Recycling Electronics and Asset Disposition (READ) Services

What are the fair opportunity ordering procedures EPA will use when EPA issues task orders?

In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act and FAR 16.505(b), the Contracting Officer will give each READ contract awardee a “fair opportunity” to be considered for each order in excess of $2,500 unless one of the conditions below apply.

For each requirement under the READ GWAC, the EPA intends to provide READ awardees a fair opportunity for consideration of a task order. This will be provided through the Government's review of information already in the Government's possession, such as awardee's original proposal (e.g., recycling rates, technical/management approaches, etc.), geographic location of the requiring activity and which geographic area the contractor supports (i.e, nationwide coverage, eastern U.S., or western U.S.), current past performance reports (including the Contractor's original proposal data if it is the most current data in the Government's possession) and other pertinent data related to the task order requirement. As work proceeds under this contract, EPA will rely upon recent performance reports received on task orders performed under this GWAC rather than on past performance records submitted with the original proposal to the maximum extent possible

Awardees may not be given an opportunity to be considered for requirements in excess of $2,500 if one of the following conditions apply:

(i) the agency need for such services is of such urgency that providing such opportunity would result in unacceptable delays;
(ii) only one such awardee is capable of providing such services required at the level of quality required because the services ordered are unique or highly specialized;
(iii) the order should be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency as a logical follow-on to a task order already issued under this contract, provided that multiple awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order;
(iv) it is necessary to place an order with one particular awardee to satisfy a minimum guarantee; or
(v) it is known that a contractor has an unacceptable conflict of interest.