41 C.F.R. § 51-2.5
Committee decision
The Committee considers the particular facts and circumstances in each case in determining if a commodity or service is suitable for addition to the Procurement List. When the Committee determines that a proposed addition is likely to have a severe adverse impact on a current contractor, it takes this fact into consideration in deciding not to add the commodity or service to the Procurement List, or to add only a portion of the Government requirement for the item. If the Committee decides to add a commodity or service in whole or in part to the Procurement List, that decision is announced in the
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1994–2023 · leading case: Nat'l Telecommuting Inst., Inc. v. United States, 123 Fed. Cl. 595 (Fed. Cl. 2015).
Nat'l Telecommuting Inst., Inc. v. United States, 123 Fed. Cl. 595 (Fed. Cl. 2015). “41 C.F.R. § 51-2.5 . B. Procurement Process After the USDA Forest Service posted a Request for Information (“RFF’) for IT help-desk services support (“HelpDesk Services”) on October 30, 2012, SourceAmerica approached the Forest Service to discuss whether the HelpDesk Services…”
McGregor Printing Corp. v. Kemp, 20 F.3d 1188 (D.C. Cir. 1994). “See 41 C.F.R. §§ 51-2.5 , 51-2.6(a)(l) & (b) (1990); 41 C.”
Goodwill Indus. of South Florida, Inc. v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2022). “41 C.F.R. § 51-2.5 (2020). The JWOD Act implementing regulation at 41 C.”
Sekri, Inc. v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2023). “” 41 C.F.R. § 51-2.5 . This regulation does not apply when an item is already on the procurement list.”
Top Gun Servs., LLC v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2020). “41 C.F.R. § 51-2.5 . In 1984, Congress enacted the modern statutory framework for Federal procurement, the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984, Pub.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.