Fair opportunity and the minimum guarantee
Started by Bailers · May 16, 2012 · 4 replies
- BOriginal post
Bailers
May 16, 2012 · 14y ago
I've been unable to find a definition for the word "necessary" when it is referring to an exception to fair opportunity under multiple award IDIQ contracts. Does the ability to exclude vendors from opportunity to propose only apply at the end of a period or can it refer to any period in the contract. To state it plainly, can the exception be used for sole sourcing task orders at the beginning of the contract period to satisfy the minimum guarantee before competitively awarding the rest?
- N
Navy_Contracting_4
May 16, 2012 · 14y ago
If you want a definition for the word "necessary," look it up in the dictionary. In the FAR, "ndefined words retain their common dictionary meaning." [FAR 1.108(a).]
- B
Bailers
May 17, 2012 · 14y ago
Thanks
- D
Don Mansfield
May 17, 2012 · 14y ago
In my opinion, it's necessary to place an order to satisfy the minimum guarantee at any time the minimum guarantee has not been satisfied. I don't know of any decisions on point.
- B
Bailers
May 17, 2012 · 14y ago
Thank you Don, that was my thought as well. In this case it is a large service contract with a base period of three years. Without knowing that we will have funding in years 2 & 3, I believe it is proper to use sole source awards to vendors in year one until the minimum has been met. At which point all future orders would need to be competed under the fair opportunity provisions. Waiting until the end of a period of performance to satisfy the minimum makes me nervous in the shrinking fiscal environment we are currently in.