48 C.F.R. § 16.501-1
16.501-1 Definitions.
As used in this subpart—
Delivery-order contract means a contract for supplies that does not procure or specify a firm quantity of supplies (other than a minimum or maximum quantity) and that provides for the issuance of orders for the delivery of supplies during the period of the contract.
Task-order contract means a contract for services that does not procure or specify a firm quantity of services (other than a minimum or maximum quantity) and that provides for the issuance of orders for the performance of tasks during the period of the contract.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2000–2024 · leading case: Corel Corp. v. United States, 165 F. Supp. 2d 12 (D.D.C. 2001).
Corel Corp. v. United States, 165 F. Supp. 2d 12 (D.D.C. 2001). “” 48 C.F.R. §§ 16.501-1 , 16.501-2. Task and delivery order contracts, of which the NIH’s Electronic Computer Store Program is an example, essentially create a menu of goods or services of an indefinite quantity that can be ordered by an agency on an as needed basis.”
Worldwide Network Servs., LLC v. Dyncorp Int'l, LLC, 365 F. App'x 432 (4th Cir. 2010). “One complaint 1 Regarding “task orders,” see 48 C.F.R. § 16.501-1 (“Task order contract means a contract for services that does not procure or specify a firm quantity of services (other than a minimum or maximum quantity) and that provides for the issuance of orders for the…”
Savantage Fin. Servs. Inc. v. United States, 81 Fed. Cl. 300 (Fed. Cl. 2008). “§ 253k; 48 C.F.R. § 16.501-1 . FASA excludes orders placed under task or delivery orders from this Court’s bid protest jurisdiction, so long as “the task or delivery order contract itself has been obtained through full and open competition,” unless an order is protested “on the…”
Brent Berry v. Native Am. Servs. Corp., 109 F.4th 1297 (11th Cir. 2024). “48 C.F.R. § 16.501-1 . As with most federal construction contracts, DWG was re- quired to obtain surety bonds to protect the Government’s inter- ests for DWG’s nonperformance.”
Phoenix Air Grp., Inc. v. United States, 46 Fed. Cl. 90 (Fed. Cl. 2000). “” An identical definition is found in 48 C.F.R. § 16.501-1 (1998). An examination of the 2047 Contract confirms that it is an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract which includes three types of contract line items: (1) indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity CLINs,…”
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.