(5) 15 U.S.C. 631 Note (HUBZone Act of 1997), with the exception of 15 U.S.C. 657a(b)(2)(B), which is optional for organizations subject to statutory requirements. Yes, what he said. I do not understand why this is confusing, Part 13 deals with actions that require public disclosure and actions that do not. Their action obviously does so. „In this case, the DEA complied with the legal obligation to achieve the most practicable competition when it set the BPAs for these small purchases. Under these conditions, it is not necessary for the DEA between BPA holders between BPA holders for each individual order subsequently placed under the GAP. [Internal citation omitted]. Is it not reasonable to interpret this, as I have only been able to identify three sources of market research to which I can send a request (electronically) without regard to the contractual action publication requirements of Part 5 of the FAR (since this action would normally require a summary in accordance with 5.101 and no exception under 5.202 is applicable)? (c) Orders without price may be placed on paper or electronically. A realistic monetary limit, either for each item or for the total order, is set for each order without price. The monetary limit is an obligation that can be adjusted when the fixed price is set. The customer tracks each order to ensure timely pricing.

The customer or its designated representative will verify the invoice price and, if applicable (see 13.106-3(a)), process the invoice for payment. FAR 13.104(b) applies to circumstances where a summary is not required. 2. Justifications and approvals are required under this Sub-Section for the acquisition of exclusive purchases (including brands) or for parts of an acquisition requiring a brand name. If the justification should cover only the part of the acquisition that is a brand name, this should be indicated; The requirements concerning the level of approval shall then apply only to this part. (e) The requirements set out in Part 8 apply to purchases at or below the micro-purchase threshold. (f) Agencies maximize the use of e-commerce where feasible and cost-effective (see subsection 4.5). Detailed drawings and specifications may be made available offline on paper or by other appropriate means. I am evaluating options to compete for a non-complex commercial service requirement subject to the Service Contracts Act (CHA), with an estimated value of $4 million. It will be a socio-economic freeze. A market study confirmed that there are competent contractors in the targeted socio-economic market and narrowed the procurement strategy to a Part 12, 13 or 15 acquisition (no GSA or Part 8 sources or internal IDIQ/Part 16 vehicles fall within the scope).

The Part 15 approach is neither desirable nor necessary because of these other available options. We can move towards a Part 13 approach using simplified procurement procedures (SAP) in accordance with (IAW) 13.5 – Simplified procedures for certain commercial items as opposed to a combined IAW synopsis/tender procedure with FAR Part 12.603 because of the flexibility, usefulness and need to describe the relative importance of evaluation factors when SAP is followed (see FAR 12.602 (a) for a comparative update of differences in differences in assessment factors, if necessary). My question relates to the confusion between advocacy of FAR 13.104 and the solicitation requirements of FAR 13.105. FAR 13.104 requires only the promotion of competition to the greatest extent possible, taking into account the administrative costs of purchasing, and states that when using AMPs and without notification of the government-wide port of entry (GPE, i.e. FBO), maximum competition can generally be achieved by soliciting quotations or quotations from sources located in the local commercial territory (the required location is the suburb of DC, so that there is no shortage of available contractors). FARTheLoveOfGod, why do FAR do this? Am I misinterpreting paragraph 13.104(b)? If so, what is the purpose of identifying and requesting three sources with SAP and always having to post on FBO. Rhetorical question, since I do not see the need for it. In no way am I trying to circumvent the requirements of the FAR, but I am simply trying to understand and interpret them as written, as I do not see how the use of AMP would achieve the objectives of Part 13 of the FAR as reiterated in FAR 13.002 (reducing administrative costs, promote efficiency and cost-effectiveness, avoid unnecessary burdens, and as I said, it will be a socio-economic reserve) if notification to GPE regarding IAW 5.101 and 5.203 FBOs by FAR 13.105 is required for this requirement and may result in an overwhelming number of responses. I see how the evaluation process is simplified qualitatively with SAP, for example: It is easier to evaluate responses, but how would SAP then be quantitatively „simplified” in terms of the potential load of a potentially overwhelming number of responses due to ESA`s reservation request? seems counterintuitive for FAR 13.002, because if I sync, I essentially have to send a subsequent request to any supplier that expresses interest from a fairness perspective, and procurement may no longer be „simplified” or „convenient.” In addition, in principle, each category of work is subject to the SCA, so that the local determination of wages establishes a basis for competitive prices, and this is the certainty that the FBO reservation part will not result in a previously unknown supplier being able to offer extremely competitive prices. Now let`s look at what simplified procurement processes are and how your organization can benefit from an expanded SAP knowledge base.

Parent topic: Federal Acquisition Regulation 13.000 Scope of the part. This Part establishes principles and procedures for the purchase of supplies and services, including construction, research and development, and commercial goods, the total amount of which does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (see 2.101).