C.F.R. » Title 48 » CHAPTER 5—GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION › SUBCHAPTER I—SPECIAL CONTRACTING PROGRAMS › PART 570—ACQUIRING LEASEHOLD INTERESTS IN REAL PROPERTY › Subpart 570.3—Acquisition Procedures for Leasehold Interests in Real Property Over the Simplified Lease Acquisition Threshold

48 C.F.R. § 570.303-4

570.303-4 Changes to SFOs.

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

(a) If the Government's requirements change, either before or after receipt of proposals, issue an amendment. Document the amendment using the same method as for the SFO, written or electronic.

(b) If time is critical, you may provide information on SFO amendments orally.

(1) Make a record of the information provided.

(2) Provide, or attempt to provide, the notice to all offerors or prospective offerors on the same day.

(3) Promptly confirm the information provided orally in a written amendment.

(c) Distribute an amendment as follows:

(1) If before the proposal due date, send the amendment to all prospective offerors who were sent a copy of the SFO.

(2) If after proposal receipt, send the amendment to each offeror who submitted a proposal.

(d) If an amendment is so substantial that it requires a complete revision of the SFO, cancel the SFO, readvertise if required by 570.106, and issue a new SFO.

(e) If there are changes to the Government's requirements for amount of space, delineated area, occupancy date, and/or other major aspects of the requirements, the contracting officer shall consider whether there is a need to readvertise, and to document the file accordingly.

[64 FR 37265, July 9, 1999, as amended at 76 FR 30851, May 27, 2011]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2015–2015 · leading case: Springfield Parcel C, LLC v. United States, 124 Fed. Cl. 163 (Fed. Cl. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Springfield Parcel C, LLC v. United States, 124 Fed. Cl. 163 (Fed. Cl. 2015). · cites it 6× “” 48 C.F.R. § 570.303-4 (a). 15 These regulations have been interpreted to show “not only that the [GSA] has no obligation to consider nonconforming offers on the merits, but that it would be improper to do so without first changing the solicitation and notifying other bidders.”
Fp-Faa Seattle, LLC v. United States, 124 Fed. Cl. 236 (Fed. Cl. 2015). · cites it 5× “306 (a), Evaluating Offers, 48 C.F.R. § 570.303-4 (a), Changes to Solicitations For Offers; Interested Party 28 U.”
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.