Given an IDIQ, CPFF task order contract awarded as a base year plus 4 option years, is it permissible for a task order for severable services to cross the contract performance period? I know that it is permissible for a severable services task order to cross fiscal years provided that it doesn't exceed one year in duration (FAR 37.106(b). To make my question more specific, assume a basic IDIQ contract with a base period of performance from Jan 1 to Dec 31. Is it permissible to issue a 12 month severable services task order (with follow on task orders fortchcoming each subsequent year) to be issued on June 1st, extend beyond Dec 31 (date the contract option would be exercised) and last until May 31 of the following year? I am looking at a particular contract which says that is not permitted and I am wondering why? Was that a discretionary Contracting Officer decision or was it compelled by some tenet of Appropriation Law or some Comp Gen decision? It seems to me, from looking at FAR 52.216-22(d) it was anticipated that the performance period of task orders might extend beyond the contract period.

By Anonymous on August 31, 2001 - 02:39 pm:

Without asking any questions my first impression is yes......more next week

By Dave Barnett on August 31, 2001 - 02:42 pm:

It depends on your agency regulation concerning contract financing. My agency allows for the situation you're describing and has delegated the authority to do such a thing to the Chief of the Contracting Office. We do it. Now I recall back in the seventies, DoD didn't allow for fiscal appropriations for severable services to cross fiscal year lines, and that caused a big problem for teachers at DoD base schools. Pretty much, it seems to me, that you now can fund 12 monthes of services that cross fiscal year lines with the appropriations being from one fiscal year allotment. However, check your agency regs. Also, if your contract doesn't allow it, you will have to issue a supplemental agreement changing your ordering process.

By doug on August 31, 2001 - 04:06 pm:

thanks Dave, but my question was not whether the task order can cross fiscal years. I know the answer to that is yes as addressed in FAR 37.106(b). That is currently being done at my agency. My question is whether a severable services task order can cross the contract performance period, meaning the date a new option year would be exercised or even the end of the contract. I am looking at a contract which does not permit that although it does permit the crossing of FYs. The net result of that restriction is if someone wants to issue a new severable services task order starting at the 6 month mid point of the contract year, they would not be able to issue a task order longer than the remaining 6 months. What would compel a Contracting Officer to place such a limitation on task orders? I have been given the impression that appropriation law has something to do with it but I can't find anything specific. All of my research indicates it is OK for a severable services task order to cross the contract period.

By Hastur on Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 11:09 am:

Follow the guidelines of the applicable IDIQ.

If you want to make a logical argument with the PCO of the contract in order to foment a change in the vehicle, ask them what the basis/es for the restriction/s is/are...then you'll know.

I have plenty of IDIQs accessible by other agencies that allow the orders to live past contract expiration (includes options or full contract term) for a period of five years. The five years is an internal financial restriction.

By ji20874 on Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 12:21 pm:

The period of performance you cite may not be a real period of performance -- it may be a period for issuing orders -- you can issue orders for one year plus four options -- each order has to fit the bounds established in the contract -- but the period of performance of the order can go past the ending period of the contract -- see the language in the Indefinite Quantity clause (FAR 52.216-22), para. d -- "Any order issued during the effective period of this contract and not completed within that period shall be completed by the Contractor within the time specified in the order. The contract shall govern the Contractor's and Government's rights and obligations with respect to that order to the same extent as if the order were completed during the contract's effective period..."

By David Berkey on Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 01:15 pm:

Presicely "jie0874"! In fact, since it's an ordering period, and not a period of performance, why ever have options in an IDIQ? Folks continue to confuse this. Heck, just write a five year ordering period and use no option clauses. You may still have differing prices over the ordering period stated most any way you need.