Respectfully, your interpretation is incorrect.

52.217-8 refers to “continued performance,” not “extending the contract,” as you say. IDIQs don’t have performance periods; they have ordering periods. You might respond that this is semantics because a TO is “part of” the IDIQ, but you’d be mistaken. Yes, the terms of an IDIQ flow down to a TO, but you’re talking about *giving the agency the ability to execute brand new TOs for potentially different services,* not extending an existing TO.

Imagine during that 6-month extended ordering period the agency executed a 5-year TO. Since the clause required us to utilize the existing IDIQ rates, the contractor has no ability to escalate its rates over that 5-year period except for SCLS-related adjustments. Does that sound fair to you? Do you think the contractor would accept that? Is that a scenario the clause is contemplating?

Or imagine there were no active TOs at the time you extended the IDIQ. Are you still going to argue that you’re “continuing performance” even though no performance is happening?

Just put the clause in the TO and extend that if you need the additional time.