C.F.R. » Title 48 » CHAPTER 1—FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION › SUBCHAPTER H—CLAUSES AND FORMS › PART 52—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES › Subpart 52.2—Text of Provisions and Clauses

48 C.F.R. § 52.202-1

52.202-1 Definitions.

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

As prescribed in 2.201, insert the following clause:

Definitions (JUN 2020)

When a solicitation provision or contract clause uses a word or term that is defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), the word or term has the same meaning as the definition in FAR 2.101 in effect at the time the solicitation was issued, unless—

(a) The solicitation, or amended solicitation, provides a different definition;

(b) The contracting parties agree to a different definition;

(c) The part, subpart, or section of the FAR where the provision or clause is prescribed provides a different meaning;

(d) The word or term is defined in FAR part 31, for use in the cost principles and procedures; or

(e) The word or term defines an acquisition-related threshold, and if the threshold is adjusted for inflation as set forth in FAR 1.109(a), then the changed threshold applies throughout the remaining term of the contract, unless there is a subsequent threshold adjustment; see FAR 1.109(d).

(End of clause) [78 FR 70482, Nov. 25, 2013, as amended at 85 FR 27091, May 6, 2020]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2001–2005 · leading case: Tecom, Inc. v. United States, 66 Fed. Cl. 736 (Fed. Cl. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tecom, Inc. v. United States, 66 Fed. Cl. 736 (Fed. Cl. 2005). “Two Air Force documents concerning LB & B's responsibilities under the expiring contract referenced a paragraph 5.2.4.4.1 of the PWS to the LB & B contract, which apparently similarly required that delayed maintenance backlog be less than "25% of the total vehicle equivalents in…”
Northrop Grumman Corp. v. United States, 50 Fed. Cl. 443 (Fed. Cl. 2001). “The RFP incorporated 48 C.F.R. § 52.202-1 , which, as explained above, defines an NDI.”
Die Casters Int'l, Inc. v. United States, 67 Fed. Cl. 362 (Fed. Cl. 2005). “] 48 C.F.R. § 52.202-1 . FAR § 2.101 defines “termination for convenience” and "termination for default”: Termination for convenience means the exercise of the Government’s right to completely or partially terminate performance of work under a contract when it is in the…”
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.