There is some debate about what is considered bundling as the FAR definition seems to be different than other guidance.
If a requirement is consolidating 2 contracts, one previously performed by a LB and one previously performed by SB, is this considered bundling? After discussing this with several KOs, it seems that people have different opinions. One opinion is ' this does not involve bundling as defined in FAR 2.101, because the consolidation does not involve two or more requirements previously provided under 'separate smaller contracts' that when combined will likely be unsuitable for award to a small business. By definition 'separate smaller contracts' means, ' a contract that has been performed by one or more small business concerns or that was suitable for award to one or more small business concerns.' In this example, one of the contracts that is being consolidated has been historically performed be a LB and has not been suitable for award to a small business concern.
FAR 2.101 also defines 'separate smaller contracts' as 'a contract that has been performed by one or more small business concerns or that was suitable for award to one or more small business concerns.'
Open full Question Details
The contract could have been suitable (meaning capable of being an award to a small business) for an award to a small business, but was awarded to a large business instead for whatever the reason, probably a better offer (or maybe no small business proposals were received). So if the requirements weren't big enough to preclude a small business from competing for the award, then whatever the size of the firm that actually wins the award doesn't matter.
The interpretation that both contracts have to have been performed by small businesses is incorrect- the correct answer is only one is necessary for there to be bundling.