Shutterstock_2559909587-2.jpg

Period of Performance Considerations for GSA FSS BPAs

Government agencies often establish Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs) with General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contractors to meet their repetitive procurement needs in a flexible and streamlined manner. Such BPAs may be single or multiple award and may be utilized by one or more agencies with a period of performance of up to five years. The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 8.405-3, which contains ordering procedures for BPAs established under FSS contracts, states that a single award BPA may not exceed one year, although it may have up to four one-year options. Contractors should be mindful that such BPAs are not contracts in and of themselves and are awarded against and tied to a contractor’s underlying GSA FSS contract. In this regard, FAR 8.405-3(d)(3) provides that schedule contractors may be awarded BPAs that extend beyond the term of their FSS contract only if there are option periods remaining in their FSS contract that, if exercised, will cover the BPA’s period of performance. Consequently, if an FSS contractor’s schedule contract, including its options, is set to expire before the end of the BPA’s period of performance, then that contractor is ineligible to receive a BPA award.

In B-423311, a decision issued on April 10, 2025, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) determined that the protester was ineligible for a BPA award when its underlying FSS contract was set to expire before the end date of the BPA’s total potential ordering period. The GSA issued the relevant Request for Quotations (RFQ) for establishing a single-award BPA for travel and expense consulting services. The BPA’s period of performance consisted of one base year and four one-year option periods, beginning on the date of award. The protester’s quotation was eliminated from consideration by the contracting officer (CO) after a preliminary review for not meeting RFQ requirements, which specifically provided that the procedures of FAR 8.405-3 would be utilized in making the award. The CO determined that, among other failures, the protester’s quotation did not meet the requirements of FAR 8.405-3(d)(3) because its underlying FSS contract was set to expire some 20 days before the last day of the ordering period of the contemplated BPA. Consequently, the protester’s quotation was deemed ineligible for award and was rejected from further consideration. Meanwhile, the protester argued that, since an option was not an obligation, the BPA’s period of performance was limited to one year, as reflected by its base period.

The GAO began its analysis by referring to its earlier decisions, acknowledging that FSS BPAs are established under the contractor’s GSA FSS contract, rather than directly with the contractor. Therefore, an FSS BPA cannot survive the expiration of the underlying schedule contract. Furthermore, the contractor’s underlying schedule contract must be valid to satisfy the competition requirements of the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) with respect to the orders placed under the BPA. In the present case, the RFQ clearly stated that the BPA’s period of performance was up to five years, and the protester’s FSS contract was set to expire before then. Therefore, the protester was ineligible for an award. The GAO rejected the protester’s argument that the BPA’s period of performance be limited to its base period. In addition to the base period, the solicitation contemplated four option periods, which could be exercised at the government’s discretion. The GAO explained that adopting the protester’s position would prevent the government from acquiring services during the option years of the BPA. Moreover, not only had the protester failed to cite any relevant authority to support its position, but its own quotation had included pricing for the option periods. Given these reasons, the GAO determined that it was reasonable for the CO to exclude the protester’s quotation from the competition because its FSS contract would not cover the BPA’s entire period of performance.

A BPA is not a contract because it lacks mutuality of consideration between the government and its contractor. Since BPAs lack this essential element for the formation of a government contract, they are merely considered an overarching framework of terms and conditions for future contracts that come into existence when an order is placed and accepted under the BPA. Furthermore, GSA FSS BPAs are tied to the contractor’s underlying schedule contract. As a result, GSA FSS BPAs cannot survive the expiration of the underlying schedule contract. Under FAR 8.405-3(d)(3), a BPA that extends beyond the term of its underlying FSS contract may only be awarded when one or more option periods remains on the contractor’s schedule contract that, if exercised, would cover the entirety of the BPA’s period of performance. Ultimately, to determine the eligibility of an FSS contract to receive a BPA award, contractors should first calculate the BPA’s total ordering period by adding any option periods to the BPA base period. Then, consistent with the decision described above, determine whether the period of performance of the FSS contract, including any options, covers the entirety of the BPA ordering period.

This Federal Procurement Insight is provided as a general summary of the applicable law in the practice area and does not constitute legal advice. Contractors wishing to learn more are encouraged to consult the TILLIT LAW PLLC Client Portal or Contact Us to determine how the law would apply in a specific situation.

Related Insights

TLF-Bid-Protest-Insight-54.jpg

The General Services Administration (GSA) directs and manages the Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) program, which allows federal agencies to obtain commercial products and services through a simplified acquisition procedure under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 8. When procuring services through the GSA FSS, government agencies use established procedures to place orders to pre-approved vendors, satisfying the Competition in Contracting Act’s (CICA) full and open competition requirements. In obtaining the FSS contract, service vendors provide functional descriptions for labor categories (LCATs) for the services they intend to offer via the GSA FSS. When procuring services through the GSA FSS, federal government agencies must ensure that the services are within the scope of an awardee’s applicable FSS contract LCATs. If the services being procured on the FSS task order are outside the scope of the awardee’s proposed LCAT functional descriptions, the award may be protested for being outside the scope of the vendor’s underlying FSS contract.

more
Shutterstock_1788508130.jpg

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has strict timeliness rules for submission of bid protests. Under these timeliness rules, post-award protests must typically be filed no later than 10 days after the basis of the protest is known or should have been known, except when the debriefing exception applies. The debriefing exception, which does not apply to federal supply schedule (FSS) procurements, requires unsuccessful offerors to file their protests within 10 days of a required and requested debriefing. In General Services Administration (GSA) FSS procurements conducted under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4, unsuccessful offerors are only entitled to a “brief explanation.” Due to the terms being somewhat similar, contractors may confuse the “brief explanation” contemplated under FAR subpart 8.4 with the required and requested “debriefing” of competitive proposals. Such confusion may prove problematic as it can cause an unsuccessful offeror to miss the 10-day deadline to file their post-award protest at the GAO.

In B-422881, a decision issued on September 12, 2024, the GAO dismissed such a protest as untimely, reminding the protestor of the distinction between a required and requested “debrief” and a “brief explanation” under FAR subpart 8.4. The Navy’s Military Sealift Command issued the relevant FSS Request for Quotation (RFQ) for lodging negotiation and management services, requiring vendors to provide multiple extended-stay studio rooms in Mobile, Alabama. The RFQ contemplated a lowest-priced technically acceptable (LPTA) award and required offerors to submit their quotations on or before August 8, 2024. The protestor was notified that its quotation was unsuccessful on August 13 via the GSA eBuy system. On August 16, the government provided the protestor with a “brief explanation,” as required under FAR subpart 8.4. In the brief explanation, the Navy advised the protestor that its quotation was evaluated as technically unacceptable and was therefore ineligible for award. The brief explanation also specifically noted that it was not a debrief.

more
Shutterstock_2492572063.jpg

The General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) program requires pre-approved schedule contractors to publish an authorized FSS pricelist containing all the supplies and services they offer. The pricelists include the terms and conditions for each Special Item Number (SIN) on the contractors’ schedules. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 8.401 defines a SIN as a group of generically similar (but not identical) supplies or services intended to serve the same general purpose or function. When issuing requests for quotes (RFQs) under FAR subpart 8.4, procuring agencies may include a provision identifying a SIN and expressly limit the procurement to that SIN. In such procurements, only contractors with the identified SIN on their schedule contracts may compete to fulfill the requirement. Additionally, in service procurements, contractors may only propose labor categories (LCATs) that fall under the applicable SIN. However, procuring agencies do not always identify an applicable SIN or limit the contractors’ ability to only propose LCATs from a particular SIN. In the absence of such SIN limitations, contractors may compete for the RFQ if the quoted goods and services are available on their underlying FSS contracts without regard to a particular SIN.

more
Shutterstock_1872564373-3.jpg

The General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) program allows federal agencies to acquire services from pre-approved vendors via simplified acquisition procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 8. When utilizing the FSS program, procuring agencies may not purchase “open market items,” which are any services not already listed on a vendor’s GSA schedule. At the same time, the services on a vendor’s schedule may not always directly correlate to the requirements of the solicitation. In such situations, the relevant inquiry is whether the required services are within the scope of the vendor’s schedule contract, as reasonably interpreted. In deciding whether their GSA schedule covers services being sought in the solicitation, contractors should determine whether the required function in the solicitation is the same as the function covered under their schedule contract. In this regard, services are not considered open market items if they are within the scope of particular line items on the FSS contract. Additionally, while the broader, general scope of a schedule contract and the description of its Special Item Numbers (SINs) are relevant in determining the scope of line items, such descriptions are not dispositive to resolve whether the services are covered by the schedule contract.

more

Period of Performance Considerations for GSA FSS BPAs

TILLIT LAW Federal Procurement Insights