C.F.R. » Title 48 » CHAPTER 2—DEFENSE ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE › SUBCHAPTER C—CONTRACTING METHODS AND CONTRACT TYPES › PART 217—SPECIAL CONTRACTING METHODS › Subpart 217.74—Undefinitized Contract Actions

48 C.F.R. § 217.7401

217.7401 Definitions.

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

As used in this subpart—

Contract action means an action which results in a contract.

(1) It includes contract modifications for additional supplies or services.

(2) It includes task orders and delivery orders.

(3) It does not include change orders, administrative changes, funding modifications, or any other contract modifications that are within the scope and under the terms of the contract, e.g., engineering change proposals, value engineering change proposals, and over and above work requests as described in subpart 217.77. For policy relating to definitization of change orders, see 243.204-70.

Definitization means the agreement on, or determination of, contract terms, specifications, and price, which converts the undefinitized contract action to a definitive contract.

Qualifying proposal means a proposal that contains sufficient information to enable DoD to conduct meaningful analyses and audits of the information contained in the proposal.

Undefinitized contract action means any contract action for which the contract terms, specifications, or price are not agreed upon before performance is begun under the action. Examples are letter contracts, orders under basic ordering agreements, and provisioned item orders, for which the price has not been agreed upon before performance has begun. For policy relating to definitization of change orders, see 243.204-70.

[56 FR 36345, July 31, 1991, as amended at 75 FR 10191, Mar. 5, 2010; 75 FR 48277, Aug. 10, 2010; 77 FR 76940, Dec. 31, 2012; 84 FR 39206, Aug. 9, 2019]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2015–2023 · leading case: United States Ex Rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States Ex Rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., 241 F. Supp. 3d 37 (D.D.C. 2017). “After the government issued Task Orders, KBR and the government engaged in the process of definitization, meaning “the agreement on, or determination of, contract terms, specifications, and price, which converts the undefinitized contract action to a definitive contract.”
United States ex rel. Watkins v. KBR, Inc., 106 F. Supp. 3d 946 (C.D. Ill. 2015). “” 48 C.F.R. § 217.7401 (b). KBR also certified, as of the date of definitization of each of those task orders, that the cost or pricing data submitted to the Government were accurate, complete, and current as of the date of definitization.”
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. v. Sec'y of the Air Force, 66 F.4th 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2023). “” 48 C.F.R. § 217.7401 . The specific process for definitization in government contracts is set forth in “Contract Definiti- zation” clauses in 48 C.”
— 48 C.F.R. § 217.7401(b) — 1 case
United States Ex Rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., 241 F. Supp. 3d 37 (D.D.C. 2017). “After the government issued Task Orders, KBR and the government engaged in the process of definitization, meaning “the agreement on, or determination of, contract terms, specifications, and price, which converts the undefinitized contract action to a definitive contract.”
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.