10:49 am:

The way the contracts were written, the total ceiling is shared by both contractors. The contract is for maintenance and repair of electronic/communication equipt etc. The amount of work is beyond what was anticipated.


By Fran Cass on Wednesday, July 26, 2000 - 04:25 pm:

Do I understand all of the awardees are approaching the maximum quantities in their individual contracts? If so -- and if the dollar value of the "increased quantity" is below the competition threshold for the 8(a) Program -- I might attempt to "offer" a new requirement to SBA requesting concurrence the "new scope" be executed as an out-of-scope modification (one mod for each of the multiple awards.) I think this approach would be particularly desirable if the cause for the exhausted quantities is not expected to continue in your remaining option periods.

The one aspect I would examine closely is whether all of the awardees are being heavily tasked. If only one is approaching the maximum quantity, you might be faced with a symptom that needs alternative action.

By the way, our District SBA folks have been very supportative when we enlist their assistance. I'll bet you District is also willing to help out!


By C.MERCY on Wednesday, July 26, 2000 - 03:53 pm:

YOU ARE NOT REQUIRTED TO AUTHOR A J@A FOR ANY ACTION COMPLETED UNDER THE 8A PROGRAM. IF YOU WERE TO INCREASE THE MAX QUANTITY ON ALL EXISTING CONTRACTS YOU MAY DO SO WITHOUT ADDITIONAL JUSTIFICATION.


By Elizabeth on Wednesday, July 26, 2000 - 01:58 pm:

GAO's Standard of Review regarding contract modifications which may violate CICA is as follows: In determining whether a modification triggers the competition requirements in CICA, we look to whether there is a material difference between the modified contract and the contract that was originally awarded. Evidence of material difference between the modification and the original contract is found by examining any changes in the type of work, performance period, and costs between the contract as awarded and as modified. We also consider whether the solicitation for the original contract adequately advised offerors of the potential for the type of change found in the modification or whether the modification is of a nature which potential offerors would reasonably have anticipated at the time of the original award...SEE B-278407.2 February 13, 1998 Sprint Communications Company.


By Vern Edwards on Tuesday, July 25, 2000 - 06:57 pm:

Jeanie:

An increase in the maximum quantity of an IDIQ contract (other than through the exercise of an option) would increase its scope and constitute a new procurement, requiring either full and open competition or a J&A. See: Liebert Corp., 70
Comp. Gen. 448 (Apr. 29, 1991), in which the GAO stated:

"An order in excess of the maximum quantity stated in the contract would be outside the scope of the contract. Such an order would result in a contract materially different from that for which the original competition was held and, absent a valid sole-source determination, would be subject to CICA requirements for competition. See Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc., 69 Comp. Gen. 292 (1990), 90-1 CPD 212; Clean Giant, Inc., B-229885, supra. We therefore sustain the protest to the extent that the quantities to be ordered are in excess of the stated maximum quantities in the Exide contract."

(The GAO cited Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. incorrectly. The correct citation is 69 Comp. Gen. 247.)

Also see FAR 16.505(a)(7). The contract in Liebert was a requirements contract and not an IDIQ contract, but I don't think that has any bearing on the GAO's holding. I presume that since an order that exceeds the maximum quantity would be outside the scope of the contract a modification to increase the maximum quantity would also be outside the scope of the contract.


By Jeanie on Tuesday, July 25, 2000 - 04:41 pm:

Vern,

I am referring to the contract max. Sorry, for the confusion.


By Vern Edwards on Tuesday, July 25, 2000 - 02:50 pm:

Jeanie:

You use the terms "IDIQ/T&M" and "ceiling." The term "ceiling" or "ceiling price" should be used with respect to an individual T&M task order issued under an IDIQ contract. See FAR 16.601(c) and 52.232-7(d). The term "maximum quantity" applies to the IDIQ contract as a whole. See FAR 16.504(a)(1), 16.504(a)(4)(ii), and 52.216-22(b).

When you ask about increasing the "ceiling," are you referring to the ceiling price of a T&M task order or to the maximum quantity of an IDIQ contract?


By Jeanie on Tuesday, July 25, 2000 - 02:25 pm:

An IDIQ/T&M contract, solicited through competitive 8(a) procedures was awarded under multiple award contracts. Task orders are competed among the contractors, however the need has arisen to increase the ceiling due to the actual requirements. Other than through exercising options early, is there a process to add "sole source ceiling" to these 8(a) contracts without a J&A?  

ABOUT  l CONTACT