M-13-22

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
FROM: Sylvia M. Burwell
Director

SUBJECT:
Planning for Agency Operations during a Potential Lapse in Appropriations
Appropriations provided under the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations
Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-6) expire at 11:59 pm on Monday, September 30. The Administration does
not want a lapse in appropriations to occur. There is enough time for Congress to prevent a lapse
in appropriations, and the Administration is willing to work with Congress to enact a short-term
continuing resolution to fund critical Government operations and allow Congress the time to
complete the full year 2014 appropriations. However, prudent management requires that
agencies be prepared for the possibility of a lapse. To that end, this guidance reminds agencies of
their responsibilities to plan for agency operations under such a contingency.
At this time, agencies should be updating their plans for operations in the absence of
appropriations, consistent with Section 124.2 ofOMB Circular A-ll (which is available at
http://www.whjtehouse.gov/sites/default/file lomb/as ets/all current year/sl24.pdf). In doing
so, agencies should refer to relevant legal opinions issued by the Attorney General and the Office
of Legal Counsel of the Department of Justice, which set forth the legal requirements imposed by
the Antideficiency Act (Act) during a lapse in appropriations and the guiding standards agencies
should use in making decisions under the Act during a lapse in appropriations.
In updating contingency plans, agency leaders should ensure that only those activities that
are "excepted" pursuant to applicable legal requirements would continue to be performed during a
lapse in the appropriation for those activities (unless the agency has a separate funding source for
an activity that will remain available during a lapse and that the agency would use for the activity's
continued performance). Also, agency leaders should carefully review determinations regarding
which employees would be necessary for the agency's continued performance ofthose "excepted"
functions, to ensure that these case-by-case determinations are consistent with the applicable legal
requirements.
In addition, agencies should consult the attached Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
documents, which address technical questions about particular matters related to agency
operations during a lapse in appropriations. OMB previously issued these F AQ documents in
April2011 and December 2011 (in conjunction with OMB Memoranda M-11-13 and M-12-03),
and they provide an overview ofrelevant legal principles that apply to all government operations,
address particular issues with contracts and grants, and answer questions relating to information
technology, travel, orderly shutdown, and payment for excepted work. Also, the Office of
Personnel Management (OPM) previously issued F AQs to assist agencies and employees on
personnel issues associated with a funding lapse, which can be found on OPM's website.
Agencies should continue the process ofupdating their plans until further guidance is
provided. Should it prove necessary, OMB will provide additional information on planning
efforts at a later date, including regarding external outreach to stakeholders and the release of
updated plans. Agency leaders with questions on the contents of this Memorandum or about the process
for updating plans for the orderly shutdown of operations should contact Joseph Jordan, OMB's
Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy, or Geovette Washington, OMB's General Counsel.
Your staff should direct queries to your OMB Resource Management Office or your agency's
Office ofGeneral Counsel. We greatly appreciate your cooperation. We will continue to be in close contact with you
as developments unfold.
Attachments

Attachment 1
Frequently Asked Questions on Contracting, Grant Administration, and

Payment Processing During a Lapse in Appropriations

As agencies update plans for an orderly shutdown in the event ofan absence ofappropriations,
there are a number ofcross-cutting issues that apply to all agencies. The below FAQ is meant to
address these issues in a way that is understandable, accessible, and convenient to agencies. If
you have further questions, please consult your agency counsel or your appropriate points of
contact within OMB.
Normally, routine, ongoing operational and administrative activities relating to contract or grant
administration (including payment processing) cannot continue when there is a lapse in funding.
Therefore, agency employees who are paid with annual appropriations and who perform an
activity associated with contract or grant administration (including oversight, inspection, payment,
or accounting) should generally not continue work during a funding hiatus.
Below is an outline of the general principles that govern an agency's operations during a lapse in
appropriations. Following this outline is a set ofQ&As, based on these principles, for agencies to
use in addressing contract and grant situations that arise during a lapse in appropriations.
The outline and Q&As are based on the legal opinions issued by the Justice Department (DOJ),
and the guidance issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), regarding agency
operations during a lapse in appropriations (see, generally, OMB Circular A-ll, Section 124). To
the extent that agency staff need further guidance regarding the situations addressed below, or on
other situations involving contracts and grants, the staff should consult with the agency counsel,
which may in turn consult with OMB and DOJ.
I. Basic Principles of Agency Operations during a Lapse in Appropriations.
The Antideficiency Act prohibits agencies from incurring obligations that are in advance of, or that
exceed, an appropriation. Thus, with certain limited exceptions, an agency may not incur
obligations when the funding source for the obligation is an appropriation that has lapsed.

A. Excepted activities under the Antideficiency Act (express statutory authorizations,
emergency circumstances, and the President's constitutional authorities).
As DOJ has explained in its opinions, an agency may incur an obligation in the absence of an
appropriation in certain "excepted" situations:
1. A statute or other legal requirement expressly authorizes an agency to obligate funds in
advance of appropriations. In very rare situations, Congress has granted an agency the statutory authority to incur obligations
in advance ofappropriations. The best known example, in the contracting realm, is the Civil
War-era Feed and Forage Act (41 U.S.C. § 6301), which provides authority to the Defense
Department to contract for necessary clothing, subsistence, forage, fuel, quarters, transportation or
medical and hospital supplies in advance of appropriations. Other examples are the authorities
provided by 25 U.S.C. § 99 (Bureau oflndian Affairs contracts for goods and supplies) and 41
U.S.C. § 6302 (Army contracts for fuel).
2. The function addresses emergency circumstances, such that the suspension of the
function would imminently threaten the safety of human life or the protection of property.
As DOJ has explained, the emergency exception applies when both ofthe following exist:
(a) a reasonable and articulable connection between the obligation (in this case, involving a
contract or grant) and the safety oflife or the protection of property,
and
(b) some reasonable likelihood that either the safety of life or the protection of property would be
compromised in some significant degree by failure to carry out the function in question -- and that
the threat to life or property can be reasonably said to be near at hand and demanding ofimmediate
response. As the Antideficiency Act states, the emergency exception does not authorize the continuation of
ongoing, regular functions of government, the suspension ofwhich would not imminently threaten
the safety of human life or the protection of property.
3. The function is necessary to the discharge of the President's constitutional duties and
powers (e.g., Commander-in-Chief or conducting foreign relations).
B. Activities that an agency must continue, in the absence of appropriations, because their
continuation is "necessarily implied" from the authorized continuation of other activities.
In addition, as DOJ has explained, there are a limited number of government activities which an
agency must otherwise continue despite a lapse in their appropriations because the lawful
continuation of other funded or excepted activities "necessarily implies" that these additional
activities will continue as well. A "necessary implication" can arise when an agency needs to
incur obligations, even though there has been a lapse in the appropriation against which those
obligations would be charged, in order to implement:
1. An "orderly shutdown" when there has been a lapse in appropriations (as DOJ has
explained, "authority may be inferred from the Antideficiency Act itself for federal officers
to incur those minimal obligations necessary to closing their agencies"),
2. One ofthe "excepted" activities in LA. above, or
3. A congressionally authorized or appropriated function for which Congress has
provided funding that remains available during the lapse (including funds already
obligated from the current fiscal year), where the suspension ofthe related activity (during
the funding lapse) would prevent or significantly damage the execution ofthe terms ofthe
statutory authorization or appropriation. The touchstone ofthe analysis is determining
whether execution ofthe terms of the statutory provision- not the terms of the funded
contract or grant pursuant to that statute-would be significantly damaged in the absence of
immediate performance of the unfunded, related activity.
As DOJ has explained, an example of a "necessarily implied" activity, for which
obligations can continue to be incurred despite a funding lapse, are the administrative
activities (funded out of annual appropriation) that are necessary to disburse benefit
payments under entitlement programs, such as social security benefits, for which an
indefinite appropriation provides the funding for the benefits (and for which there is a
congressional authorization to make regular payments to beneficiaries).
However, as DOJ has also explained, a "necessary implication" may not ordinarily be
inferred from the kind of broad, categorical authority that often appears in the organic
statutes of government agencies.
Moreover, the fact that an agency has unobligated balances (appropriated in a prior fiscal
year on a multi-year or no-year basis) that continue to remain available for funding a
program does not, in itself, demonstrate that the incurring of obligations for related
activities (for which there has been a lapse in appropriations) is necessarily implied. In
this regard, it is often the case that agencies possess discretion with respect to when, during
the period ofavailability, the agency engages in activities for which Congress has provided
funding. Furthermore, in those cases when Congress has provided funding on a
multi-year or no-year basis, the agency may often possess substantial discretion with
respect to the timing of when the agency carries out these funded activities. In such
situations, where an agency is not otherwise compelled by the terms of a statute to engage
in a funded activity during a period in which there is a lapse in appropriations, there is not a
"necessary implication" that the agency must incur obligations for related activities for
which the appropriation has lapsed.

II. Questions and Answers on Contracts and Grants.
The following Q&As address principally the impact on contract and grant activity of a lapse of
appropriations, with respect to an agency incurring obligations for the contract or grant itself as
well as for the administrative activities in support thereof.
Of course, in the situation in which performance under an already-issued contract or grant is not
impacted by such a lapse, the contractor or grantee may continue to proceed with its work during
the lapse period. An example is the situation where an agency has already obligated funds
representing the entire price under a contract or task order before the funding lapse began, or where
the agency may use multi-year or no-year funds to incur new obligations for the contract or grant.
This assumes there is no problem with funding for any necessary related activities, for example, by
federal employees overseeing the contract or grant. The question of what to do ifnecessary
activities related to the contract or grant are funded out oflapsed appropriations is addressed in
Question 5 below.

A. Incurring New Obligations for Contracts or Grants.
Ql. When an appropriation has lapsed, may an agency incur a new obligation- by signing
a new contract or grant, or by extending a contract or a grant, or by exercising a renewal
option- when the funding source for that obligation would be the lapsed appropriation?
Al: No- except in very limited circumstances.
The Antideficiency Act prohibits agencies from incurring obligations that are in advance of, or that
exceed, an appropriation. Thus, except in certain limited circumstances, an agency may not incur
obligations when the funding source for the obligation would be an appropriation that has lapsed.
As outlined above in LA.-B., these limited circumstances are when:
1. A statute expressly authorizes an agency to obligate funds in advance of
appropriations.
2. The function addresses emergency circumstances, such that the suspension ofthe
function would imminently threaten the safety ofhuman life or the protection ofproperty.
3. The function is necessary to the discharge of the President's constitutional duties and
powers.
4. The agency must continue the function, in the absence of appropriations, because its
continuation is "necessarily implied" from the continuation of other authorized activities.
In these limited circumstances, an agency may incur the obligation (e.g., by awarding a contract to
support an emergency activity, such as the minimal necessary guard services to protect a facility),
but the agency cannot pay the contractor until appropriations are enacted. Agency staff should
work with agency counsel to establish if such an exception may be appropriately invoked.
Q2. May an agency incur a new contractual or grant obligation in order to address
emergency circumstances, even though the annual appropriation, against which the
obligation would be charged, has lapsed?
A2: Yes, ifthe new obligation is necessary to address emergency circumstances that imminently
threaten the safety of human life or the protection of property. See I.A.2., above, and the DOJ opinions that address the emergency exception.
Q3. May an agency incur a new contractual or grant obligation - even though the
appropriation for this obligation has lapsed- as part of the agency carrying out a program
that is separately funded through an appropriation that remains available?
A3: That depends on whether the authority to incur the obligation during the lapse is a "necessary
implication" of the program (see I.B. above).
Q4: May an agency incur a new contractual or grant obligation that would be charged
against an appropriation that remains available for obligation if the agency would not incur
any related obligations (such as for administrative activities by agency employees) for which
the appropriation has lapsed?
A4: Yes. In this situation, the agency may incur the new contractual or grant obligation, since
both the contract or grant obligation itself, as well as the obligations for necessary related activities
(e.g., the administrative actions that are needed in order for the agency to incur the contract or
grant obligation), may be charged against an available appropriation.

B. Continued Performance of Administrative, Supervisory, or Support Activities, During a
Funding Lapse, In Connection With a Previously-Awarded Contract or Grant.
QS: The agency has previously awarded a contract or grant, and the contractor or grantee
is in the midst of performance. If there has been a lapse in the appropriation that funds the
Federal employees who supervise or support the performance of the contract or grant, can
the Federal employees continue these activities during the funding lapse?
AS: In most cases, the absence of appropriations would prevent the continuation ofsuch
supervision or support. Routine ongoing activities, related to the agency's contract and grant
administration, would not usually be authorized to continue when there has been a lapse in the
appropriation that funds the contract and grant administration activities. In other words, during a
funding lapse, the performance - by contracting officers, contracting officer technical
representatives, contract administration personnel, and grants management specialists - of routine
oversight, inspection, accounting, administration, payment processing, and other contracting or
grant management activity would generally not continue.
There are very limited circumstances under which such work may continue, notwithstanding the
lapse in appropriations. As is further explained in I.B. above, these limited circumstances are
when the continued performance ofthe contract or grants administration is "necessarily implied"
for carrying out:

1. An "orderly shutdown" when there has been a lapse in appropriations,
2. One of the "excepted" activities in LA. above (i.e., express statutory authorizations,
emergency circumstances, and the President's constitutional authorities), or
3. A congressionally authorized or appropriated function for which Congress has
provided funding that remains available during the lapse, where the suspension of the
related activity (during the funding lapse) would prevent or significantly damage the
execution of the terms of the statutory authorization or appropriation.
For example, in the situation where an agency has awarded a contract to provide services that are
necessary to address emergency circumstances that pose an imminent threat to life or property,
some contract administration might well be necessary in order to enable this "excepted" activity to
accomplish its objective (e.g., where a contractor cannot perform an emergency service unless the
contractor receives direction from the contracting officer regarding how and where to proceed).
In that situation, that direction by the contracting officer would be a "necessarily implied" activity,
and thus could occur even though there has been a lapse in the appropriation that funds contract
administration. Another example might be a grant program that cannot proceed to the next milestone, under the
previously-awarded grant, unless the grant administrator provides approval to the grantee for its
continued performance. Ifthe grant progran1 is one that is mandated by Congress, and iffailing to
proceed to that next milestone - during the period of the funding lapse - would violate a statutory
timetable, then in that case the review and approval by the grant administrator would be a
"necessarily implied" activity, and thus could occur even though there has been a lapse in the
appropriation that funds grant administration. Again, the touchstone of the analysis is
determining whether execution of the terms of the statutory authorization or appropriation for
which funding remains available -not the terms ofthe funded contract or grant pursuant to that
statute- would be significantly damaged in the absence of performance of the unfunded activity.
These situations are expected to be very limited ones, and the employee may be excepted from
furlough only for the bare minimum oftime necessary to carry out the review and approval.

Q6: The agency has previously awarded a contract or grant, and the contractor or grantee
is in the midst of performance. In addition, the agency has determined that, due to a lapse
in the appropriation that funds the Federal employees who supervise or support the
performance of the contract or grant, those Federal employees cannot continue these
activities during the lapse. In the absence of such supervision or support, may the
contractor or grantee nevertheless continue performance?
A6: If the continued supervision or support, during the lapse period, is not critical to the
contractor's or grantee's continued performance during that period, then the contractor or grantee
may continue to proceed with its work. This is the case, for example, if an agency had obligated
funds representing the entire price for a good or service under a contract or task order before the
funding lapse began. In that example, the agency would not have to issue an affirmative direction
to the contractor or grantee to continue performance, such as a notice to proceed. Instead, the
contractor or grantee could continue to engage in performance. (It is always prudent to be in
communication with the contractor or grantee to avoid a misunderstanding.)
However, depending on the duration ofa funding lapse, the absence of available Federal employee
oversight may lead an agency to reconsider whether the contract or grant activity should continue
to be performed. In particular, ifthe continued supervision or support, during the lapse period, is
critical to the contractor's or grantee's continued performance during that period, then- where
consistent with law and the terms ofthe contract or grant-the agency should instruct the
contractor or grantee to suspend performance.
The same would be true ifcontinued performance depends on the participation of other Federal
agencies or the availability of other Federal facilities that would be precluded by the lapse of
appropriations.
Q7: The agency has previously awarded a contract or grant, and the contractor or grantee
is in the midst of performance. In addition, the agency has determined that the continued
performance of the contract or grant, during a lapse in appropriations, does not require the
supervision or support of Federal employees who may not continue to perform these
activities during the funding lapse. In that case, should performance of the contract or
grant always continue during the funding lapse?
A7: The first consideration is whether continued performance ofthe contract or grant is required
in order for the agency to comply with its authorization or appropriations statute.
If it is the case that continued performance is statutorily required, then performance should
proceed. If continued performance is not statutorily required, then the agency should consider whether
having the contract move forward is a sensible use oftaxpayer funds in light ofthe lapse of
appropriations. In this regard, there might be situations in which the continued performance of a
contract would be wasteful due to the impact that the funding lapse is having on other agency
activities. For example, if a Federal building is closed due to the funding lapse, it might be
wasteful to have a contractor perform its normal duties of emptying trash cans every day in the
building's offices. In that situation, the agency should consider whether to have the contractor
suspend performance. If an agency decides that continued performance would be wasteful and thus should be suspended
during the funding lapse, the agency should take appropriate contractual action (which would be
part ofthe agency's orderly-shutdown activities). Contracting staff will need to work closely
with agency counsel in making and implementing these decisions to minimize costs to the
government.
Q8: Is the duration of a funding lapse a factor in the analysis in Q&As 5-7?
AS: Yes. In evaluating whether, and to what extent, Federal employee activities- and
contractor or grant performance - should continue during a lapse in appropriations, agencies
should consider whether these activities or the performance can be postponed until after
appropriations are enacted.
In some cases, activities and performance would not qualify for continuation during a very brief
funding lapse (under the analysis in Q&As 5-7), but they would qualify if the duration of the
funding lapse became longer.
In other cases, the opposite conclusion should be reached, namely, that activities or performance
which would qualify for continuation at the outset ofa funding lapse, or at some point during a
funding lapse, become unnecessary - having been discharged - and thus should be discontinued
(e.g. in the case of an agency's initial shutdown activities, or in the case ofthe one-time,
grant-administrator approval that is discussed in the answer to Question 5).
Another situation in which the duration of a funding lapse can have a significant impact on the
analysis is where the agency had previously awarded a contract or grant, and - under the analysis
in Q&As 5-7-the contractor or grantee could continue to perform during the initial period of the
funding lapse. However, if the funding .lapse extended for a sufficiently long period, a situation
might arise in which continued performance could occur only if the agency obligated additional
funds to the contract or grant. Whether the agency could obligate such additional funds would
depend on whether the lapse of appropriations includes the funding for the contract or grant
payments, and/or for the contract or grants administration, and whether the continued performance
would be wasteful because of the impact of the funding lapse on other agency activities. The
agency would therefore need to undertake the analysis under Q&As 2-8 to determine how to
proceed in that situation. If the agency determines that the contract or grant performance should
discontinue due to the funding lapse, then the agency would not obligate additional funds to the
contract or grant, and the contactor or grant would cease work when the previously-obligated
funds run out. (Agencies would be well advised to communicate with contractors to avoid any
misunderstanding.)

C. Making Payments to Contractors and Grantees during a Lapse in Appropriations
Q9: In the case of a contract or grant that has been previously awarded (and thus for which
available funds were obligated), can Federal employees be excepted from furlough in order
to make timely payments to the contractor or grantee in accordance with the contract or
grant?
A9: No- except in very limited circumstances.
During a lapse in appropriations, the activity of making contract and grant payments on a timely
basis does not, by itself, qualify as one of the limited circumstances for which obligations can be
incurred under the Antideficiency Act (as outlined in I.A.-B., above). In this regard, the fact that
the government would incur interest penalties under the Prompt Payment Act or other law, due to
the delay in payment caused by a funding lapse, does not provide a legal justification under the
Antideficiency Act for an agency to continue to make payments during a funding lapse.
An exception would exist in the very limited situation in which making the payment to a contractor
or grant- during the funding lapse-is "necessarily implied" under the analysis outlined in LB.,
above. There may be very limited circumstances where making a payment, during the funding
lapse, is necessary because the agency's failure to make the payment- during the funding lapse­
itself would result in an imminent threat to life or property, or would critically impair the
President's constitutional functions, or would prevent or significantly damage the execution ofa
congressionally authorized and funded function. In that latter situation (applying the analysis in
I.B.3., above), the agency must determine that (1) the continuation ofthe program during the
funding lapse has been contemplated by Congress in authorizing or appropriations legislation, (2)
the agency's failure to make the payment during the funding lapse would delay contract or grant
performance, and (3) this delay in payment would significantly damage the execution ofthe terms
of the authorizing or appropriations legislative provision.
QlO: Can an agency pay a contractor or grantee, during a funding lapse, for performance
under a contract or grant that the agency awarded during the funding lapse under one of the
exceptions to the Antideficiency Act (see Q&As 1-2)?
AlO: No. As is the case with federal employees who are excepted from furlough to perform
authorized activities during a funding lapse, the agency will incur obligations for the excepted
work that a contractor or grantee is authorized to perform during a funding lapse. However, as
with the pay ofthe excepted federal employees, the agency cannot liquidate those contract and
grant obligations until an appropriation is enacted.
D. Can Non-furloughed Employees Perform Other Work?
Qll: The agency has excepted, from furlough, employees who are performing necessary
contract or grant support functions for an "excepted" activity or under the "necessarily
implied" standard. Can these employees also continue to perform other work (that is not
for an excepted activity and is not "necessarily implied") during the remaining hours of the
workday?
All: Ifthe non-furlough ("excepted') support function can be performed in less than an entire
day, the employee is required to resume furlough status after completing the function.
However, there may be cases in which an employee is required to perform this "excepted" support
function intermittently throughout the course ofthe day, and the intervals in between are too short
to enable the employee to be furloughed and then recalled in time to perform the function. In such
cases, the employee may remain at work, and may perform non-"excepted" functions during these
intervals. In such situations, agencies must minimize the number of employees who are
performing "excepted" functions on an intermittent basis, by consolidating the "excepted"
functions, to the extent possible, for performance by a smaller number ofemployees (e.g., agencies
should not except, from furlough, multiple employees in order to perform intermittent "excepted"
work, when instead the agency could have fewer employees perform the "excepted" work on more
of a full-time basis). In this way, the agency properly minimizes its reliance on the
Antideficiency Act to incur obligations for which the appropriation has lapsed.

Attachment 2
Supplement to Frequently Asked Questions Concerning Contingency Planning for Lapse in
Appropriations
The FAQs below are designed to respond to additional questions posed by agencies in preparation
for prior potential lapses in appropriations concerning IT, travel, orderly shutdown, and
entitlement to paymentfor excepted work, and build upon the Basic Principles ofAgency
Operations During a Lapse in Appropriations that were setforth in the FAQs on Contracting,
Grant Administration, and Payment Processing During a Lapse in Appropriations.
A: Information Technology
Ql: What is the controlling consideration for the continuity or suspension ofiT operations
for an agency during a lapse in appropriations?
Al: The consideration governing all determinations concerning continuity or suspension of
Federal activities funded through lapsed appropriations is that such activities, including IT
operations, may continue only ifthey are excepted activities under the Antideficiency Act, or
where their continuation is necessarily implied from a congressional authorization or
appropriation of other continued functions.
Q2: How should agencies determine what systems, including linked interoperable
systems, are to be maintained and operated during an appropriations lapse?
A2: If a single system must operate to avoid significant damage to the execution ofauthorized or
excepted activities, only this system should maintain operations, and support for continued
operation ofthe single system (whether by agency IT staff or by a contractor) should be the
minimum necessary to maintain functionality and ensure the security and integrity of the system
during the period of the lapse. Ifthe integration ofthat system with other systems makes it
infeasible to maintain operation ofthe single system without maintaining others with which it is
integrated, an agency must provide guidance on operations consistent with avoiding any imminent
threat to Federal property (including avoiding any permanent disruption to agency IT systems and
ensuring preservation of agency electronic records). Given that websites represent the front-end
ofnumerous back-end processing systems, agencies must determine whether the entire website
can be shut down or components ofthe website will be shut down.
Q3: What is the guidance on keeping Government websites up during a lapse in
appropriations if the costs of maintaining the website are funded by a lapsed appropriations
source?
A3: The same standards described above would apply. The mere benefit ofcontinued access by the
public to information about the agency's activities would not warrant the retention ofpersonnel or
the obligation offunds to maintain (or update) the agency's website during such a lapse. However,
ifmaintenance of the website is necessary to avoid significant damage to the execution of
authorized or excepted activities (e.g., maintenance of the IRS website may be necessary to allow
for tax filings and tax collection, which are activities that continue during an appropriations lapse),
then the website should remain operational even ifits costs are funded through appropriations that
have lapsed. If it becomes necessary to incur obligations to ensure that a website remains
available in support of excepted activities, it should be maintained at the lowest possible level.
For example, in the IRS case above, the IRS website would remain active, but the entire Treasury
Department website would not, absent a separate justification or a determination that the two sites
cannot not feasibly be operated separately.
Q4: What notice should agencies provide to the public regarding the status of their websites
during a lapse of appropriations?
A4: If an agency's website is shut down, users should be directed to a standard notice that the
website is unavailable during the period of government shutdown. If any part of an agency's
website is available, agencies should include a standard notice on their landing pages that notifies
the public of the following: (a) information on the website may not be up to date, (b) transactions
submitted via the website might not be processed until appropriations are enacted, and (c) the
agency may not be able to respond to inquiries until appropriations are enacted.
QS: What if the cost of shutting down a website exceeds the cost of maintaining services?
AS: The determination of which services continue during an appropriations lapse is not affected
by whether the costs of shutdown exceed the costs of maintaining services.
Q6: Ifwebsites are down, will agencies be able to extend deadlines for applications that
would otherwise have been due during the lapse in appropriations?
A6: To the extent permitted by law, agencies may extend deadlines for activities, as necessary to
compensate for the period ofthe lapse in appropriations and the unavailability of the website.
Q7: What is the guidance regarding the use of mobile devices such as Blackberries, or
home access to work email through Secure ID?
A7: Furloughed employees should be given clear guidance that the prohibitions ofthe
Antideficiency Act extend to work performed from outside of the office, including via mobile
devices or remote computer connections. Orderly shutdown procedures should not rely on
mobile devices or home access to work email for providing notices of when to return to work.
Agencies have discretion to enforce these access restrictions in light of their own particular needs.
Some may choose, for example, to include in orderly shutdown activities a requirement that
furloughed employees tum in their Blackberries until they return to the office; others may
determine that circumstances warrant a different approach.

B. Orderly Shutdown
Q8: How long should "orderly shutdown" take?
AS: Ordinarily, furloughed employees should take no more than three or four hours to provide
necessary notices and contact information, secure their files, complete time and attendance
records, and otherwise make preparations to preserve their work. OMB Circular A-ll requires
agencies to provide OMB with written justification for the conduct of orderly shutdown activities
in excess ofa half-day. While it may be appropriate in limited circumstances for some employees
to take longer to assist in shutdown activities (e.g., seeking court continuances or stop-work orders
on pending contracts), these may not be necessary in the event that a very short period of a lapse in
appropriations is anticipated. Agencies should make every effort to prepare for these needs in
advance of a lapse so that orderly shutdown activities are minimized.
Q9: In the event of a lapse on a Friday, when would employees whose schedule is a normal
Monday-Friday work week and who are funded by annual appropriations be expected to
conduct orderly shutdown activities?
A9: They should be directed to return to work on the following Monday morning to conduct such
activities.
QlO: Does this mean that they can continue to work remotely over the preceding weekend?
AlO: No. Following a lapse in appropriations, the Antideficiency Act bars nonexcepted work
by such employees other than to perform orderly shutdown activities.
C. Travel
Qll: If employees funded through appropriations that have lapsed are on temporary duty
assignments away from their normal duty stations at the time of an appropriations lapse,
can they make arrangements to return home sooner than planned?
All: They are encouraged to do so wherever reasonable and practicable. However, agencies
should make a determination of reasonableness and practicality based on the length ofthe
assignment and the time required for return travel, compared to the anticipated length ofthe lapse,
so as to minimize the burdens of doing so.
D. Entitlement to Payment for Excepted Work
Q12: How will excepted employees be paid for excepted work required during the lapse in
appropriations?
All: Without further specific direction or enactment by Congress, all excepted employees are
entitled to receive payment for obligations incurred by their agencies for their performance of
excepted work during the period of the appropriations lapse. After appropriations are enacted,
payroll centers will pay all excepted employees for time worked.