48 C.F.R. § 17.207

17.207 Exercise of options.

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) When exercising an option, the contracting officer shall provide written notice to the contractor within the time period specified in the contract.

(b) When the contract provides for economic price adjustment and the contractor requests a revision of the price, the contracting officer shall determine the effect of the adjustment on prices under the option before the option is exercised.

(1) Funds are available;

(2) The requirement covered by the option fulfills an existing Government need;

(3) The exercise of the option is the most advantageous method of fulfilling the Government's need, price and other factors (see paragraphs (d) and (e) below) considered;

(4) The option was synopsized in accordance with part 5 unless exempted by 5.202(a)(10) or other appropriate exemptions in 5.202;

(5) The contractor does not have an active exclusion record in the System for Award Management (see FAR 9.405-1);

(6) The contractor's past performance evaluations on other contract actions have been considered; and

(7) The contractor's performance on this contract has been acceptable, e.g., received satisfactory ratings.

(d) The contracting officer, after considering price and other factors, shall make the determination on the basis of one of the following:

(1) A new solicitation fails to produce a better price or a more advantageous offer than that offered by the option. If it is anticipated that the best price available is the option price or that this is the more advantageous offer, the contracting officer should not use this method of testing the market.

(2) An informal analysis of prices or an examination of the market indicates that the option price is better than prices available in the market or that the option is the more advantageous offer.

(3) The time between the award of the contract containing the option and the exercise of the option is so short that it indicates the option price is the lowest price obtainable or the more advantageous offer. The contracting officer shall take into consideration such factors as market stability and comparison of the time since award with the usual duration of contracts for such supplies or services.

(e) The determination of other factors under paragraph (c)(3) of this section—

(1) Should take into account the Government's need for continuity of operations and potential costs of disrupting operations; and

(2) May consider the effect on small business.

(f) Before exercising an option, the contracting officer shall make a written determination for the contract file that exercise is in accordance with the terms of the option, the requirements of this section, and part 6. To satisfy requirements of part 6 regarding full and open competition, the option must have been evaluated as part of the initial competition and be exercisable at an amount specified in or reasonably determinable from the terms of the basic contract, e.g.—

(1) A specific dollar amount;

(2) An amount to be determined by applying provisions (or a formula) provided in the basic contract, but not including renegotiation of the price for work in a fixed-price type contract;

(3) In the case of a cost-type contract, if—

(i) The option contains a fixed or maximum fee; or

(ii) The fixed or maximum fee amount is determinable by applying a formula contained in the basic contract (but see 16.102(c));

(4) A specific price that is subject to an economic price adjustment provision; or

(5) A specific price that is subject to change as the result of changes to prevailing labor rates provided by the Secretary of Labor.

(g) The contract modification or other written document which notifies the contractor of the exercise of the option shall cite the option clause as authority.

[48 FR 42231, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 50 FR 1742, Jan. 11, 1985; 50 FR 52429, 52434, Dec. 23, 1985; 53 FR 17858, May 18, 1988; 72 FR 36854, July 5, 2007; 74 FR 31560, July 1, 2009; 78 FR 37679, June 21, 2013; 78 FR 46787, Aug. 1, 2013; 81 FR 58638, Aug. 25, 2016; 81 FR 91638, Dec. 16, 2016; 82 FR 51530, Nov. 6, 2017; 83 FR 48697, Sept 26, 2018]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 16 cases, 1985–2020 · leading case: Labat-Anderson, Inc. v. United States, 65 Fed. Cl. 570 (Fed. Cl. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Labat-Anderson, Inc. v. United States, 65 Fed. Cl. 570 (Fed. Cl. 2005). · cites it 3× “See 48 C.F.R. § 17.207 (f) (requiring the contracting officer to insure that the cost of an option is specified or reasonably determinable from the terms of the contract).”

Canadian Com. Corp. v. Dep't of Air Force, 514 F.3d 37 (D.C. Cir. 2008). · cites it 2× “2d at 35 , under the Federal Acquisition Regulation an agency may not exercise an option unless it has determined that doing so is "the most advantageous method of fulfilling the Government's need," taking price into account, 48 C.F.R. § 17.207 (c)(3); the Air Force does not…”

Phoenix Air Grp., Inc. v. United States, 46 Fed. Cl. 90 (Fed. Cl. 2000). · cites it 4× “48 C.F.R. § 17.207 (c)(3). This was not done at all with respect to the MIDPAC and WESTPAC services.”

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. United States Dep't of the Air Force, 375 F.3d 1182 (D.C. Cir. 2004). “48 C.F.R. § 17.207 (e); see also id. § 17.”

Info. Sys. & Networks Corp. v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 970 F. Supp. 1 (D.D.C. 1997). · cites it 3× “According to ISN, Diane Crawford, the CO for federal information processing resources for NIEHS, had the sole decision of whether or not to extend ISN’s contract under the applicable procurement regulations, 48 C.F.R. §§ 17.207 4 ; 43.102 5 ; Pl.’s Opp.”

Automation Tech., Inc. v. United States, 73 Fed. Cl. 617 (Fed. Cl. 2006). · cites it 2× “48 C.F.R. § 17.207 (2005). Plaintiff has not demonstrated, nor, as counsel stated at oral argument, does plaintiff claim, that the current state of the procurement of computer maintenance services was orchestrated by Customs, in bad faith, to deprive ATI of a right to protest.”

Ravens Grp., Inc. v. United States, 78 Fed. Cl. 390 (Fed. Cl. 2007). “48 C.F.R. 17.207(c) provides that a Contracting Officer may exercise an option only after “determining that .”

K-LAK Corp. v. United States, 93 Fed. Cl. 749 (Fed. Cl. 2010). “207, 48 C.F.R. § 17.207 (2009) (emphasis added).”

Green Mgmt. Corp. v. United States, 42 Fed. Cl. 411 (Fed. Cl. 1998). “The same requirement is found in FAR 17.207(a): “When exercising an option, the contracting officer shall provide written notice to the contractor within the time period specified in the contract.”

cooper/ports Am., LLC v. Sec'y of Def., 959 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2020). “24 (quoting 48 C.F.R. § 17.207 (g)). CPA claims that the January 31 email should have explicitly identified sec- tion 52.”

Nat'l Gateway Telecom, Inc. v. Aldridge, 701 F. Supp. 1104 (D.N.J. 1988). “Originally Count Three charged a violation of 48 C.F.R. Section 17.207 governing the exercise of options under a contract.”

C.M.P., Inc. v. United States, 8 Cl. Ct. 743 (Ct. Cl. 1985). “48 C.F.R. § 17.207 . This court’s jurisdiction to grant equitable relief is founded in 28 U.”

Show all 16 citing cases →

— 48 C.F.R. § 17.207(c) — 1 case

Ravens Grp., Inc. v. United States, 78 Fed. Cl. 390 (Fed. Cl. 2007). “48 C.F.R. 17.207(c) provides that a Contracting Officer may exercise an option only after “determining that .”

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.