48 C.F.R. § 6.102

6.102 Use of competitive procedures.

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

The competitive procedures available for use in fulfilling the requirement for full and open competition are as follows:

(a) Sealed bids. (See 6.401(a).)

(b) Competitive proposals. (See 6.401(b).) If sealed bids are not appropriate under paragraph (a) of this section, contracting officers shall request competitive proposals or use the other competitive procedures under paragraph (c) or (d) of this section.

(c) Combination of competitive procedures. If sealed bids are not appropriate, contracting officers may use any combination of competitive procedures (e.g., two-step sealed bidding).

(d) Other competitive procedures. (1) Selection of sources for architect-engineer contracts in accordance with the provisions of 40 U.S.C. 1102 et seq. is a competitive procedure (see subpart 36.6 for procedures).

(2) Competitive selection of basic and applied research and that part of development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement is a competitive procedure if award results from—

(i) A broad agency announcement that is general in nature identifying areas of research interest, including criteria for selecting proposals, and soliciting the participation of all offerors capable of satisfying the Government's needs; and

(ii) A peer or scientific review.

(3) Use of multiple award schedules issued under the procedures established by the Administrator of General Services consistent with the requirement of 41 U.S.C. 152(3)(A) for the multiple award schedule program of the General Services Administration is a competitive procedure.

[50 FR 1729, Jan. 11, 1985; 50 FR 52429, Dec. 23, 1985, as amended at 53 FR 27463, July 20, 1988; 59 FR 53716, Oct. 25, 1994; 70 FR 57454, Sept. 30, 2005; 79 FR 24198, Apr. 29, 2014; 84 FR 19842, May 6, 2019]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1999–2000 · leading case: Petchem, Inc. v. United States, 99 F. Supp. 2d 50 (D.D.C. 2000).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Petchem, Inc. v. United States, 99 F. Supp. 2d 50 (D.D.C. 2000). “See 48 C.F.R. § 6.102 (detailing the procedures that meet the requirement for “full and open” competition).”

Am. Sci. & Eng'g, Inc. v. Kelly, 69 F. Supp. 2d 227 (D. Mass. 1999). · cites it 2× “See 48 C.F.R. § 6.102 (d)(2). In addition, CICA at times allows executive agencies to exclude a particular source (or sources) from participation in a procurement if doing so would “establish or maintain any alternative source or sources of supply” for the desired property or…”

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.