Scenario 4.0:
The buyer intended to change the pricing structure for a contract for garbage collection services at one of its facilities. Previously, the contract included contract line items priced on a ''per-ton'' basis, along with overhead line items covering the contractor's variable costs. The buyer intended to issue a solicitation that eliminated the overhead line items, thus requiring all costs to be included in a ''price-per-ton'' pricing method.
Prior to issuing a solicitation, the buyer conducted market research to determine whether it was customary industry practice to price garbage collection services based on the weight of the garbage collected. This market research included three parts:
* Reviewing refuse contracts at three other locations;
* Posting a notice to potential sellers asking for feedback on the proposed structure, to which the buyer received seven responses---four of which suggested a monthly line-item structure, which would include variable costs and not be on a ''per-ton'' basis, since these four respondents indicated that a ''per-ton'' pricing structure was not a ''customary commercial practice,'' and three had no comment about the line-item structure; and
* Obtaining ''historical market research'' that had been performed during the previous year by personnel at another buyer location, consisting of talking to a sales representative from a waste removal company who indicated that his company used a ''per-ton'' pricing structure that was a ''practical method of pricing for trash removal services.''
Following this market research, the buyer determined that it was ''in the buyer's best interest'' to utilize the ''per-ton'' approach and that it was a ''customary commercial practice.''
A solicitation was issued requiring offerors to submit fixed prices on a per-ton basis for several line items, for which the solicitation provided estimated quantities. The buyer removed the line items for overhead costs that had been present in the prior contract for waste removal. Instead, the new solicitation required offerors to submit prices that reflected ''all fixed and variable costs'' on a per-ton basis and only permitted the seller ''to invoice on tonnage collected.'' The resulting statement of work indicated that the seller was required to provide all items necessary to perform the required services, including personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, materials, and supervision.
In this scenario, what type of contract was issued originally by the buyer?
Show Answer
Hide Answer
Correct Answer:
D
The correct answer is D (fixed price, requirements) because the scenario describes an original contract structure where the buyer procured garbage collection services with line items priced on a per-ton basis along with separate overhead line items. This indicates a fixed-price arrangement, as pricing was established per unit (per ton), rather than reimbursing actual incurred costs as in cost-reimbursement contracts.
Additionally, the nature of garbage collection services suggests that the buyer likely required the contractor to fulfill all actual needs for those services over a period of time, which is characteristic of a requirements contract. In such contracts, the buyer agrees to obtain all of its requirements for specified services from the contractor, while quantities may vary based on actual demand.
Option A (CPFF) and B (cost reimbursement, indefinite delivery) are incorrect because the scenario does not involve reimbursement of allowable costs plus fee. Option C (fixed price, indefinite delivery) is less precise because an indefinite delivery contract requires a guaranteed minimum quantity, which is not indicated in the scenario.
CMBOK explains that requirements contracts under fixed-price structures are commonly used when recurring services are needed, but exact quantities cannot be predetermined. The original inclusion of separate overhead line items further supports that it was a structured fixed-price requirements-type arrangement prior to being modified into a consolidated per-ton pricing model.
